text:
Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/Not deleted/March 2005

Template:Substub
An article should be either a stub or a speedy deletion candidate. This template is instruction creep, and should not have been created in the first place. →Raul654 18:38, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, And while you're at it, get rid of all the other stubs too. Yes they provide nice categorization but at the cost of server resources. should be more than enough for any article in my humble opinion. Inter 18:58, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * It is large categories with too many articles (such as Category:stub) that cause a large hit on database performance. The stub category grew to be so huge, and such a drag on the servers, that it was removed from the Template:Stub for a long time (there are currently over 15,000 articles with the stub template). According to one of the developers, User:Jamesday, the goal for the developers is to have each category under 500 articles, and having the stub category divided into topic stubs is beneficial. Blank Verse   ∅   21:37, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Agree with BlankVerse. The stub subcategories are far less of a drain on the servers than having one big stub category. And it makes the stubs easier for editors to find. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]]
 * Delete. Presents a POV which happens to run counter to Wikipedia deletion policy as generally understood. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:04, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Unfortunately, the Wikipedia is filled with very stubby articles that don't quite fit the criteria for Speedy Deletion. Unfortunately (again), way too many of those articles would never reach a consensus for deletion if put though the VfD process (and would swamp VfD if anyone actually started nominating a large percentage of the 3,000+ substubs). Many of the substubs are good "merge and redirect" candidates, but until that happens (or someone changes the substub into a topic stub), it is probably best to leave them as substubs. Blank Verse   ∅   21:37, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. James F. (talk) 22:18, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Though I agree that substub is a useless distinction, I vote keep - for now. However, I also vote that mention of substub be removed from Wikipedia's "How to" pages for newbies and from its lists of templates. Having those articls available for stub sorting is very useful - to delete the template would consign those articles to the unfindable void (unless they are all changed to stub - a huge drain on servers). Far more useful is to somehow keep those items available and discourage people from using the template (at least in part by hiding it). Significantly reduce the number of articles in Category:Substub, then we can kill the template. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 00:37, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - some articles are most definitely substubs. Can't agree with deleting this one. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:40, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - can we say "don't shoot the messenger?" --Joy [shallot]   00:49, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. ✏ Oven Fresh  ²  03:10, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - Stubs need to be distinct from substubs. Andros 1337 03:33, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. A stub is a stub is a stub. Snowspinner 06:17, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep this, but delete every other stub type as unneeded clutter. - SimonP 06:19, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Need something for "worse than a stub". --Henrygb 10:54, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. A stub is a stub. Categorised stubs (e.g. Template:Bio-stub) are useful for people interested in a subject area, but this isn't - David Gerard 13:39, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is a grey area between stubs and CSDs. Expand the definition of either set first, preferably by deleting few thousand random substubs, and I reconsider this vote. jni 17:03, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. As Henrygb mentions, something for "worse than a stub" makes articles that are very short be more likely to be expanded. I see no reason why articles can't be listed as (eg) both Actor-stub and Sub-stub. — OwenBlacker 19:34, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Since I became aware of this vote (earlier today) I've been flipping through the sub-stubs and finding that a) very many can be categorized to existing stub categories other than general-stub, b) very many could, in fact, be merged into larger articles (or stubs) that already exist, and c) as pointed out before, few meet the speedy deletion criteria.  In my opinion, the best fate for a sub-stub that is not a candidate for speedy delete is a merge into a larger article or stub rather than re-categorization.  However, the number is so vast that this isn't immediately practical, unfortunately Courtland 19:37, 2005 Feb 26 (UTC)
