User talk:Mike oootside of edmonton

January 2008
Hi, the recent edit you made to Edmonton Investors Group Limited Partnership has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 18:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Edmonton Investors Group Limited Partnership
I have removed the tables that you added to the article as Wikipedia not a financial profile website nor a news service tracking the voting preferences of shareholders. While the potential sale of the Oilers is notable and should be included in the article, the tracking of individual shareholders should not be included as it puts undue weight upon that the event and clutters the article with excess information. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your messages: While I understand the interest in the list of shareholders, the information you added was beyond just a list of shareholders, but also the current status of various parties per the potential sale. That, in my opinion, is an excessive amount of information.  Might I recommend that you instead find an external link to the list of shareholders and link to that instead of adding in the table?   If you do re-add the table, it should include all of the shareholders instead of an arbitrary number, though the external link is probably the better method. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your message: By "arbitrary" number, I meant the table currently lists 13 shareholders and a statement that there are another 20 unlisted. It would be better to list either all of the remaining 12 shareholders with 100 shares or drop the two in the table that have 100 shares. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 21:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your message: Okay, I see what you're doing. The double tables were confusing.  So I've re-added the changes you were trying to make and formatted them more like a usual article with references formatted like they normally are.  Is that the look you were trying to attain? -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 01:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Re your message: I'm glad that we got that worked out. Sorry about the back and forth that it took to get it settled. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 14:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Cal Nichols
A tag has been placed on Cal Nichols 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.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (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. Gromlakh (talk) 16:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Cal Nichols
A tag has been placed on Cal Nichols 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 person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (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. Gromlakh (talk) 16:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As the reviewing admin, I declined the speedy--he's probably important. But:


 * 1) do not sign articles on wikipedia. Your contribution is noted in the page history.
 * 2) make absolutely certain none of the material is copied from another publication or website
 * 3) Suggested reading: WP:FIRST, WP:COI.

and I do not consider the recent edits vandalism, though perhaps they might contain material that is more appropriate in an article on the team. Please however do not revert that until there is some discussion. DGG (talk) 19:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * as for COI, it seemed to me you had some specific connection with the subject, but If Im wrong,feel free to remove it. DGG (talk) 20:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Mike oootside of edmonton]. Please accept my apologies, I was mistaken in my reverting. I wanted to revert your signing of the article and instead reverted the whole bunch of your legitimate edits. I forgot that a rollback would affect all the edits you made. Happy editing,  Snowolf  How can I help? 20:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)