User talk:MarcGarver/Archive 3

Wikiproject Essex.
Hi Quite Unusual. I'm thinking about proposing a Wikiproject Essex. If there was one, would you be interested in it? Thomas888b (talk) 13:18, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * If so, Could you show support for such a project at The WikiProject Essex Proposal Page. Thanks, Thomas888b (talk) 15:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Neil Taculod


A tag has been placed on Neil Taculod 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 or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. Vrenator (talk) 15:44, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * ?? I didn't create this article. I moved one of the same name into user space and then put a db-r2 on the subsequent redirect. Anyway, no problem! QU TalkQu 20:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

G3 tag on Is trey a douche
Why did you mark it as G3 rather than G10? → Σ  τ  c. 21:14, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * When in doubt, that's all. G10 is worded to imply it is for a specifically directed attack. In cases where the page uses an editor's name (e.g., "QuiteUnusual is a Douche") or a full person name (e.g., "Trey Doe is a Douche") I'd use G10. In this case, it might be argued the attack wasn't very specific that's all. QU TalkQu 21:16, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand your motives, but I think "Is trey a douche"? (with the content it had) is a very specific personal attack (that also falls under A1, A3, G3, but that's irrelevant, as G10 takes higher priority). From WP:CSD itself, "Both the page title and page content may be taken into account in assessing an attack". Anyway, for future tags, if you can ask "Would the subject of the article desire to be known by the only content of the page" and answer "no", it's probably a G10. → Σ  τ  c . 21:31, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It doesn't make a difference, anyways; the article is gone. Move on. –MuZemike 21:35, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Tour des Faroes 1997
Tour des Faroes 1997 was blanked by the page creator, so he should not be given a warning. Huggle may not warn you if there are page edits by non-page creator editors in the middle of the history. Would you please remove your warning? Happy editing! Jim1138 (talk) 23:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * User_talk:Wolfgang_7lsp btw. Jim1138 (talk) 23:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, thanks. It was a nice friendly L1 "warning" so hopefully he / she hasn't been too offended - it's gone now QU TalkQu 23:12, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

First Class
The expression is not recognised by the major authorities for matches before 1815. No important source uses that expression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.79.147 (talk) 22:34, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source for that? I know that sounds like a daft question (is there a source for there not being a source) but could you point to the basis of your information? I'm not disputing it, I'm curious. Also, it'd be helpful if you used an edit summary as your edits do look a little like vandalism (the remove of the external links without explanation for example). I'm happy to "undo" my "undoing" of your edits - thanks QU TalkQu 22:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The article on first-class cricket, though pretty badly unsourced itself, is factually correct. (One of these days one of us at WP:CRIC will tidy up all of these unsourced articles from the early days...) There's rather a lot of "custom and practice" about what constitutes "first-class" even in the 19th and early 20th centuries (and even in matches involving fairly famous people) and there's an article on Variations in first-class cricket statistics that goes into more detail than you probably want. I'm replying because your previous IP correspondent on here has got himself blocked. Johnlp (talk) 18:58, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi, first of all sorry for reverting your edits in 1802 season, etc. While it is true that first-class cricket was not initially defined until the 1890s and formally defined in the 1940s, it is generally agreed that, in retrospect, first-class cricket dates to 1772 which is the year in which scorecards began to be prepared on a regular basis. If you look at the CricketArchive site and go into its Archive/Seasons tabs, you'll see what I mean.  All the best.  Jack | talk page 20:10, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Here's the link. Jack | talk page 20:12, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, no problem as they weren't really my edits! I reverted an IP removing the first-class definitions and then, following a discussion, reverted my own reverts. So I think you've reverted my revert of myself leaving it back where it started before any of us got involved! Cheers QU TalkQu 20:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:31, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Lurgan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Logan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 26 February 2012 (UTC)