User talk:Wikipeterproject: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:02, 8 February 2010

Zahi Hawass

Hello,

Regarding Hawass, your rational for removing the section on his statements was “Reworded (and summarized) section to ensure NPOV (and also to make sure it is balanced with the article's length)). My responses are:

1. I assume that NPOV means neutral point of view. His comments are quoted and therefore are as neutral as can be. There was no editorial opinion from whoever added the quotes.

2. If all sections were edited to make sure they are balanced with the length of the overall entry or with other sections then all Wikipedia entries would be limited in length depending on the amount of information that was added by the creator of the entry. So editing this section in this article for that reason doesn’t sound valid. To achieve a different balance the proper course of action would be to add information or details about the subject to the other sections.

3. Hawass is an internationally recognized authority on archaeology and frequently appears in documentary TV programs. His statements and writings on the subject in this section are highly relevant for those interested in learning more about him without having to click on every citation.

4. Your edit stated "Hawass has been criticized for various comments relating to Jews. He has questioned Jewish influence in America but stated that he does not believe in a "Jewish conspiracy to control the world". The original entry only quoted Hawass and did not express or mention criticism. Your entry quotes his defensive statement but does not provide the context of his original statements which are much more extensive that your summarization of questioning Jewish influence in America.

I suppose I am supposed to check back here for your response.

Thanks

James Pike

FYI - I've been working hard on a biography page you marked for cleanup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Pike

thanks for the start!

--RFlynn1000 17:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Gumley

Hello there. Hope you don't mind that I have reverted your edit of 26 May as the full title of the professional association which links to Engineers Australia is The Institution of Engineers - Australia. cheers Geoffrey Wickham 00:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

I have peer reviewed James Killen. You can find the comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/Peer review/James Killen. Giggy _U^CP 04:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DMO additions

Thanks for that. I came home with a pile of Org Charts; you've saved me the effort. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gumley = 3.5 stars?

By whom is Gumley Considered a "three-and-a-half star"? i.e. Have you a reference to support this?
Maybe you could have argued that when he was "Undersecretary", but now that he's CEO, he's a 3 star. Yes, he does have 3 stars (or more precisely, SES level 3) reporting to him, but that's not an unusual situation - the CIO has been a 2 star, and had 2 stars reporting to him, until the relatively recent appointment of Farr. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tamara Ecclestone

I closed this discussion as "keep" as you didn't really give a valid reason for deletion but while looking at the article's history, I see what bothered you. The IP editor you were trying to revert gave edit summaries that suggests he represents some kind of "management company". Therefore, I put a coi tag on the article. If he keeps it up and fails to discuss his edits, then take it to the conflict of interest noticeboard. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

F1 edits

Hi there, just a quick note to say that if you edit driver results tables after a GP, please don't remove the bolding / italics from the tables that denote pole positions and fastest laps. Thanks, Bretonbanquet (talk) 14:29, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noted.Wikipeterproject (talk) 16:45, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GAN notice

Hi Wikipeterproject, you currently have at least one article up a WP:GAN in the Sports and recreation section. In an attempt to clear out the backlog there, User:Wizardman asked all sports WikiProjects to review at least two articles from that section. I'm now going around and asking anybody with an article nominated under Sports and recreation to review at least one article in that section to help us clear the backlog out so your articles can finally be reviewed faster! iMatthew ^talk at 15:07, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

While 'Norwegian' is an adjective, 'former soldiers' is a compound noun. Please do not revert things that are not errors. 155.188.247.5 (talk) 19:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My answer at 155.188.247's talk page. Wikipeterproject (talk) 13:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Essendon Nickname

It is a well known fact that Essendon used to be referred to by that name and I provided a source backing it up. How is that vandalism? --58.111.120.66 (talk) 09:47, 3 October 2009 (UTC) That's okay, apology accepted. --58.111.120.66 (talk) 20:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

President's Prize

Just thought I'd comment on your revision to my post. Here in America, there is more criticism surrounding the timing rather than his accomplishments. GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 21:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Skinhat

Do you ever add content or just delete stuff? User:skinhat —Preceding undated comment added 08:26, 13 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]

My answer's at [Talk page]

"up with which"

See my talk page, and feel free to follow up there. -- Hoary (talk) 13:29, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Murray

Thanks for the work on the Andy Murray article, it really needed it. Hope my edits didn't get in your way too much. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 00:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Australian Open Singles Finals appearances

Go Here and look!69.137.120.81 (talk) 22:49, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Political candidates

Hi there. I noticed you participated in the Articles for Deletion discussion for Graham Jones (politician). I have started a discussion regarding a consensus position for candidates in legislative elections (by way of amending WP:POLITICIAN, in case you are interested in putting forward your views there. --Mkativerata (talk) 01:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]