Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Alaska
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Archives |
Contents |
[edit] Deletion problems
Hi, everyone, Ray Troll was deleted, a note placed on my page January 14 that it had been nominated for speedy deletion. Apparently the poster couldn't even wait for a full day, because the page is gone. I find this VERY annoying, and a problem that we've encountered in pages in progress before. I'm not quite sure how to avoid this; it seems to me that we need to keep a sharp eye out on our people stubs. Anybody else here want to help me develop the Alaska artists stubs? I'm going to have to recreate the page and make sure I include all the stuff that makes him notable. This is, to put it bluntly, a real pain in the posterior. Deirdre (talk) 10:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Deirdre, Do you have a copy of the Ray Troll article? The deletion comment says that it was speedily deleted for not asserting notability. If there was in fact an assertion of notability, then a speedy deletion was out of order. If there wasn't -- for better and worse, that's why they call it "speedy." I think it's a good practice assert a person's significance in the very first paragraph of a biographical stub -- to make it clear that the article is not just a promotional page for a less notable person. References are also very helpful in this regard. I found a bunch for "Ray Troll" by searching Google news, along with the interesting fact that he seems to have a fish named after him. Notable for sure. -- Shunpiker (talk) 14:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- No, but there should be one in the record somewhere. The problem is not so much that the stage at which the article was at failed to show notability, but that it was in progress and basically got deleted before it was done. In other words, I hadn't gotten around to demonstrating why he's worth talking about (a HUGE list of educational and fun books on prehistoric fish, for instance--he's popularized paleoichthyology--as well as having a species named after him). I'm a bit of an inclusive Wikipedian--we're not wasting paper here--and since the purpose of Wikipedia is to make the world's knowledge available on the web, free of charge, why the rush to delete? Deirdre (talk) 22:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- I have looked at the article, and I have to say that I agree with the deletion. The article made clear what Ray Troll has written and done, but it didn't make clear how that made him notable. Maybe he is notable enough for Wikipedia, I can't tell, but it didn't become clear from the article. If you can write an article that makes his notability clear (using for instance multiple coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject), you can be bold and do so. If you disagree with the deletion itself, you can request a deletion review. If you need help with that, you can leave a message on my talk page. AecisBrievenbus 23:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image:AlaskaStateSealTransparent.png
The above linked image of the Alaska state seal is up for deletion on commons (discussion here). Apparently the image is not in the public domain, as claimed, so somebody might want to reupload it on the English Wikipedia so all the links don't turn red when it's deleted on commons. - auburnpilot talk 20:14, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Nunivak Island needs cleanup
The section "ART" (sic) of the article Nunivak Island needs Wikifying and general cleanup. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 14:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Assessement request
There was some controversy about the importance assessment of White Pass. Please review. Thanks. --Qyd (talk) 13:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fhoki/Shoki/Seiki Kayamori
Near a library with a decent coverage of Alaska? Then please take a quick look at the plea for sourcing and elementary research at Talk:Seiki Kayamori. Thank you! -- Hoary (talk) 14:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Skagway?
Today, User:Polaron (reputable, not any kind of vandal) moved around and edited some pages under the claim that Sitka Skagway is now its own borough, apparently similar to Sitka and Anchorage. Has this been done? Some of the moves are quite major, especially moving Skagway-Hoonah-Angoon Census Area, Alaska to Hoonah-Angoon Census Area, Alaska, even though the census area is a creation of the Census Bureau and therefore can't itself be changed except by the Bureau. I don't have access to much of any Alaska sources; would project members please seek to use your sources and resolve this quickly? Nyttend (talk) 03:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, reading through your post I think you are mistaking Skagway for Sitka. Sitka is and always has been its own borough. Skagway is part of the Skagway-Hoonah-Angoon census area, and although there are indications that it is trying to become its own borough ([1]) the fact remains that the US census bureau website returns no hits for either the Skagway Borough or the Skagway Census Area. Though I have no doubt Polaron's edits were in good faith, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and there just doesn't seem to be any hard evidence that a split ever happened or will happen in the forseeable future. Not to mention of course (here comes the original research) I live one borough over and this is the first I've heard of it. L'Aquatique[talk] 05:53, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
- I do meant to say "Skagway is its own borough", thanks :-) I've never been closer to Alaska than Rocky Mountain National Park. Nyttend (talk) 11:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I've been talking with Polaron, and he (she?) says that there are sources out there, but instead of just giving them to me he told me I would find them if I looked hard enough. Not entirely sure what to make of that. L'Aquatique[talk] 00:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
- I do meant to say "Skagway is its own borough", thanks :-) I've never been closer to Alaska than Rocky Mountain National Park. Nyttend (talk) 11:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I did a search on "Skaguay borough" and found this page: http://www.skagway.org/, which says, interestingly enough, "Welcome to the Municipality of Skagway Borough, Gateway to the Klondike," right on the main page. Here's the explanatory text: "On June 5, 2007, voters approved dissolution of the City of Skagway and incorporation of the first first-class borough in the State of Alaska. The State of Alaska certified this election and the Municipality of Skagway Borough was incorporated on June 25, 2007. The Municipality of Skagway will be transitioning from city to borough status over the next 2 years." Archived story on the Skagway News website: http://www.skagwaynews.com/122006skagwayborough.html. So it looks like it's legit. It's not listed on the state's local boundary commission page, yet, though. Deirdre (talk) 21:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
