User talk:Acdixon/Archive2006

The Family Foundation of Kentucky
The article that you had created, The Family Foundation of Kentucky, was deemed non-notable for organizations. Below is the criteria guidelines:

Criteria For Organizations

 * 1) Organizations are usually notable if the scope of activities are national or international in scale and information can be verified by a third party source.
 * 2) *Individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not notable enough to warrant a separate article unless sufficient notability is established through reliable and verifiable sources.  However, chapter information is welcome for inclusion into wikipedia in list articles as long as only verifiable information is included.
 * 3) Organizations whose activities are local in scope are usually not notable unless verifiable information from reliable third party sources can be found.

Assertion of notability
Notability can be asserted for organizations through:
 * 1) Inclusion in third party published materials.
 * 2) A significant amount of media coverage that is not trivial in nature and that deals specifically with the organization as the primary subject:
 * 3) *For example, in 2004 and 2005, UC Berkeley enforced a moratorium on alcohol for fraternities and sororities. The moratorium became a much covered topic in the media outlets in the San Francisco Bay Area.  While this asserts notability for the moratorium and the greek system at Berkeley and possibly justifies an article either on the moratorium or the greek system in general, it does not assert notability for an individual chapter of a fraternity or sorority on campus.

The following cannot be used to assert notability:
 * 1) Internal documents cannot be used as an assertion of notability. However, they can be used as source material for an article.
 * 2) *Internal documents can include, reports, newsletters, press releases, magazines and websites published by the organization itself.
 * 3) Student-run newspapers.

A search-engine search of the Internet may have been performed, and was not seen as notable enough. However, I performed a search and have seen alot of references to it. So you may be able to request that the article be restored, using as many of the third-party, more significant, unbiased references as possible. - CobaltBlueTony 00:37, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. I'm sure you can tell I'm new to Wikipedia. How do I request that my article be restored? To whom do I make the request? Once it is restored, do I just need to add some external links to the bottom to establish noteworthiness? Acdixon 14 September 2006


 * To have your article reviewed, please read the Undeletion policy. If you need support, you can count on mine, based solely on my search, linked above. - CobaltBlueTony 14:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Seeing as the person, Cobaltbluetony, has changed their mind I have restored the article. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 18:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! - CobaltBlueTony 14:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Redirect of Big Blue Nation
Hi. Sorry I didn't respond earlier; my daughter was just born last week.

I've reverted my redirect of the article, even though I'm not entirely convinced it's necessary to have an article separate from on on UK basketball (or UK athletics in general).

I also find it odd that 2 of the 3 external links are to UK websites that aren't directly related to fandom, and the third is called "Wildcat Nation" rather than "Big Blue Nation". The only reference in the article doesn't mention the term "Big Blue Nation" either. This seems like a WP:V problem that could probably be fixed with some editing. Geoffrey Spear 19:59, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:KYOVA
You have been invited to join the WP KYOVA Region, an effort to coordinate articles within the "tri-state" region. Be sure to spread the word!  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 15:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

feedback to your draft Education in Kentucky article
see my feedback at User talk:Acdixon/DraftPage. Good job!. --rogerd 17:03, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Assessment system for WikiProject Kentucky
Hi Acdixon,

If I'm gonna be involved, then Christamas sounds good. I'm swamped. You can do it yourself tho. It's not difficult at all, conceptually, there's just many categories to be created (perhaps twenty to 23; could be less if you desire fewer categorization options) and put into a hierarchy. Once you've done it once, it's a cakewalk. Later! --Ling.Nut 15:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Gabibbo is Satan.
Gabibbo is Satan.

later--Ling.Nut 15:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply to user:Seicer
I can't find that much about the "notable person" either, so I am inclined to leave it off for the intern. At any rate, it would fit under Flatwoods, not Ashland, but since the cities involved are quite small, it should be noted that the person was "born in Flatwoods" if it does pan out.  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 03:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Did a search at work and couldn't find anything so it's safe to assume its not notable.  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 05:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Kentucky
The next step up from a B-rating is a good article rating. Unfortunately, that is a more formal designation, and articles really only get that after being submitted to Good articles. So, I gave it a "B"-rating because that was the highest one I could give it myself. You may wish to submit the article for peer review and/or list it on the page Good articles/Candidates to see if it can receive the more formal Good Article standing. There was no disparagement of the work of the article, again, it's just that a "B" rating is really the highest rating an article can get from me as an individual in this more-or-less informal way. Badbilltucker 15:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You're right, an article can be made an "A"-class article without going through Good article recognition first, as an A-status is also basically an informal status. Unfortunately, I have myself discovered several so-called "A" articles which failed when nominated for Good article status, and on that basis hesitate to possibly mistakenly overrate an article as an "A" only to have it crash down to a "B" status after a failed good article review. So, in practice, I tend to error on the side of caution and give an article which hasn't been recognized as a good article the "B" class. This avoids the possibly disspiriting relegation later. The good article review is also rather more in depth than the more basic review I give, and in several cases I have found that I mistakenly overlooked insufficient referencing or other faults which prevented an article reaching good article status. Again, almost all of the assessments as placed in banners are less formal ones, generally for letting a project interested in an article have a rough idea of the article's current status so it can know how much effort to put in its improvement, than those given by the good article and featured article reviews, which are more formal procedures. I just want you to know that I wasn't in any way denigrating the quality of the article, just basically erring on the side of caution. Badbilltucker 15:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I noted that there is no real climate section as it is, and that several people have been stressing that having one is important for comprehensiveness. It might be a good idea to indicate if there are any high ranking officials of the various creeds in the state, like Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran or Methodists bishops or archbishops and other notable leaders, although I'm not sure if it's required. You do want to remove the duplication of the percentage of Catholics, though. The sports section could make reference to any notable minor league teams or non-major sports teams, but I only would if they are particularly notable in their fields (past champions, that sort of thing). Lastly, the government sections, particularly the lead, are really short. One sentence sections are a definite no-no. I know that all that might sound like a lot, but I don't think it's really much, and much of it might not be required anyway. It does look like a good solid article, and like I said, even many of the things I cited might not be seen as being vital anyway. I'd still try to do something about them, particularly the climate and government sections, as I think that those might very well be counted as important. Badbilltucker 16:07, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

