User talk:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please leave a new message.

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:


Contents

[edit] Discussion

You know, with the recent discussion we've had at Joseph McCarthy, we might actually be getting at the crux of our underlying disagreement. It just may be that we're close to resolving the disagreement and will be able to finally put it behind us and move on. Since this isn't specific to the McCarthy article, I thought we could move the discussion here.

To repeat (roughly, I edited myself to be less confrontational) our last 2 exchanges:

Footnoted references use the "{{cite" transclusion, a "footnoted comment" or "footnoted factoid", or a "footnoted additional fact", also goes to the bottom of the page but only uses the "<ref" html coding, both appear at the foot of the article, yet, are used for different purposes. The footnoted additional fact introduces new material, the footnoted reference citation doesn't introduce new material, it uses the actual quote from the cited material. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 19:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, a footnoted reference citation usually does not introduce new material. However, saying that a reference citation "uses the actual quote from the cited material" is your own personal practice, and is not at all a part of standard citation practice. It obviously should not be done when the quote serves no purpose, and merely repeats information already in the main text. It should only be done when when you are combining the two forms of footnote you describe. That is, you are both providing a reference citation and introducing some new information that clarifies or expands upon the main text. Sometimes this clarification and expansion is done with a quote from the source. But if you aren't using the footnote to introduce new information, you don't need a quote from the source.
The general rule here is a simple one: The reader doesn't need or want to have the same information thrown at him twice. If you're repeating information, you're doing something wrong. RedSpruce (talk) 19:55, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Like I said, this seems to get at the crux of our disagreements. Namely, what is "standard citation practice"? If you agree that your citation footnotes should use standard citation practice, then let's find some references about exactly what that is. I'm willing to be shown wrong here. If it turns out that it is common practice for citation footnotes to include a quote from the reference source, even when that quote adds no significant information to the article/book/whatever, then I'll stop making that objection to your edits. If you agree, then let's both try to find some documentation about this issue. RedSpruce (talk) 21:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Another way of settling this

I just spent some time at the Wikipedia:Featured articles page, clicking on random articles and searching for uses of the "quote" parameter in footnotes. Out of the 35 featured articles I looked at, this parameter was used twice, and in both cases it was used according to the proper usage I describe above -- that is, it was used because the quote added information, expanding upon the footnoted text.

Featured articles are probably the best place to decide an issue like this; FAs have been reviewed by many WP editors, with every nuance of style and content examined with an eye to what belongs in a Wikipedia article.

Would you like to shut me up, once and for all and forever about this issue? Here's how to do it: Find a single Wikipedia featured article that uses footnote quotes (more than one in the article) the way you use them, and used them in that way at the time it was promoted to Featured Article status.

Just one featured article, and I'm done with this issue.

RedSpruce (talk) 12:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ...And yet another possible way

I'm going to file a request with WP:Requests for arbitration about this issue. I have no idea if they'll consider it worth accepting, but it's worth a try. RedSpruce (talk) 10:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I see in this comment you said "This should be debated on a global level rather than the case by case basis as is done now." Since you feel that way, you should be in favor of the request for arbitration I mention above, since that's exactly the purpose of the request. If you would leave a comment expressing your support for arbitration here, that might help a lot toward getting it accepted. RedSpruce (talk) 00:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:7339591 116942546340.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:7339591 116942546340.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Courtesy notice

Hi, I have performed a partial revert of a revert you have made. If you check the diff it seems you assumed a good edit by an IP user was vandalism, when in fact it was removing vandalism. Just letting you know as I know I like to know about it when I make such mistakes. Cheers. aliasd·U·T 17:41, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The revert you performed was over three different IP user's contributions. Only one of the users you reverted was performing vandalism, the other two were fixing it. aliasd·U·T 19:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Bert_Acosta_Obituary_Photo_1954.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bert_Acosta_Obituary_Photo_1954.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly hi! 03:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I added {{non-free newspaper image}} to the above image, as this would seem to be the correct license...would you mind adding a fair use rationale? Kelly hi! 14:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NYT articles

Can you pass me the text for these two articles: http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F6091EFA395C0C738FDDAB0994DB484D81 and http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA061FFE3E5C0C7B8DDDAD0894DC484D81 --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] O'Malley

