User talk:Radinbc

Jo e  I  13:42, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

reasoned advocacy
After reading this comment I wondered whether I should offer you a fuller apology, for mistakingly including you with the individuals who had claimed the article on Sarah Coyne should be deleted, because she hadn't done anything, after I had reminded the nominator that GNG doesn't actually require individuals to do anything.

I didn't check your comment carefully enough. You did reference two different policies, so my inclusion of you was definitely a mistake, and I am genuinely sorry for making it.

You wrote my comments had come to "look less and less like reasoned advocacy." Ouch. Sorry you feel that way.

You asked: "Are we supposed to accept that because someone is one of thousands who have attended a private school such as UTC that this is a notability factor?" Um, yes, kind of.

I tried to explain this, after my table, when I described how even though everyone accepts that winning a Victoria Cross, or equivalent, is sufficient to establish notability, all by itself, many members of the military wikiproject won't accept that a lesser medal, like a silver star, or a bronze star, conveys any notability. In my opinion, even a purple heart conveys some notability.

WRT to UTS, it is not that UTS is a private school, it is that UTS is a school that requires higher than usual academic achievement to be admitted, and whose graduates have a higher than usual record of distinguishing themselves. Frankly, as I scanned the school's list of notable alumni, I was a little underwhelmed. I only recognized a small fraction of them, about a dozen. If you have an idle moment, and you check, you may find that you recognize more of those alumni than I do.

Anyhow, I am completely serious, and I am doing my best to aim for "reasoned advocacy".

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 17:08, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

· Apology accepted. Radinbc (talk) 01:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC)