User talk:Average Earthman
From Academic Kids
Hello "Average Earthman" and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:
- Peruse Wikipedia:Welcome, newcomers and associated pages, such as
- You can experiment in the Wikipedia:Sandbox.
- Sign talk page entries with ~~~~, which is automatically converted to a name and date.
- If you have any questions, see Wikipedia:Help, or you can a question to the Wikipedia:village pump.
- I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian -- Infrogmation 16:14, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hello, stuff like Network Service Provider is a speedy deletion candidate and should be tagged with {{msg:delete}}. No use tagging it with {{msg:vfd}} and going through the VfD process for rubbish like that. And, BTW, if you tag something with {{msg:vfd}}, you should also list it on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. But for this one, if you haven't already added it there, I just suggest changing the tag to {{msg:delete}}. Lupo 13:28, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
Battle of Lepanto
If you find something that you know is wrong, then, very definitely, delete it. RickK | Talk 19:56, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thanks!
Thanks for creating Bactrian Gold! Keep up the good work, Kingturtle 19:10, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Cricket pages
From Vfd discussion, it sounds you might know about cricket. Could you help with this one? There is a page about cricketeer on Cleanup with the following text:
Wenura Dissanayake - just a list of stats, last sentence bizarre. No google hits, does he exist?
I was profoundly puzzled by the sentence "his bowling career ended due to safety issues of spectators" but I know nothing about cricket. Does that sound plausible? Andris 22:13, May 19, 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for sorting this out! Andris 13:47, May 20, 2004 (UTC)
Do you want Atlantium deleted
I was just running up the tally on the deletion page for Empire of Atlantium and have noted your vote as a vote for delete, even though you don't say "delete" anywhere in you vote. Do you vote to have this page deleted? I have listed that you have in the tally, but would like confirmation from you. Samboy 19:31, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
European Union Olympic medals count for 2004
Hi there,
I wonder would you consider reversing your decision to delete this article. I have substantially rewritten it. A united EU team is not going to happen. I've discussed potential EU co-operation towards the olympics, and kept the table. I believe the table is valid, for us Europeans/EUians to see how the area has fared as a whole. Please comment on my talk page if you still feel the article should be deleted.
zoney ███ talk 00:49, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Professor Sir
Debrett's Correct Form states: "It is not customary in formal usage to combine the style emanating from other sources with titles conferred by the Sovereign. Alderman Sir William Brown and Professor Sir Edward Hailstorm are solecisms." The media don't tend to be good guides to correct form, at any rate (the BBC are especially bad). Proteus (Talk) 15:30, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
1988 Olympics
Thanks for adding the medal count table for the 1988 Olympics in Seoul. You've filled a terrible gap! Very much appreciated and have a nice day! Kokiri 07:56, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Peter Weibel
Could you look in again at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Peter Weibel? I've reversed my earlier vote & think you might want to take a look at what I've found. -- Jmabel 23:40, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)
What is notability?
I did nominate the kings of Numenor pages for deletion and it seems that they're too popular. Apparently my factual pages on election results are far less notable than lists of names out of a Tolkein appendix. Acsenray 16:18, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Dr. Michael M. Krop High School
- Since you posted your DELETE vote in Dr. Michael M. Krop High School, I have improved the article substantially. Still working on it, but for now I would like you to check it out and hopefully change your vote to KEEP. Your help will be greatly appreciated.--AAAAA 01:13, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I've had a look at the page, and can see you've done a lot of thorough work on it, but I'm sorry to say it still doesn't make it notable for me. I'm not looking for quantity or depth of detail, more the shining light that says why this is a particularly notable school. I'll congratulate you on the thoroughness, but my opinion of the level of note needed for a school clearly differs on the fundamental level from yours. Average Earthman 12:20, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- You are right. There's nothing really notable about this school, yet. It's too young (only 6 years). But I think it would not hurt anybody if this and all high schools that had somebody write a thorough article on them could "stay". As mentioned in different parts of the discussion, this article is of interest to about 3,000 people every year (1,000 students and their parents). Over 20 years, it will be of interest to more than 50,000. Maybe a few of those will contribute continously to the article. I estimate that eventually Wikipedia will let High Schools "in", as it is customary for Colleges and universities. Why not start now?--AAAAA 12:30, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Unless the article is trivial, rude or non-factual, or occupies a space better suited to a different topic, there's no reason to delete it. I could imagine prospective parents looking their local schools up on the internet would find the encyclopaedic article most useful. Nicholas 18:22, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- You are right. There's nothing really notable about this school, yet. It's too young (only 6 years). But I think it would not hurt anybody if this and all high schools that had somebody write a thorough article on them could "stay". As mentioned in different parts of the discussion, this article is of interest to about 3,000 people every year (1,000 students and their parents). Over 20 years, it will be of interest to more than 50,000. Maybe a few of those will contribute continously to the article. I estimate that eventually Wikipedia will let High Schools "in", as it is customary for Colleges and universities. Why not start now?--AAAAA 12:30, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I've had a look at the page, and can see you've done a lot of thorough work on it, but I'm sorry to say it still doesn't make it notable for me. I'm not looking for quantity or depth of detail, more the shining light that says why this is a particularly notable school. I'll congratulate you on the thoroughness, but my opinion of the level of note needed for a school clearly differs on the fundamental level from yours. Average Earthman 12:20, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Brian Clough
I know he scored 230-something goals in 270-something games but to call him talented is still POV as that is opinion. JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 17:18, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Still, calling him talented is someone's opinion and not a nuetral point of view. If you said he was 'widely considered talented' that would probably be ok. JOHN COLLISON | (Ludraman) 15:37, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
WikiProject Formula One
Hey Average Earthman - I noticed you'd previously expressed some interest in Formula One-related articles. I've started a WikiProject on F1 and I thought you might be interested. Thanks! User:Rdsmith4/Sig 03:07, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Nottingham co-op
I eagerly await your article on the Greater Nottingham Co-Operative Society :-) Nicholas 18:18, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
your comments are desired
Please take a look at a discussion on the village pump; an admin has taken it upon himself to challenge clear VfD deletion results through a third channel, other than voting and undeletion requests. Thought you might be interested... Postdlf 01:49, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
WP:VFD/HS
Just letting you know that I thought you might be interested in taking a look at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/High schools, as well as what I wrote on Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy. —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 05:41, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)
Culture of Greece
Culture of Greece is this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.
New Zealand Photographers
Would you consider changing your vote on Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/New_Zealand_Photographers? I have deleted the original non-content and added some proper content. Cheers - Drstuey 11:59, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Dickinson High School
Hi Average Earthman... The Dickinson High School has been heavily revised. If you wouldn't mind, please take a moment to visit the refactored version in the event you wish to reconsider your vote. —[[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 03:02, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Do you not want a user page? I'll delete it for you if you like. Everyking 18:24, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)| talk)
Adminship nomination
Hi. You seem to be a good editor & able to get along with people. I'll nominate you for adminship if you wish. Please reply here to accept. Regards & happy editing, Wile E. Heresiarch 00:58, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Ramil Safarov
Nagorno-Karabakh is a region that is the object of a disputed between Azerbaijan and Armenia. They had a real war, not just an edit war. For a taste of just how hot people get over this issue, read about Ramil Safarov. The copy of the page at Republic of Nagorno-Karabahk is one of many created the other day by an anon, User:64.136.2.254, who also messed with a lot of redirects and every link to the Nagorno-Karabakh page. Theresa knott cleaned up a lot of the mess. This page is still around because a likely sockpuppet, User:Clarkefreak, reverted out the {{del}} tag and made this page ineligible for speedying. I'm working with the parties to end the dispute. If I thought that a redirect was appropriate, I could have saved myself a lot of typing. — Davenbelle 13:39, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
Talk page vandal
Thanks for reverting. Burgundavia 20:14, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
Oh! Mr. Porter! VFD
Hi there--
Another user and I have done a rewrite of the Oh! Mr Porter! article in the hopes of making it worthy of keeping. I'm wondering if you'd take a look at the new article, and reconsider your vote to delete it . Thanks!
