User talk:Daniel Olsen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
| 1 (-∞ - November 25 2006) 2 (November 25 2006 - ∞) |
Contents |
[edit] They are notable according to WP:BIO... just maybe not to you
I think you made a couple of Speedy deletions of some football player pages, as posted on User:Lachy554. You also made a comment on his user page, not his discussion page (oops). Whilst I agree that the pages were lacking in content, references, poorly written and unencylopedic, they are actually notable, according the WP:BIO Articles about first team squad members who have not made a first team appearance may also be appropriate, but only if the individual is at a club of sufficient stature that most members of its squad are worthy of articles. The Richmond Football Club is a fully professional league at the highest possible level of Australian Rules Football. It's squad is limited to 44 players and both Edwards and Riewoldt have just been drafted to that squad. All other existing members of its squad have articles, so he qualifies. Of course, it helps if the new user writes more wiki-like articles, but it's hard to improve them when they are deleted. The-Pope 00:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you for voting
Thank you for voting in my RfA which at 51/20/6 unfortunately did not achieve consensus. In closing the nomination, Essjay remarked that it was one of the better discussed RfAs seen recently and I would like to thank you and all others who chose to vote for making it as such. It was extremely humbling to see the large number of support votes, and the number of oppose votes and comments will help me to become stronger. I hope to run again for adminship soon. Thank you all once more. Wikiwoohoo 20:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Adoptee
Hello! I've been editing Wikipedia for about a year now, off and on with little edits. I feel that I would like to understand the process a little bit better, and I'm glad that I now have someone to ask. I guess I have several questions and concerns about things I don't exactly understand about wikipedia. I guess that one of them is what exactly is the etiquette for user page conversations? What decides who's talk page a discussion will be on, does it bounce back and forth? I've never gotten that really clear yet.Sethwoodworth 22:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Claremont Res 91 Oak Fire.png
I have two points I would like to make.
- The original fair use tag was entirely appropriate. The image is a screenshot of a copyrighted television program, not a faithfully digitised unique historic photograph as it is now tagged.
- The accuracy of the fair use image tag is not a qualification for deleting the speedy deletion template. The template had nothing to do with the tag, but instead had everything to do with the lack of a fair use rationale. Specifically, because the image was both uploaded after 2006-05-04 and lacks a fair use rationale, it is a candidate for speedy deletion under CSD I6.
I am not going to revert your edits because I do not want to start a revert/edit war or create any illusion of bad faith on my part. I am requesting, however, that you reply with any concerns to this message here on your talk page. I will watch your page and reply promptly. Thank you. Iamunknown 23:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry about the confusion, it was my mistake. The version before i came was 100% better than after I left it (that's what happens when you don't get enough sleep and try to edit wikipedia while writing a paper). I've reverted it back. --Daniel Olsen 01:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you. Good luck with your paper. :) Cheers, Iamunknown 01:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Spider-man 1995 Live Action Show
Why did you delete that page? What are you, some kind of narc? A tool of the system? What did poor spidey ever do to you? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.239.242.110 (talk) 10:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Headmaster
Can you please revert the change to the headmaster article? The man is a headmaster of the school, that is totally appropriate. As of the moment the article choate rosemary hall does not have a link to its headmaster. For the 850 students and 16,000 alumni, plus numerous visiters, having a bio for the schools' headmaster is crucial.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gault8121 (talk • contribs) 03:43, December 14, 2006.
[edit] Disambiguation
Hi. I seem to have painted myself into somewhat of a logical corner. I have written a fairly lengthy, but not yet complete article at Randall Edwards (Oregon politician). I originally titled it simply "Randall Edwards." After clicking "save," I checked "what links here," and found several references, all about a 1980's American soap opera star. Given the number of links, the American fascination with media celebrities, and the fact that "my" Randall Edwards has not yet risen above statewide office to the national scene, I decided to move my article to the current, more specific title, and create a stub for the actress at Randall Edwards, placing reciprocal disambuation links on each. On further thought, I think I have probably gotten it backwards. The actress seems not to have done much other than a two year stint on a soap long ago, while the politician is poised to move up. Should I leave things as they are, reverse the disambiguation so that the simpler title automatically retrieves an article rather than a stub, or (shudder) file an RFC? Sorry to hand you a robe and gavel, but I'm tired of fretting over this. (P.S., if you have some time to waste, you might want to read my COI disclosure on my personal page. I hope it doesn't come across too snarky.) -- J-M Jgilhousen 09:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Announcement
|
To keep this slightly Wikipedia related I have started Adopt a State, so adopt your state article today! |