Unless either you would rather do it yourself (which would be my preference) or you object, I will nominate Walter O'Malley as my next WP:FAC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I am having trouble with the Time search engine. I am unable to get the 1958-04-28 cover story from 50 years ago today. I know stories from this era and even earlier are in the search archive, but it does not come up under Walter O'Malley.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
My real problem is with the logic of the search engine. Since the 1958 cover story does not appear in the search engine probably many other articles about him are missing from the search results. I suspect it has something to do with the apostrophe.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I have queries out all over the place for guidance on getting the Time search engine to give me the O'Malley results. I have one at the computing reference desk on WP. I have queries at three different boards on the.fool.com and one at frihost.net. I just need someone to tell me how to search on the guy in the Time search engine now that I can see there is a problem.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I read through the article and added a lot of stuff. Have a look.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I added a lot of stuff. I am worried about a couple of things for the WP:FAC:
  1. Some facts that were there before today are not reffed
  2. The Walter O'Malley copyright
  3. The Edwin O'Malley copyright

With Jack Kemp and Jesse Jackson, Jr., I could find whatever I needed at Time, Newsweek and U.S. News & World Report. I think the apostrophe is causing some sort of problem for O'Malley. I can't figure out how to get the info I need. However, with Newsweek and U.S. News they don't go back to when O'Malley was alive yet.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I've got a lot more sources to go through now. The gods have found a way to use the almighty google search logic within the Time database: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Computing#Time_Magazine_search_engine.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I have added the Time archive. There was a lot of good stuff that changed the breadth and depth of the article. If you get a chance, it might need a new copyedit.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

There is a problem at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Walter O'Malley with ref two. I can not open the link. I think it was a page you originally added.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I am guessing you will get some sort of repsonse that a server is down or that the site has been relocated to a new URL. Let's give them a day. If they are in LA, they have not even gotten into the office yet.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I will be leaving in about 45 minutes for a 2-6 shift at the Obama Get out the Vote effort in NW Indiana. I will be gone until the evening.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:22, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't remember any contemporaneous quotes. The other magazines that I added with historical hatred are relevant, but I am not sure what you are looking for.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
P.S. with your earlier comment about my ribbons and stars, you might want to add a Tiger to my user page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
What is your thinking on delinking teatotler?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I checked out nine Dodger books at the Chicago Public Library today. They are all basically about the Jackie Robinson era. It seems people are unimpressed with our article.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I am going to put the article at WP:PR.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Chelsea Dawn Gerlach

I have nominated Chelsea Dawn Gerlach, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chelsea Dawn Gerlach. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? MBisanz talk 10:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] en-dashes

Wikipedia is now UTF-8-compatible, so there's no need to continue to use HTML entities, we can use the actual UTF-8 characters, which are much more readable, don't you think? At the bottom of the edit window, we now have those nice UTF-8 characters conveniently available, so why not use them?--BillFlis (talk) 13:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History of Science WikiProject

Based on the editing interests you mention on your userpage, you might be interested in joining the History of Science WikiProject. You can browse the lastest project newsletter to see what some other editors have been doing lately with the histories of science, medicine and technology. Cheers--ragesoss (talk) 01:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 05:56, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Footnoted quotes

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Footnoted quotes/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Footnoted quotes/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 16:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

In setting up the pages for this case, a mistake was made: Your comment from the request page was moved to this page: Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Footnoted quotes as an "Uninvolved statement", instead of to this page: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Footnoted quotes. This confusion no doubt happened because you didn't use your fill user name in the heading to your statement. You should ask Anthøny to correct this, since you aren't allowed to edit these pages yourself. RedSpruce (talk) 19:46, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Richard, thanks for letting me know about being mentioned in this RFA. Its odd that I was not given any other notice. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 21:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD for Downward Mobility

Hi. Probably don't want a redirect on the article until the WP:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 May 6 discussion is settled regarding article Downward Mobility. Although I nearly did the same myself!

Cheers, Nk.sheridan   Talk 23:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I've replied...

to your query on my talk page. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 21:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Overbye

A tag has been placed on Overbye, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ro098 (talk) 00:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP:LOTM

Thanks for voting last month. I could use your vote here this month. Voting ends on the 20th.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the votes, but you can't vote for the same thing twice. Your 4th and 5th place votes were the same. Can you fix your ballot?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
It seems you missed this note above. Please fix your vote.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Signature songs

I have nominated Category:Signature songs (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Dudesleeper / Talk 09:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Acosta14615.jpg}

Thank you for uploading Image:Acosta14615.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NYC Meetup: June 1, 2008

New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday June 1st, Columbia University area
Last: 3/16/2008
This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, elect a board of directors, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).

