User talk:KoshVorlon/Archive 2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
C H A P T E R 2
"The Family " . Contents [hide] 1 Organised crime, unreferenced 2 October 2007 3 signature 4 Deletion problems 5 Calling people names 6 Liszt Compositions 7 Really, what's the point 8 North River (South Fork Shenandoah River) 9 Geber_(crater)
[edit] Organised crime, unreferenced I put up the tag on the page for organised crime, and allthough organised crime does not want to be written about, every article in Wikipedia needs sourcing, in complience with the verifiability policy. If you haven't already, it's a good read, and it shows how articles in Wikipedia should be sourced, and also what information should be included. Throughout your editing in the future, realise that this is a core policy of Wikipedia, and all aritcles should adhere to it. Especialy the first line there is something to remember! Martijn Hoekstra 18:36, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] October 2007
Welcome to Wikipedia. It would be appreciated if you would not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Mexico City Airport People Mover. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Martial BACQUET 18:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry but I don't see where this article is a stub? It's redacted with capital letters and seems to be a joke. Please excuse me if it is not, but afd templates mustn't be removed as you did. Martial BACQUET 18:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC) As you wish. But for me, this article meet criteria for speedy deletion. Maybe it could reach a good article but it won't if it's written in capital letters. I'm not a native speaker of English no more but I don't write in capital letters. So do what you wanna do with this article, I'm just going to remove capital letters into to. Martial BACQUET 18:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
C H A P T E R 3
"Dude, check you signature " .
[edit] signature Please don't take this as a criticism or a slight, but I would recommend you remove the line breaks from your signature. It's generally considered undesirable per WP:SIG. Thanks, and happy wiki'ing. - Che Neuvara 18:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
C H A P T E R 4
" Deletion blues " .
[edit] Deletion problems Hi KoshVorlon!
You've recently tried to nominate for deletion two articles, List of Jewish American musicians and Samnaun. There were problems with both nominations that I've cleared up, but at the price of closing the one discussion I could find.
Specifically, the problems were that the List one was malformed on the page and on the discussion so I couldn't tell exactly what you were trying to do, whilst the Samnaun one didn't appear to have a discussion at all that I could find.
The Articles for Deletion process can be a bit tricky, so you may want to follow the step-by-step guide at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to list pages for deletion. I recommend keeping a tab or a window open with it in as you nominate an article. Completion of all steps is required or User:DumbBOT, a robot that polices Wikipedia deletions, will notice and request assistance (that's how come I'm here).
There's a long and detailed guide to Wikipedia deletion at Wikipedia:Guide to deletion that may help give you pointers on what we do and don't delete. It's quite a read, but worth doing if deletion is something you see yourself being involved in.
You're welcome to restart the AfDs for either article (following the How-To guide), although I'd also suggest you check Wikipedia:Lists for advice on Wikipedia listmaking; and the criteria for speedy deletion for the geography article.
I hope this helps. Happy editing! ➔ REDVEЯS was here 08:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
C H A P T E R 5
" The name game" or calling a Spade a Spade .
[edit] Calling people names Re: this: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Punkmorten 07:48, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
C H A P T E R 6
The List of Liszt or Wikipedia is NOT a list
[edit] Liszt Compositions There's no way this is going to get deleted. You might like to withdraw this AfD before it starts snowing. Nick mallory 12:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of compositions by Franz Liszt (S.1 - S.350)... Your complete missuse of WP:NOT#DIR seems to indicate you are either attempting WP:POINT or, as you are completely ignoring all the editors demonstrating to you how incorrect you are [1][2] (read WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT very carefully), you are simply trolling. This "chapter" lay-out of you talk pages lends evidence to the latter. --Oakshade 22:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
In response to your post on my talk page, please become familiar with the following statement from WP:NOT#DIR:
Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic, for example Nixon's Enemies List.
And this isn't at all a list of "loosely associated topics", but multiple compositions very specifically associated with the list topic of a famous composer. If you're a trained classical pianist as you say are, you would know that. As stated in the AfD, if you'd like to change WP:NOT#DIR to eliminate all lists, you have to make your case at the WP:NOT talk page, not on specific articles as you are only wasting time of editors (notice that you're the only one in this AfD who wants to delete this article?) as you efforts are looking more like an example of WP:POINT or trolling. --Oakshade 21:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
C H A P T E R 7
The point is? or Friendly note from Martijn
[edit] Really, what's the point Hiya, Kosh. You seem to be having a lot of fun in Wikipedia recently, but your main aim seems to be disrupting and confusing. Maybe it's a good idea to step back for a moment, and think about your motives for editing wikipedia for a while. You might be able to mildly disrupt a lot of people and pages, but the project will probably go on, and nobody will take much notice. Could you explain why you edit Wikipedia, and what your aims are? I'm sure there are more productive ways to accomplish that than the path you have taken now. (And do give this a nice chapter. I do like your chaptes.) Martijn Hoekstra 13:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
C H A P T E R 8
Oh Shennandoah, I long to see you...
[edit] North River (South Fork Shenandoah River) If you truly feel this river is non-notble, send it to AfD as your added notability tag has been repeatedly removed. I am well aware of the notability guidelines. Perhaps you are unaware that WP:NOTE provides for common sense exceptions, like for towns or geographical features. WP:OUTCOMES are examples of those. As WP:NOTABILITY states, "it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. " You're failing to understand this. --Oakshade 18:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, an perhaps you didn't notice, the EPA is a reference in the article. --Oakshade 18:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Fall out boy, you will be blocked from editing. Excirial 18:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, looks like that article was just plain nonsense. The origional longer article was just one big attack, and the edit that almost cleared the page was of the same caliber. Guess we just ended up ping-pong reverting the two vandalism articles. I marked it for deletion nowm should be removed shortly :) --Excirial 18:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Geber_(crater) Which guideline does it fail to meet? Its a lunar crater, not a pop star, company, etc. —— Eagle101Need help? 19:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, please read WP:N to see how notability is defined. Cheers, WilyD 19:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC) I have noticed that you have replaced the template again, and I went hunting for your rational. I found it digging through your contribs on User talk:WilyD. If that is what you think, I suggest that you nominate the page for deletion, and let folks figure it out there, rather then revert warring. 3RR is an upper limit on disruption, please lets talk it out. Thanks. —— Eagle101Need help? 19:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC) Holes in the ground can get right notable, eh? If you need an appeal to common sense, I'll tell you pretty plainly it's almost impossible for find four reliable sources for something that isn't notable. WilyD 20:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC) I'm not the author, I think its notable, its astromical data, that is not found anywhere else and is a useful collection of data. In addition the subject of the moon is a rather important one, though there are of course other astrological items. My suggestion is again, to stop adding the tag, and instead simply nominate it for deletion and come to a final result to the article. In addition I should note that if you want the author to respond, I would suggest you leave a note to him, rather then rudely templating the article that he put his time and work into. There are humans behind these account names. —— Eagle101Need help? 20:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:KoshVorlon"
