![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
You're right, the source provided was rubbish but Jeff Dye did date Sara Jean Underwood. There are many circumstantial pieces of evidence, myspace photos (the couple together in fairly ordinary couple photos) and videos (her goofing watching Superbowl with him), twitter comments (although Underwood no longer maintains a twitter page). The problem is how difficult it is to find a more reputable a source mentioning the relationship given both of them are relatively low profile "celebrities". It is unquestionably true but the way most people enforce WP:BLP most editors will not allow it to be added to the article. There was an editors who dismissed the Howard Stern Show as a good enough source for her relationship with Ryan Seacreat but that was clearly just prejudice or snobbery. Some editors are just determined to undermine and remove any Personal life sections from articles. -- Horkana (talk) 19:46, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Any chance you could find the original air dates for some of the episodes? Some of the gameplay devices could be sourced to individual episodes, ideally from anything Olmec said. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Regardless, I don't think original airdates are necessary with this type of show. To use primary sources, we have to have enough information given identifying a particular episode so that someone else can obtain it and check for themselves. Here, the episode titles are uniquely identifying enough. For other shows without distinct titles, information like celebrities appearing, names of contestants, names of teams participating, as well as original air date and production number can serve to uniquely identify one episode. There's no problem with citing a particular episode, but stuff like "once on The Joker's Wild, there was a 'Road Signs' category that caused problems for the two contestants involved" is (in addition to being remarkably trivial) hard to verify. RJaguar3 | u | t 05:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, this is just to inform you that elections for Clerkship at WP:UAA have started on the talk page. You have been sent this message because you were recently active in handling submissions or discussions. Discussion is ongoing and you are encouraged to voice your opinion on the candidates.
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Fridae'sDoom (talk) at 06:43, 14 September 2010 (UTC).
I wouldn't mess with Tomballguy if I were you. He's hypersensitive, and he doesn't like edit warring. Just don't do it, dude. You won't like him when he's angry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.240.223.29 (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Hossam taha musician 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 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles – see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding ((hangon))
to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. NtheP (talk) 15:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
You seconded a proposal to delete K'nex Sonic Blizzard Coaster. The author of the article has contested the PROD, and the article has now been taken to a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K'nex Sonic Blizzard Coaster. You may wish to contribute to the discussion. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Don't forget the two that were already deleted if you are going to make a table of winners. We should have a sortable table based on total winnings. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
A discussion has begun about whether the article List of Jeopardy! contestants, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jeopardy! contestants until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. CTJF83 chat 19:39, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
Not sure if this is of interest to you, or if such should even be merged into your new "list" article, but for a limited time, the content from the now-deleted Dan Pawson article is still available in Google's cache. [1] Robert K S (talk) 03:35, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
You previously participated in an AFD discussion regarding a child article of Jeopardy!. There is currently another ongoing AFD for Jeopardy! Kids Week and you may be interested in providing a comment or vote for/against deletion. If you'd like to participate you can find the discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! Kids Week. Sottolacqua (talk) 03:31, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
You previously participated in a discussion/AFD for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! Kids Week and I'd like to make you aware of another ongoing discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celebrity Jeopardy! (2nd nomination) in which you may want to offer your own opinion. Please feel free to comment...thanks. Sottolacqua (talk) 17:36, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Yikes! I'm not sure how I did that. Thanks for catching it! ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 21:37, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much for removing that fake block notice on my talk page! I was completely fooled!
Have some fried chicken on me:
Ken g6 has given you a fresh piece of fried chicken! Pieces of fried chicken promote WikiLove and hopefully this piece has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot piece, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!
Spread the tastiness of fried chicken by adding ((subst:GiveChicken)) to their talk page with a friendly message, or gobble up this chicken the giver's talk page with ((subst:MunchChicken))!!
