User talk:HH1234

September 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Otto Philipp Braun. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ol Yeller '''Talktome 14:24, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi OlYeller21

thank you for your message. I was a little surprised, since I improved almost all problems mentioned by the maintenance template. Now the article has:

- cited references

- if you read it, the notability should be without a doubt (since there exist similar articles in French, German and Spanish)

- there are a lot of links to other articles

- AND the article is no orphan any more (see Battle of Junín for example)

So after you reverted my removal of the maintenance template I think it is your turn to remove your removal!

Sincerely HH1234 HH1234 (talk) 17:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * You're right, I shouldn't have reverted the removal of all of the tags. I have now removed some.  The ones on the article now apply to inline citation which isn't a big deal but it's hard to determine what information the references you have provided can verify.  For example, if someone is to try and verify the information, should they just read the entirety of the three books you listed and this article?  I also kept the notability tag.  The tag doesn't mean that the subject of the article isn't notable, it means that I don't know what inclusion guideline he specifically satisfies.  If you'd like to get the template removed, I would point of what part of WP:N the subject satisfies.  Being a general doesn't necessarily imply notability; it may make them notable but it may not (see WP:BIO).  The subject may satisfy WP:N by receiving significant coverage from reliable sources but as the references you have provided are simply to an entire text, it's hard to say (not to mention that they're not in English but that doesn't apply to verifiability).  Does that all make sense?  I'll be watching this page so if you want to talk about it more, let's do so here or on the talk page of the article if you want.  On a side note, you've done a great job with the article as a new editor.  Ol Yeller  '''Talktome 17:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)