User talk:Packerfansam/Archive 4

Speedy deletion nomination of Simon Lock Lord


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Simon Lock Lord requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. 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 this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Xx236 (talk) 07:47, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Deadlinks
Please do not remove citations to reliable sources when the link is dead. Instead, it's better to find an archived copy of the page and link to that. Example here 32.218.32.230 (talk) 01:21, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

External links: always plural never singular
According to Wikipedia's Manual of Style, the External links section is always plural never singular even if has only one link in the external links section in an article. Thank you-RFD (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Use of mergenote
Hi! I was doing maintenance on mergenote and noticed you had transcluded mergenote to notify users of a merge discussion. I went ahead and fixed them so you don't need to worry. For future reference, mergenote should always be substituted or else it won't automatically sign your contribution. To do so, use:

Thanks for your contributions! Happy editing. Wugapodes (talk) 23:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Removal of reference
I am puzzled that you removed a reference in this edit. I see that you added it back as an external link in a subsequent edit. That doesn't seem like the appropriate way to handle this, but perhaps you have a good explanation. I note that it wasn't explained in the edit summary; had you explained your reasoning in the edit summary I might not be bothering you. Would you be so kind as to explain your rationale?-- S Philbrick (Talk)  17:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * After glancing up at your talk page I see that someone informed you that the political graveyard should not be treated as a reliable source, so I assume that's why you converted it from a reference to an external link. This is a good reason for using edit summaries, it would've saved me a bit of time.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  17:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Packerfansam (talk) 18:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Olin B. Lewis
Hi-I had to make a change to the Olin B. Lewis article; Lewis never served in the Minnesota House of Representatives. However, Lewis did served in the St. Paul Municipal Assembly. Unfortunately, the Political Graveyard website listed Olin B. Lewis as serving in the Minnesota House of Representatives. To add to the confusion, as you know, the lower house of the Wisconsin Legislature is: the Assembly. One of the reference librarians of the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library was very helpful; the Minnesota Legislators Past and Present weblink is maintain by them. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 17:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've made additional changes where it seemed necessary. I've also sent a message to The Political Graveyard. Packerfansam (talk) 05:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings
To You and Yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:53, 20 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Belated thanks. Packerfansam (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

List of people from Devon
Hi, Packerfansam. I noticed in this edit you removed, without explanation, a notable person from the above article. I have restored the link and mention. If you think I've made a mistake, let me know - thanks! JohnInDC (talk) 12:38, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Edit-a-thon in Madison

 * ART+FEMINISM EDIT-A-THON


 * Saturday, March 5th, 9:30 a.m. – noon
 * Madison Public Library (Madison, Wisconsin)
 * Bring a laptop! There will be snacks and daycare

RSVP on the event page if you plan to attend or have any suggestions. czar 00:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


 * You received this message because you are a member of Category:Wikipedians in Wisconsin. To opt-in to future Madison event messages, add yourself to the mailing list.

Julius Ingram
Can you please provide a reference for Julius Ingram as Orrin Henry Ingram's brother? Very interesting if true. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 07:10, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It was include in a source listed elsewhere. I've re-worded things a bit so the reference works for this info as well. Packerfansam (talk) 07:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I've improved the layout and added an infobox. Are you able to find his date of death please? I think it may be 1917.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:17, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you're right, 1917. Packerfansam (talk) 05:24, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

