User talk:Ben@liddicott.com
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!
... ClockworkTroll 13:20, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks, ClockworkTroll
[edit] Leeds redirect
Done. You should check to make sure no article is still trying to use them - when I clicked on "What links here" a long list of stuff showed up, but most of it looked non-significant. Noel 16:42, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Homeorhesis
Nice job! Definitely a keep now (well, by my vote). And I'm removing it from the Deadend page since its not a deadend. --Cje 17:07, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Good evening. You asked about the decision to m:transwiki this article to Wiktionary. Actually, I was not the admin who made that call. Someone else put it in the transwiki queue. I just volunteered to bring some record-keeping up to date. Unfortunately, we'd have to wade through the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Old page's history to try to find out who really made the call.
Having said that, I'm not sure I'd agree with your count. If I had been doing the count, I would have discounted all the votes before the third bullet (the anon comment that the definition had been corrected). The votes prior do not appear to have been made with all the facts at hand. (An assumption, of course.) That anon vote is itself neutral on a recommendation to keep or transwiki. Regardless, it would have been steeply discounted for being unsigned. The votes of Crevaner and Old Right may have been deliberately discounted. They are thought by some to be sockpuppets and have been accused of vandalizing the VfD page with irrelevant votes. I have not personally investigated that matter but watched enough discussions to know that could have been an interpretation of the deciding admin. That leaves SWAdair voting to transwiki and Cje to keep. In a tie, the deciding admin might well have added his/her own vote. Unfortunately, this is speculation because the deciding admin failed to do the record-keeping.
Personally, I think this is a borderline case. As an encyclopedia article, it's a bit light. As a dictionary article, it's terrific. It clearly defines the term and puts it in context. It even describes the origins of the term.
If you feel strongly, I would recommend 1) that you wait until someone actually performs the transwiki (that could take months - it's a messy queue) then 2) nominate it for undeletion. In the meantime, I don't think anything needs to happen. My 2 cents, anyway. Rossami (talk) 09:46, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Rockall
I've reverted your change to Rockall, cos I think the Greenpeace stuff is too subtle when hidden within the British claims section (and, to be fair, the section is History and competing claims — and they did proclaim it to be an independent state of Waveland, albeit not all that seriously, one assumes). I reckon a better solution than merging the sections would be to come up with a better heading, cos I write awful headings. All suggestions welcome… :o) — OwenBlacker 23:27, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] County towns
The information on the county town status of Wakefield came from county town - if it is not a county town perhaps this article needs to be amended. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 03:46, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
