User talk:Rifleman 82

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Older discussions archived at

• User_talk:Rifleman_82/Archive 1 (End Oct 2006).
• User_talk:Rifleman_82/Archive 2 (End Dec 2006).
• User_talk:Rifleman_82/Archive 3 (End Feb 2007).

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Steam distillation Pot still Gasification Still Sodium bis(trimethylsilyl)amide Enlisted rank Alkoxide Fraction (chemistry) Fluoropolymer Polybutadiene Carbon-carbon bond Double distilled water Cyanate Tetrakis(triphenylphosphine)palladium(0) Strong base Tincture Dehydration reaction Thermolysis Triphenylphosphine

Cleanup Chemical test for cyanide List of organic chemistry topics Plastic bag Merge Thermal decomposition Solubility Polyoxymethylene Add Sources Octane rating Sulfur mustard Paint Wikify Good Laboratory Practice Decaborane Karen Horney Expand Cyclopentadienyl complex Edinburgh Castle Methyl isobutyl ketone

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 14:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tan Cheng Han

your basis of asserting non-notability is? my arguments to the contrary are well-stated in the article itself. dean of the only law school in Singapore, specialist judge, senior counsel, all of which are important if not sui generis positions in the local legal fraternity. a google search isn't unsatisfactory by WP standards too IMO.

to be sure, i'm not arguing that each appointment per se makes for noteworthiness. but i have to point out the fact that elsewhere in WP, such appointments per se, without more in some instances, have passed noteworthiness. for senior counsels (similar, if not equivalent to, Queen's Counsel), see this. for deans of law schools, see this. moreover, Tan is an established academic. lastly, we have articles on most of our Supreme Court judges, although a specialist judge may not sit on the Supreme Court. thanks.

addendum: i can't provide you the online cite since archives of Straits Times online is now via paid subscription, but Tan was named a couple of years ago as one of the most powerful people in Singapore aged under 40.

therefore, if the article suffers from a lack of notability it is only because it may not be clear enough, but not from an intrinsic lack of? am i right to say this is your view if you accept my arguments. Chensiyuan 00:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The exact criteria for notability can be found here. I notice that one of th middle paragraphs is plagiarized from this page listed. People come and people go in appointments such as dean, and I'd not consider them inherently notable. In any case, I think a few third party mentions, i.e. not from NUS, are necessary. ST sources are fine. I (and anyone else) can read them by Lexis-Nexis. --Rifleman 82 04:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

so your point is? i've said the collectivity of the portfolios establishes notability, what is your reply to that? the "plagiarism" contention can be easily overcome by attribution. lastly, all but a couple of the 6 sources are from Sraits Times (in pdf, if you open the link) although the url is from nus law. thanks. Chensiyuan 05:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

My point is, and has always been, that being dean itself is not inherently notable. However, setting aside my misgivings, I have suggested that if you feel strongly otherwise, you should give more citations. And since you've been around Wikipedia awhile, why not cite them properly? Using {{cite news}} for example?

didn't do it back then cos was in a middle of something. since you've done it, thanks. so what else do you think lacks notability? what do you make of the google results, which is often used as a loose yardstick for establishing notability.

I don't understand why you are trying to split hairs about "plagiarism" (your quotation marks, not mine). Either it is or it isn't; seeing that it is (or nearly is) word-for-word from the NUS site, I find it hard to describe it otherwise. --Rifleman 82 06:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

not terribly important to go into semantics, my point was it can be overcome by attribution. i inserted the quotation marks because you framed it as such. Chensiyuan 08:08, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You

Thanks for sorting out my picture of a Kugelrohr. It looks great now. - Curious Gregor - Synthesis for all 19:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)