AN/I notification
See Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. KateWishing (talk) 00:18, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
 * Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Green Bay Packers
Hi Packersfansam! I noticed your username and wanted to let you know that I recently restarted the Green Bay Packers WikiProject! If you are interested in joining, please feel free to add your username to our active member list. Let me know if you have any questions! « Gonzo fan2007  (talk)  @  00:54, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Gaylord Graves for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gaylord Graves 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/Gaylord Graves 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 notice from the top of the article. Steve Quinn (talk) 01:22, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Adolph R. Bucknam for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adolph R. Bucknam 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/Adolph R. Bucknam 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 notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 21:24, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Nathan Sadowsky for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nathan Sadowsky 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/Nathan Sadowsky 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 notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 21:25, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Michael B. Danaher for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael B. Danaher 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/Michael B. Danaher 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 notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 22:05, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of A. U. Coates for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A. U. Coates 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/A. U. Coates 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 notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 23:15, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Joshua H. Berkey for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joshua H. Berkey 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/Joshua H. Berkey 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 notice from the top of the article. Dolotta (talk) 00:54, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * A note that this piece has been rather substantially expanded and will probably end as a Keep. Carrite (talk) 21:48, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!
From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:24, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Alva Garey for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alva Garey 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/Alva Garey 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 notice from the top of the article. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:43, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:44, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Eliot Wolf for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eliot Wolf 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/Eliot Wolf 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 notice from the top of the article. Drmies (talk) 17:16, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello
Glad to have you back editing! -- Dolotta (talk) 04:47, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Packerfansam (talk) 06:12, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Please link to sources
I noticed that you've been adding a lot of sources that are online, but haven't linked to their URLs (example). It would be helpful to readers to link to the sources you've used. Thanks. 32.218.37.81 (talk) 20:32, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Wisconsin NRHP articles
Hi, i happen to have recently expanded some articles you created back in 2012 or 2013, including this expansion of Delavan Post Office. Also I have gotten notifications of your creating some new NRHP articles. thank you for your contributions!

Perhaps you are aware of some effort going on to improve NRHP articles, with some discussion at wt:WI, with my main focus being to add the very relevant, usually available now, NRHP nomination documents and associated photos. It would be great if you would include those into your new articles, from the get go. You can find them by clicking on the NRHP reference number in the county list-article or in the NRHP infobox of an existing article. Or simply by copy-pasting in the following draft reference and filling in the reference number at "id=" in two places:

Also, I think you may be creating articles by copy-pasting an NRHP infobox from one article and adapting it. It is easier and better to use the already filled out custom NRHP infobox available here, at least for places listed by 2010. See more about that and other tips at wp:NRHPHELP.

Also you are including links to private, commercial website www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com, which is a copy of the National Park Service's data. I personally would simply remove from your articles. I prefer the NRIS reference from the NRHP infobox generator, which refers to the National Park Service's database. Your links to landmarkhunter seem more worthwhile because, while that also has a copy of NPS info, it also seems to provide a photo somehow.

Hope you don't mind my making suggestions this way. Please don't sweat it if any of this is a bother. The main thing is that you're helping build coverage, keep up the good work! cheers, --Doncram (talk) 00:17, 29 March 2018 (UTC)


 * By the way, for many (perhaps most) NRHPs in Wisconsin unlike in any other state, there has been extensive development of the county list-articles with descriptions and sources, chiefly by editor Jeff the quiet. So for the Union Depot (Ashland, Wisconsin) new article you created, there was a corresponding entry in the county list-article with a Wisconsin Historic Society source (this source).  The URL gives an error and seems unaccessible to me right at this moment.  But perhaps it could be found within the wisconsinhistory.org website, and the description given is still valid and sourced information.  So if you are starting new Wisconsin NRHP articles, IMHO you should be starting them with inclusion (and credit in edit summary such as "started with text from National Register of Historic Places listings in Ashland County, Wisconsin") of material from the list-article.
 * I will try to take a look at your recent new NRHP articles William and Susanna Geenen House and Trout Point Logging Camp and Gunning–Purves Building, too. Thanks for your clear edit summaries about them and again for your contributions over many years. --Doncram (talk) 03:18, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I tried but actually wasn't able to add very much. I did add an NRHP document source to the Geenen house one, which could be used to expand the article more.  Hope this hasn't been a bother.  That's all for me, for now. --Doncram (talk) 18:38, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I don't mind the suggestions and I'll try to see if I can take advantage of them. Packerfansam (talk) 06:11, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh really? :) I added a bit to your new Joel S. Fisk House article. --Doncram (talk) 14:43, 3 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Hmm. I personally don't mind super-short stub articles that have some sourcing at least.  It's just that you have started multiple new articles, apparently working from National Register of Historic Places listings in Brown County, Wisconsin and perhaps other NRHP county list-articles, but you haven't included the description and sources in the NRHP list-article.  It is like you are splitting out new articles, with less content than in the source, and it seems disrespectful to how other Wisconsin NRHP editors have chosen to proceed over a few years.  Could you possibly please consider how this looks, in terms of cooperating with others? :)  It sort of seems like you can be hurting readers, who are tricked into going to the stub article which has less than the list-article. --Doncram (talk) 14:56, 3 April 2018 (UTC)


