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.
39 of 393 articles have been prepared and submitted. Come help us prepare more at the
workshop page.
Feature: Wikipedia 0.7
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of articles taken from the English version of Wikipedia, compiled by the
Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. It is designed for a DVD release, and the selection was put together using a
Selection Bot, based on the quality and importance assigned by WikiProjects.
The Video games Project and its daughter projects have multiple articles among the selection and are currently working on cleaning up the articles to improve their presentation. A
workshop page has been set up that is designed to assist and coordinate the effort. The status of and recommendations for articles is listed on the table. Discussion about which articles should be kept and removed from the list have been taking place on the
talk page.
If you have assisted in working on and improving a current Featured article, Good article, or A-Class article, please check the workshop page to see if the article is recommended for inclusion.
Articles will need an
id version submitted to ensure it is included. They will also need to be cleaned up if maintenance tags and other issues are present. Participation is not restricted, and if you can assist with the preparation effort, it would be greatly appreciated.
Things to remember for preparation
The workshop page has a notes section for each article. Clean up suggestions have been left for some articles.
Do a light sweep of the article to address any vandalism andclean up tags: citation needed, more references, lengthy plot, etc.
If you need help with an article, post on the
talk page.
Newsletter delivery by
xenobot 12:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Harmen1
Hi, i tried to make a article on my band Deanmoore but it got deleted and protected. Is there a way it can be unprotected please? Regards, --
Harmen1 (
talk) 15:21, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I have posted Article about Indian Govt. Publishing company who is very much important because all the academic books in business schools we read is published by Taxxmann.
Hi - if the
Taxxmann page is recreated and it makes clear the company's notability, then no doubt it'll remain as an article. As it stood, the article made no claims of the company's notability, so the article was suitable for deletion per
WP:CORP. Best regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 06:56, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi Oscar it is TaxMann (not taxxmann). the company is publishing Indian Govt Direct & Indirect Tax Laws, Cases, Rules. Also publishing study material & books for
Indian Institute of Management Schools. This is the only company publishing Supreme )Court Case Judgements for last (150 years).
There are many sutbs in wikipedia which is pointing many useful articles of taxmann.net. So i belive this company should be published. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Dharmendarm (
talk •
contribs) 06:36, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi Oscar?. I came across WIKI after a google and the first thing I saw was
TIBCO Rendezvous. As a user of the CityVision product (in company of Bank of England, HM Treasury etc) I thought a factual article might be useful. Sorry if I broke the guidelines - I'd intended to follow the style of the TIBCO article, which presumably is OK? I think I'm missing the difference in approach, so any advice welcome. Rgds.
BearJam (
talk) 13:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
Willie Bean
Hello,
Willie Bean is an article that I am creating that has SEVERAL references that I am trying to add. I cannot add these references successfully when the article keeps getting deleted. Please allow me to make the framework of this page first and then decide before you add to speedy delete.
Mnemnoch (
talk) 17:48, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Sure. I've added the underconstruction tag to mark it as such, and fixed some formatting issues, added a nocat and stub tag too. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 17:59, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Athena Study Abroad
Hi - This is in response to the comment you made on Athena Study Abroad:
Similar study abroad companies are on Wikipedia. This is to make people aware of the valuable concept of study abroad and global awareness. Many universities promote and work with Athena Study Abroad, and charities receive donations on behalf of the organization, which makes the company notable. Many study abroad websites make reference to the company. Have a good day.
Jbenander (
talk) 22:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the feedback. The article as it stood made no claims to notability, see
WP:CORP. If notability can be made clear in a later version, then it should avoid the deletion. Hope this helps. Thanks, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 09:51, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Garmin GPS 12
Hi, i'm not sure if this is the right way to talk to you by editing your talk page.
Blatant advert? I'm a little foggy on the definition, but I don't think it advertises the GPS 12 in any way. Garmin no longer makes this unit. Also, the article is in a format similar to the
Garmin eTrex article, which I also made, and that article has been on here for almost a year, and it never got that warning.
