User talk:Writerose

Speedy deletion nomination of Broken Hill Womens' Brigade


A tag has been placed on Broken Hill Womens' Brigade 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, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Taroaldo (talk) 06:39, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I am yet to indicate the significance of the subject becuase I only just created this page within the last hour or so and have not yet had time to add this to the page. I was working on a related page, the 1892 Broken Hill miners' strike and the importance of the Womens Brigade bears a direct relation to the labour disputes of the 1890's and was about to go back to it but it seems it has been deleted before I could add the significance to it.

I am not able to find a button as in the template above to argue for keeping the page which seems to have been deleted while I was editing the related article. Am I able now to create this page or will I be breaching a Wikipedia policy to re-create a page that has been deleted without my having had the time to make any contribution to the argument to retain it?Writerose (talk) 07:03, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * You can recreate a page if the previous reason for deletion no longer applies.
 * If you want to build the page slowly, without it being deleted before you've established 'notability', you can write it in your "Userspace" by creating User:Writerose/Sandbox or User:Writerose/Trade Union Act 1881. Love the topics you are working on. ;-) John Vandenberg (chat) 09:12, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks John, I appreciate the tips. Writerose (talk) 04:11, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Adoption
Writerose, I have noticed your request to be adopted. Please take a moment to review my userpage and see if their might be a good match or common interest. I have helped editors improve their overall skill on wikipedia and develop their contribution to the Wikipedia project as a whole. I also contribute to the back-end of wikipedia to help keep it orderly by work with administrators for WP:Prod/WP:xfD/WP:ACC, and work over at the helpdesk and WP:COIN. If this is of interest to you, please feel free to reply here or over at my talk page, and we can go from there.Tiggerjay (talk) 16:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Tiggerjay, I'm not sure we have many common interests in terms of the articles we are likely to create or edit. How important is this? I note that you seem to be interested in software and technology. My son actually codes for a Californian company but my interests tend to run to politics, history etc rather than technology. My main problem with Wikipedia is the reams of policies that apply to everything and knowing when there is a policy which applies. I don't know how to participate in processes on Wikipedia such as voting on things as it is such a big site that I find things hard to locate or keep up with. I thought I'd try the mentoring because I often feel concerned that I might be breaching a policy I know nothing about. Do you think this sounds like your cup of tea? Writerose (talk) 03:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Common interests can simply help mentorship, but it is not necessary. Additionally what can be important is that there are no conflicts on viewpoints, but as it stand, everything seems fine. Here is where I can probably help you out:
 * Participating in voting
 * Better understanding of policies
 * Anything else we discover along the way...
 * If you're still interested and ready, let me know. Tiggerjay (talk) 06:57, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I've begun editing SlutWalk as I feel it is in need for improvement and it has also been nominated for deletion. This seems like a good place to start. Actually now that I've seen what WP:COIN is, the issues for which SlutWalk has been nominated seem right up your alley. I'm not sure how we are supposed to go about this mentoring arrangement? My main issue with the article is that some of it is not written in a tense which ages well and as it is an unfolding phenomenon, needs to be expanded to be kept up to date. I've added a Criticisms section but will need to do a fair bit of reading before I go much further with it. To date I've mostly created articles from scratch and not had anyone else really edit them so I'm not used to actually overwriting other people's work to any degree so I'm not sure how to handle any discussion which arises. Writerose (talk) 13:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Great, lets get started. Head over to User_talk:Tiggerjay/Adopt/Writerose and I posted a lot of things to get started. The first bit is my standard adoption introduction, the second is regarding the SlutWalk article and the third is regarding some addition things. There is a lot on that page, just skip over it and start with one thing at a time and we can go from there. On the onset, I can say I appreciate your edits to the Slutwalk page already. Tiggerjay (talk) 01:40, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)