 * FYI, I added a bit more to several more of your new articles. I think you did make an effort to include what was in the corresponding list-article already, thanks.  I was able to add a few references to the online NRHP nomination documents which are available for some of them.  Those weren't cited already in the list-articles, actually.  It is irritating to me that they're not available for all, but they are very good and are available for some, and sometimes can be found by clicking on the NRHP reference number in the list-article or in the NRHP infobox of a new article.
 * It seems to me that Otto and Hilda Gretzinger House is across the street from, but not included in, the North Broadway Street Historic District, based on the NRHP doc available for the latter, which was listed in 1983, so I revised mention of their relationship in both those articles. For this district the NRHP document does not include a map, unfortunately, so its bounds aren't as completely clear as for many other districts, but it does list out all its included properties.  Let me know, or revise the articles, if I am missing something.  Thanks! --Doncram (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was going by what was written on the Wisconsin Historical Society's website, but having carefully re-read their wording, I guess it could be taken either way as to whether the house is actually in the district or just on the outside of it. Packerfansam (talk) 19:42, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

suggestion
When you create a new one, e.g. Charles R. Smith House, you appear to be using internet search results (e.g. landmarkhunter.com and Wisconsin Historical Society) plus an infobox from Elkman's NRHP infobox generator (if it has anything available, which is only for places NRHP-listed before mid 2010). Thank you for doing all that. But could I suggest that you also copy-paste the content from the corresponding NRHP-county-list-article into your draft, and edit from that, too? This way you would be guaranteed to include at least everything from the list-article item, and that would save other/future editors' time in checking whether everything was transfered, etc. That way would guarantee that readers get more, and not anything less. I personally would argue that ensuring readers get nothing less should be like a requirement, though I am ambivalent about making any requirements exactly. I don't like being forced on anything myself, or forcing other editors to do anything (we are all volunteers, it is clear that some value is being added no matter what, including that there is now a larger photo visible for the reader, etc.). I just hope you can find it easy to incorporate everything in the list-article item, so that you want to.

When you're editing, maybe this means having an extra window or two open. For the Charles R. Smith House, you would hit "edit" on the list-article, and copy-paste the following:

|image=CharlesRSmithHouseNeenahWI.jpg |lat=44.190556 |lon=-88.445 |description= Rambling mansion begun by Smith in 1890 and later expanded with various pavilions and porches with Queen Anne, Italianate, and Colonial Revival features. Charles was a son of Elisha Smith, founder of Menasha Wooden Ware, and expanded, modernized, and diversified the company when he took over. For his second wife, Smith got the town of Warner renamed Ladysmith, and after Charles died, that wife married the silent movie actor Orrin Johnson, who retired to the mansion.

You would be inserting that into the starter material you get from the Elkman infobox generator. It includes a perfectly good well-formed reference to the NRHP document in this case. Optionally, also if the infobox doesn't already include any coordinates (as sometimes happens), this gives you coordinates for the article (it is a bit of a bother, but you could take the lat= and lon= items and compose an infobox line: |coordinates=44.19056°N, -88.445°W

But mainly you would just select the description text with its included footnote(s) (which is of extraordinarily good quality in Wisconsin NRHP list-articles), and probably you would delete the rest. In your edit summary it would be nice if you would acknowledge the source, i.e. use edit summary like "create page, including text from National Register of Historic Places listings in Winnebago County, Wisconsin ", although I don't think you have to do that, you could just say "create page" instead.

