User talk:Msr69er

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello Michael, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will normally produce your name and the date automatically. However, the link in your signature at the New user log leads to a page in the article namespace instead of the user namespace. To fix this problem, click "My preferences" at the top of your screen. Then click on the "User profile" tab. Then delete everything in the "nickname" box. If you just leave the box empty, the Media-Wiki software will create a normal signature for you. For more information on using the nickname feature, see Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages#Customizing your signature.

You can also create your own user page, which is the page that others see when they follow the link in your signature. Your user page is User:Msr69er.

Also, you might be interested in joining WikiProject Football, WikiProject Visual arts, or another WikiProject.

If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  --TantalumTelluride 23:37, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Football vs. Soccer

I should have directed you to WikiProject National Football League. Sorry about that. Actually, this might be a good time to caution you about regional varieties of English. In general, Wikipedia accepts all English varieties, but the variety should remain constant throughout individual articles. Therefore, Americans sometimes have to use British spelling (and vice-versa) to maintain continuity. Anyway, since you're interested in American football, be careful when editing pages where it might be confused with soccer. For more information, see Wikipedia:Manual of style#Spelling, Wikipedia:Manual of style#National Varieties of English, and American and British English differences. Thanks. --TantalumTelluride 18:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Babel

Regarding your message on my talk page, one of the most difficult aspects of editing Wikipedia (in my experience) is the use of tables. They never do what you want them to! Anyway, the collection of userboxes on my user page is a sort of table. I created it using templates, but then I subt:ed them to reduce server strain (and to tweak some of the colors). Here's what you need to do:

  1. Use {{Babel-1}}.
  2. Subst: it.
  3. Add userboxes.
    1. On a new line, type <tr><td>
    2. Then, without typing spaces, fill in the userbox template, such as this one from my page: {{userbox|black|red|[[Image:Red_Flag_waving.png|40px]]|This user is a '''[[socialist]]''' Wikipedian.}}
    3. Type </td></tr>
    4. Once you get the hang of it, consider subst:ing them. By doing this, you can help the Wikimedia servers, you can play around with font colors, and you can learn to use tables.
  4. Go out and edit boldly so that other users will click your signature and visit your user page.

Good luck. --TantalumTelluride 22:25, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:AZlicenseplt.gif

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:AZlicenseplt.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

[edit] Post on ANI

Have you left a polite note on the deleting admin's talk page? Most admins will listen to a polite argument that speedy deletion was improper. Of course, "listen to" does not equal "agree with", but the admin can unilaterally reverse himself.

If that fails, the correct place to challenge a deletion decision is Wikipedia:Deletion review. State your case that the article was not validly covered under the criterion named, and it will be looked at.

The one thing I urge you not to do is to waste your time recreating deleted content -- that is a valid reason for speedy deletion on its own, and it won't make your case any stronger. Robert A.West (Talk) 18:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Good luck. I have no opinion one way or the other, and cannot guarantee success, but please remember that nearly everyone who looks at the situation, including the admin who deleted the article, is honestly trying to improve Wikipedia. Differences of opinion are normal, but it can be hard to remember that if one's hard work gets deleted. Robert A.West (Talk) 20:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Like schools, articles on shopping malls are subject of great discussion around here. Most of such articles contain a bunch of trivial information and a long list of shops located in the mall. If you write it using great prose and make sure it's properly sourced, it's less likely to be deleted. - Mgm|(talk) 20:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I am not particularly interested in retailing in Mississippi, but I was able to find two references for Metrocenter Mall (Mississippi)]. Viewing the full article costs money, but the free preview gives you a general idea of what the article is about. http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_go1584/is_200410/ai_n7035153 Mississippi Business Journal, October, 2004 by Lynn Lofton "Metrocenter-area businesses stay optimistic despite departure; coalition cleaning house to attract new faces" As well, an article in the Jackson Free Press at http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/cover_comments.php?id=354_0_9_0_C describes the mall's curfew policy. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 20:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't know of any standards, but then again it took a lot of time for any standard to form on schools too. Do you have any sources to verify the content of the article. If I can take a look at that, I might be able to say what information is encyclopedic, if any. - Mgm|(talk) 20:25, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks everyone. I will spend the next day or so rewriting the articles (I have posted deletion review requests for two) and will use "reliable secondary sources", independent of the developers, as per the Wikipedia guidelines; I will try to make special note of economic and social impacts to the Phoenix area from these malls. I will then repost the articles, but only after making them as rock-solid as possible as far as verifiability and notability are concerned. After that, it's a difference of opinion as to whether or not these are relevant, notable and appropriate subjects for Wikipedia.--Msr69er 05:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
  • After posting my situation on the Village Pump, I have decided to hold off on recreating the pages until I get a more clear idea on whether it would be a good idea to proceed or not; I am learning a great deal on what is considered an acceptable topic - or not - on Wikipedia.--Msr69er 18:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mall Speedy Deletes

I will acknowledge that all malls are not notable, but the articles that are being deleted are for major malls that either have clear claims of notability or could easily be expanded to address notability concerns. I have major issues with an individual who takes it upon himself to determine Wikipedia policy without allowing a consensus to be built on what is -- and is not - a notable mall article. The best advice is always to include as many sources as possible about the mall, the more the better, the bigger the publication the better, the more clearly the mall is the focus of the article the better. Few major malls will not have articles regarding the mall's creation, construction, opening or expansion, or its effect on the local economy. The sources do not have to be clickable, but they must clearly define the title, publication and date; even a link to an article fragment that requires purchase will be helpful in this regard. Keep up the good work! Whatever the issue, speedy deletes are not the answer. Alansohn 19:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criteria for Malls

A number of Wikipedians are interested in creating articles about shopping malls. I myself have voted for deletion of a number of malls and retention of others. I think the time is ripe to start a project for establishing criteria for malls to have articles. It could beWP:MALL. See WP:CONG for an example of a new guideline in the process of creation. It has been argued that malls fall under WP:CORP, but I see nothing wrong with more specific criteria unique to malls to separate the important ones from small obviously unremarkable ones. When it was done, the debate could be shortened by citing whether the leasable square feet was above the guideline for a mall (but how big?) or whether it met other criteria which could be laid out (oldest in an area? Largest? Architecturally notable based on ???) If you kick off the project to create a standard, I am sure others will add their thoughts. Regards. Edison 23:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Excellent job starting off the project for creating a guideline for malls! I have left messages on the talk pages of people who commented in AfDs for malls in the most recent round. The more input, and the better the spectrum of viewpoints is represented, the more there is a consensus. Edison 07:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
A project for malls would be sensible. There are projects for things like state hiways, but they seem to be aimed at creating an article for every one such in the world, regardless how small or insignificant (on the ALL x's are notable philosophy). If the project could somehow have its own criteria for which malls deserved articles to be created by project members, there would still be a need for guidelines because the owner of a small strip mall with a laundromat, a barber shop, a pizzaria and a video rental store would proceed to create a vanity article to publicize it. I expect there is a curve of size versus frequency for malls: as the size goes from 1 million square feet to 2 million, the number decreases. From 2 million to 3 million it decreases more. etc. But going down from a million to 900,000 there would be a lot added. Going from 900ooo to 800000, far more would be added. From 200000 to 100000 a huge number would be added, and they would be more and more ho-hum, but in every case some persons could be found to assert that they were very notable. As is, people are asserting that "No malls are notable" even though some had had a huge influence for better or worse on their nearby towns. I have tried using the "1 million square feet equals notable regional mall" argument, and we can see how well it works. I know there are books on architecture and on merchandising which would work better than newspaper stories for mall notability. Newspapers usually just say "Man hurt on escalator," "Santa arrives Tuesday," or "New Sears store opening" and are dismissied as passing references. The trade press would make a better independent source, On another note, has there been any mention of the phenomenon of central business districts trying to be "malls" such as the State Street Mall in Chicago (which I think reverted to a street) where they ban most (but not always all) vehicles, thinking people will come back and shop? Edison 17:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Whip Jones

I've revamped the Whip Jones page and I'm asking for a revote. Please see the discussion on this. Please reply there to comment on what you think we need to fix or delete in order to keep the article. I didn't create the article, I took the existing BIO and moved it to a separate page for clarity.

I'm a newbie and will come back to your list of how to write good articles. For now though I'm trying to make the Whip Jones one good enough to keep. Thanks for your advice.

69.19.14.44 06:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC) Bruce Jones

[edit] Straw poll

Please take a look at WP:MALL to which you have contributed, with respect to proposals to merge it with WP:LOCAL, to continue developing it, or to go ahead and implement it as a guideline. Thanks. Edison 21:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I replied on my talk page. Yuser31415 01:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding edits made to Arizona Diamondbacks

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Msr69er! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bangelfire\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 14:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Admiral (disambiguation)

Hi there, Please don't include detailed information in the disambiguation pages. They exist to let the user decide which of several similarly-titled articles is the one they want; any info beyond the bare minimum required for this should go in a proper article (either an existing article or a new one). Thanks for your contribution. Fourohfour 13:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Edits to Will Smith

Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Will Smith, as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one (and vice versa) is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you.
~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 21:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)