User talk:Gardner.rw1

Hi Gardner.rw1. I've now left a comment on a classmate’s talk page in full satisfaction of the silly second assignment.

Hey Will! -Lauren — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurenrach (talk • contribs) 19:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I have also commented on a classmate's talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BracusAnguis (talk • contribs) 15:58, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Mentorship
Hi Gardner, and welcome to Wikipedia! I would be happy to look after you and your project. It is late here, but tomorrow I will take a look at the work you are intending to do and see where things are, and the roadmap for completion. I work to UK time and am usually available from noon UTC to about 2a.m. UTC, so there's a good chance I can deal with any enquiries quite quickly. Cheers. Rodhull andemu  23:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Nonpoint source water pollution regulation


A tag has been placed on Nonpoint source water pollution regulation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. RadioFan (talk) 01:19, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Nonpoint source water pollution regulation
I have moved Nonpoint source water pollution regulation into your user space as User:Gardner.rw1/Nonpoint source water pollution regulation (moved). Though Wikipedia welcomes your contributions, articles should not be moved into article space until they are at least written in prose. They can be stubs (very short articles containing only a few sentences), but they need to at least use complete sentences, as opposed to just being in outline form. --B (talk) 02:41, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi there
Hi there, unfortunately it appears that your former online guide/ambassador has retired from editing, however I have offered to take up that role. I see above that your draft has been moved into your "user space" which means it is not yet good enough to release into the main article space. This is perfectly fine and I hope you will have no trouble continuing to work on the draft at this location. It can be moved later. I am only just aware of your target topic, and I imagine that your article on regulation would be a main article that appears as a link at the head of a relevant section in Nonpoint source pollution. You might have to work on that article a bit as well. Let me know if and when you are stuck. I live pretty much out of your time zone, so please be prepared for a delayed response. Shyamal (talk) 15:17, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Have not seen activity for a while. Just an advanced note that your draft article could greatly benefit from the use of a secondary or tertiary source - especially check the table of content of any pollution related book for structure ideas. You can use primary references (journals -largely relied upon in the draft) as well to lead people to specific details. (useful reading PRIMARY) Shyamal (talk) 03:57, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Good to hear from you! Is the article scope restricted to regulations within the United States ? If so the title should indicate it. Shyamal (talk) 01:37, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Shyamal: Good point. While I believe the types of policy instruments used to regulate nonpoint source water pollution are the same regardless of country, my professor indicated that he would like us to focus on U.S. regulation. Let me confer with my group members. We will take one of two approaches. We will either change the scope of the article to generally discuss policy instruments to regulate nonpoint source water pollution, with a subsection that also discusses how these regulations apply to the United States. Or, alternatively, we will change the title of the article to comport with a U.S. regulatory focus. I'll email them now and will fix the article as soon as I here back from them (hopefully soon). Thank you again. Gardner.rw1 (talk) 04:10, 25 March 2011 (UTC)


 * p.s. I'm not sure if normal Wikipedia protocol is for me to respond to you on my own page or respond on yours. Just let me know what you prefer!
 * Replying on either page is fine. Thanks, I do actually hope this is global in scope. Shyamal (talk) 09:59, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Shymal: Looks like the "powers that be" (i.e., my professor) would like U.S. policy to be the focus of our article. There are drawbacks to this, but perhaps it will spur on other Wikipedians to look at similar regulations in other countries. I am going to change the article heading to reflect the US-centric focus.Gardner.rw1 (talk) 22:50, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries. I just looked at the article and it still seems to have many empty sections, apart from sections that are too short or without citations. Do try and flesh out empty sections, if sections are not likely to grow to a substantial length, it might make more sense to combine them up under their major headings. Also do consider citing tertiary sources - such as standard textbook. Shyamal (talk) 13:58, 7 April 2011 (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) 14:29, 24 November 2015 (UTC)