User talk:HisSpaceResearch/Archive 4

Thanks
Thanks for the help! Russe304 16:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

In reply to Allanaquoich - I have a particular interest in Mar Lodge Estate - and feel it worth the while to expand on its place names etc. - I've found it to be a very interesting place. WikiWriter 11:28, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

paki shop
restored - I've removed the CSD tags.  E LIMINATOR JR  17:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Supercentenarian trackers
Perhaps this could be renamed, but I find it quite odd that the person who nominated this for deletion suggested an article instead. Even if an article were made, the main purpose of the 'category' is to 'categorize' and link articles that are related in certain aspects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_November_1#Category:Supercentenarian_trackers

Ryoung122 02:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Embarassed cough
Sorry. Honestly I didn't think to check the edit history on the Emma Tatham AFD. So I am genuinely sorry for any misplaced crotchety-ness on my part, and I admit there might have been some. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 03:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just thinking about it. What I'll do is strike but not delete my reply to your (not a) vote and explain, in suitably embarrassed terms, on the AFD. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 03:56, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

User:NEMT
Hi. I've reported this user twice to WP:ANI in the past with absolutely no effect. Look at his contribution history and talk page to see why. He delves into puerile vandalism every now and then such as creating inappropriate redirects or adding inappropriate content. Perhaps a new voice will have more effect? If you do report him then thanks for trying. Cheers.  Zun aid  ©  ®  08:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Tagging mistakes
You marked both Judge Lubbie Harper, Jr. and Judge Thomas A. Bishop for speedy deletion as copyright violations G12 - but didn't say what they were violations of, which made the tag unhelpful. I checked the history and saw that the original authors had blanked the page, so they could be deleted under WP:CSD. The correct tag to use when the original author has blanked the page is Db-author. GRBerry 14:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:LandCockayne.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:LandCockayne.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Murder of Arlene Fraser
Murder of Arlene Fraser, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Murder of Arlene Fraser satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Murder of Arlene Fraser and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Murder of Arlene Fraser during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 11:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Feeder
Sure thing, thanks a lot for editing :).Marcus Bowen 14:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Internet as a source of prior art
Please see Talk:Internet as a source of prior art. Thanks. --Edcolins 20:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

No Body Modficiation tag
It's an expression of an opinion. How is saying one is repulsed by body modification any different from saying one is repulsed by smoking? --Scottandrewhutchins 14:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I guess you're right. I am not offended by the tag myself (I would lean towards being repulsed by body modification as well) but I could see it being contentious, and divisive and/or inflammatory as it singles out something that people do and says "I can't stand that", so promotes intolerance in a sense. However it is still just an opinion.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 14:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Juggs
I expanded the article as promised. Want to look again? --AnonEMouse (squeak) 14:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Admin
Hi. I'd like to nominate you as an admin, as I think you're qualified. Let me know if you're interested. Epbr123 15:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

 HisSpaceResearch would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact HisSpaceResearch to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Hey there. You may wish to consider withdrawing and resubmitting yourself at a later point as your RfA does not appear to have much chance of succeeding. I also made a note about this at WP:BN. User:Veesicle 07:23, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Request for comment
Hi, I was wondering if you could take a look at a request for comment on the St Mark's College discussion page.

This is the result of an ongoing dispute and I think the more people we get to comment, the better chance we'll have of resolving the issue once and for all. You're comments would be much appreciated. Cheers. Username nought 12:38, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA
Hey there!

Don't take what's happening personally&mdash; RfAs can be a rough place but it's not meant to be unkind to its victims. :-) While my own RfA looks like it's in a good shape this time, I did need three swings at the bat before I could hit the ball; and my previous attempt did feel pretty crappy with people opposing for (what seemed to me at the time) the flimsiest of reasons.

