User talk:Akihabara

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 90 days are automatically archived to User talk:Akihabara/Archive/Archive Jan2007. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Contents 1 The Torch 2 Reuben Singh 3 DYK 4 the radio stations 5 Often-populated Wikipedia category redirects 6 Wajahat Khan 7 Thanks 8 Notability Companies 9 Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

[edit] The Torch

• I am not sure how to answer your concerns. Most of the information is available on-line. As for notability, I am not sure how to address this because it is not quantifiable. So if you are inclined to think it is not notable, then to you it isn't. That is fine, though there is no real way for me to say you are incorrect. The reason I removed the tag is because, to me, it is notable and notability in something like this really boils down, in the end, to the opinion of one or two people. I would rather you take off the tag and err on the side of leaving information out there, but that's just my opinion. -I read this and it came off harsher than I intended but I think notability is too subjective.

[edit] Reuben Singh

Please note I have just replaced the Reuben Singh article with the proper 'neutral' version (Sunday Jan 7, 1739 GMT). Compare this with the vandalised edits. There are clearly some IP addresses and usernames that need to be banned. The neutral version should not be prod. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.10.36.158 (talk) 17:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] DYK

On January 12, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Toso, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Many thanks for your contributions! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] the radio stations

Glad to hear from you. I think there were a few other stations you prodded at the same time--maybe you can add them to the AfD--I don't know how to do a group. I simply do not know whether radio stations are intrinsically notable or not, or how to tell in case only some of them are, and I too want to hear it discussed. Since there was a project box at the bottom with all the stations listed, editors are obviously adding them systematically--that's what made me decide to question it. DGG 05:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Yes there may be more; let me take a look at what I did yesterday. I was categorizing articles beginning with W that were uncategorized, and after doing 2 or 3 of these and prodding them I stopped, simply because I then noticed there were so many. I thought I'd wait a while and see what happened. There was about forty five beginning with W just for December; so there are likely hundreds added recently. I agree I'd like to see consensus here. Akihabara 05:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Often-populated Wikipedia category redirects

Hello! Yes, it never occurred to me that people would find categories from the main index. I cannot think of a way of removing these categories from the index, or even italicising them like #redirects. I think this would require a software change, one that the developers would see as very low priority. A better long-term solution would be for the Wiki software to implement a special sort of category redirect that really worked, and even that is not high priority! - it would be quite a software engineering challenge. Many Wikipedians have been thinking about this for some time, and this is simply the best solution we have currently. Meanwhile don't worry about populating categories that are {{category redirect}}s; the robot handles it all without any problems, and you are not putting anyone to any inconvenience! Your work categorising articles is much appreciated. Best regards, RobertG ♬ talk 16:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wajahat Khan

Hi. I've deprodded this one with a few improvements. The worldwide concerts should be OK against WP:MUSIC even though I've left some only on the talk page. (At first glance, I wasn't sure the Singapore one met WP:V.) --Mereda 10:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

That's great, thanks for your effort. Akihabara 22:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for your note. I left a reply on my user page. Coinman62 16:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability Companies

I noticed that you have been working on fine tuning some special guidelines for notability of companies.

I’m trying to understand the value of having these specific inclusion-criteria for companies. If a company gains automatic notability from one of these criteria, how can you populate the article with meaningful information without having credible independent sources? If you don’t have independent sources it will fail on verifiability and/or primary research, and if you have the sources for the information, you’ve proved notability.

So why do you need special criteria for automatic inclusion of these special cases? I may be wrong, but it seems redundant. It’s like wearing a belt with suspenders. --Kevin Murray 00:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)

It has been proposed that the following criteria be removed from this guideline: 1. The commercial organization is listed on ranking indices of important companies produced by well-known and independent publications.3 2. The commercial organization's share price is used to calculate one or more of the major managed stock market indices.4 Note this is not the same as simply being listed on a stock market. Nor is it the same as being included in an index that comprises the entire market. The broader or the more specialized the index, the less notability it establishes for the company.

We are close to evaluating consensus, please join with us in the discussion. --Kevin Murray 04:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)