User talk:Triwbe: Difference between revisions
→Luis Radford: rep |
|||
Line 154: | Line 154: | ||
I removed the prod because, contrary to your impression, the article does cite references. In fact, it cites over 400 of them, namely 100 cites at Google Scholar per each of his four articles mentioned. Radford is a distinguished educator and your suggested deletion shows insufficient attention to detail on your part. [[User:Tkuvho|Tkuvho]] ([[User talk:Tkuvho|talk]]) 16:31, 30 May 2010 (UTC) |
I removed the prod because, contrary to your impression, the article does cite references. In fact, it cites over 400 of them, namely 100 cites at Google Scholar per each of his four articles mentioned. Radford is a distinguished educator and your suggested deletion shows insufficient attention to detail on your part. [[User:Tkuvho|Tkuvho]] ([[User talk:Tkuvho|talk]]) 16:31, 30 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
:Thank you, I appreciate it. I fully agree with the policy of "no personal attacks", yet it surely leaves room for constructive criticism :) [[User:Tkuvho|Tkuvho]] ([[User talk:Tkuvho|talk]]) 16:41, 30 May 2010 (UTC) |
:Thank you, I appreciate it. I fully agree with the policy of "no personal attacks", yet it surely leaves room for constructive criticism :) [[User:Tkuvho|Tkuvho]] ([[User talk:Tkuvho|talk]]) 16:41, 30 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
:: I was well aware of those "citations" but I believe that none of them gave any direct [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verification]] as required by [[WP:BLP]]. A simple google gave more than enough sources, so I took one and added it. |
|||
::Also I am a firm believer in the phrase "Comment on content, not on the contributor". No one has any right to say if my attention is sufficient or not. --[[User:Triwbe|Triwbe]] ([[User talk:Triwbe#top|talk]]) 16:51, 30 May 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:51, 30 May 2010
This is Triwbe's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Template:Archive box collapsable
The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010
- News and notes: Berlin WikiConference, Brooklyn Museum & Google.org collaborations, review backlog removed, 1 billion edits
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Environment
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Vacation
I will be on vacation for a couple of weeks, so don't expect any replies from me 'til then. Bye bye. --Triwbe (talk) 20:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Gray Powell article nominated for deletion
Nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gray Powell AkankshaG (talk) 00:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 April 2010
- From the team: Introducing Signpost Sidebars
- Museums conference: Wikimedians meet with museum leaders
- News and notes: Wikimedia announcements, Wikipedia advertising, and more!
- In the news: Making sausage, Jimmy Wales on TV, and more!
- Sister projects: Milestones, Openings, and Wikinews contest
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Gastropods
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010
- Book review: Review of The World and Wikipedia
- News and notes: iPhone app update, Vector rollout for May 13, brief news
- In the news: Government promotes Tamil Wikipedia, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject U.S. Roads
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Please Read This
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_restore_removed_comments
Lusanders (talk) 06:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, So, what are you implying ??? --Triwbe (talk) 06:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
There's no implying at all, just don't restore removed comments.
Lusanders (talk) 06:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- I never have done have I ? If so, when and where ? --Triwbe (talk) 06:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I will have to say here: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALusanders&action=historysubmit&diff=225847007&oldid=225846457
Lusanders (talk) 07:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- Goodness, 2 years ago when I was a newbie, my deepest apologies. --Triwbe (talk) 07:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010
- From the editor: Reviewers and reporters wanted
- Commons deletions: Porn madness
- Wikipedia books launched: Wikipedia books launched worldwide
- News and notes: Public Policy and Books for All
- In the news: Commons pornography purge, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Birds
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
creating wiki page
hello, This is Japanesebusinesswriter.
For the first time I tried creating wiki page in English about a Japanese company called Ubiquitous Corp. which I have been following recently for its uniqueness that I thought useful to let overseas people know also.
I may have missed some writing rules as I later found my poting was deleted. Frankly I know very little about wiki creating or editing rules so I appreciate it very much if you can advise the way so that my creation will not be deleted.
I have followed wiki questions such that I do not relate to this company nor I have conflict of interest, and also cited all the sources that I originally obtained the information from.
Sorry if my questioin sounds not wise, but truly I would like to know the specifc rules, if someone can help.
best regards, Japanbusinesswriter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Japanbusinesswriter (talk • contribs) 07:59, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Why did you move this page to a title with a lower case last name? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 03:59, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010
- News and notes: Backstage at the British Museum
- In the news: In the news
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Essays
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 2010
- News and notes: New puzzle globe, feature for admins, Israel's "Wikipedia Bill", unsourced bios declining
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Saints
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
BLPPROD of Mayou Trikerioti
Please note that I have removed the BLPPROD from this page, as ImDB is widely used in referencing of films on wikipedia, and I see no reason why it should be declared as uncontroversially unreliable. Prods should only be used for uncontroversial deletion, so if you still feel that this article should be deleted, please take it to AfD and give your reasons there. Thanks. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 16:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- I have just added a second reference to the page. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 16:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- I did not see the second reference before an admin deleted the page, but I agree with Wikipedia:Citing IMDb (although failed) and for a BLP article I think a better source is required as per WP:BLPPROD. --Triwbe (talk) 17:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- In any case, I added a second reference which was a review which mentioned the individual in relation to one of the films listed on the article. It'll need more to establish notability to the satisfaction of an AfD, but it passes a BLPPROD and also the A7 speedy deletion criterion, so I'm appealing to BzG to restore the page so that more references can be added, etc. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 17:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- I would have been OK with that. --Triwbe (talk) 17:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- In any case, I added a second reference which was a review which mentioned the individual in relation to one of the films listed on the article. It'll need more to establish notability to the satisfaction of an AfD, but it passes a BLPPROD and also the A7 speedy deletion criterion, so I'm appealing to BzG to restore the page so that more references can be added, etc. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 17:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- I did not see the second reference before an admin deleted the page, but I agree with Wikipedia:Citing IMDb (although failed) and for a BLP article I think a better source is required as per WP:BLPPROD. --Triwbe (talk) 17:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
"the Hunches' article and notability
Hello Triwbe, I'm posting to your talk page to ask how I should better establish notability for "the Hunches" page I just created. I reviewed the standards for musical notability before writing up the article, and found that this article was sufficient. I would be happy to add whatever documentation is needed. Most of the references I provide are long-standing and significant music critic sites in the US. I have to run off to work, so I will save out the article in case it is deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canavarbey (talk • contribs) 20:38, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, The criteria for bands is given in Wikipedia:Notability (music) and it was not clear to me precisly which of these criteria, if any, the band met. I expect they do pass, that is why I did not propose it for deletion, but clearing this up now will prevent future editors from deleting it. --Triwbe (talk) 20:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
"saama"
I have the content, can you plz help me recreate the page Chowdharyramineni (talk) 21:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
- Please see this. -- Hoary (talk) 10:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
I removed the prod because, contrary to your impression, the article does cite references. In fact, it cites over 400 of them, namely 100 cites at Google Scholar per each of his four articles mentioned. Radford is a distinguished educator and your suggested deletion shows insufficient attention to detail on your part. Tkuvho (talk) 16:31, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, I appreciate it. I fully agree with the policy of "no personal attacks", yet it surely leaves room for constructive criticism :) Tkuvho (talk) 16:41, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
- I was well aware of those "citations" but I believe that none of them gave any direct verification as required by WP:BLP. A simple google gave more than enough sources, so I took one and added it.
- Also I am a firm believer in the phrase "Comment on content, not on the contributor". No one has any right to say if my attention is sufficient or not. --Triwbe (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2010 (UTC)