User talk:Auchansa

Welcome!

Hello, Auchansa, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Sourcing
Welcome to Wikipedia!

Let's discuss this edit

The problem is that you added an assertion that doesn't exist in the cited source. Please start a new sentence, and add a source after that sentence. Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 04:09, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Name changing articles.
support to the article name change was clearly defeated 15 to 5. How was this justifiable? Kingjeff (talk) 21:17, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

But the vote is an overview of what the consensus is. Kingjeff (talk) 14:31, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

NY 228
When you've been reverted now thrice, it would be wise to stop making edits of the same kind. In good faith, I understand what you're trying to add, but a lot of stuff has been rather superfluous to an article about one route (i.e. the 3-digit route number statement), unsourceable material (i.e. the Hamilton Fish statement) and is just written and cited poorly (i.e. traffic counts). I have the article at WP:GAN and wish you wouldn't keep re-adding this stuff, cause you're going to sink it due to stability because we have to keep reverting you. If it means so much, let me add the traffic counts, at least I can add the traffic counts in where it isn't sticking out like a sore thumb. Mitch 32 (There is a destiny that makes us... family.) 11:16, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Every time my edit has been removed, I have rethought it and, in some cases, did not pursue it. In other cases, I put it in a different section and re-wrote it.


 * Believe me, the Hamilton Fish statement is not a lie, there is really a historical marker that says so. Should I take a photo?  The photo would be for you, not for the article.


 * Do consider the traffic count. It's a very small road as you might know. Auchansa (talk) 03:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I understand its a real historical marker. I am sure one was posted. One, its not relevant to NY 228. Also, lemme talk it over with User:TwinsMetsFan and we'll see what we can do. Mitch 32 (There is a destiny that makes us... family.)  03:45, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not insist on the historical marker. The guy is obscure.  I just didn't want you to think I was making it up.  As far as the traffic count, it was a genuine effort to improve the article but, again, I do not insist.  In my opinion, traffic info is one way to introduce depth to the article so that it is not merely a route description and history of the highway numbering. Auchansa (talk) 03:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't question the good faith effort here. I just have to be slightly worried when the article is up for an important review, a la WP:GAN. Also Hamilton Fish is nowhere near obscure. He was a governor of New York, a US Senator and a Secretary of State. Hell the Newburgh-Beacon Bridge is dedicated in his honor. If you'd like, one I can tell you're new, if you'd like, I'm willing to help you improve your writing skills. Mitch 32 (There is a destiny that makes us... family.) 03:54, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I generally agree with the argument on including traffic counts because it answers a basic question. Each Wikipedia article should answer the 5 Ws and the H: Without the traffic counts, we're left with the generic, unstated answer that the who is the motorists that use the highway to connect from Point A to Point B. The problem though is that the raw numbers leave it to the reader to interpret if that's busy or not.  Imzadi 1979  →   03:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Who uses the road? (in this case, how many people?)
 * 2) What is it? (it's a road, duh!)
 * 3) Where is it? (route description)
 * 4) When was it created/changed/decommissioned? (history section)
 * 5) Why? (harder, but should be answered by the various sections as best as possible)
 * 6) How? (same as why)
 * I've readded it cleanly. So, there we go. Mitch 32 (There is a destiny that makes us... family.) 04:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Clarify Please
Hi, you left a comment on the review page of a Good Article Nomination and I can't seem to understand what you are trying to say. Can you please clarify it for me? Thanks!--Dom497 (talk) 19:56, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John Brunner (CEO)


The article John Brunner (CEO) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Sources do not  support notability. Fails to  meet criteria at  WP:POLITICIAN

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I took down the prod template. Considering his status as a leading candidate to replace Akin if he drops out, I think it'd at least be nice for people to see who this fellow is. Cheers, -- Ja Ga  talk 01:32, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Nominated here Articles for deletion/John Brunner (CEO).(Lihaas (talk) 11:33, 15 September 2012 (UTC)).

Marine Corps
If you are going to make edits to the USMC page, then cite proper sources and remove your POV from the article. Ex. "glorious" Marines...--Revmqo (talk) 04:32, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Sure thing, I will remove it even though it is true.Auchansa (talk) 04:37, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Reactions to shooting
That's an excellent idea. I wonder if perhaps you should perhaps begin such an article? Is there a policy preventing that? I am something of a neophyte as an editor, so I am not sure. Coretheapple (talk) 18:17, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

A Christmas Story
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you have twice added commentary to an article, A Christmas Story. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. –&#32; –&#32; Gareth Griffith-Jones &#124; The Welsh Buzzard &#124; 06:27, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Please refrain from continuing to make non-constructive edits to A Christmas Story. Your edits could appear to some as being vandalism. Please don't worry about it; they have been reverted. Thank you. –&#32; –&#32; Gareth Griffith-Jones &#124; The Welsh Buzzard &#124; 06:00, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I see that you zealously watch and guard that article. However, the section heading is inaccurate.  The rifle in the film is not the same as any sold or presented elsewhere.  Auchansa (talk) 04:34, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I appreciate your doing so. I have modified the notice above to read less severely. You must learn about indenting. I have inserted the correct indent for your posting (above) The sub-heading is just that ... a heading, not a description. I'm here to help you. Please continue ... Good editing! –&#32; –&#32; Gareth Griffith-Jones &#124; The Welsh Buzzard &#124; 09:54, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Good morning Auchansa,

Hawaii five-0
Hi Auchansa, all new pages created are patrolled for suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia. Having reviewed Death Sentence (Hawaii Five-0) I am concerned that it does not meet the notability requirement of WP:GNG as there appears to be little independent coverage (see WP:RS) of this episode on its own, and it would appear that most other H5-0 episodes do not have (or need) their own articles. The content which you have provided is already contained at Hawaii_Five-0_(season_3), so this title should not be a page on its own, instead it should be a redirect to the episode list. If you have no objection I'd like to create this redirect, if you disagree please can you explain the reason why the episode is notable enough for its own article. Thanks. Baldy Bill ( sharpen the razor &#124; see my reflection ) 00:02, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Article notability notification
Hello. This message is to inform you that an article that you wrote, Murders of Lucia and Leo Krim, has been recently tagged with a notability notice. This means that it may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please note that articles which do not meet these criteria may be merged, redirected, or deleted. Please consider adding reliable, secondary sources to the article in order to establish the topic's notability. You may find the following links useful when searching for sources:. Thank you for editing Wikipedia! VoxelBot 19:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Asiana Flight 214 / Criticism of NTSB by ALPA
Please come to Talk:Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214 to discuss encyclopedic value of ALPA's early criticism of NTSB for fueling speculation. 75.208.105.97 (talk) 19:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)