![]() | 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. |
![]() |
The Chain Barnstar of Recognition | |
For making a difference! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 3-5 others with 500+ edits but no barnstar. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 01:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Chain Barnstar of Merit | |
For your hard work! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 4 others with 1500+ edits but no barnstar or has few barnstars. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 01:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Chain Barnstar of Diligence | |
For shaping Wikipedia! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 3 others with 2500+ edits but no barnstar or has few barnstars. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 01:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Wikipedian's Chain Barnstar of Honour | |
For building Wikipedia! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 2 others with 5000+ edits but no barnstar or has few barnstars. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 01:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC) |
It's all true!!!!! Don't take this so seriously, geez. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vonkers ( talk • contribs)
Wow, thanks for the tip about Oscar (cat), how could I not vote on such an afd. Best regards, -- Oscarthecat 17:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
You might want to add Delete (in bold) to your contribution to that discussion, so that whichever admin doesn't miss your comment. Cheers.
(I'm assuming that's what your intention was. If it was simply a comment, neutral position or similar, it's still a good idea to add whatever's necessary and make it a bullet point in order to make it stand out.) -- Mark H Wilkinson ( t, c) 09:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
I refer to Palazzo d'Accursio... does encyclopaedia Britannica list sources for such small articles? I think this mania of "references at any cost" is going out of mind. Ciao and good work. -- Attilios 11:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Why is this article being recommended for deletion? There seems to be so justifiable explanation. Thanks in advance. Finneganw 16:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for putting the welcome message on this page; it solves my problem of providing confusing information to the user (I should have thought about the welcome message myself...). Schutz 09:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
You tagged Reduct as needing sources less than an hour after it was begun. Articles do not emerge fully developed in an instant. Please check the edit history and be more careful in the future. (You can reply here if you feel the need.) -- KSmrq T 21:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
T. T. T. Put up in a place where it's easy to see the cryptic admonishment T. T. T. When you feel how depressingly slowly you climb, it's well to remember that Things Take Time.
Hey Tikiwont! I added some more stuff to the Catalyst (magazine) article and removed your notability warning, since I think I addressed your reason. (I'm new here! Don't shoot me!) I think that if the State Library of Victoria keeps copies, that speaks to its notability. alexis+kate=? 12:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Got your message -
There used to be an article there, but someone moved it and redirected the title to the wrong page.
Anyway, no problem. -- Parsifal Hello 19:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey I think the wikipedia criteria for what is or is not notable are a bit strict. Shouldn't any art gallery which is or has existed be noted? And if so why not?
BTW I do not work for the galleries I posted pages for, and they were galleries which are mentioned on other sites in wikipedia.
-- artabase —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artabase ( talk • contribs) 10:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the info tiki, I'll read up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artabase ( talk • contribs) 11:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
[1] :) Neil ム 20:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for courteous correction on Bouldnor My interest is the nearby archaeology site -set I hope, to become extremely important internationally -and I wanted a link from it. JRPG 17:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice - I guessed the template, and didn't see any space for comments in my preview, so just assumed reasons were not needed and it was supposed ot be obvious... sorry. Anarchia 01:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Just a friendly reminder. When you close an afd, be sure to remove the afd tag from the article. :) Corvus cornix 15:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the notice. I appreciate the time you took to let me know. -- Deathphoenix ʕ 17:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Dear Sir /Madam,
Greetings from Professional Social Workers Association (PSWA), Chennai, TN state, India www.PSWA.Org.In!
Thank you very much for the feedback on our entry with a heading "social workers Association". We are intending to put different headings by which many of our fellow social workers put a search in wikipedia. There is no marketing aspect in that intention. Kindly guide us, in the process.
Thanking you,
For PSWA, K.S. Ramesh President. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PSWA.Office ( talk • contribs) 15:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Your note was the first I heard of any response to that post, let alone MartinDK's response. I'm not sure what to do about it; I'm surprised that a single comment would drive someone away like that. Had he responded to my post first, even in anger, I would have explained that to him. His abrupt departure leads me to conclude that he didn't care to know my reasons for writing that. I don't know how to talk to someone who doesn't want to listen.
My reasons for that comment was that I was serious about what I wrote, to a degree. I believe one should not just quote policy to make a point on Wikipedia -- one should explain a position, then butress that explanation by pointing to the relevant policy. Otherwise this leads to profitless wikilawyering & edit wars on policy pages -- as if they were laws that could be enforced -- as well as enforcing escalating blocks, & coping with sock-puppetting & other malicious acts that take up everyone's time & energy. Regardless of what anyone believes how a given policy should read, I have found that none can be completely enforced to the letter all of the time. Thus I believe that we should try to follow the intent of these pages, as well as trying to persuade our fellow Wikipedians to do the same; no need to enforce the 3RR rule if everyone stops at two. Or to quote an ancient philosopher, the better policy Rem tene, uerbis sequentur -- "Hold onto the idea, and the words will follow." -- llywrch 17:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
As someone that occasionally does NA closures as well, I would advise you that per Non-administrators closing discussions "closing discussions in which you have offered an opinion or for a page that you have edited heavily presents a conflict of interest and should be avoided." if something actually qualifies per WP:SNOW, someone else will certainly come along and close it accordingly. Moreover, for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bolster Day you still need to add an {{oldafdfull}} tag to the talk page. -- Tikiwont 13:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I just closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GURPS Illuminati University (2nd nomination), I was right to do this one wasn't I? Fosnez 14:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)