-- Ken_g6 (factors | composites) 23:49, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
The article 2010 basketball referee battery is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 basketball referee battery 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 good 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. tedder (talk) 23:49, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that a tag that you added here is causing a ParserFunction error. You can see this by checking ((Pufc|1=Console gameboxes.jpg|date=2011 January 6)) which produces Error: Invalid time. Interestingly, this is fixed by swapping the date format to ((Pufc|1=Console gameboxes.jpg|date=6 January 2011)) which produces the desired result. I will see if I can fix the problem at the source, Template:Pufc, and let you know. You can respond here, since my IP page is shared. 134.253.26.11 (talk) 16:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
If the IP does it again, let HJ Mitchell know. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 01:37, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
The article Jeopardy! broadcast history is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! broadcast history (2nd nomination) 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 good 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. Sottolacqua (talk) 16:28, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for adding that ref on the Chris Bell Music bit. I doubt it'll stop the vandal, but at least it's there. Robert K S (talk) 06:14, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Dear Sir/Madam, I have been informed that the above entry is beyond the scope of the Wikipedia. The equations, I must admit are rather hefty, but on the other hand the mathematics is essentially elementary without any approximations, although quite involved in the derivation. This work appears to be entirely new and unknown to the mathematical establishment at this time so that no immediate verification is possible. I am respectfully appealing to Wikipedia not to delete my entry until at least it has been read by someone out there and worked out and that Wikipedia has been informed of their findings. WPGS25041941 (talk) 14:12, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Dear Sir/Madam,
As the author [and sole originator to the best of my knowledge] of the above, I have revised my opinion and come to the same view point as Wikpedia, that the research in the proposed entry has not yet reached a mature stage and as yet there is no established usefuness. Neither has the work been verified in the Wikipedian sense of the word. The effort I used in producing my contribution to Wikipedia has by no means been wasted, for I have been able to improve the work for inclusion elsewhere and what is more to the point, have acquired a greater proficiency in computing, to which I am still very new. My computer was only connected to the Internet in 2010 October 10th at 10 UTC. By " verifiable " you surely mean [immediately] verifiable. That is, reference has been made by Wikipedia to an authority where the work had been subjected to a rigorous analysis and was then authenticated by that citation.
However, many thanks for directing me to alternative places where the research can be peer-reviewed and developed into something of practical utility. This I have done.
Yours Sincerely,
W. P. G. Shaw.
[Br. English expression has been used in this missive] — Preceding unsigned comment added by WPGS25041941 (talk • contribs) 14:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC) WPGS25041941 (talk) 14:40, 30 January 2011 (UTC)signedWPGS25041941 (talk) 20:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Dear RJaguar3,
There is a quote by the eminent German mathematican G.F.B. Riemann [1822 - 1866] in which he asserts that
the irregular distribution of the primes [prime numbers] is " a mystery into which the [human] mind would never penetrate. "
He was absolutely right in that he was presumably working
in the decimal system. However in the more fundamental binary system, matters look entirely different. He was in my view, mistaken in believing that the erraticity of the primes is unexplainable. This perplexity was a challenge and in the two contributions to Wikiversity: [the result of many an hour pondering the matter]
" Polynomial Quotient Equations " - the above entry under another name and " Matrices of Remainders " I think the matter might now be virtually resolved
except for some straight forward equation solving. Plotting the complex zeros duly labelled, computing their amplitudes and finding their significance seems to be all that remains to be done. To the best of my knowledge this has not happened, for the above equations had not been derived hitherto.
My very limited interest in maths was in solving
an allegedly unsolvable problem, but I feel that I have done my part and should leave persuance of matters to others.
In view of the above, in another forum,
I cited an equation differentiated from Riemann's Zeta Function [RZF] in that unlike the RZF, all of the even terms are absent - only uneven integers occur. I never imagined that my innocent comment would attact such vehement personal abuse from the Establishment. In the process, I discovered far more about sociological issues of human nature and politics than about logical discussion for what there was of it, which in any case could have been discovered years ago.WPGS25041941 (talk) 19:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Just letting you know I failed the article here. If you want to put it up for nomination again, you should probably address the concerns I placed in the review. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your review and comments. My responses are at Talk:Mitt Romney/GA2. Wasted Time R (talk) 14:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for helping out and offering to do the GA Review for the article Aaron Saxton, much appreciated. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:24, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for adding the image of Senator Nick Xenophon to the article Aaron Saxton, it is well placed and looks good! ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
To try to break the logjam on the Mitt Romney GAN, I've done a new analysis and made a new proposal at Talk:Mitt Romney/GA2#Article length. Let us know what you think and thanks for bearing with this review. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:19, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
The article Legends of the Hidden Temple you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Legends of the Hidden Temple for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. I've left my reasoning and any advice I could give on improvements in the review. Unfortunately, I know nothing about the show at all, or I'd try to be of some use to you, but don't be afraid to ask me for any help with it in the future anyway. Good luck with it in the future. GRAPPLE X 14:10, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
On behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, we would like to take the time and thank you for your contributions made as part of the March 2011 Good articles backlog elimination drive. Awards and barnstars will go out shortly for those who have reviewed a certain number of articles.
During the backlog drive, in the month of March 2011,
We started the GA backlog elimination drive with 378 GA nominations remaining, with 291 that were not reviewed at all. By 2:00, April 1, 2011, the backlog was at 171 GA nominations, with 100 that were left unreviewed.
At the start of the drive, the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 101 days (Andrei Kirilenko (politician), at 20 November 2010, reviewed and passed 1 March 2011); at the end of the drive the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 39 days (Gery Chico, at 24 February 2011, still yet to be reviewed as of this posting).
While we did not achieve the objective of getting the backlog of outstanding GA nominations down to below 50, we reduced the GA backlog by over half. The GA reviews also seemed to be of a higher quality and have consistently led, to say the least, to marginal improvements to those articles (although there were significant improvements to many, even on the some of the nominations that were failed).
If you would like to comment on the drive itself and maybe even make suggestions on how to improve the next one, please make a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/March 2011#Feedback. Another GA backlog elimination drive is being planned for later this year, tentatively for September or October 2011. Also, if you have any comments or remarks on how to improve the Good article process in general, Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles can always use some feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles.
Again, on behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, thank you for making the March 2011 GA backlog elimination drive a success.
MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 21:51, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Whether editors 'support' or 'oppose', most of the regular !voters do this objectively (it takes a while to load). Please see my response to your rebuttal. You may not be aware of our efforts at User:Kudpung/RfA reform to clean up the RfA process. If you feel there is something wrong with the current RfA system, you are really most welcome to come along and comment. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:15, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
So adding a link informing people of System Requirements is spamming. Stop accusing me of spamming, Its 100% relevant to the Game YoVille. I will continue to edit it, until you prove that the page or link is spam. If you reply to this message explaining how its spam when stated "nofollow added". Adding that link some where with "dofollow" would be an attempt to spam. This message has been recorded as well as your Wiki information, in case of further actions. If you don't like the content thats one thing, but link title and page is relevant to the wiki page title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.59.131 (talk) 22:45, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
_____________________________________________________
Thank you for replying, guess I have to work harder. Also Official source isn't necessary BIG business, because many assume "to be official", one needs to be part of some sort of BIG business company (Like an employee). Also it's not a fan site from what I can tell. Again, thank you for clarifying your position. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.59.131 (talk) 19:45, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for adding the deletion notice on Crustache, as I just couldn't find the right warning!
I tried adding a unnotable, but then I realised it was for people articles! Thanks again,
Limideen 15:17, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
![]()
|
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thanks for fixing the license tag! Without your help the image might have been deleted. JohnHWiki talk - 04:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC) |
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jeopardy! international tournaments 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeopardy! international tournaments 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 good 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. Ѕōŧŧōľäċqǔä (talk) 15:32, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Empires & Allies 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 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 labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion (
((db-...))
) 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. TransporterMan (TALK) 02:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
I withdraw the nomination.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:04, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Jeopardy! intertitle.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
((bots|deny=DASHBot))
to your talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:39, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Subsequent to your successful nomination of R Jay Gabany for speedy deletion on the grounds that notability had not been established, perhaps you would like to review of R. Jay GaBany. I think the subject might be notable, but I'm a bit concerned that the article creator's name is the same as the subject of the article. TheMadBaron (talk) 08:59, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
I saw you did a couple of redirects/renames on an article I created, Zynga Poker. I was wondering if you would consider undoing the renames as I do not feel they were necessary. The common name for the game is Zynga Poker, which is why I originally named it as such. Since the current website and logo indicate this as the common name, would you consider taking this into consideration? I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this.
JovanWelks (talk) 22:33, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
![]() New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello RJaguar3! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
Hey, sorry if it seemed unexplained, that's my fault for not using an edit summary. :) I rolled them back because the user added copious links to the same blog (fusible.com) to a series of articles unrelated to the blog's main topic (domain names) and the name of the account is the same as the company that owns fusible.com. I didn't see that they added other references not to that blog, so my bad. Thanks for dropping me a note, I appreciate it! Steven Walling • talk 23:45, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
No problem! I have done my share of inadvertent reverts and warnings. Thanks for your contributions! Cheers, Jim1138 (talk) 18:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Zynga-poker-thumbnail-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
((bots|deny=DASHBot))
to your talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:39, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Please see WP:User page#Deletion of user pages for special details on deletion of user pages and user talk pages. Thanks.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:43, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? episodes 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? episodes (3rd nomination) 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 good 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. WikiLubber (talk) 02:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited Buy Here Pay Here, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Credit (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
You should know that I reintroduced the original, fair-use version of the Pac-man cutscene in the new History and influence section at Power-up article. The image is now illustrating the history of the Pac-Man power-up and thus can't be replaced in this usage by a free image, so I think it's legitimate now. Diego (talk) 12:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi. When you recently edited 2011 Wisconsin Act 23, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native American (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Password Plus and Super Password with this edit, did not appear to be constructive, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. DawgDeputy (talk) 01:12, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
FYI: your edit count account link on your user page says it is expired. ;) --Dkriegls (talk to me!) 06:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
There is currently a straw poll taking place here. Your input would be appreciated. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 00:03, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't agree with this revert: [12] because I mentioned all details, and the email is valid, it can easily be checked, just ask Dell customer service. Further, self-publishing is not something unheard of: the other Dell customer that got refunded in Belgium was also self-published, it was a blog he wrote himself. For all we know it could be just a hoax, just as well as mine. At least I quoted the exact email, with reference numbers, unlike him. I can and will write a blog entry about this, of course, but that's still self-published. So, should I write a blog entry and then it's OK? I am confused. Just because that "dell refund win" story was widely circulated doesn't mean it's less more more true then mine. In fact, as I have stated, it is less supported by actual Dell reference numbers.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Msoos (talk • contribs) 16:46, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
The AFD debate for CBS music was closed, see discussion on this talk page. Thanks. Go Phightins! (talk) 10:18, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the Bridy refs to the Copyright Alert System article, and for all the other attention you've given it. I'm glad it's not languishing anymore. —mjb (talk) 13:29, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Your work at consumer arbitration is very illuminating. Impressive! II | (t - c) 16:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC) |
Hello RJaguar3, I noticed that you've previously made some edits to the Center for Copyright Information article. I'm currently working on behalf of the CCI to improve the article and, due to my COI, I posted a message on Talk:CCI previously about my proposed changes. This led to quite a bit of feedback from a few editors. I've now addressed that feedback, but the main editor involved has indicated that he's busy currently, and asked that I reach out to others.
I'm wondering if you might be willing to take a look at the discussion at Talk:CCI and the updated draft in my userspace and, if things look okay, go ahead and move my draft over? Thanks! ChrisPond (Talk · COI) 13:24, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adam Orth Twitter incident 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Orth Twitter incident 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. Robofish (talk) 00:25, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Tout le monde veut prendre sa place 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 an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
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, you can place a request here. Caffeyw (talk) 09:48, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
(section heading added by RJaguar3)
Hello. Would you please explain why you are so attached with removing factually correct information of a legislator's record -- in the entirety of a career, and continuously adding back a comment made to a partisan crowd? I would appreciate an end to the internet vandalism. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samiskin (talk • contribs) 02:42, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I transferred the discussion to the Talk page of the article -- Bahaltener (talk)
The article Comparison of collegiate quiz bowl formats has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.
While all constructive 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 ((proposed deletion/dated))
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 ((proposed deletion/dated))
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.
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |