User talk:Law Lord

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives
1, 2
This user is currently on editor review. You may comment on his edits at Wikipedia:Editor review/Law Lord.

Contents

[edit] RfA Thanks

Hi Law Lord - thanks for your participation in my request for adminship. It passed 52/0/0, and I'm now in possession of a shiny new mop. If I can ever help you with anything, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 08:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of The Blekingegade Gang

A tag has been placed on The Blekingegade Gang requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. JohnCD (talk) 18:23, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article titles

According to our manual of style, articles such as 'a' 'an' and 'the' should be avoided in article titles. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

However, that is only true "... unless part of a proper noun ..." as in this case. --Law Lord (talk) 16:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] oops

I'm a dummy today, I clicked the wrong link and put that warning on the incorrect page. I noticed you tagged it as vandalism, though. It was human error, I meant to inform a user of the fact their article was taged for speedy deletion, but accidentially placed it on the wrong page. Although I'm greatful you caught it and reverted it, I am a little disheartened that you taged it as vandalism (maybe that wasn't your intention but it comes off as assuming bad faith.) Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 18:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, which I will bear in mind if I revert pages in the future. --Law Lord (talk) 18:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE: 3 April 2008

Sorry about that - I edited the wrong page by mistake and didn't realise. Won't happen again (I hope) Daniel (talk) 19:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Capital "Advice"

Hi.
I'm contacting you because you have edited Advice (constitutional), and in relation to the capitalisation of "Advice" (or "advice", if you prefer). A wee dispute about this has arisen at the article, with one editor decapitalising in the text and placing a "fact" tag on the statement that the term is often capitalised. If you have some input on this, and particularly some relevant references, please take part in resolving it, at the article. Thanks and best regards
-- Lonewolf BC (talk) 19:55, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Incivility on Wikipedia

Yes, discussions here can get a bit heated, can't they? My best advice is to ignore users who make such comments. If he takes action you disagree with, call for a vote on attempts to rename or merge a page or to add edits you disagree with. Sometimes you may have to take it to arbitration or bring an editor to the attention of administrators if he's been particularly rude. Everyone is entitled to edit Wikipedia. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 12:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. I agree. --Law Lord (talk) 12:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Kari Havsland Jørgensen

I have listed an article that you have been involved in editing, Kari Havsland Jørgensen, for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kari Havsland Jørgensen. Hemmingsen 10:55, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand what your comment on my talk page is about. I never claimed it was somehow illegal to publish her name and I wasn't trying to protect you from being sued or anything like that. I am well aware that parts of the media have published her name (while other parts of the media have chosen not to), however that is of course not a reason for us to do so. My concerns have primarily been with regards to the policy Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. And the part about publishing her name was the least important of my reasons for nominating the article for deletion. Hemmingsen 16:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, this is somewhat redundant to the comments I left at the AfD and at the DRV, but in the interest of clarity:
  • I'm opposed to any article about her as a case of WP:BLP#Articles about people notable only for one event.
  • I'm opposed to an article about her that publishes her real name per WP:BLP#Privacy of names.
  • I consider the wording used in the deleted article to be problematic, because it did not specifically state that she hadn't been charged or convicted.
  • As all the sources I've read, only cover her in the context of the event with trivial coverage of the rest of her life, I am not convinced that she is sufficiently notable for a separate article.
I made it a bulletted instead of the numbered list, you asked for, to avoid assigning numbers that could resemble relative priorities, but hopefully it still clears things up a bit. Hemmingsen 10:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kari Havsland Jørgensen

Normally I would grant your request, but as the article was deleted because of violations of Wikpedia's biographies of living persons policy I'm not allowed to. If you want it to be undeleted you need to take your sources to Wikipedia:Deletion review and get a consensus there that the concerns raised in the AfD nomination aren't valid. Hut 8.5 14:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of user talk pages

Yep, they can. Editors can remove whatever they want from their talk pages, and can request their deletion if they wish. An administrator will very rarely turn their request down unless it's in the middle of a dispute, in which the history is a fundamental part of the discussion. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

No probs! :) Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Support

This user supports Steve Smith (Sarcasticidealist) in the 2008 WMF Board of Trustees elections.

Law Lord (talk) 18:54, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, m'Lord - that's very gratifying. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 20:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Constantine II of Greece

Of course, the relevant guideline is Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles), "Former or deposed monarchs". Constantine (no surname) is extremely non-specific (it gives abolutely no information on who the article is about); for that reason, it's not an appropriate article title. In case of disputed moves (and other major changes of articles), you should discuss the issue at the appropriate talk page (you can also go to Requested moves). - Mike Rosoft (talk) 09:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Doc glasgow/The BLP problem

For the interest of clever people. --Law Lord (talk) 12:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)