User talk:Meehawl

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Alai 00:33, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

-

Well, let's see, I've played/observed more ARGs than I can conveniently count, and worked BTS on two major ones, and nothing I have played has ever required me, in the game's basic reality, to be anyone or anything but myself. So, I'm not seeing the roleplaying.

-

I think you're confusing what the PMs do with what the players do. How can it be "role-playing" if you're not playing a role? Phaedra777 17:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC) - I think you are not quite comprehending fully the terms of engagement between the internal self and the public self. We are always playing a role. The only thing at issue is how many roles are being acted at simultaneously, and what props we are using: The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life Symbolic interactionism Meehawl 17:09, 29 December 2006 (UTC) - And I think that while that may be a valid argument, for people looking for a basic idea of what an ARG is, comparing it to a LARP or RPG is going to give them an inaccurate perception. Phaedra777 17:28, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Marc Collins-Rector
Please do not make personal attacks. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

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. -- WebHamste r  03:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

This article is not "controversial in tone and unsourced" - it is a statement of two facts, both of which can be sourced multiple times, and this article contains a direct link to a government registry of sex offenders. This is a canonical source that cannot be legitimately disputed. This person is notable, and has been covered by numerous printed publications for the past ten years.Meehawl 03:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

It may not have been an attack page but the article was anyways a candidate for speedy deletion based on criteria CSD A1 - article that provides little or no context. So I would suggest that you expand the article with reliable sources and make that the individual is notable, because it may have a CSD A7 candidate, an article on an individual that does not assert its significance. Also I wasn't the one who proposed the deletion but another editor, the one who've put the warning. -- JForget 03:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I've restored the article but in condition that you make improvements to the article. I've added the necessary tags for improvements. If nothing is done to improve the article, it is very susceptible to be tagged for speedy deletion (WP:CSD) or deletion discussion (WP:AFD). Otherwise, you may just want to merge it to the Digital Entertainment Network per failure in meeting notability guidelines (WP:BIO). JForget 03:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fractal globule
A tag has been placed on Fractal globule requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. 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. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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), 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ⊥m93 talk. 01:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * My ego has nothing to do with this whatsoever. The article had been tagged for deletion for a lack of content, not for the content itself.  I will be more than happy to restore the article for you and place a construction template on it.  PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

And there you have it. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Expanding Fractal Globule
Could you expand the article a bit so that non-biologists might see why fractal globules are significant? Autarch (talk) 21:33, 17 October 2009 (UTC)