User talk:Jackson Harrison

Welcome!

Hello, Jackson Harrison, 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! WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 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

Wildlife of Norway
Your Wildlife of Norway template appears to be mostly useless, as it points mostly to topics related to India. Even when edited to point to topics related to Norway, most of those topics are redlinks. Can you give a good reason why this template shouldn't be deleted? WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Fauna of Norway
An article stating that there are 40,000 species of fauna in Norway is hardly encyclopedic. Do you have more to say? WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fauna of Norway


A tag has been placed on Fauna of Norway requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Wildlife of Norway
Template:Wildlife of Norway has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 22:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but the template is just created, one moment please :-) --Jackson Harrison (talk) 12:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Recent edits to Norway
I'm not sure why you made this series of edits to Norway (and then reintroduced those changes after I had reverted them). The edits in question change a "Note" to a "Reference" (there is a usefulness to having long explanatory notes kept separate from the general references for the article), and added a very akwardly worded comment about the area of Norway should the Svalbard and Jan Mayen areas be discounted. I will restore the explanatory note as separate from the references, and I'll attempt to clarify your comment about Svalbard and Jan Mayen. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:29, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Flag of Norway
With this edit to the Flag of Norway article, you added material that I had reverted this change once, with a full explanation in the edit summary, and you reverted back, with no explanation. I will once again remove these changes for the reasons stated above. Please discuss the matter here or on Talk:Flag of Norway before restoring such changes again. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:29, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) is grammatically incorrect in itself and renders the rest of the sentence also grammatically incorrect; and
 * 2) is inappropriate for the lede of the article (which should highlight only the most important ideas of the article; and
 * 3) is duplicated elsewhere in the article (see the Symbolism section).