A few suggestions for future success:
 * Take the time to really read the opposes. Most will be about one incident specifically, which seems like overreaction, but the ones who opposed are probably using it as example of what they don't like.  You can almost always extract valuable general advice from that single incident.
 * Make yourself known by your good admin-like work before you try your next RfA. The commenters want to see how well you'll handle the tools; and the best way to show them is by doing that sort of work!  Check out some of the areas I suggested in your RfA and participate.  That's the best way to demonstrate you understand policy.
 * Resist the temptation to defend your previous errors&mdash; the people in RfA don't especially want defense or mea culpa, they want to see that you're not going to do them again. The best way for that is don't to them again for a while.  :-)

Don't take an RfA failing to heart and keep contributing. You're a valuable editor, and the tools are just that&mdash; tools. &mdash; Coren (talk) 13:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Your RFA, Would you like me to close it?
Would you like me to close your RFA or do you want to wait?  Wikidudeman  (talk) 15:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry. Hope you succeed next time. Regards, R udget zŋ 16:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Next time I'll consider doing things differently. I think I might request deletion of all of my Wikipedia essays and not have views against anonymous editing. I will make some significant changes to my Wikipedia behaviour, and may attempt to request adminship again sometime early next year. Thanks for the support from those who have offered it.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 16:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I still think you said nothing untoward in your essays, although it appears the majority do not agree with me. I look forward to seeing you at RFA at the earliest possible opportunity. Resurgent insurgent (as admin) 00:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Ocean Finance
Ocean Finance, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Ocean Finance satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Ocean Finance and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Ocean Finance during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 01:58, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Userbox
I suppose I could create a userbox for you if you like. ISD (talk) 07:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Here is a link to the userbox. User:ISD/BBW. Is this what you are thinking of. ISD (talk) 11:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That's OK. Thanks. ISD (talk) 14:04, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

LOTD experiment
Now that my project is fully up and running, I though you might want to consider the four main benefits of my method over the one that you seem to be supporting:


 * 1) There is a set of orphaned articles for persons who do not have any featured lists of their own or persons that would like to take responsibility for more. Anyone can nominate such orphans.  This benefits WP by getting people involved in list articles that might not have active editors to update them or defend them against vandalism.  Please consider adopting one of our orphans.
 * 2) Each list will be encouraged to respond to commentary and feedback during the candidacy period, which will hopefully improve the quality of the articles.
 * 3) Articles without pictures will be encouraged to find them. E.g., List of Harry Potter films cast members had no image before its nominator added an image for this experiment.  This type of thing, of course, improves the project.
 * 4) Articles are encouraged to add relevant projects to their talk page. This alerts other project to articles that they would likely have an interest in and would be able to either improve or protect.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Barry Beckett
Barry Beckett, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Barry Beckett satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Barry Beckett and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Barry Beckett during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 05:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Protecting pages for 20 years?
There's always a method to my madness. :) One reason I protect pages for unreasonable long amounts of time is that I do it whenever indefinite protection is necessary... but protecting indef has one caveat: it clogs up Special:Protectedpages, which has been undergoing a cleanup effort recently. The other reason is that I like injecting flavor into boring, clinical noticeboards such as WP:RFPP. Cheers, east. 718 at 12:01, November 22, 2007

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:45, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Lesbian sexual practices
You wrote:

This article that you created seems kind of unnecessary and redundant to the main lesbian article and all of the various articles about sexual acts. If you can expand and source the article so that it meets WP:V and doesn't fall foul of WP:NOR then fine - if not, I'll probably nominate it for deletion at AfD. Thanks.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 18:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know but you might want to join the discussion about this at Lesbian and look into why the article was created and what the consensus is on all this before arbitrarily trying to enforce your individual notions of WP policy and readership needs. All the best. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Radiohead
Hi, I've put the Radiohead article up for a peer review, and would welcome your opinions on it. Thanks. Atlantik (talk) 21:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

