User talk:Pop Secret

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Pop Secret, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Ziggurat 07:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Your vote at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Vote/Daniel.Bryant

Firstly, thank you for your analysis of my contributions - it will help me improve in the future, no doubt. However, you don't have suffrage for this election (see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Vote). Unfortunately, this means your vote is disqualified; I have moved it to the talk page, rather than removing it as some other candidates/election officials have done, because I believe in transparency, and if people want to make an informed decision they should have all viewpoints available to them. I hope you don't mind, and if you have any questions or issues, feel free to leave me a note on my user talk page and I'll be happy to discuss them. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T ยท C ] 23:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] I'm entitled to my opinion restored

This article has been restored after its deletion was contested at Wikipedia:Deletion review. As you nominated the article to be deleted via WP:PROD, you may wish to nominate the article for a full deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion.

GRBerry 15:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marcy Wheeler

Yeah, I love this policy stuff. Good idea to move it off of AFD, though.

I believe that we, as editors should not be passing judgment on whether coverage is merited or faddish or whatever. I don't think that Paris Hilton or any of her socialite friends should get as much coverage as they do, but they do, so they're notable. Likewise, whether or not I think that Wheeler deserves coverage, she's gotten some, so it appears to me that she, too, is notable.

The definition of trivial (or as I put it, neglible) coverage in an article is defined at WP:N, and basically it just refers to the depth of coverage in an article. If all there is in a source is a name in the middle of a list of names, that's obviously trivial. If it's a feature article about the subject, it's obviously not. When you get a paragraph or two, I think that's where judgement calls come into play about whether or not a specific article can be used to justify notability. Although the guideline does say that a sufficient number of trivial mentions may be enough to confer notability, as well.

Anyway, I don't really care one way or the other about the Wheeler article, but I enjoyed this chance to talk policy.Chunky Rice 19:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Donkey punch AFD

If there are any arguments to delete, it immediately becomes not a speedy keep candidate. Check WP:CSK for more info on that. --Coredesat 20:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)