 * Comment: the number is currently just over 3000, and I'm trying to drop that by about 20 a day. Very few new substubs seem to be being tagged - either that or, like stub, the template has been "de-coupled" from the category. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]]
 * Delete - does not help with classification as other stub subcategories do. -Sean Curtin 00:49, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This has been discussed to death on Wikipedia talk:Substub for months already...  Anyway a lot of stubs seem pretty complete compared to some of the articles listed here.  Ideally all the substubs would become full articles (or merged or deleted as is appropriate).  However that's unrealistic in the short term.  For now I'd probably favor categorized articles.  Category:Substubs already recommends interest related stubs over the use of sub and substub.  If we're talking about dumping hundreds (thousands) of articles into the general stubs category, then I still have to say the split will help.  These articles probably need more attention than the average stub anyway. --Sketchee 06:59, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. All substubs could either be: merged, deleted, tagged as a stub, moved to Wiktionary, etc. No need for yet another type of stub. --jag123 20:16, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. When I see a substub, I know that I should add information to it (if I can) with a certain amount of urgency. When I see a stub, I think, okay, whatever, it's not a complete article yet, no big deal. There's quite a difference — a stub is maybe a decent short paragraph, while a substub might be a sentence fragment. QuartierLatin1968 15:21, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, as per QuartierLatin1968's comments. Thryduulf 17:47, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. Alphax τεχ 06:35, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * keep 500LL 21:53, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep -Frazzydee|✍ 05:13, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A request
If the vote is for delete, I would like to request that I be able to compile a list of the articles in the category before the template is removed from them, in order to keep the names of these 3100 articles available to the stub-sorting project. Grutness|hello? 12:09, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * In the event of a final delete decision, I think there would be enough people to actually put together a WikiProject aimed at depopulating the template; the task is large enough, I would think. Or am I misinterpreting the scope and purpose of WikiProjects in general?  I certainly wouldn't suggest the template being deleted prior to a "major offensive" of this type.  Courtland 00:03, 2005 Mar 1 (UTC)

Template:reproductive system

 * Delete. Redundant, all articles already in category. Neutralitytalk 00:41, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think that this template is a good example of how a navigational template can work better than a See also section, or using Categories. It covers a reasonable number of closely related articles without being too large, and it nicely divides the articles into those for the female and male reproductive systems. I also think that a navigational template is appropriate for this particular topic since many of the people who are looking up information on one part of the reproductive system will then want to move on to look at information on another part of the reproductive system. Blank Verse   ∅   04:56, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is actually a good example of how to use these templates. →Raul654 21:22, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Alphax (t) (c) (e) 04:35, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. POV. Snowspinner 04:59, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * What is POV about this template, Snowspinner? I'm obviously missing something. Courtland 21:18, 2005 Mar 4 (UTC)

 * Keep Is handy and compact. Also, here is solution to POV problem: add third line for any Intersex issues. WpZurp 05:14, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful and stated problems are eminently fixable - David Gerard 13:28, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep excellent example of this type of template. Thryduulf 23:09, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not really comparible to a category.  This seems much more intuitive alternative for browsing, IMHO.  If it is POV, edit it. --Sketchee 00:39, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Modify. See my comments in Template_talk:Reproductive_system Courtland 21:20, 2005 Mar 4 (UTC)

Template:Sectstub
No no no! We do not need to marking individual sections as stubs. Articles are stubs, not sections. Dump this nonsense. →Raul654 15:24, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * It is a bit of a misnomer, but I think we do need a template to mark sections for expansion (but only one). Move/Merge to Template:Expandsect. -- Netoholic @ 15:36, 2005 Feb 23 (UTC)