Does this seem workable? Really it is just cutting and pasting one thing, and it does save you from cutting and pasting the photo file name from elsewhere, and I hope you might try it and see if it works for you. --Doncram (talk) 22:17, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I can try doing something like this, at least to a certain extent. I come from a job where I have to be diligent about plagiarism, so copying and pasting sections, even in instances when it's perfectly fine, tends to feel foreign to me. Packerfansam (talk) 05:14, 7 April 2018 (UTC)


 * All the better that you are familiar with the issue. I too have professional experience with plagiarism issues, and came to understand that plagiarism is when less credit is given than is due, and what is particularly bad is taking credit for your personal benefit.  I personally use direct quotations from NRHP documents more than many other editors do, in order to fully give credit to original authors, and I personally dislike badly done paraphrasing which fails to give adequate credit to original writers for their wording (even tho it includes a footnote, that's not enough credit if the wording overlaps too much).


 * Here it is not like you are seeking credit for the writing for any personal benefit. And what is presented to readers is still all from a single Wikipedia voice.  And it matters what the original writer(s) actually want.  Here, the writer is mostly User:Jeff the quiet ... Jeff, could you comment?  Also there are the wishes of others like me, who all want for the articles to be created and want efficiency in production (and even can resent extra work being created for others to have to follow up and check whether or not stuff has been transferred where it needs to be done as here IMO) and want for readers to get more and not to get less.


 * There is wp:PATT about proper attribution for copying within Wikipedia, which recommends using, in edit summary "copied content from page name; see that page's history for attribution" Especially if Jeff the Quiet agrees, that is what I think should be done.  And I believe Jeff the Quiet wants for the pages to be created with the base text plus more, and does not himself want to produce the pages, and wants for you to go ahead, as I do.  If you proceed with doing what everyone wants, and it is legal (not copyvio) and it is with appropriate credit, then it is just good to do. --Doncram (talk) 07:48, 7 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Don, well said. Sam, I'm happy to have my summaries copied verbatim into new articles.  Outside of Milwaukee, Waukesha and Dane counties, I've written 98% of the summaries that exist for Wisconsin, so you don't need to do much analysis of article history to be pretty sure a summary was from me.  I agree that new starts are a step in the right direction, and it's a bit annoying as a reader to go to a page and find less information there.  Don is right: I'd rather spend my time writing missing summaries and adding references, so I'm happy to have you expand the summaries into starts of articles.


 * Another thought: Once you've copied the references into the new article, I'd be happy to have the references removed from the county list, to make those lists load faster and not have such huge lists of references at the end.  I'd like the text itself left in the county list, so a reader can quickly scan for highlights in a county without visiting each page. For example consider the Merchant Avenue Historic District on National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Jefferson_County,_Wisconsin. As long as the references are on the individual page, they seem near enough to me. That's what I've been doing on county lists lately, to keep the pages smaller. I'm not sure how others feel about that, though?  -Jeff the quiet (talk) 14:56, 7 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks Jeff the quiet for commenting. To be clear, you would start with the copy-and-paste, but then you will probably want to edit/expand on that.  The list-article summaries are just that, summaries, often with sentence fragments.  And Packersfansam, you have been bringing other sources to bear, too.  You would be adding value, not merely copy-pasting!  About refining the list-article summaries why don't we talk about that at wt:WI.  I know somewhat about getting list-articles to Featured List status, and it probably could be okay to drop references that are included in the linked articles, but do let's talk about that elsewhere, and not burden Packerfansam about that.  Thanks!--Doncram (talk) 23:17, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Columbus, Wisconsin
Great work you are doing JD Milburn (talk) 07:34, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much, I appreciate it. Packerfansam (talk) 05:43, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Merger
Hi-the Charles C. Schmidt article could be merged into the Charles J. Schmidt article; an administrator may be able to merge the two articles. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 11:45, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi-the Charles C. Schmidt article was merged into the Charles J. Schmidt article-many thanks-RFD (talk) 13:11, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update. Packerfansam (talk) 05:49, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

