Jump to content

User talk:力: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Kelly Sadler: new section
Line 252: Line 252:


I admit it needs a lot of work to be a well written article. However, she was a reporter of medium prominence for nearly 3 years at Bloomberg. Her Wikipedia article is bad timing because she should have gotten an article then before this McCain attack. The way it is now, many people are just beginning to hear of her and then come to the fast conclusion they want the article deleted. Just because you hadn't heard of someone, doesn't mean they don't qualify for an article. Have you heard of [[Yavor Hristov]]?
I admit it needs a lot of work to be a well written article. However, she was a reporter of medium prominence for nearly 3 years at Bloomberg. Her Wikipedia article is bad timing because she should have gotten an article then before this McCain attack. The way it is now, many people are just beginning to hear of her and then come to the fast conclusion they want the article deleted. Just because you hadn't heard of someone, doesn't mean they don't qualify for an article. Have you heard of [[Yavor Hristov]]?

I have nothing bad to say about you, just think this article is not so straight forward a delete.
[[User:Cowdung Soup|Cowdung Soup]] ([[User talk:Cowdung Soup|talk]]) 18:37, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
[[User:Cowdung Soup|Cowdung Soup]] ([[User talk:Cowdung Soup|talk]]) 18:37, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:38, 13 May 2018


  • I generally reply inline to comments posted here, and only rarely use {{replyto}}.
  • For the forseeable future, a majority of my activity will be between 1800GMT Sunday and 0400GMT Monday. I will respond to pings and comments here at other times. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:39, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost help

Hi, thanks for starting the Arbitration Report this month. Will you be able to continue on it? There is a new case request at WP:ARC opened last night or today. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bri: I won't have time until Sunday, but I plan to update that report (and copy-edit anything not yet copy-edited) then. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:01, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That should be fine. Thanks! ☆ Bri (talk) 17:26, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to WikiProject Portals

The Portals WikiProject has been rebooted.

You are invited to join, and participate in the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system and all the portals in it.

There are sections on the WikiProject page dedicated to tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too), and areas on the talk page for discussing the improvement and automation of the various features of portals.

Many complaints have been lodged in the RfC to delete all portals, pointing out their various problems. They say that many portals are not maintained, or have fallen out of date, are useless, etc. Many of the !votes indicate that the editors who posted them simply don't believe in the potential of portals anymore.

It's time to change all that. Let's give them reasons to believe in portals, by revitalizing them.

The best response to a deletion nomination is to fix the page that was nominated. The further underway the effort is to improve portals by the time the RfC has run its course, the more of the reasons against portals will no longer apply. RfCs typically run 30 days. There are 19 days left in this one. Let's see how many portals we can update and improve before the RfC is closed, and beyond.

A healthy WikiProject dedicated to supporting and maintaining portals may be the strongest argument of all not to delete.

We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.

Let's do this.

See ya at the WikiProject!

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   10:24, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note...

But at the Teahouse, you probably want to dial things back a little bit to...basically just being welcoming and getting them to contributing in a way that gets them past their first few hundred edits. Statistically, that's the biggest hurdle that the vast majority of new users don't ever get past. You don't...necessarily want to jump straight to "write an FA"... because... they don't know what that is and they're not totally sure they care yet. Even if they did, they're at least a year off from even trying, even if they're particularly gifted. And...leading off with "treacherous bureaucracy" isn't necessarily a great way to welcome someone into the community. GMGtalk 02:49, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I felt it was a reasonable goal compared to "I have 4 edits and am dying of cancer and want to be an admin". If they know enough to know what an admin is, I think starting on an FA is reasonable. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:52, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Umm...Yes, but you're looking at it from the perspective of someone who understands Wikipedia, and not someone who doesn't. Most people at the Teahouse are there because Hostbot invited them, because they're new, and they have no idea what they're doing, and often don't really understand the meanings of the words they're using in a technical Wikipedia sense. Someone who knows what an admin is, doesn't show up to the Teahouse in their fourth edit and asks to be an admin. Trust me, this question comes up about once every two or three weeks. Most of them mean well, and are just asking how to get more involved. A good portion of them don't yet understand that we're volunteers and not employees. GMGtalk 03:01, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I still think that strongly encouraging that type of user to work on improving articles is the correct approach. Beyond that, there's a reason I generally avoid the Teahouse, feel free to ask on IRC if it's somehow unclear why. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:03, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's an exercise in empathy, to the point where sometimes I write the same comment three times before I post it. But it requires being keenly aware of how you were yourself when you were on your fourth edit. GMGtalk 03:13, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding article Lau Ah Kok

May I know why have you tagged the article Lau Ah Kok as not notable? And how do the references may not meet the criteria for reliable sources?Zulfadli51 (talk) 05:24, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The references are largely obituaries, and founding a chain of 9 grocery stores isn't sufficiently important to automatically pass the notability guidelines. I do think it would probably survive a deletion discussion, but am not 100% certain. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:27, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

18:16, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

16:18, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Manny Ramirez Jr

Hello Power~enwiki. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Manny Ramirez Jr, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: plays for notable team, son of notable player. Thank you. SoWhy 07:52, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Son of notable player isn't remotely a credible claim of importance or significance. Playing in the Atlantic League of Professional Baseball I suppose is enough to survive A7; I thought it was a semi-pro league (which wouldn't be), but it appears to be fully professional, though not related to MLB. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:35, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
I'm not sure why, but this scentence is one of the funniest things I've ever read. I'm not sure if you meant it to be funny, but I found it hilarious. 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk 22:59, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another RfC on Net Neutrality

A month ago you participated in an RfC at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 147#Net neutrality. The same proposal has been posted again at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal: A US-only CentralNotice in support of Net Neutrality. (This notice has been sent to all who participated in the prior RfC, regardless of which side they supported). --Guy Macon (talk) 20:50, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16:28, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

GNG v SNGs

I'm planning to work on expanding User:Power~enwiki/GNG and SNGs this weekend. If I'm forgetting something obvious that should be included on a page of this type (or it already exists somewhere else), please tell me. power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:04, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Via IRC, you criticized the fact that I had !voted 20 times in 6 minutes. How exactly is that unusual? Septrillion (talk) 13:14, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PageRank

From a project I've been working on, here are some top pages on Wikipedia by PageRank (my results haven't stabilized yet). Locations (countries and cities) feel over-represented at the top due to the large number of inbound links (every biography will link to the country the person is from, for example, and country articles tend to link to history and geography articles). power~enwiki (π, ν) 22:27, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Sadler

I admit it needs a lot of work to be a well written article. However, she was a reporter of medium prominence for nearly 3 years at Bloomberg. Her Wikipedia article is bad timing because she should have gotten an article then before this McCain attack. The way it is now, many people are just beginning to hear of her and then come to the fast conclusion they want the article deleted. Just because you hadn't heard of someone, doesn't mean they don't qualify for an article. Have you heard of Yavor Hristov?

I have nothing bad to say about you, just think this article is not so straight forward a delete. Cowdung Soup (talk) 18:37, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]