 * Comments: Actually there are currently four templates for inadequate article sections since Template:Stubsection redirects to Template:Expandsect, and there is also Template:Sect-stub (which requires a section #). There should be only one, but both Template:Sectstub and Template:Expandsect leave much to be desired. Template:Expandsect, for example, links to Requests for expansion, although none of the articles that I looked at that used the template were listed on that page (and it is probably inappropriate to list just sections there anyway). That template is also way too wordy so it is usually larger than the rest of the text in the section it is put into. On the other hand, I think that the graphic included with Template:Sectstub calls too much attention to the notice to itself and should be further shrunk or removed from the template. In my opinion, there should probably a new template (Template:Expandsection ? — an easier to remember name), with wording something like: "note: this article section should be expanded. You can help Wikipedia by editing it.". Also, this notice should always be put at the bottom of the section instead of at the top where most of the current ones are located. Blank Verse   ∅   21:07, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I think your suggestions are good, and you should feel free to adjust Template:Expandsect (in other words, creating a fifth template "expandsection" seems unnecessary). -- Netoholic @ 03:18, 2005 Feb 24 (UTC)
 * More comments: I've started wondering about the utility of any of the four section-stub/expand templates. Where you would think that they would be mostly likely be used is for articles using a common format with predetermined sections (countries, cities, computer game characters, etc.), but in almost all of those articles the empty section(s) are just left blank with no template added. However, I think that is a good enough indicator of here is a section that needs to be filled out that it doesn't need any other notice (although those articles should probably get a category added to help those Wikipedia editors who like to the grunt work of fixing articles with problems—something like Category:City article with empty section). For all of the other articles with inadequate sections, it would be much better to explain the problem in more detail, saying what is missing and what should be done in a ToDo list on the article's Talk page. Occasionally it might be nice to have a notice on the article's Main page (something like: "note: this article section should be expanded. Please see this article's [Talk page].", but in most cases even that is not needed. I can also envision too many Wikipedia editors just adding that template without adding the ToDo information on the Talk page. My current opinion, then, is to delete all four section-stub/expand templates. Blank Verse   ∅   20:52, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Merging with the expansion template is okay, but it shouldn't be deleted altogether. Marking inadequate sections as such is a good thing. --Joy [shallot]   00:48, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Bad idea. Delete - David Gerard 13:28, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep of merge with one of the similar templates. --SPUI (talk) 18:18, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. A short section (e.g. history, economy, etc.) of an article that can be expanded should be marked so others can know. Tony Jin 22:12, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rephrase to something like: This section needs expanding and/or improvement. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it -- AllyUnion (talk) 05:16, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Template:Lived
Simply puts in the births and deaths category - much better to just add the two categories (this doesn't simplify things at all). violet/riga (t) 17:37, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete - Agree completely. -- Netoholic @ 17:53, 2005 Mar 10 (UTC)
 * Delete - 100% agreement; we know someone has lived if they were born and did something that was notable enough to be included in Wikipedia as an article or piece of an article. I'm implying that if someone is put in the births or deaths category that they should appear elsewhere in Wikipedia. Courtland 18:36, 2005 Mar 10 (UTC)

 * Keep. I misinterpreted the usage. It is useful as a way of adding two categories at once, one for birth and one for death.  Apologies for the reversal in vote. Courtland 02:40, 2005 Mar 11 (UTC)

 * Delete not necessary. Categories aren't hard. This template results in ludicrities such as Category:44 BC deaths.  These work far better as decade or century links (i.e. Category:1st century BC births.  Makes the categories actually useful.  Smoddy (t) (e) (g) 18:35, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I do understand the inefficiency of creating categories of death years that contain one person. However, there seems to be no reason why one cannot accomodate the broader year spans; maybe someone who has used it in that way could comment. Courtland 02:40, 2005 Mar 11 (UTC)
