User talk:Microchip08/Archive 3

Sig
Your sig violates WP:SIG for it's length. Please change it.  Simon KSK  23:39, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyediting an RFA
Re I know you meant well but please do not modify other's comments without their permission. best, – xeno  ( talk ) 01:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Microchip08/Labyrinth
User:Microchip08/Labyrinth, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Microchip08/Labyrinth and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Microchip08/Labyrinth during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. (Note: There are several of your pages batch nominated for discussion at that link. I didn't nominate them, but I wanted to let you know about the issue, since it doesn't look like anyone else did so.)  Raven1977 Talk to me My edits  18:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

PROD removed from Navpop
I have removed the dated PROD template you placed on Navpop. That tag is only applicable to articles, not to redirects. Redirects may be taken up at WP:Redirects for discussion. Cnilep (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Anita Dunn
Hello - We've been going around and around for a month or more on the Anita Dunn article, and are trying to make some improvents to that protected article. I was wondering if you could support simple removal of the heading on the "Mao incident", since most everybody agrees it gives too much weight to the incident. I agree that the present wording is rather NPOV, but you also said it was too wordy. Most of the wordiness comes from the footnotes, not from the article itself. We argued over that for a while too, and it was felt by some that the more we simply let the quotes speak for themselves, the better. Anyway, I was wondering what sort of edit you would support. Thanks - PAR (talk) 02:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Microchip08/Extremely obvious
User:Microchip08/Extremely obvious, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Microchip08/Extremely obvious and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Microchip08/Extremely obvious during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Cunard (talk) 06:06, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Renominated at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Microchip08/Extremely obvious (2nd nomination). Cunard (talk) 06:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

"Secret page" trail
Creating a secret page trail on Wikipedia is pointless given the mass of history information available. Please put a thing like that on your own website. &mdash; RHaworth 11:13, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Signature
Hello, please use a standard timestamp in your signature like "7 March 2011" rather than "March 7 2011", so that your signature is readable by archive bots and the like. I've discovered several instances where two-year-old conversations have stayed on talk pages just because the archive bots weren't able to read the timestamps properly. This is not a major issue at the discussion where I found your signature, but it's worth keeping in mind. Graham 87 03:39, 7 March 2011 (UTC)— μ 09:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Hadn't noticed the discrepancy. — μ 09:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Fennville High School
Hello Microchip08, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Fennville High School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 00:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Brizzly for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brizzly 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/Brizzly until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. LauraHale (talk) 23:15, 13 October 2012 (UTC)