No Consensus
Thanks for your message, I obviously need spelling lessons! Davewild (talk) 16:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Adam Hood
A tag has been placed on Adam Hood requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Whitstable 14:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, ignore the above, was tagged in error Whitstable 14:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Adam Hood
Adam Hood, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Adam Hood satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Adam Hood and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Adam Hood during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Whitstable 15:43, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Sent to AfD as requested to see what the community think. Regards Whitstable 15:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Warm Fuzzy
Hi HSR, In reply to your AfD nomination/notification on warm fuzzy, I agree with your Mergism here, and have moved the article to a footnote of transactional analysis, and elaborated the Wiktionary page, as I detail at the the AfD page. Trust this resolves this -- thanks! Nbarth 15:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Re: "Should have waited for AfD to be over first"; sorry about that -- don't know protocol. Will let discussion run its course in future. (Be bold, but not during AfD discussions!)
 * Nbarth 15:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Andrew W.K.
No kidding! It's difficult to know where to even start on that one. Wwwhatsup 00:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I took a shot at cleaning it up. Remove the tag if you feel like it. Wwwhatsup (talk) 19:30, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar for you
A tag has been placed on My Hero (video game) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. UtherSRG (talk) 18:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry for the redirect confusion. At the time I was working on my malfunctioning IRC bot so I was a little stressed, and I didn't read the history well enough. Sorry again, Thedjatclubrock :) (T/C) 13:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC).

Perpetual Wake AFD
Another editor has added an article to the AfD. Your comment on the AfD only applies to the articles that were on it at the time you commented. To aid the closing admin, please go back to the AfD and decide if you want to include the third article in your !vote, and leave a comment stating such. Thanks, JERRY talk contribs 03:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Soor Plooms
I have nominated Soor Plooms, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Soor Plooms. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 23:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I was looking here to do research for your RfA, and didn't expect to see this. 2 edits with TW? –Pomte 14:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

No real?
Just ask NORAD for a WP:RS [].--Santa (talk) 01:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Fingerboard AfD
Hi, this article has rewritten, please consider revisiting the AfD discussion to see if your comments have been addressed. Benjiboi 23:45, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Replay Publishing AfD
Hello. I've added a number of reliable sources to the Replay Publishing article, and would ask that you revisit it and comment on the AfD Discussion for Replay Publishing. I believe I've addressed your concerns with the article. The AfD is mainly about Second Season, but also nominates Replay Publishing, which I feel I've brought up to standard through adding information, citations, and links. I've also rolled the information from some of the linked Replay pages into the main article, and would be fine with keeping the main article and deleting the others I created. Thank you very much.Kezzran (talk) 04:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Loveless talk page
Don't let Ceoil hear you say you prefer Going Blank Again. I told him I preferred Nowhere over Loveless and he went crazzzzy. C'mon, "Vapour Trail" and "Taste" are awesome.

I don't think there's an imbalance of music articles necessarily. While it is true half the album FAs are alt-rock albums, there's quite a few music FAs and GAs that aren't about alternative artists: The KLF, Sex Pistols, Slayer, John Mayer, Leo Ornstein, and "Hey Ya!" are some well-done ones off the top of my head. It might interest you to know that a few of us have been helping out editors at WikiProject Metal, and now you're getting stuff like a well-written Metallica article and the recently-featured Godsmack. Still, I am planning to submit R.E.M. (band) to FAC real soon. . . WesleyDodds (talk) 02:22, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you familiar with rocksbackpages.com? They have a database of articles from major publications for countless bands. You pay for a subscription and all that. Also, the New York Times website (nytimes.com) is invaluable, since its archives appear to be complete, which is quite impressive since that includes articles as far back as the 19th century.


 * By the way, I helped "Hey Jude" pass FAR. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, no, it's perfectly alright. I always understood what your point was (even though your phrasing seemed somewhat negative, I was aware that was not your intention). Honestly, in my case alt-rock is generally just what I like to study and write about. I like the Beatles, early heavy metal, post-punk . . . I've even been exploring prog and the Canterbury Scene. But that's what ilike to listen to, and I'm not necessarily in the mood to work on related articles. I have one non-alternative music related article at FAC right now(Joy Division, which admittely is a direct predecessor to alt-rock) and I'm certainly open to help on other articles if you need it. Decide what you want to work on, and I'll try to help out as much as I can. I agree other musical articles should be improved, but the problem isn't necessarily a lack of editors interested in the topics. Led Zeppelin gets tons of edits, but it has a way to go to actually be a high-quality article. Dedication and the development of an understanding of how to write excellent articles by the project members is the real secret to how and why we've pumped out so many FAs. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Sticky Fingers merge
This merge would not be hard to perform, and at least half the Sticky Fingers song articles are weak stubs. However, I'm going to pass on this for now because there seems to be some resistance to this merge in WikiProject The Rolling Stones.

