User talk:SarekOfVulcan/Archive 9
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| ← Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 → |
Your deletion closure
Hi, regarding your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Jones (author), I don't plan on making a big stink out of this, but since I see you are on admin coaching, let me say I find this kind of closure inappropriate. It's really still totally out of process - if you look at Wikipedia:Speedy keep, you'll find speedy keeps are really just for dealing with bad-faith nominations or other similar irregularities, and for the special case where everybody including the nominator agrees on keeping. None of this applied here. There really is no such thing as a legitimate speedy keep simply because of strong and early consensus. There would have been no harm in simply waiting out the process to run its course, so WP:IAR doesn't apply either. There was no good reason to ignore all rules, especially since an admin (me) had explicitly asked not to do that. Overruling such a request, in the absence of a pressing need, comes across as disrespectful.
And if you are going to cite WP:SNOW now, well, read it: SNOW is not an invitation for you to break proper process; it's an invitation for me to not dig in my heels now that you have (unfortunately) already broken it. Which is exactly what I'm going to do now, so don't worry. Still, just saying.
Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
- crossposted from FP's talk
- Concerns noted, WP:SNOW read in full. Thanks for the advice.
- I thought that everyone except the nom had voted keep, and that the nom had all but withdrawn it because of the added sourcing. I had missed your "conditional delete" above. I apologize for that.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 01:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
The impossible quiz
Thanks for your note. Given your evidence that - despite appearances - it was not nonsense, I have undeleted the article, and then re-deleted it on the correct grounds of CSD A7: "Article about a person, group, company, or web content that does not indicate the importance of the subject." Warofdreams talk 04:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Patricia Stoddard
A tag has been placed on Patricia Stoddard requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, 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 assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (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 would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Maelwys (talk) 15:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Shriners.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Shriners.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Image:Rabbi Prinz1.jpg
So what do I need to do? Thank you
- Juda S. Engelmayer (talk) 21:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
You corrected it, thank you very much. Juda S. Engelmayer (talk) 22:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Amazon price = bad idea
Two arguments:
- Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory (i.e. policy)
- The price range goes through two orders of magnitude and changes all the time. It's like quoting the current season or current temperature for a country. The price range (at this instant) is now 1.23 to 450.00? Why just link Amazon ? Why not every online bookseller ?
Megapixie (talk) 22:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Upside-down sigs
No, I don't *think* I got it from you, but I could be wrong. I think I saw upside-down Unicode written on another site a couple of months ago and decided it looked cool... though I can't remember where actually. Looks like we've got ourselves a meme :-) ǝɹʎℲxoɯ (contrib) 20:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Characters of Firefly
Recently you contibuted to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derrial Book. There is now an ongoing discussion stemming from that AfD here if you wish to contribute. [[Guest9999 15:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)]]
To Visit the Queen
No, good faith edit, what is your point. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Uh, belly laugh! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Response: PHA Star
Huh. I wrote the info about the founding of GGC, and I never realized that the date was after PHA's founding. Nice catch on the rewrite.
Is there a PHA headquarters comparable to the GGC's headquarters in DC, or is each state independent, like the Grand Lodge system?--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 01:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- I don't really know, I just came across the article and dicided to clean it up. I really know nothing of the actual organization (aside what was in the article).→041744 13:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Re:Your "Joe Klein" edit
Can you conceive of any circumstances under which you would approve linking to the TIME Editors? (I mean, if not now, then when?)
--Nbahn (talk) 05:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
One more thing: It is my belief that Jane Hamsher's[1] contribution deserves some sort of reference in the Joe Klein and Time Magazine articles because otherwise people will not easily see it. What are your thoughts on the matter? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nbahn (talk • contribs) 05:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmmmm.....I don't suppose that a blog entry by Glenn Greenwald would suffice? (I'm assuming that a blog entry by Hamsher herself doesn't suffice.)