no further disambiguation needed for "Third Avenue Historic District (Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin)" and similar
Hi there. I often get notices of new articles like Third Avenue Historic District (Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin), which I sometimes browse to check. This article includes a "for" hatnote, "For other places of the same name, see Third Avenue Historic District". I don't personally care much and certainly don't want to carry on any dispute about it, but perhaps you should know that the "for" note will get removed by other editors, because it is not needed by readers to clarify anything (the title includes "Sturgeon bay, wisconsin" and is not at all ambiguous) and it is highly unlikely that any reader interested in this article also wants to read articles about other random, essentially unrelated historic districts about Third Avenues elsewhere. In my experience, there are disambiguation-focused editors who will eventually find and remove unnecessary disambiguation. So why add it in the first place; and why not remove it to save others' effort.

You must think that disambiguation and for-notes work differently than I do; perhaps you or I could ask a question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation or some other forum where the disambiguation specialists hang out.

But anyhow, I am glad to see the new article, and I just tried to add a bit from the available NRHP document about it. The reference number in the NRHP infobox already linked to the NRHP document; i just pasted a draft reference from the Elkman NRHP infobox generator into the article and adapted it a bit, and included a quote and a bit more from the document. I do think it helps readers to give them access to the document and its 41 accompanying photos. :) --Doncram (talk) 13:45, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Elroy C. Honadel


The article Elroy C. Honadel has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Does not meet WP:NPOL."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jmertel23 (talk) 19:35, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

W.G.C. Bagley
Greetings and hi. I am writing to ask if you wouldn't mind moving W.G.C. Bagley to W. G. C. Bagley. The reason is that the initials represent three separate names and not one abbreviated single form of a name. Check out my edits if you like, also. Thanks! --Southern Iowan (talk) 22:30, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Andrew M. Schuster for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew M. Schuster 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/Andrew M. Schuster 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  03:06, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Wisconsin political bio format
Howdy. Assuming you're the fellow who creates all the Wisconsin politician bio articles. Why do you keep putting one line at the top, then have a Biography section, with the rest of the article after it? That's not the correct format. GoodDay (talk) 14:41, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Ralph E. Kronenwetter for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ralph E. Kronenwetter 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/Ralph E. Kronenwetter 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. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:29, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Wisconsin political bio format
Howdy. Just a friendly reminder, to format those article intros correctly, when you're creating them :) GoodDay (talk) 18:17, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michael D. Navrkal


The article Michael D. Navrkal has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  17:40, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Sam -- An IP had removed the references that were in the article a few months ago. I added them back in. -- Dolotta (talk) 21:36, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Packerfansam (talk) 03:41, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of James Loy (United States Navy)


The article James Loy (United States Navy) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Seems to be notable for only one thing. Unlikely to meet general notability requirement unless a decision has been taken that all recipients of the medal are automatically notable. Please expand or clarify, if possible.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skinny87 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Harold Drotning‎


The article Harold Drotning‎ has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skinny87 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of George Engel (United States Army)


The article George Engel (United States Army) has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skinny87 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks but


Thanks much for your help but someone else can put up with this. I have better things to do.

R — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlevse (talk • contribs) 19:34, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of D. J. Clark for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article D. J. Clark 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/D. J. Clark 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.  Eagles   24/7  (C)  14:37, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Charles P. Dykman
Hello. I have recently proposed the deletion of Charles P. Dykman. Please check the article if you want to contest the proposed deletion. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:56, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:48, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Packerfansam (talk) 04:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Michael T. Sullivan for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael T. Sullivan 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/Michael T. Sullivan 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. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 09:24, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Daniel L. LaRocque for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel L. LaRocque 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/Daniel L. LaRocque 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. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 09:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Paul Lundsten for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Lundsten 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/Paul Lundsten 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. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:28, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Paul C. Gartzke for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul C. Gartzke 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/Paul C. Gartzke 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. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 18:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Robert D. Sundby for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert D. Sundby 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/Robert D. Sundby 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. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 13:22, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Edward T. Hartman


The article Edward T. Hartman has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "DSM is not sufficient for notability, doesn't otherwise seem to meet GNG or NSOLDIER."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)