WP Kentucky
Not entirely by coincidence, I'm sitting in KY right at this moment. :-)

Setting up the assessment system is really easy but time-consuming. You can look at these categories and make similar ones, changing "Hawaii" to "Kentucky". The only even slightly tricky thing is to get the hierarchy of higher-level and somewhat lower-level categories straight:


 * Category:A-Class Hawaii articles
 * Category:B-Class Hawaii articles
 * Category:FA-Class Hawaii articles
 * Category:GA-Class Hawaii articles
 * Category:Hawaii articles by importance
 * Category:Hawaii articles by quality
 * Category:Hawaii articles needing attention
 * Category:Hawaii articles needing merge action
 * Category:Hawaii articles needing reassessment
 * Category:Hawaii articles with comments
 * Category:Hawaii categories
 * Category:Hawaii disambiguation pages
 * Category:Hawaii stubs
 * Category:High-importance Hawaii articles
 * Category:Low-importance Hawaii articles
 * Category:Mid-importance Hawaii articles
 * Category:Non-article Hawaii pages
 * Category:Start-Class Hawaii articles
 * Category:Stub-Class Hawaii articles
 * Category:Top-importance Hawaii articles
 * Category:Unassessed Hawaii articles
 * Category:Unassigned-importance Hawaii articles
 * Category:WikiProject Hawaii articles

After that, you'll wanna make major edits to the template that places articles in your WikiProject. You may need more help witht that; I'll be glad to help. Essentially, you'll wanna copy Ethnic groups. Don't copy the Hawaii template; I haven't made the necessary changes to set the small option (to compare, see Talk:Popora people &amp; Talk:Hoanya people.

Don't worry, I'll be around in case you have any questions. My internet access is much more limited over the holidays than is usually the case, but we aren't in any huge hurry, are we..?

Drop me a line any time with any question at all.. --Ling.Nut 16:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

PS I just thought that I could make it a little easier.. here, click these redlinks, and copy the contents of relevant Hawaii template to the new Kentucky category, altering things slightly:

--Ling.Nut 16:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Category:A-Class Kentucky articles
 * Category:B-Class Kentucky articles
 * Category:FA-Class Kentucky articles
 * Category:GA-Class Kentucky articles
 * Category:Kentucky articles by importance
 * Category:Kentucky articles by quality
 * Category:Kentucky articles needing attention
 * Category:Kentucky articles needing merge action
 * Category:Kentucky articles needing reassessment
 * Category:Kentucky articles with comments
 * Category:Kentucky categories
 * Category:Kentucky disambiguation pages
 * Category:Kentucky stubs
 * Category:High-importance Kentucky articles
 * Category:Low-importance Kentucky articles
 * Category:Mid-importance Kentucky articles
 * Category:Non-article Kentucky pages
 * Category:Start-Class Kentucky articles
 * Category:Stub-Class Kentucky articles
 * Category:Top-importance Kentucky articles
 * Category:Unassessed Kentucky articles
 * Category:Unassigned-importance Kentucky articles
 * Category:WikiProject Kentucky articles

I did the first one for you, but still ned to check it sometime or other. I just edit/replaced HI with KY.--Ling.Nut 16:37, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Category:WikiProject Kentucky
Category:WikiProject Kentucky is probably redundant. We'll look at it later. --Ling.Nut 17:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Assessment System for WikiProject Kentucky
Hi. I'll be happy to provide technical assistance on this if you need it, especially on templates. I'm still in the process of refining WPLou's system, but I think I have it nailed down enough to be able to help others with similar systems. Stevie is the man! Talk &bull; Work 02:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


 * working on it, to be copy/pasted to the template space when finished. --Ling.Nut 20:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
 * mmmmmm I think it's done. I moved it into template space. See Talk:Kentucky for the small version. --Ling.Nut 20:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Someone needs to look over the discussion page here and see if any tweaks need to be made! :-) --Ling.Nut 21:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Apparently "Stevie is the man" is very knowledgeable. Feel free to ask him any questions.
 * At this point, tho, unless someone has screwed up the categories (quite possible), you can just start assessing articles & leaving comments. If there are q's that Stevie can't answer, drop me a line.
 * --Ling.Nut 17:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the barnstar. BTW, I see you were born in Greenville. I lived for 2 or 3 years in Sacramento. I was in diapers at the time tho. :-) --Ling.Nut 17:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * see the table transcluded at the bottom of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Kentucky --Ling.Nut 23:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I might chip in to WikiProject Kentucky a little, but don't count on me to be a heavy hitter. For one thing, I have been thinking of quitting Wikipedia (probably won't, but the joy is gone). For another, I just started WikiProject Endangered languages, so I need to devote some energy to getting it up &amp; running.
 * The Everly Brothers are my mother's heroes. I might chip in there, for a start. But I dunno when that would be. --Ling.Nut 15:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)