--Nbahn (talk) 06:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Kor (Star Trek)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Kor (Star Trek), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kor (Star Trek). Thank you. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 07:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Glenn Greenwald
Please don't reinstate the "exposes errors" phraseology. It is incumbent upon us to exercise care in regards to living people under WP:BLP. I've asked for administrator intervention on the BLP Noticeboard, and I think the more neutral wording should remain until there is further input from that source.--Samiharris (talk) 16:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
re your reply: thanks I think that is the best way to proceed.--Samiharris (talk) 19:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Seems the issue has been settled by reference to the Howard Kurtz article, so I am ok with your original language. Seems Klein did admit it! Now we have good independent sourcing saying so, and I think the article is better this way.--Samiharris (talk) 19:07, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Your "clean up" seems questionable
Why is it that every article I've ever edited is on your "clean up" list. What AWB are you using? Your edits appear to be that of Wikistalking since they are all articles I have edited in the last month. CelticGreen (talk) 22:13, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Scratch that. It appears you are Wikistalking IrishLass, we just have worked on some of the same Days pages. CelticGreen (talk) 22:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- I took a look at these edits. While I don't think you are trying to distress anyone and nothing about your edits themselves looks disruptive, you should know that people can get kinda weirded out by being followed around like that, and I think it's pretty clear you've been doing that recently. I can give you suggestions for other ways to find articles to work on if you're interested. Mangojuicetalk 05:44, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
AN/I thread
FYI, this has been brought up here. --Onorem♠Dil 13:22, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
AWB edits
Please go back and review every edit you made with AWB. Look at what you did here, scroll down to see all the bright red cite errors you made. I have corrected that page but you are responsible for the edits you make. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 02:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Olive branch
Thank you for understanding all that happened, the reactions, and for being a good person in agreeing to not use contributors lists in the way you used mine. I hope we can move on and work in harmony in the future. I considered your thought of using AWB but it's about to become 1984 at my work and big brother will be watching. I think I'll wait to see the damage caused before I apply, but I will consider applying if I can ever edit from home. IrishLass (talk) 17:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Sarek -- Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Adrian.walker Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.159.81.56 (talk) 15:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Adrian.walker (talk · contribs)
I had a feeling he'd appeared somewhere on Wikipedia before. At least we're giving him consistent advice. Acroterion (talk) 03:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
More Notable Sources for Aspose
Hi,
I found two more notable sources about Aspose.
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/dotnet/Word2Help.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salman.sarfraz (talk • contribs) 08:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Blogs and self-published sources are not considered reliable sources for the purposes of Wikipedia.--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 11:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
These are NOT self-published sources. That's why i am sharing with you and these are good sources. Check them out carefully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salman.sarfraz (talk • contribs) 14:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Converting Microsoft Word files into HTML Help Files
- By Jason Nadrowski
- An Automated Method of Converting Microsoft Word files into HTML Help Files
- Note: This is an unedited reader contribution
Hi,
Little update, the URL of CodeProject article i shared with you is changed to http://www.codeproject.com/KB/office/Word2Help.aspx . Moreover, Unedited Reader Contribution doesn't mean Self-Published Article. If you check this term explained here: http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/Unedited.aspx , you will see that all articles that are submitted to www.Codeproject.com through their submission wizard gets this status and with the passage of time, they move it to other specific categories based upon their popularity. Anyways, i just found it and shared with you as it is.
I want to share another notable source with you that i just found. Please check it too: http://www.builderau.com.au/program/soa/First-Look-Aspose-Excel/0,339024614,339131440,00.htm This website is owned by ZDNet and this page seems 2-3 years older. I hope, you will consider it too as a notable source. Salman.sarfraz (talk) 13:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Ad advocacy CfDs
Ok, I see the nominations, is a discussion coming soon?--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 12:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes. My apologies for typing slowly. : ) - jc37 12:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Series of tubes
An article that you have been involved in editing, Series of tubes, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Series of tubes. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 02:33, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Rihannsu
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Rihannsu, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Rihannsu. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 01:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sure, takes some time :) If there is hope, no need to delete right away :) Also, if you find a little, then we could merge this as well so we wont lose any content you might find. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