Could you give me a better explanation of what's wrong with the article? I'll be happy to try to make improvements! :) --
Trent021 (
talk) 22:51, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi - this is the right way to discuss it, via this talk page. The article merely read like a sales catalog definition of the Garmin GPS product. There's some guidance about this, at
Wikipedia:CATALOG#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory. Some claim of notability really needs to be made. Hope this helps. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 23:01, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Now I see the eTrex article is up for deletion. Would removing info about the features of specific models help? Or perhaps putting them in a more casual way? --
Trent021 (
talk) 23:44, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, definitely. Plus some sources such as reviews, to confirm details of them. I've had a look at the
TomTom article and it manages to use this approach. Makes it less like a sales catalog that way. Thanks, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 08:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Nuclear Fusion Definition
Do you have a program that doesn't let interested persons contribute subject matter like definitions into the article about Nuclear Power. And is it one of your interests? And what was wrong with it as a submission? WFPM
WFPM (
talk) 19:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I
reverted it as it rather looked like you'd added it onto the wrong page (should have been the talk page perhaps, as it was discussion on what fusion is, and you'd signed it, something normally done on talk pages). There's a good guide to using talk pages at
WP:TALK if that helps. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 20:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
--Why should the definition of the subject matter be in the talk page? You have eleminated the article about Nuclear Energy where more basic items of subject matter might be discussed and moved everything to the Nuclear Power article without explaining the differences in kind of the subject matter and thus inviting comments about extranuous matters like feasability, economics, availability, hazards, etc, that are not pertinent to a lot of the parts of this subject and are inhibiting the process of organizing and developing a set of articles that does organize and develop the subject. And I read about wikipedia contributions and thought I was encouraged to "be bold". WFPM
WFPM (
talk) 21:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC).WFPM
WFPM (
talk) 21:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
--How do I get a contribution into an article without signing it? WFPM
WFPM (
talk) 21:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Talk is for the talk page. Please take a read of
WP:TALK to understand how this aspect of wikipedia works. By all means be
bold but try to keep to the wikipedia guidelines, it avoids complete anarchy! Welcome and regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 21:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
--Well I looked at the talk page and I notice that they recommend references in the articles and that you help the contributor when he/she tries to make a contribution. And I want to say that I appreciate your response to my inqueries but I'm not an editor. Only a person interested in the subject matter and having a forum for discussion. But I would think that the editors/administrators should be also interested in the subject matter and be willing to help me with my attempts to improve an article as some have done. WFPM
WFPM (
talk) 22:11, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Any time you edit wikipedia, you are an editor. If you have suggestions for improvement and would like to discuss how to best incorporate them into the article, then by all means please describe them on the talk page & we'll see what consensus can be reached.
Mishlai (
talk) 02:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Jerry from Queens
Yeah, believe it or not, Seinfeld does call WFAN-AM and "schmoozes" with Steve Somers periodically. A typical exchange:
JS: Take the song for example.
SS: Mike & the Mad Dog's intro?
JS: Yeah. I mean, what's that about? "Talking sports, going at it as hard as they can"? I mean, I can think of many ways to talk sports, but I wouldn't go at it "as hard as" I can.
SS: Well, no doubt you're reading a lot into that line.
JS: Maybe.
... later ...
SS: Then again, we don't always talk sports. We just had a couple of Sports Illustrated swimsuit models here as guests.
JS: Really? No doubt you had to do a lot of research for the interview.
SS: Of course. I'm a professional.
JS: I'm sure you went at it as hard as you could.
Anyway, just wanted to let you know I wasn't blowing smoke up my backside. –
TashTish (
talk) 07:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Great, thanks. I'll see if there's a source we can cite for the article then. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 07:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
25 June 1997. You destroyed it. Why? --
Petercorless (
talk) 19:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, it was nominated as a speedy for reason A1 (not enough context). As it stood, the article looked like it qualified for A1. Did you plan to add a significant amount of additional content to it? --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 20:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Word of caution
Hi, I see you appear to be having a minor dispute with John-joe123. I just thought I'd let you know that in my experience, this user tends to ignore edit summaries and talk pages and normally just continues to revert edits until he get bored. I'm always torn as to whether consider it vandalism as he appears to just not know about these things. Just thought I'd mention it. ChimpanzeeUK -
User |
Talk |
Contribs 19:45, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS CHIMPANZEE UK, why are you always stalking my edits and looking at my talk page? why can't you just leave things alone, you are not in charge of wikipedia and the ps3 article or anything to do with it, I only keep on readding information because I know i'm right and everyone knows it, it doesn't have to be sourced to be true, and I don't get bored readding info, its just that i don't have enough time to readd it, maybe you wouldn't be torn about wheter to consider my edits as vandalism if you didn't worry about them and minded your own business.--
John-joe123 (
talk) 16:46, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
John-joe, please be aware you're contravening
WP:CIVIL with edits like this, and risk having your editing privileges removed. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 17:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Playstation 3
yeh i know the thing about the percentages of ps1 and 2 games on the 60 and 2007 80GB ps3 are unsourced but the rest of the information i added was completely true, all of it is gotten fron the playstation 3 page, for example when i said that the 2008 80GB ps3 was identiacl to the one released in PAL territories except for the difference in hard drive size, you added "cititation needed", it even says on the ps3 articles page under retail configurations that it is and it also says all the other information i added about the accesories of the ps3, and when i said that the 60GB ps3 for NTSC territories was effectively discontinued and you put "cititation needed", i only put that there because no one was saying there was a cititation needed when it said that the 60GB ps3 was effectivly discontinued for PAL territories and I think thats unfair favouring NTSC territories over PAL territories.--
John-joe123 (
talk) 16:46, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
OK, great. If we can ensure sources continue to be cited for any further additions, we should be able to avoid all this edit/revert trouble. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 17:55, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Just so you know
I have given John-joe123 a final warning for edit warring
User talk:John-joe123#3RR warning. Just wanted to make you aware because I've seen you interact with him somewhat frequently over the last few weeks.
Thingg⊕⊗ 17:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Great, thanks for the heads-up and assistance. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 17:54, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Well..
If you say "board member, notable?" it doesn't sound like a speedy deletion is warranted, even from your viewpoint. If you wonder whether someone is notable, you don't kill it within the first ten minutes; you start a discussion about it.
Punkmorten (
talk) 17:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I've withdrawn the speedy, will continue to watch the page and discuss. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 21:59, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Template Substitution
Hi there, and thank you for using templates on Wikipedia. On one of your recent edits you used a template that should have been substituted but you did not subst it. Please subst templates that are meant to be substed in the future. Please take a look at
Substitution to learn more about it. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you need any more help or want to reply to this please contact me on my talk page. Thanks. ·Add§hore·Talk/
Cont 13:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Shodcast
You recently deleted my newly created page on 'Shodcast' due to G11 - blatant advertising.
Shodcasting is a new form of podcasting, referring to the art of improvising internet radio and recording a podcast in one take.
I would like to rewrite the article so that it does not contain blatant advertising.
Well, if you're fairly sure Shodcast isn't a
WP:NEOLOGISM then you could post a request on
WP:UNPROTECT. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 21:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
hi
why was it removed? it was not experimental
92.238.109.113 (
talk) 17:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi - you'd
edited the page to include content which was already available via the redirect. So redirect is sufficient, no point duplicating content. Regards,--
Oscarthecat (
talk) 18:53, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Just letting you know,
POWER Magazine has been recreated with what appears the same problems mere moments after you deleted it. Thanks!
Dayewalker (
talk) 09:15, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip. Now deleted and
WP:SALTed ! --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 13:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
For some time now, the Video games project and the
Military history project have been cross listing their articles undergoing peer review in an effort to improve the quality of articles, as well as the copy editing skills of editors. The idea was first proposed by
User:Krator as a way to better prepare articles for
Featured article candidacy. After being approved by both projects, the idea was implemented under a trial period, and eventually approved as a standard practice.
New, cross listed military history articles are announced on the
Video games project talk page, and listed on the
Video games Peer review page under a
special section. Video game editors are encouraged to leave any type of comments that come to mind. If you don't know anything about military history, that's perfectly fine because that's the point. An editor lacking knowledge about the particular topic can provide a helpful point of view as a general reader—the intended audience.
A peer review process such as this will not work if editors do not give as well as take.
Peer reviews are meant to examine not just the prose, but the sources and images used in the article.
Feedback can range from brief comments after skimming through a page to a full blown dissection of grammar, structure, and references. Either way, every bit helps.
Reviewing another editor's article can help sharpen your writing skills, which in turn can improve the articles you write.
