User talk:Jeanenawhitney/Archive 1

Government departments template
Hello. I am really sorry but can't make heads nor tails of what to do. There is as mentioned elsewhere a United States WikiProject. There is a US Government Agency WikiProject somewhere maybe, I don't remember. Some discussion of fixing an infobox, some disagreement about that. No clear direction that I could find at the moment so for now I used the table again in an article or two until the time comes that a good infobox exists. Yes it is a messy solution. Also apologies if I derailed your own work on one. I am also new to Wikipedia, less than 1.5 years. Best wishes. -Susanlesch 06:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
 * In case you are interested in participating and did not see it there is a discussion of infoboxes in the talk page of the Secretary of State. I am going to have to let this one go for the time being. Good luck. -Susanlesch 05:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Peter Jennings
Because your edit to the article was exactly like the many edits of another editor (see, , , , and the article history for more), who has repeatedly put the same exact fair use image in the infobox (despite countless pleadings to stop), causing much annoyance. I assumed that you and him/her were one and the same. Please read up on the image policy regarding fair use. They can't be used to merely show what a person looks like, which is what your edit did. 140.247.131.86 21:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Article : Little John Beecher
I removed the speedy you placed on this article as I believe it was meant to be a redirect to John Hubbard Beecher. ARended Winter 19:02, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Tagging
Hi there. Do you think you could slow down a bit with your speedy tagging please? Tonight you've tagged at least three articles as A7 which clearly indicated their subjects importance.

Anatoly Lieven - a prince and general

Paraic Duffy - the leader of a major sporting governing body

Władysław Szafer - a professor of botany, at least eminent enough to get an obituary in at least one of his field's journals

Keep in mind that speedy deletion is only for the most uncontroversial cases - mainly "vanity" articles for obviously non-notable people ("John Smith is a student at somewhere High School. He has lots of friends and is very cool" - that sort of thing). An article doesn't have to prove beyond doubt that the subject passes WP:BIO to avoid it - just give a reasonable indication of why the subject might be notable. If there's a claim of importance but you don't personally thin it's strong enough, you should use WP:PROD or WP:AFD instead. Best, Iain99Balderdash and piffle 23:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I tagged those articles when they were nothing more then one liners without references. Władysław Szafer obituary reference goes to a broken link (still). So how is any body to know if these people are or were real. I will try and refrain from such requests. --Jeanenawhitney (talk) 01:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Couple of points. First, unless an article is obviously nonsense or vandalism, you shouldn't really speedy tag it within a minute of it being created - many editors, particularly newer ones, create articles over the course of several edits, as happened with Paraic Duffy, and it's very dispiriting for new editors to have their work tagged for deletion before they've had chance to finish it. If you're not sure whether it's a work in progress or not you can always leave it as unpatrolled and let someone else look at it in twenty minutes or so.


 * As for references, lack of references is never a reason for speedy deletion (unless it's a negatively-toned biography of a living person); if an article can reasonably be improved it shouldn't be deleted. It's better to assume good faith and ask the article creator to provide some sources, as I've done with Anatoly Lieven, and then maybe think about prodding or AfDing if they're not forthcoming in a reasonable period of time and if you can't find any yourself. Remember though that for some topics (like Russian Civil War commanders) Google is unlikely to be the best way of finding sources - for things like this it's a good idea to ask a relevant Wikiproject (eg Wikiproject:Military History to have a look if you're not sure about the accuracy of the article.


 * Finally, the link in Władysław Szafer; it was actually fairly straightforward to find the correct URL through the journal's website, and hopefully I've fixed this now. The reference confirms that he was an important figure in Polish biology, and I might have a go at expanding the article this evening if I get time. However, even if the paper hadn't been available online, the reference still gave the journal name, volume and page number of the obituary, and this is ample information for anyone with access to a good library to confirm the facts; a printed reference doesn't require a working internet link to be verifiable.


 * Anyway, hope this is helpful; your efforst on new page patrol are appreciated and I hope you'll continue; just keep in mind that deletion is a last resort rather than a first one. See New pages patrol for more advice. Best, Iain99Balderdash and piffle 13:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Trev
Because he's already categorized as an LGBT actor from the United States. The category is redundant and splinters an already small category. Otto4711 (talk) 14:12, 22 November 2007 (UTC)