User talk:42° South/Archive/10

Charles Arthur

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Charles Arthur, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Ichibani 09:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks okay. I added the Wikiproject Cricket template to the talk page. Also, the article doesn't list any references, only the Cricinfo external link. It looks like a reliable source, so I'm going to indicate that it is a reference, not a link. Please ensure all your articles clearly list their references. Ichibani 10:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:HarryBarron.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HarryBarron.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:International cricket in 2007-08Y

Yeah, I have no problem with them being added when it comes to the season. Right now, however, they are out of date and as a result completely irrelevant to the season at hand - we still have the majority of the 07 season to go, the ranking table can change hugely before the season starts. It makes no sense to have a table which will be out of date one and has no bearing on the subject in question. AllynJ 12:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tasmanian hospitals

There are plenty of things which are notable in and of themselves which don't meet the bar for notability within Wikipedia. When I was category sorting I found a whole heap (not just these) of basic stubs which did not assert notability, which were clearly not major or teaching hospitals, and in at least one case had a completely incorrect box (it was for a different Catholic hospital when it was an Anglican one). On checking, similar articles for small hospitals in other states generally didn't exist - in Perth for instance we have literally dozens of small hospitals which are basically glorified clinics with an operating theatre (St Anne's/Mercy, Kaleeya etc) about which little more than their existence and construction and capacity could be built, and about 8 or 9 big notable ones - the equivalent of Royal Hobart, LGH, etc. I do apologise for the brevity of my earlier deletion reason - my only excuse is that I'd gone through literally hundreds of articles that day. Orderinchaos 15:53, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]