I would want a consensus among regular Rolling Stones editors, rather than simply imposing my preferred form on them. Also, I believe there may exist sufficient secondary sources to demonstrate notability and provide sufficient sourced content for rich, independently notable articles for Rolling Stones songs from this period. Maybe someone will follow through with writing them, rather than just defending the stubs.

I'm not an inclusionist. I'm used to being called an evil deletionist in discussions for articles that plainly need to go, and furthermore it is my belief that a richly detailed album article beats nine song stubs. But if there is an active project that intends to develop these song articles, they should be given a chance. / edg ☺ ☭ 08:13, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. 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. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. 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! --SineBot (talk) 19:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Tips on how to do an Afd properly
Please see and follow the directions at Articles_for_deletion. For example, you do not have step 1 done at Quiche-eater. Thanks. Ra2007 (talk) 22:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Got it, so Twinkle, a tool you're using, did not complete the listing process. If the process is not completed, however, nobody will see the Afd, and it will fail on procedural grounds.  You should either complete the process or expect the article to not be deleted.  Ra2007 (talk) 22:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

"references/" vs "Reflist"
Sorry to bother you, but do you think you could point me at an explanation of the difference(s) between "references/" & "Reflist", and give me a brief summary of why you prefer the latter over the former? Thanks in anticipation of your reply, Pdfpdf (talk) 09:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It's more condensed, and looks better in my opinion, so all articles should use that.

Thanks. Most appreciated. (I can't understand why they have two "things" that do almost the same job.) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 09:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks ...
...for the barnstar! Bearian (talk) 15:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

RFA
I was wondering whether you wanted nominating for adminship?-- Phoenix -  wiki  22:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, good, I'll write your nomination first thing tommorrow morning.-- Phoenix -  wiki  22:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, for your benifit I've selected some commonly asked additional questions and provided sample answers here. Obviously you shouldn't copy them word for word but something like them is good.. You should have a read over them. As for the three standard questions:


 * What admin work do you intend to take part in?
 * You should mention responding to WP:AN and WP:ANI, deleting stuff on CAT:CSD and closing WP:XFDs here


 * What are your best contributions to Wikipedia, and why?
 * Mention your two GAs here


 * Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or have other users caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?


 * Best to answer honestly here if you have. Make sure to mention what you've learned from the disputes too. Also mention any WP:MEDCAB cases you've taken.


 * Hope that helps!-- Phoenix -  wiki  22:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The answers you've provided as examples to those questions would be similar to the answers I would give in the first three cases, but with the last question I don't know that much about the administrator recall controversy.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 00:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Requests for adminship/HisSpaceResearch 2 &mdash; You can answer the questions whenever.-- Phoenix -  wiki  13:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Email.
Please consider enabling yours, administrators usually have this done. And some don't. :) Special:Preferences.  Regards, and good luck, M ercury 
 * Haven't yet received a confirmation code. I'll try again later.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 23:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Got it now. Confirmed.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 23:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: I've never been awarded a barnstar, and I've made 9000+ edits
If someone else hasn't already, here you go. Assuming you've been here for two years (check http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate here), you deserve this.  Two One Six Five Five  discuss my greatness 19:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Encouragement
I want you to know that your contributions to the encyclopedia are valued. I would like to see you continue. All good things come in time. Because we have contributers, we will soon have a free paper encyclopedia I can give too my daughter hopefully. Keep it up! Warmly, M ercury  00:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Tour articles
Please see my response at Articles for deletion/New World Tour regarding your general argument against tour articles. Wasted Time R (talk) 14:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

About sensomusic Usine
hello, just few comments about Usine, Usine is a young soft (a year) and has a 2000 users community which increase around 20% each month... How can you decide that it's not a 'notable' soft? I'm a spammer because I've included a link on max/msp page? If you look at the French version you will see that the page contains around 10 links to related softwares... So on the English version of the article I have only reproduce the same kind of link. If I resume the 'related software' section is allowed in French but not in English? Also the article has been rewritten to fit to 'wiki spirit'.

Regards Olivier Sens —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sensomusic (talk • contribs) 14:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA was not successful
Hi HisSpaceResearch. I have closed your RFA. I am afraid there was no consensus to promote you. Please consider the concerns that were raised, and feel free to reapply in the future. Good luck. --Deskana (talk) 15:39, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Tough RfA, well done for not taking all the drama too personally. From looking at the RfAs that others have gone through, I'd guess you'll get there eventually but may need to let more time pass and really demonstrate that you've taken on board all the oppose comments (even the ones you didn't agree with or thought were trivial). Good luck! Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk)  15:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD question: Recombinant text
I have very little experience in AfD matters, and am asking for your input before nominating an article for deletion, because, quite frankly, I do not want to be seen as someone who capriciously nominates articles which do not meet AfD standards.

If you have time, please take a look at this article. It was created by the person who—as the intro asserts—is the very person who coined the term. Most of the edits are by that person. Most, if not all, of the sources link back to this person. I mean, at best it appears to me to constitute OR, at worst, self-promotion. But maybe I'm seeing it wrong. What do you think?

I selected you and many other editors pretty much completely at random; I picked one day's AfD archives, and clicked on the talk pages of the first two or three dozen editors' talk pages I came across. I hope that in using this selection method, I will get editors who are well-versed in AfD policies, yet who also represent a good cross-section of AfD philosophies. I will monitor your talk page for your response. Thanks. Unschool (talk) 07:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your input. Incidentally, I don't feel WP:CANVASS applies at all.  My purpose is clearly acceptable given its total transparency and completely neutral intent.  But thanks for the friendly advice; it has actually only been a few weeks since I learned about WP:CANVASS. Unschool (talk) 10:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

This Is Fake DIY AfD
The recent AfD on This Is Fake DIY was recently closed as "No consensus", and a new one has been re-opened at WP:Articles for deletion/This Is Fake DIY (3rd nomination). As an editor that participated in the closed AfD, you may wish to repeat your comments at the current one. Tevildo (talk) 16:00, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

William Street, Brisbane
Hey there. Just as a note, I removed your prod here. Cheers, Dihydrogen Monoxide 09:39, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Damian Samuels
Hi,

At the moment I don't think my recently-created article should be deleted. As you probably know, it was still under construction. He has made 10 appearances on TV and I have made lots of other articles about actors from Doctor Who - all available at this part of my user page: User:Jordan5001. Alright, I admit I can be over-entusiastic when it comes to Wikipedia (see my userpage for proof!). Also, Damian is to appear in another film in 2008, so his career is still ongoing so I presume that his article will continue to expand. Also, profiles about him are to appear soon on the Internet, so personally I don't think he is too minor, at least not compared with other articles I have seen on Wikipedia and created myself. It will be classed as a stub, but if you still feel it is not meeting Wikipedia's standards, please replace the deletion log. Thanks for noticing this, I'll finish this article as soon as I can!!

Go easy on me I'm only 13, however I won't use my age as an excuse, please delete this page if so regardless - you're much more experienced than I am!

Jordan5001 (talk) 15:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Damian continued
Ok, I respect that it should be deleted. I've got all my research for my previously made articles and Damian from imdb. So could I ask you a favour? Could you scan quickly through the other articles I have made and see if they're OK?

Also, I know Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, but, correct me if I'm wrong and I probably am, but it is most certainly being filmed this year - the cast is laid out. the seventh harry potter book had its own article months before it was released.

This isn't really part of the issue, I'm just curious! - so much to learn!

Jordan5001 (talk) 16:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

RE: Aberdeen Grammar School
Aberdeen Grammar School: Just a reminder for GA reviewing, you said you might review it. Thanks! WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN play it cool.  23:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

James Joynton Smith
Blimey you are quick- I'm only getting started! Troyon (talk) 10:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Fuchsia boliviana
Yes, i agree with Troyon above, please don't be so quick to slap tags on new articles as i got two edit conflicts whilst you were doing so. Thanks HelloMojo (talk) 11:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)