User talk:Redlands597198
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia
|
[edit] Deleting Helter
Thanks for your effort in identifying useless articles that had better be deleted. It is appreciated. You might, however, want to read Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, Wikipedia:Proposed deletion, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, which explain the standard ways of attracting administrator attention for such cases. Wikipedia:Deletion policy will also be a good read. Henning Makholm 12:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hollyoaks
Hello. Just thought I'd contact you as you seem to be one of the main editors of the Hollyoaks article. I recently wrote on the Hollyoaks Talk Page regarding the development of the article, I was wondering if you have any thoughts on it? Ben 01:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- Great! We do not necessarily need to move to individual pages, Coronation Street, EastEnders and Emmerdale all have a comprehensive character list in its own article, most of the Hollyoaks character information could easily be moved to a similar article and remain 'as-is'. If you read WP:FICTION it states: 'Wikipedia articles on works of fiction should contain real-world context and sourced analysis, offering detail on a work's achievements, impact or historical significance, not solely a summary of that work's plot.' That is what we really need for Hollyoaks; context, analysis and impact. The biggest problem we may encounter is sourcing information from the early days of the programme, since even the Channel 4 Hollyoaks website seems to forget ths show's history. Any ideas? Ben 11:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'll do some rooting around and get back to you! Ben 12:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've had no luck. I looked at the 'Hollyoaks Companion' book yesterday on Amazon (I think) I guess it could be a useful investment, but it seemed more like a 'fun' book than useful content. It's a shame that there are minimal resources. Hmph! Ben 17:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'll do some rooting around and get back to you! Ben 12:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] October 3
I'm pretty sure that the Pi record you added to the October 3 article fails to rank high overall among the global events featured in days of the year articles. Thoughts? Rklawton 04:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe... Possibly... Probably.
- You can go ahead and remove it. Thanks, mate. Redlands597198 04:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- No worries. Thanks for understanding. Rklawton 04:34, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Summaries
--Mel Etitis (Talk) 18:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)