User talk:Kennvido

How much info is too much info in an article
Regarding the in on the Chris Kyle article. Almost all of the arrest and info on the alleged killer was removed because Wiki is not a news place as mentioned by the editor that took it all down. Then it is put back. Is a war going to start? There seems to be NO concrete standard on what is covered in an article. Many articles like shootings or new deaths or huge accidents are somewhat of a 'newsy' item as it is happening. You may be able to spout off 'Rules and Regs' that are on Wiki, but that still doesn't show a 'standard' which is followed to a T. I find it very informative when the facts with references are given as things are going and I do it a lot. I think many viewers like that. To be sure, watch the Super Bowl page today as the game is going on. I can guarantee that it will be CONSTANTLY updated. Now, if Wiki is NOT a news place, nothing should be mentioned until the game is over. Personally, I like the updated material.

Just to let you know -- Missing Wikipedians
You have been mentioned at Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 10:39, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I have added some info at Missing_Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:08, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Catherine McClenahan for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Catherine McClenahan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Catherine McClenahan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  20:12, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of AP Pro32 rankings for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article AP Pro32 rankings is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/AP Pro32 rankings until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Hey man im josh (talk) 02:56, 10 February 2023 (UTC)