User talk:RobbertS

Speedy deletion of Gebruiker:RobbertS/Signature

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 22:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain further...

The record shows you nominated the Abdul Basit (terrorist suspect) on May 12 2009. The wikipedia's deletion policies recommend that nominators leave a note on the talk page of the contributor who started an article, to illustrate their good faith.

Could you please explain why you failed to do so? Geo Swan (talk) 00:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply.

I asked for the administrator who closed that {{afd}} to userify it for me. User:Geo Swan/review/Abdul Basit (terrorist suspect). I've made some changes. Please recognize that those who have contributed to an article can't address the concerns of those who think it should be deleted if they aren't informed of those concerns. I am going to encourage you to leave the courtesy "heads-up", as the deletion policies recommend, in every single case.

Most nominators tell me about their nomination of articles about individuals who have been held in extrajudicial detention by western nations. Sometimes their central justification for deletion is that, worldwide, there are millions of individuals currently held, or formerly held, in secret detention camps. They are underestimating. If you count Nazi Germany's concentration caps, the Soviet Gulag, the equivalent camps in Red China, Cambodia's killing fields, the Argentine and Chilean "disappeared", the actual number is probably something like 100,000,000 individuals held in extrajudicial detention during the last 100 years. But we need to compare like with like. 99,997,000 of those 100,000,000 were held by countries recognized as not respecting the rule of law. Only 0.003 percent of those individuals were held by countries generally regarded as respecting the rule of law. I believe that makes individuals held in secret detention by countries that respects the rule of law worth covering when verifiable authoritative references have published their secrets.

I am going to ask the closing administrator whether they are satisfied that the articls addresses the concerns expressed in the {{afd}}. If they agree I will wait a couple of days to read your opinion too. Geo Swan (talk) 16:23, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on my talk page.

I noticed you use {{time}} in your signatures. This shows the reader the current time, not the time you left the comment. ~~~ displays the wikiid, but with no timestamp. ~~~~ displays the wikiid, and a timestamp. ~~~~~ displays a timestamp, but with no wikiid. Maybe you should append that to your signature?

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 21:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doped

Where did you get the idea that pure silicon, an intrinsic semiconductor, is not a semiconductor? I reverted it as nonsense. Please talk about it before trying something like that again. Dicklyon (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]