Hi, you gave your input in the deletion discussion of this article; however, the problem remains on what exactly should be done with this article and the relevant featured articles. There is currently a discussion about it at
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Eight featured articles to be demoted. Please stop by and participate. Thanks.
Megata Sanshiro (
talk) 11:54, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
I see that you deleted the above, it appears to have been immediately recreated.
Paste (
talk) 09:45, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi - thanks for the tip - have deleted again and
WP:SALTed it this time. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 10:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Could you kindly justify your deletion of this page. I do not believe it was advertising, let alone 'blatant' advertising. Perhaps you could have entered into more of a productive discussion and advise on how it could be improved?
163.1.212.48 (
talk) 12:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a
deletion review of
Freebiejeebies. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
163.1.212.48 (
talk •
contribs)
Hi,
I saw you deleted skoobid (without informing me...)
I feel pity the article is lost, I wanted to rewrite it. Could you please next time create a talk before deleting? so it gives the author time to review and correct?
thanks,
Sylvain —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Bonfas (
talk •
contribs) 06:35, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Skoobid appeared to just be an advertisement and made no claims of notability. It's been created, still seems rather advertisement-like, but I've posted a AfD so that others can comment before any actions (if any) are taken. On the subjective aspect, please take a look at
WP:CORP and
WP:WEB for details of company / website notability guidelines. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 08:56, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
1) This article has no commercial purpose at all, or at least, not more that the sites mentioned above in this talk where each online selling site detail their business model and justify why they are better than the competition.
2) how about "degressive flow" it's a new concept that has now an online application. Why can't it be referred into an encyclopedia?
from
WP:WEB "website's achievements, impact or historical significance"
In Taiwan this "new flow" attract 4000 unique users per week...
from
WP:WEB "The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization"
here you are (chinese):
http://mr6.cc/?p=2422 (Mr6 is the largest chinese speaking blog for new techs)
I'd love to discuss with other admins about deletion if possible.
thanks,
Sylvain —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Bonfas (
talk •
contribs) 09:37, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi - those are interesting facts about the site and do help to infer some measure of notability. The existing article didn't make many of those claims, and therefore was suitable for deletion. How about you created a new version of the page at
User:Bonfas/Skoobid (note the lack of TM in the article's title, such names aren't permitted in wikipedia) and then ask an admin or some other wikipedia editors for their thoughts on whether it's suitable? I'd be happy to help in this regard. If then looks ok then content can be pasted over to
Skoobid. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 15:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I would like to point out the user that created the article,
User:Protageagent, may be a possible conflict of interest and the account has been blocked before. ←Signed:→Mr. E. SánchezGet to know me! / Talk to me!←at≈:→ 10:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
He's now asking for explanation on we've deleted his article many times (he asked on my talk page). Can you share your insight? Thx! ←Signed:→Mr. E. SánchezGet to know me! / Talk to me!←at≈:→ 10:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I note you speedy deleted a brief article that someone had created on this ship. I have had another go and feel that it now warrants inclusion, could you perhaps have a look? Many thanks.
Paste (
talk) 10:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi - new version looks a lot better, notable and sourced. Cheers, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 16:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
The Old 76 House
While doing some
new page patrolling, I found this article when I redirected a new article with a similar name to it. I'm curious how and why this article got deleted. I did some copyedits on it on November 16, 2008 and it seemed to be a valid article at that time. As a historical inn involving people and situations in the
American Revolutionary War, it should pass
notability. The page history showed that it had been around for several months. Some of the text repeated itself and I noted that it could use some more cleanup. I didn't see any reason to delete it though ... at the time I edited, it wasn't tagged as a
copyvio or anything else. Thanks.
Truthanado (
talk) 01:39, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi - my mistake! An editor had been creating multiple old 76 house titled articles and I was deleting the newly created bogus copyvio articles. I've now restored the article
The Old 76 House. Please accept my apologies. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 08:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Should article on "What to Eat Now" be merged with that on Warner?
