User talk:Swpb/Archive/2006
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Swpb. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Welcome to Wikipedia!!!
|
Barnstar Award
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| This is for you extensive work with the USS Gray (FF-1054). I really was quite impressed, and as you haven't recieved any Barnstars yet... Congrats and keep up the good work! Sharkface217 04:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC) |
AfD
You forgot to add Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Hait to the AfD log. -- RHaworth 07:50, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Rectifying notabilty
Hello Swpb! I've attempted to rectify the notability guideline you expressed concern about on Ruxton Towers. I'm unsure how to remove the tags. Even if it does not meet your requirements for notability, I think that the strength of Wikipedia is that anything that anyone might want to find out about can be covered, and of course this means both some of the rather obscure things that might tweak my interest and many things that I couldn't care less about, but other people care passionately about. Thank you! I'm learning, eh? Chrismathewsjr 17:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi, bird species lists are invariably in taxonomic ordeer to show relationships. I've put a heading in the article now to avoid confusion, thanks, jimfbleak 06:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Nice space suit
Your space suit additions are interesting. You ought to try out some other topics related to space. Good luck! Jussenadv 06:52, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
UFO's Real or Not
i seem to understand that you have my article up for deletion and i have preformed all changes i have made to make it differ from the article you said it was similar to, hell i even sited the article to my article in question, might i ask why it is still on the list for deletion. i put all my powers of writing to make that article sound as real and as true as possible with out stealing information and calling it my own. so please do a new member a favor and keep the article and project it on Yahoo and Google please :'( Tu-49 22:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- I moved the article to his user-space... should be a happy home for it temporary. ---J.S (t|c) 00:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes until i can make chnges to get it back together as well as making it better Tu-49 00:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Nice work on the above article--your cleanup!
If I'm correct
Hello swbp, I am quite sure that when you add the {{db-bio}} to someone's new page, you warn the user..? As you did to Vince shah, you didn't warn the user. I did, and hopefully you can continue you patrol new pages. If thats the case, this is just a friendly reminder from me. Thanks, Ardo 19:52, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Ok, Thanks. Ardo 20:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
You db-nonsensed this page. The page creator removed the tag immediately. Thought you should know MNewnham 21:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi -- Thanks for your reminder about not blanking pages. I do not generally blank pages, but I understood the Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion point #7 that listed "Author requests deletion" as a category for speedy deletion to say "If the author blanks the page, this can be taken as a deletion request." I was the only author; it was a rewrite because a copyright confusion; the copyright confusion was cleaned up by an admin; I blanked the page for speedy deletion. --LQ 01:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Lowrider band
Ok, now, it still needs a reference. Otherwise, I will be forced to place it on WP:AFD. Happy Editing!
BTW, thank you for actually posting on my talk page rather than just removing it and not saying anything :) xxpor yo!|see what i've done 03:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for bringing it to my attention, but I was actually testing out some template stuff, and had placed the tag on the page to test a few things out. Sorry for the confusion, and thanks for trying to help out! —Mets501 (talk) 21:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Lincoln Options
OK, I now understand the guidelines for notability better. Thank you.
WmCliff 01:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Your BUITMS (BUITMS) RfD nomination
It appears to me that you got the template arguments backwards in your nomination (No sweat; I screw up templates all the time). Since BUITMS (BUITMS) is the one you tagged with {{rfd}}, and since that's the one that matches your argument, I have gone ahead and changed the section title so that people won't be confused. If I got it wrong, feel free to correct the nomination or drop me a note so I know what to do. In any case, thanks for tracking down an obvious candidate for RfD. I voted delete on it already. Gavia immer (u|t|c) 17:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Love Torpedo
I saw you nominated Love Torpedo for speedy deletion. I agree with you, it's not my page I just found it through the Recent Changes.
What I was wondering was why you deleted it. Obviously some bands like my friends' band The Optimus Prime Experience are not big enough to warrent having a wikipedia article. But obviously some bands like The Beatles and The Darkness are big enough to warrent having their own articles.
But what is the cut off point? I've seen some really really crummy pages people have made to promote their even crummier bands and they obviously deserved speedy deletion but this one looked quite good. What is the criteria for keeping a page apart from having enough people to argue For on the discussion?Simondrake 23:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
WiiLi
Hi, I have removed the speedy delete tag that you placed on WiiLi. The reason is that there is already an article on this subject Wii Linux Project and I have converted WiiLi to a redirect to that article. At best the article Wii Linux Project is marginal and if you continue to have concerns then an AfD is the way to go. TerriersFan 00:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Scratch page you just moved for me
Sorry I have no idea about what I am doing or what the rules are. I just sort of grope around and make lots of mistakes. Thanks for helping.--Filll 05:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- I did know that there were several other pages branched off physics to try to improve it. This page was just for me to work on a rough draft synthesizing the material from the several of the other similar pages that already existed, which contain lead proposals, so I thought I would try editing them together and merging them into something hopefully better than all 3. Maybe I should have hung it off my page instead, although I obviously do not know the rules about what you can and cannot do (or should and should not do is more accurate I guess).--Filll 05:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Hereford High School, Parkton
Hi, I have removed the speedy from Hereford High School, Parkton and I want to explain why. This article has been hanging around all day with the speedy tag on it but no-one has been prepared to touch it; too many people consider that high schools have inherent notability. I have cleaned up the article and stubbed it bit not researched its notability. If you still consider it should be deleted then a WP:AFD is the way to go. TerriersFan 02:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately, original research is not a speedy deletion criterion, so I declined the speedy deletion of this article. Try sending it to WP:AFD instead. --Coredesat 01:33, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't know if you're also the IP address 82.26.244.185, but there are some concerns about other Countdown champions being bundled with the Richard Brittain article that have been posted at the AfD discussion for the article that you nominated above. Just messaging you to let you know. Andy Saunders 19:07, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- It probably looks better if you, as the nominator, remove the bundle. Andy Saunders 20:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
The order of entries, and issues with piping and extraneous links. It's not as desperate as some other cases, but it needs cleanup nonetheless. A lot of entries have been added since its last cleanup (compare versions), and the result is that the page now needs attention to ensure entries deserve entry, are prioritised and sorted correctly and the page is simple to follow. In short, it's become messy. Neonumbers 23:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- I noticed :-). It looks very well done. Cheers, Neonumbers 23:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)