Best wishes, Jacobw 18:52, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Images and media for deletion
- I am contacting people who previously helped to vote to delete a generally objectionable photograph by a vote of 88 to 21, and who might be unaware that immediately after that image was voted to be deleted someone posted another which was very similar in content. My objections to this, and the previous image that was voted to be deleted might be based upon reasons far different from any that you have, but I do object to it, and consider the posting of such images to be acts of asinine stupidity, which burdens the project and its major educational aims in ways that they should not be burdened, and can be extremely detrimental to the acceptance and growth of WIkipedia's use and influence. Thus far those who I believe to be in the extreme minority of Wikipedians who would like to include these images, many who have been channeled to the voting page from the article with which it is associated have dominated the voting, 23 to 12 (as of the time that I composed this message). I would like to be somewhat instrumental in shedding a bit more light upon the issue, and if possible, helping to turn the tide against its inclusion. It might also be necessary to begin making an effort to establish an explicit Wikipedia policy against explicit photographic depictions of humans engaged in erotic, auto-erotic, or quasi-erotic activities. To my limited knowledge such images have not been accepted as appropriate anywhere else within this project, and frankly I can agree with those who are casually labeled prudes for opposing their inclusion, that they should not be. Vitally important information that might be unwelcome by some is one thing that should never be deleted, but un-needed images that can eventually prevent or impede many thousands or millions of people from gaining access to the great mass of truly important information that Wikipedia provides is quite another matter. There are vitally important distinctions to be made. Whatever your reasons, or final decisions upon the matter, I am appealing for more input on the voting that is occurring at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion. ~ Achilles † 04:22, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The Most Honourable and Worthy Ancient Order of the Knights of the Franklin Mint
Or something like that. Congrats on being the first person to vote on all three of these silly articles. Well, I've spent more time on this chap than I can spare, and am turning off the 'puter for the night. However, I thought I might let some sane person know that "Lord Seal" has a funny way of creeping into Spilsby. Who knows, perhaps "Lord Hudson" will similarly creep into an article on some other placename. If, as is highly unlikely, you have nothing better to do, keep your eyes peeled! (No need to reply, but if you do reply, please do so here: I'll take a quick look tomorrow.) -- Hoary 13:30, 2005 Apr 7 (UTC)
Furness Railway
It has been pointed out to me the error of my ways by another. It is, I am given to understand though, not just a question of individual preference, but part of the Wikipedia protocol that one does not include editorial comment within the article. There are other occasions when I have unintentionally done so, but will cease forthwith. I have more information for the FR though, which I shall be including shortly. Peter Shearan 13:17, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Lorna Nogueira
I thought you might like to know that I have re-nominated Lorna Nogueira at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Lorna Nogueira for deletion. Kevin Rector 04:48, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
issues over school articles
In November 2003, there was a VfD debate over Sunset High School (Portland). The debate was archived under Talk:Sunset High School (Portland). What to do with the article is still being contested and has been recently re-nominated for VfD at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Sunset High School (Portland).
I am writing to you because you have participated in such debates before. There still does not exist a wikipedia policy (as far as i can tell) over what to do in regards to articles about specific U.S. public school. My hope is that a real consensus can come out of the debate, and a real policy can take shape. Take part if you are so willing. Kingturtle 02:20, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Sharyn Clough
Greetings, Average Earthman... I've rewritten the article on Sharyn_clough, and I'm wondering if you'd consider taking a look at the rewrite and reconsidering your vote for deletion. Best wishes, --Jacobw 15:19, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
The Canadian Connection
My comment on Votes for deletion/Sir Anthony Beaumont-Dark was meant to be humorous. I VfDed an article on a Canadian businessman whose sole claim to fame was a disastrously unsuccessful run for Leader of the Manitoba Liberal Party. I was amazed, then irritated, then finally amused when the article was saved by very vocal support from Canadian editors. Which is why I tend to cite the Alan de Jardin debate whenever the notability of an obscure individual is at issue. ---Isaac R 15:55, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
Jonny Wilkinson
Hello, pleased to meet you. About the pseudonyms, that was my conclusion, too, but I thought I'd express it politely in the edit summary anyway. I thought it would give the editor a chance to contribute positively if s/he were genuine. :-) --RobertG ♬ talk 12:00, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