Dear Oscar the Cat, thank you for the tags you put on the article (which I created) on the television series
What to Eat Now. I would not like this to read as an advertisement (Wikipedia is not an advertising website) but, in view of the tags, I am wondering whether this article would be better off being merged with that on
Valentine Warner.After all, it seems strange that the article on
What to Eat Now is longer than that on Warner! What do you think? See also my comment on the talk-page at
What to Eat Now. Many thanks,
ACEOREVIVED (
talk) 22:13, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Um, speedy delete tag may wholly be justified, but removal of the two refs supporting Pen y Fal Hospital? I suspect the originator may have added this from first hand experience after visiting the site, we'll have to see. Evenso notability seems unlikely. The hospital itself, however, easily deserves its own article. If this article disappears so be it, but a future merge would mean those refs wasted?
Martinevans123 (
talk) 20:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Having an article for the hospital itself sounds good, the
Wikipedia:WikiProject National Health Service project seems keen on having them too. But the refs given seemed to be cited out of context, e.g. "..was the superintendent of Monmouthshire Lunatic Asylum[1]" where the [1] ref makes no mention whatsoever of the good doctor. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 21:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, let's hope
Wikipedia:WikiProject National Health Service have it all in hand. Refs could support hospital article but not this guy. Guess there's little point in trying to improve here what may well be deleted. Have drawn a blank on Google.
Martinevans123 (
talk) 21:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Not a future film as it was released October 27. I have expanded and sourced the artcle per Film MOS. It has a number of notables and might actually be an interesting drama to watch. I think it might be worth keeping and improving. Schmidt,MICHAEL Q. 00:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
smoothvega
I fixed the smoothvega article with full accurate soucres. Please read now and don't speedy delete. ----Angie6913----
My signature is fine. I'm not the only person who does this, in fact, admins do it all the time. If you think it's a problem, you're more than welcome to bring it up at some central discussion point. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 21:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Russian names
Are you kidding? I just started on the article a few minutes ago. I'm not don't with yet.(
LonerXL (
talk) 22:23, 27 November 2008 (UTC))
It looked like a rather odd list, no context. I've restored it now. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 22:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Bentley's Hotel
Can you please be a bit more careful about removing links to deleted articles?
I'm not going to question your speedy deletion of the Bentley's Hotel article, as the created article was truly awful - however, the hotel is definitely notable, as the catalyst for one of the most significant events in Australian history. Please don't assume that because an article is badly written that something isn't actually notable.
Rebecca (
talk) 09:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, the article consisted of just:
Bentley's Eureka Hotel was built at a cost to the Bentley family to the sum of 30,000 pounds from monies gathered together from the sale of their confectioners store at Elizabeth Street and other financial interests in Melbourne in 1853 when the Bentley's with their young one year old baby son "Henry Thomas Bentley" when they decided to move to the Ballaarat East gold fields.They knew the police magistrate John D'Ewes from Melbourne where he D'Ewes was the Police liquor licensing branch Inspector in 1852!All this has been published previously in Bob OBrian's book called Eureka the True Story 1992! And verifiable as such as i am its co author . I shall be adding to this page at a later date."
So didn't assert any notability in that state. Probably worth developing articles in your userspace or tagging with the underconstruction tag, if it's being worked on. The article was nominated for deletion by another user, I then deleted it. Links were removed automatically (and correctly) by the TW utility. Thanks, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 09:26, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Please re-read what I actually said. I didn't write the article, and I specifically stated above that I wasn't challenging its deletion; being an admin, I could see that the article was crap.
The topic, however is notable - it's something Wikipedia should have an article on, and I cannot see a proper article on the subject coming even close to being deleted by an AfD. As such, removing redlinks to it is somewhat unhelpful.
Rebecca (
talk) 09:52, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, I'll take your advice on it being a notable topic. To me, when I was deleting it, it didn't stand out as notable (shop gets sold, family builds hotel with money...) Just so I know for the future, what part of an article like this (subtly) infers the topic's notability? Thanks, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 10:01, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
If you're going to go the added step and not only delete an article, but remove redlinks to it, I'd suggest having a Google search and making sure that the subject isn't in fact notable. Nearly all speedy deletion candidates I've come across don't have redlinks that other people have added (that are actually referring to that particular subject); if they do, it's probably a good heads up that it would be a good idea to have a look around before deleting the links.
Rebecca (
talk) 21:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Long Beach Motor inn deletion
I Contest the deletion of my article "Long Beach Motor Inn" under the terms of A3 (No Context):
1. The article documents historical, accurate facts supported by valid web links by both primary and secondary sources generally accepted by Wiki.