We'll also review our recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wiki Week bonanza, being planned with Columbia University students for September or October.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

Also, check out our regional US Wikimedia chapters blog Wiki Northeast (and we're open to guest posts).
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Alonzo Church.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alonzo Church.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Apidra chem.gif}

Thank you for uploading Image:Apidra chem.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 06:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Becka Cropped4.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Becka Cropped4.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 00:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request to move article Freeman S. Gosden incomplete

You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Freeman S. Gosden to a different title - however your proposal is either incomplete or has been contested as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:

  1. Added {{move|NewName}} at the top of the talk page of the page you want moved, replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article. This creates the required template for you there.
  2. Added {{subst:RMtalk|NewName|reason for move}} to the bottom of the talk page of the page you want to be moved, to automatically create a discussion section there.
  3. Added {{subst:RMlink|PageName|NewName|reason for move}} to the top of today's section here.

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR (talk) 08:09, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Laura Shelton

Hi Richard,

Please do not move, redirect, or merge the content at Laura Shelton during an AfD discussion as you did here. While you should feel free to edit the article during discussion, hiding or relocating the content makes it very difficult for the discussion participants to come to a conclusion. Thank you. --jonny-mt 04:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Err ... I was the nominator of that discussion, and the conclusion to which we were plainly coming - on which the article's creator signed off - was that it should be merged to the Carl Monson article. It's scarcely a backhanded edit.  RGTraynor  20:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I know it was a good-faith edit, but the issue was that there was a user supporting outright deletion when it was made--merging or redirecting in that situation would mean ignoring his opinion entirely. He seems to have added further comments since then, though, so I'll take another look later on and see if we can't go ahead and close it. --jonny-mt 00:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] G. David Schine

The only way there's likely to be any resolution on this article is through mediation, i.e Wikipedia:Requests for mediation. Both parties have to agree to mediation however; will you agree? RedSpruce (talk) 20:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Raoul Wallenberg

Hi Richard,

This is a message I placed on the Raoul Wallenberg discussion page

Legacy

I am considering adding a third part to this section, headed "Wallenberg remembered in the Arts" or similar. I am aware of two examples: Peter Greenaway's "The Tulse Luper Suitcases part 3" has an extended section about his time in Budapest and then follows him to Russia; "Wallenberg", an opera by Estonian composer Erkki-Sven Tüür, which has been produced in Germany and, currently in Estonia. I'm floating this idea here first, to see if the regulars think it appropriate.Panchali101 (talk) 21:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Any thoughts?

A reply here will be fine tokeep the discussion together.

Best regards

91.84.116.27 (talk) 10:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikimedia Commons

Thank you for uploading images/media to Wikipedia! There is, however, another Wikimedia Foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please consider creating an account and uploading your media there instead. That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view images you have previously uploaded by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'image' namespace from the drop down box). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!--OsamaK 10:34, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfD nomination of Template:CAGov

I have nominated Template:CAGov (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. MBisanz talk 21:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Spam in Ghetto Gourmet

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Ghetto Gourmet, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Ghetto Gourmet is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Ghetto Gourmet, 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 here CSDWarnBot (talk) 05:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Walter O'Malley at WP:PR

I just noticed that we have a ton of comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/Walter O'Malley/archive1. Where were these guys during the FAC? I have been working from books out of the library, but will attempt to address some of these issues tonight. Please come help out if you are interested.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hetty Sylvia Ann Howland Green Wilks

[edit] Notability of Hetty Sylvia Ann Howland Green Wilks

A tag has been placed on Hetty Sylvia Ann Howland Green Wilks requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Truthanado (talk) 23:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:TonyTheTiger/List_of_the_Day/voting/200807

I would appreciate it if you would consider voting this month at User:TonyTheTiger/List_of_the_Day/voting/200807.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lizzie Borden

Kindly respond to the discussion on the talk page regarding this article. You initially added all of this as a quote, which was removed with rationale. You returned it with the misleading edit summary which implied you were returning the full title, which is not accurate. This is, in fact, not the full title of the article. You returned extensive subtitles to the citation. You are not restoring the full title, you are adding subtitles that are under the main title. There is no rationale for doing so, and to continue to conduct editing on this page while ignoring the proper rationale given on the talk page borders on tenditiousness. Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lizzie Borden

I'd rather see the bigger version first. The initial link is way too small to read. Am i looking at the right links? Alansohn (talk) 15:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

  • I think the cropped version should be bigger, if possible. I love reading a whole newspaper page for the other articles, but they are not relevant here. Alansohn (talk) 15:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Much easier on the eye. Alansohn (talk) 16:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC)