User:Tivedshambo/Archives/2006d

Only talk pages and other discussion pages should be signed. Articles are left unsigned. Hope this helps. — Tivedshambo (talk) 20:23, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Accepted, but I hope you understand why I Prodded it. — Tivedshambo (talk) 10:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

The one you copied it into is also incorrect, as it is the main Talk page for the article, not the proposed guideline. The Talk page I created for the proposed guideline is the one that the standard proposal template points to. I guess one of us must be confused here. Crum375 17:12, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the page you're looking for is talk:List of notable accidents and incidents on commercial aircraft/Guideline for inclusion criteria and format. Talk talk:List of notable accidents and incidents on commercial aircraft/Guideline for inclusion criteria and format has appeared in mainspace, and now has a talk page of it's own. Yes, it's confusing, but I can move your comments and Zntrip's to the correct page if you like. — Tivedshambo (talk) 17:18, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I guess the problem arose due to the link created by the 'proposed guideline/policy' template. Yes, obviously it should to into the proper space, but not into the main article's Talk page. Thanks, Crum375 17:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm going off-net for a few hours now, but I'm sure some friendly admin can try to unravel this ;-)  — Tivedshambo (talk) 17:25, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

And as of now I am still not sure where the page should go, assuming it can't stay where it is. The link you posted in your message on my Talk page just points to the proposed guideline page itself, not its Talk page. Crum375 17:26, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I got your message about going offline - I just hope no one is going to delete the Talk page without finding the best new home for it. Crum375 17:27, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

It is the notability that I am questioning, not the sources. — Tivedshambo (talk) 13:56, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I roiginally thought so too, but other than the small group size (of which I am not a member by-the-by) I have come to think that it is notable. Further, a group focusing on a level approximately 600 times more selective than Mensa, for example, is bound to be much smaller. I do not think a speedy is called for for G4, because this is fundementally a different article, and I do not think a speedy is called for notability. If anything, the standard AfD should be used. -- Avi 14:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. Any additional clarification you can give would be appreciated. — Tivedshambo (talk) 22:15, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I've added that extra notice. Hopefully that's sorted everything out now. -- Steel 22:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks. — Tivedshambo (talk) 22:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations). I understand that you feel it unfair that large companies can have articles when smaller companies can't, but that really is what notability is about. I didn't write the rules for Wikipedia I'm afraid. If you want to request the article to be undeleted, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. Another point to bear in mind is WP:Vanity. It is not a good idea to write about your own company, as it is very difficult to avoid bias.

By the way, please remember to sign your comments on talk pages with ~~~~. Hope this helps. — Tivedshambo (talk) 23:00, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean the Engineer's Line Reference? According to the Quail maps it's BML - which covers the line from Weymouth to London Waterloo via Bournemouth and Basingstoke. Hope this helps. — Tivedshambo (talk) 16:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm guessing that means the Bournemouth Main Line, or something similar. I'm just thinking about a possible move on one line that isn't really official, i don't think. It is under Waterloo via Weybridge railway service. I just think this article warrants a name as a line. But extended to woking. It is not right now mentioned under the SWML. Simply south 22:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

More likely BourneMouth London - engineers don't have much imagination I'm afraid :-)  — Tivedshambo (talk) 22:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Just a query, what would you rename this to? Would "London Waterloo to Woking Line" be good? Simply south 23:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Seems reasonable, or possibly just "London to Woking Line". See Category:Railway lines of England for similar examples. I've just added this category to the article. — Tivedshambo (talk) 06:28, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I've put it on WP:RM anyway. Simply south 13:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

You created an article with no evidence of notability or citations. What you said about him may be true, but equally it could be a libellous slur. See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. — Tivedshambo (talk) 12:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Uhm, you did see, that the article name already implies he is a porn star? Therefore any Mark Dalton who is not a porn star will most probably not be offended by it. Anyway, I'm going to edit the page a little, see if it remains or if someone wants to remove it. I created the article because there were red links. I usually do that when I see a red link and know something of the subject.

If there are good reasons for the article to be removed, I suppose there's nothing I can do. But I hope otherwise, and personally dislike deletionism...--Wormsie 12:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

You provide no evidence that he's gay. Be that as it may, without evidence of notability I would have tagged the article the same regardless of any aspersions made. If you can provide evidence for notability and citations, place {{hangon}} on the page and discuss it on the articles talk page. Also, if it wasn't for new page patrolling, Wikipedia would be swamped with nonsense, libel and all sorts of other stuff. — Tivedshambo (talk) 12:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, saying that somebody gay is always a libellious slur. :-) I wrote "gay pornoraphic actor" because to my knowledge he has mainly performed in gay porn. Sure, that might be taken to mean that he is gay, but I was meaning to elaborate on that. Anhow, we'll see how the page turns out. Whether its deleted or not, I can think of it as an excercise for researching for Wikipedia...--Wormsie 13:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the speedy deletion tag as you have now provided evidence of notability. — Tivedshambo (talk) 14:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

This should be on your user page or deleted, not a Wikipedia article. — Tivedshambo (talk) 11:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Pl. give me some time. I thought I was doing on my user page. How do I do it?

Swadhyayee 11:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

It has been moved for you - see User:Swadhyayee/Lipsum — Tivedshambo (talk) 12:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I use {{stub}} when I don't have the time or inclination to trawl through the hundreds of different stub templates trying to find something appropriate. As the general stub template directs to Category:Stubs, they can be easily found and rectified by someone (presumably like yourself) with more experience of stub sorting. Also bear in mind that I did not create the article in question, I merely wikified it and added the stub template. – Tivedshambo 12:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

See User:Tivedshambo/Commercial images. I cannot accept other people or organisations making money from photographs which I donate for nothing. If this is unacceptable to Wikipedia, feel free to delete the photographs, but I am not willing to relax my terms of use.  – Tivedshambo 18:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)