2. The article is informative and provides information to the reader that summarizes a collection of information without advertising and holds a neutral view. Events mentioned therein are documented properly with time and date.
--
Tomblights00 (
talk) 21:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)tombstone00--
Tomblights00 (
talk) 21:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
You seemed to replace the entire article with just some comments about why it shouldn't be deleted. So as the article had no actual content at the time, I did a speedy deletion of it. If you wish to recreate the article, other editors can review whether it's notable and whether should be removed. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 22:04, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
please accept my apologizes as I am a Wiki newbie. I have contacted the person whom deleted my article and will work to have my article restored. Thank you. --
Tomblights00 (
talk) 08:13, 30 November 2008 (UTC)tombstone00--
Tomblights00 (
talk) 08:13, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Oops, you're quite right. I'll take the speedy->prod->afd route in future. I see it's now been speedy deleted too. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 22:01, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
No worries. There's a first time for everything. :) --
Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Erika Zhao
Hi there,
Think I may have created a problem with the article on Erika Zhao. I see you deleted
Erika zhao this morning. I had the article open in a tab, and was moving it to
Erika Zhao. This seems to have worked. I also added the page to my watchlist, though, at which point I saw that you had deleted the article at 07:11 - hours before my apparently successful move! So now I'm a bit confused :) Did you later undelete it? Have I broken something? FWIW I agree that the article is pretty worthless as it stands, and having turned up zero usable Google hits I'd support a deletion. Just hoping I haven't screwed anything up. Cheers,
Gonzonoir (
talk) 13:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
There's a redirect from
Erika zhao to
Erika Zhao. The article still needs some work, at the moment it's just "Erika Zhao is a Chinese bassist who has played with the Chinese Symphony Orchestra. She is currently 44 years old, and is married with 6 children. Her career began in 1979.". Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 21:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
OK, cheers. I've supported the delete. As a relative noob I'm still confused as to how I managed to edit a page that, it appears, you had deleted earlier the same day, but am sure the source of the confusion lies with me and not in the wider world :)
Gonzonoir (
talk) 14:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Article importance is an assessment of a topic's importance in understanding a specific higher level topic. Assessments are maintained by
WikiProjects and reflect the project's view of what is essential to understanding their scope. In the VG Project's case, all importance scales are in terms of understanding
video games.
Recent discussions at the
VG Project's talk page have called for revisions to the practice of assigning article importance. The
discussion began in mid-November with the goal of clarifying what level of importance should be assigned to certain type of articles. It eventually expanded to creating a standardized table of importance to serve as a guide for current and future editors.
The discussion has focused on and shifted to several topics including flaws of previous practices, new ways to view assessment, other project practices to emulate, and specific articles which are exceptions to proposed guidelines. A brief
pole and discussion determined most editors felt that the bulk of some topics—specifically individual video game, series, and character articles—were not essential to understanding video games, making them ineligible for top importance. The discussion then shifted to tweaking the wording and layout of the table.
The current proposed table is being
discussed on the project's talk page, and the
issue of whether some topics—specifically character articles—should be allowed to be rated importance has also been brought up. As always, member are encouraged to voice their opinions and engage in discussion to determine consensus so the new assessment scale can be implemented.
Newsletter delivery by
xenobot 20:05, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
note re deprod
Hi. Courtesy note: I've de-prodded
Cultural_synergy. I agree it's a neologism, but Googling (her full name plus the term) suggests some degree of use in peer-reviewed journals, course syllabi, etc. May turn out to have insufficient usage to pass AfD, but RS suggest use may be sufficient for expansion. It's not a topic I'm familiar with though, so I don't know how much could ultimately be written on it. Best,
Whitehorse1 22:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Sure, thanks for letting me know. I've done a bit of tidying on it today. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 07:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Guatemala
I fail to see what changes to
Guatemala you find objectionable. Could you be specific? Thanks. --
Buaidh (
talk) 23:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Fluxx Goals
How could I have presented the Fluxx Goals in such a way to avoid deletion? I was expecting the page to remain and others would add the goals for the other versions? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
86.141.25.168 (
talk) 16:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, the article listed some goals, but no context to explain what fluxx was, or what a fluxx goal was. Could it be a football thing, or is it a game / film ? If you locate an article for something similar, perhaps use that as a guideline? Happy to help with reviewing the new article with you. Perhaps create it in your own userspace first, to avoid anyone meddling / deleting / tagging it. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 17:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, the intro giving context looks good. I wonder if some sources could be quoted? The article might get some editors considering it
Gamecruft if they consider it goes into too much details regarding the goals. Hope this helps. --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 09:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
It's not a page I've edited / removed recently. And there's no record of such a page (not even a record of its deleted edits or history). If you want to repost it, I'll happily help review it. Regards, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 10:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
I have deprodded this article. It is not a hoax. In fact, I redirected it to a more adequate article that already existed. -- Blanchardb-Me•
MyEars•
MyMouth- timed 23:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Great, thanks for the update. The creator had some "form" regarding hoax articles (
Thenewzzshow), but this one's ok then. Cheers, --
Oscarthecat (
talk) 06:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Pokémon Diamond and Pearl (video games), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click
hereCSDWarnBot (
talk) 17:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
A search bar has been added to the archive box on the
VG project talk page. Searching the discussion archives is now much easier.
Feature: Video game notability
Video game related articles fall under niche categories on Wikipedia: "Culture and the arts" and "Everyday life". Because of this, they are often required to demonstrate
notability more than other topics. Wikipedia defines notability as "worthy of notice", and considers it distinct from fame, importance, and popularity. Though it is acknowledge to be related to fame and the like, it is important understand that being famous, important, or popular does not mean a video game article should be on Wikipedia.
Being notable means that a topic has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Wikipedia's policy also stipulates that this only presumes to "satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." This means that though an article may meet the criteria on paper, it is up to the community to decide if a topic truly is notable and/or violates other policies such as
WP:NOT. In short, just because a video game, character, or related topic exists, does not mean it should also exist as a Wikipedia article.
Dealing with non-notable topics
Articles that do not meet the criteria are either deleted or merged into a relevant topic.
WP:Articles for deletion (AfD) handles the deletion of non-notable articles, among other types, and has an established process to begin discussions about reasons for deletion.
If an article is a subarticle of a larger topic, merging it into the larger topic article is a more desirable action. For example, the main character of a video may not be notable, but has received some mentions in reviews. It would benefit both topics, the character and its video game, to include the content into the article of the video game; essentially using a small, weaker article to strengthen a larger more notable article.
Things to remember
The best way to show notability is to provide
reliable sources about the topic.
Notability is less about keeping articles out of Wikipedia and more about making sure readers are provided articles about significant, quality topics.
While you may think a topic is notable, others may disagree. Try to keep a clear perspective when assessing notability so discussions can reach a consensus.
AfD is more of a last resort and is not always the best course of action to take.
Consider starting a merger discussion first, as some editors may not fully understand why an article they started is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Hi, I noticed that you've added significant content to the above article, so I thought that you'd like to know that I've nominated it for GA status. I've
tidied it up a bit, adding sources and removed in {{fact}} tags and think it stands a good chance. Since you're a member of
WP:VG, your opinion would be very much appreciated, especially if any issues crop up during the review. Happy editing,
Nev1 (
talk) 00:50, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
WP:FILMS Questionnaire
As a member of
WikiProject Films, you are invited to take part in the
project's first questionnaire. It is intended to gauge your participation and views on the project. At the conclusion of the questionnaire, the project's
coordinators will use the gathered feedback to find new ways to improve the project and reach out to potential members. The results of the questionnaire will be published in next month's newsletter. If you know of any editors who have edited film articles in the past, please invite them to take part in the questionnaire. Please stop by and take a few minutes to answer the questions so that we can continue to improve our project. Happy editing! This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 04:52, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Regarding merge of Periyar E. V. Ramasamy and the eradication of caste
There is already a section on this topic on the main Periyar biography. It also links to this page.
Wiki Raja (
talk) 08:53, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Deleted page retrieval
Oscarthecat (love the name)
You speedy deleted my page "Rick Dallas". As a new user/contributor here I now see the reason for taking it down. I would like to rewrite and resubmit but am having trouble getting the original. Been to Deltionpedia and tried figuring out the administrator help route too with no success.
Can you - or can you direct me to how to retrieve my page (of January 24, 2009).
This issue we are trying a new type of newsletter feature: "Featured editor". This is a chance to learn more about the various editors who contribute to the
Video games project as well as the roles they fill. If you enjoyed this new feature and would like to see similar interviews in future issues, please drop us a note at the
VG newsletter talk page.
David Fuchs (also known as Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs), is a long time video games editor that has written a large number of the project's
Featured articles. He has been ranked high on
Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured article nominations, and has assisted in reviewing and editing more many. Recently David has begun to assist with image reviews for
Featured article candidates, and branched out into other types of articles in addition to video games. He can normally been seen on the
project's talk page offering advice and his input on the various discussion taking place there.
What drew you to Wikipedia, and what prompted you to begin editing?
I got involved due in part to (I believe, my memory is fuzzy) finding the site while doing research for
Advanced Placement Europen History during high school. My earliest contributions (in December 2005) were creating topics based on what I learned, as well as creating an article for my high school with another friend. I soon became involved with editing topics related to Halo video game franchise, specifically the article on the parasitic
Flood.
What got you involved in writing Featured articles?
I think for most editors it's a shiny accomplishment you are striving for, and natural for most editors to try and get an FA. I first nominated an article for FA in 2007, after about a year of inactivity onwiki; it didn't pass as it was poorly written and didn't follow our guidelines for
writing about fiction; I also took a couple of tries to get my first video game FA (Halo 2).
What article(s) are you most proud of writing or exemplifies your best work?
I suppose Myst is a sort of accomplishment I can point to; I started work on the article on May 2 2008, when it looked like
this, and submitted it to Featured Article Candidates
one day later. I think that's some kind of record, but I dunno. In terms of being a good read or something I'm very happy with, however, I'd have to look at my more recent work, specifically Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan and
Bone Wars.
How do you pick the articles you work on?
Whatever hits me. There's many articles I haven't gotten around to editing and improving as planned because another article has caught my fancy.
What advice would you give to editors seeking to write quality articles?
In the words of one of my
favorite cartoon characters when I was a child, "We must do reeea-search!" Even in video games, online sources don't usually cut it. Even after getting an article to FA, make sure you continually trawl the internet and elsewhere for more information to add to the topic.
Note: This is an abridged version. To read the full interview, click
here.
The
VG Project Collaboration of the Week is a new effort to improve important video game articles of low quality. Every week, an article is random selected by
AnomieBOT from the
Stub-,
Start-, and
C-class categories that are rated either
High- or
Top-importance. Such topics can offer a reader a good deal of encyclopedic information about video games, but are often too underdeveloped or lacking the proper level of writing and sourcing to accomplish this.
All editors are welcome and encouraged to participate by offering their insights and suggestions. Having a pool of different editors, both old and new, will help maximize improvements to the articles as well as our editing skills.
History
Collaborative efforts have come and gone within the VG project several times before. The first such effort, the "Gaming collaboration of the week", began in October 2004 as a
result of the several otherweekly collaborations popping up on Wikipedia. It proved to be quite successful at improving articles to meet Wikipedia's standard at the time, but the effort eventually saw less and less participation. A second effort, the "Improvement Drive", began in August 2005 with the intent of improving articles to FA-quality. However, few nominations and articles were selected. The decline in participation in the collaborations and peer reviews resulted in a third effort. It began in February 2006 as a workshop, but never got off the ground.
Numerous discussions have taken place on at
WT:VG to jump start collaborations and improve the process to prevent its decline again. While previous collaborations selected any video game article, most editors felt focus should be on video game topics more encyclopedic in nature—topics that are also generally in poor shape because of lack of attention. A common problem mentioned was that previous nomination processes were lengthy and hindered participation. The current idea to automate the process was
brought up by
JohnnyMrNinja, which was
further discussed to iron out the details.
Current collaboration
The current collaborative efforts began in mid-January 2009, and several articles have been improved by editors. The random choice is intended to minimize the selection process, which allows editors to focus on article improvement. Improvements include better organization of content, massaging and copy editing the prose, removing excess non-free images, and much more. The random choice is also meant to encourage participation from editors of varying interest and help prevent burnout. If the present selection is not to your liking, wait until next week. Editors are encouraged to add
Template:Collab-gaming to their watchlist to see which article is selected. Recently selected articles are: