User talk:JDAKINS

Speedy deletion of Australian Quarterly
A tag has been placed on Australian Quarterly 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 company or corporation, 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 companies and corporations.

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. meshach (talk) 21:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

December 2007
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.  Alex ' fusco ' 5  22:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Australian Quarterly
A tag has been placed on Australian Quarterly 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 company or corporation, 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 companies and corporations.

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.  Alex ' fusco ' 5  22:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from articles you have created yourself. Please use the template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion.  Alex ' fusco ' 5  23:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Sir/madam: I am the author of the article, and my apologies for deleting the above tag. I was not quite sure of the correct procedure. I have now created a Talk Page: Australian Quarterly, in which I indicate my reasons for contesting the speedy deletion for alleged lack of significance. However, in the event that there is a technical problem with this, I would like to indicate here a) that the journal was established in 1929 and as such in Australia's oldest and longest running political science journal, and b) I have now amended the article the article to make this clear. Regards, UserName: JDakins.

AfD nomination of Australian Quarterly
I have nominated Australian Quarterly, 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/Australian Quarterly. 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. meshach (talk) 02:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Requesting your involvement
Hi JDAKINS

I've been reading your additions to some of the greens related articles, and I wanted to change the title of a paragraph you've added to the Green party page. I understand your point about what you call the Pro-War debate, but I would like to change the article header to something more NPOV. I've read the discussions on the old green pro-war debate article page, and I don't think I am going over old ground.

Basically, I feel that calling the debate "pro war" is one assessment of the outcome of the debate, not the crux of the issue. I beleive the central idea in this debate is the use of force, and whether it is against green ideals of peace and non violence to support the use of force in a conflict. Whether or not it makes the greens pro-war, or mislead the public are conclusions that are drawn from the debate.

Therefore, I would like to rename the paragraph to something like  Use of Armed Force , to reflect a more NPOV view. Please don't take this request as a personal or idealogical attack, I feel that the basic point you are trying to include in the encyclopedia is a valid one & hope that you do continue adding to wikipedia.

[the discussion is here], and I would like to let you know that I would like to change it, to make sure you're voice is heard as the origional editor of the subject. --rakkar (talk) 04:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, no worries - courtesy is the key to all communication. sorry it happened so quickly & undemocraticlly. --rakkar (talk) 08:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)