 * I can't understand why this template results in the alleged problem. Deleting it will do nothing to stop anyone putting any year into a single Category field.Saga City 09:54, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Deleting wouldn't stop people using ridiculous (IMO) categories, but it would make their automation far quicker. Not deleting would encourage it.  I concede the usefulness argument, but I would say that using it with   is essential.  Smoddy (t) (e) (g) 23:42, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep. It doesn't harm anybody. Gerritholl 21:51, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep It does simplify things, it provides a quick and easy way to add the births and deaths category and the sorting all in one line, and by listing the sort key exactly once for both categories, reduces the number of keystrokes and possibility for error.  slambo 23:03, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. "Helpfulness" in this sense is being defined as helpful for the editor, not helpful for the user. I think it is the latter sense which is meant by the "helpful" criteria at the top of the page. An editor has the choice not to use this template, and in fact most don't. Nothing grave is affected either way, and I don't see any reason for providing multiple routes to solve any given problem. Given that a large amount of pages use this template, clearly some editors find it useful to use. As I can see no negative reason for using it, I don't see any good reason to delete it. Furthermore, given the number of pages which use it, I think that deleting it would cause more difficulty in replacing the categories on the affected pages than would ever be saved by getting rid of it (and I have a hard time seeing why it is "much better" to do it the other way. More direct, perhaps, but who cares? Does it affect anything much? I'm not sure it does). --Fastfission 03:14, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep A useful shortcut, I use it all the time. Why make me type more? The reader doesn't care how I accomplished things, but I do. Fawcett5 05:47, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Handy for editors, and at some point in the future someone might come up with other clever things to do with the birth/death year information. The fact that it's being filtered through a template like this allows said clever thing to be easily implemented across the board. Bryan 07:58, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep It is an extremely useful shortcut to allow addition of two categories at once, one for birth year and one for death year.Saga City 09:48, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It performs exactly the function of a template, which is to allow similar information to be entered and processed in a uniform fashion: in particular it ensures that a given person's entries in the categories for thei birth & death years are uniform. --Phil | Talk 11:15, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep if only because I use it. You don't have to enter the sort twice this way. (I admit, I often forget to put a sort key on people categories since nonpeople cats don't usually need it.) :) --Sketchee 21:17, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Agree with Bryan and Phil. --Carnildo 07:38, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep for easy addition of the categories by editors, even though I favor converting the templates periodically to categories by bot. -- User:Docu
 * Keep, very useful. Dan100 12:52, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, but there should be a guideline somewhere (at least on the talk: page) requesting that it only be input as whatever ; otherwise it's a resource drain. -Sean Curtin 18:22, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, helpful. JYolkowski 20:50, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Very usefull. I've used it alot and like it. And as a template it might make future changes in birth/death apperance possible, for instance by including images/symbols or things like that in the bios. Shanes 00:56, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Given that there are concerns for the servers with the number of articles any particular template is attached to, how will they be affected by an - albeit very useful - template like this, which could be used on thousands of articles? Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 11:44, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * There is a slight marginal hit associated with using any template. The concerns voiced refer to a situation where a template, used by a lot of articles, is edited, because the system then has to invalidate any cached versions of the containing pages. This template is stable (it has been edited exactly once since creation and that was the addition of the {{tfd}} tag) and therefore should not give rise to such a problem. What I don't understand is that the very idea of creating the template system in the first place was to allow zillions of article containing common text to all use the same template and be kept consistent: this is now being described as a problem. --Phil | Talk 14:39, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. If you don't like the fact that the article has the template, you can always add subst: to it forcing it to include the article text INTO the article. -- AllyUnion (talk) 05:19, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but should only really be used with subst.
 * Keep, a useful shortcut and it helps to remind people to include a sort key on categories, which is easily forgotten.   —User:Mulad (talk) 00:17, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)

Template:Unencyclopedic
A somewhat abused POV-based template. I have seen this template appear occasionally on Power Rangers articles, and had to revert this template each time. We don't need this template when we have Votes for Deletion and speedy deletions instead. Andros 1337 04:45, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. At first I was going to argue for a "keep" but in looking through the template messages I find that there are a number that can be used to handle the diversity of matters that go into making an article "encyclopedic" including the cleanup-tone, POV, unreferenced, contradictory, etc.  I agree that this shouldn't be used for what the wording actually states, which is "notability", wherefrom the attachment to Power Rangers articles no doubt arises. I think most of us assume notability unless proven otherwise (and thats where the deletion options come in), whereas this template takes the opposite and pretty abrasive approach. Courtland 05:21, 2005 Mar 8 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Without looking at the articles that had been tagged with the template, I was going to vote "delete". After looking at those articles, it appears that the primary use (currently) for the template is for articles that really should be put through the Vote for deletion process, but the person who tagged the articles probably didn't want to go through the time, hassle, politics, abuse, etc. that accompanies the VfD process. Blank Verse   ∅   07:19, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep similar to Blankverse. It gives authors of borderline articles the idea that they can save their article from VfD by expanding on it, which is a positive note. Radiant! 09:49, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep See Wikipedia talk:Please do not bite the newcomers for explanation, how this template can be used (and why). --Wikimol 10:13, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * This template being placed on Power Rangers pages is an example of misuse. In the Power Rangers articles, it was used for in a POV-based way, claiming those pages to be unencylopedic fancruft, which they obviously were NOT. Andros 1337 13:30, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Have you tried contacting the misuser on his talk page, and talk it out? It may be a matter of misunderstanding. I don't believe we should remove something merely because it can be abused, since lots of things can be abused. Radiant! 08:10, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep: useful —ævarab 07:49, 2005 Mar 12 (UTC)
 * Keep. I often use it as described above: letting the original author know that they could probably do with a little more work to convince me that the topic is of sufficient merit to remain in an encyclopedia. Enochlau 01:20, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - potentially useful Fawcett5 03:27, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, keep it, it's a lot more sensible than immediately slapping a VfD listing on a questionable article. Abuse? Bah, it's a wiki, everything can be abused. --iMb~Mw 10:15, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, useful, also friendlier than putting something on VFD 3 minutes after it's created. JYolkowski 21:59, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I seem to recall that this was previously listed on TFD. -- AllyUnion (talk) 05:16, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Template:Rugby union positions
No real need for this. We don't need articles on the finer points of playing outside-half, when Rugby union positions already explains the positions nicely. This could be better achieved with just a static table on the page with section links, since it's not useful elsewhere. Chris 03:54, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * This could be handled better by a simple diagram. No need for them all to link here like this. And since several of the backpositions have different names in different countries (First five-eighth?Wing three-quarters?) this could simply confuse some people. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 05:26, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * For now, I've redirected the articles that were created as a result, and converted the table to a static one which links to subsections on Rugby union positions, which I think is much cleaner. I've also copied it over to Rugby League positions with appropriate changes.  I think having links to each position on the page is useful, but they don't need their own pages, especially when they may have different functions in the league and union games. Chris 14:23, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The positions' names are standardised by the IRB according to the article, so that's not really an issue. Rls 00:50, 2005 Mar 13 (UTC)
 * This last point needs to be verified - I'm sure that isn't the case! And even if it is, with three of the world's main rugby playing nations (NZ, Australia, and South Africa) all using different terminology to that listed, my comment still holds true. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 11:53, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I haven't been able to verify it, but at least some positions are referred to by specific name in the laws. Even if the point is not true, I think we just have to select the most popular name, as in color rather than colour, or indeed the current headings in the article. Rls 20:46, 2005 Mar 17 (UTC)
 * Keep. Why not have separate articles for each position? There is a precedent -- see goalkeeper or striker for example. Assuming there are (or will be) separate articles, then the template is useful (and until that time, I have edited the template to point internally to rugby union positions). Also, it was part of the general rugby union article where I think its inclusion was useful and informative (and when you removed it you forgot to alter the text where it referred to the diagram). Rls 00:50, 2005 Mar 13 (UTC)
 * There might well be an article for football's "striker", but there isn't one for "left centre forward". Is there anything wrong with the current setup of the positions on the one page?  More importantly, do we need a template for use on only the one page? Chris 21:31, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) "left centre forward" is a generic position, whereas "striker" is a very specific role, analagous to one of the rugby positions. 2) Having multiple entries in one article makes referencing them more difficult: many of the current articles on individual rugby union players link to their positions, which makes things awkward and messy if these have to be internal links. 3) The template is also used in the main rugby union article (which is why I created the template in the first place, to avoid duplication of information) and would be used on articles for individual positions. Rls 22:44, 2005 Mar 13 (UTC)
 * I think you're getting them mixed up. "Striker" is a generic position.  A football team may have any number of them in different places (often two or three).  "Left centre forward" is fairly specific, since it only turns up in formations with 4 or 5 forward players.  Some teams may use it to act as centre-forward when the right-hand player is on strike, and others may use the position as part of a striking pair.  There's nothing useful which can be said about a left centre-forward other than "a centre-forward on the left-hand side of the field".  Similarly, there's probably little more to be said about most positions in RU than what's already said.  Anything more gets to technical speculation about tactics, etc.  As nice as it might be, Wikipedia is not the BBC Sport Academy, or the IRB homepage.  Similarly, there's no need for the table on rugby union, as it just confuses things, particularly awkward click trails, as well as the fact that the template is more difficult to edit than the table in-place.  I'd also appreciate it if you could refrain from putting it back in until this debate is settled. Chris 05:35, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I know what a striker is. What I meant is, a striker has a specific role to play in a team, analagous to a role/position in rugby union. I also think that the description of separate positions could be usefully expanded, without resorting to tactical speculation. As for refraining from replacing the template, I will do so to avoid an edit war but I believe Wiqiquette indicates that the person trying to remove content should be the one to wait for the outcome of the debate. Rls 17:53, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)
 * I don't see the point of seperate articles on each position, what will they add that is not already in rugby union positions? The articles that already exist are just unnecessary duplication.GordyB 11:25, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * [Sorry, I adjusted your indentation for easier comprehension.] The question is, not why have separate articles, but why have them in the same article? Separate articles are easier to reference. Consider: winger (rugby union) versus Rugby union positions . Rls 13:09, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)
 * The problem with seperate articles is that you will need the main one anyway because you need to discuss difference in terminology between different rugby union nations and why union positions are more standardised than say soccer. It also helps to be able to discuss the difference between loosehead and tighthead props and blindside / openside flankers on the one page. In addition two players are noted as 'bluring the difference between different back row positions'. Where would you discuss these things if not on one page?GordyB 12:22, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * These things would be discussed in the individual articles of course. The main article would be maintained as a useful overview. Rls 17:53, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)
 * My other problem is that many of the positions have the same name in rugby league and the page would inevitably get split between union sections and league sections. I think this has already happened with scrumhalf. I prefer to keep the two sports as separate as possible.GordyB 18:05, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Scrum-half (rugby union) and Scrum-half (rugby league) ? (Assuming the rugby league positions need separate articles -- it is my understanding that positions are rather less distinct in RL) Rls 20:46, 2005 Mar 17 (UTC)

 * Comment -- I would prefer a simple table listing the positions instead of having a big diagram. Zzyzx11 02:53, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Any particular reason? The diagram provides information on where each position plays relative to the others, something much easier to convey graphically than via prose. Rls 02:58, 2005 Mar 13 (UTC)
 * That explains why the diagram. It doesn't show why to use a template for inclusion on only one page. Chris 22:01, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The diagram is fine for Rugby union positions. My problem is that the template is only being used on that one article.Zzyzx11 00:08, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep only if it will shortly be used on other articles (e.g. if the positions are getting their own articles). Otherwise, make it a table and recreate the template if it is needed in the future. Thryduulf 23:49, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Not everybody reading articles on rugby union will be a diehard fan of the game, the diagram neatly shows where evrybody plays in a way that words cannot. The internal links work well and should be kept. GordyB 11:25, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The diagram is useful, but a template that is only on one article is not. Zzyzx11 00:18, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but only if the other articles are created as soon as possible. Zzyzx11 00:18, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * There were some (badly written) articles on individual positions but Chriscf changed them to redirects after I had created the template. I would be happy to begin (re-)creating the articles, but it seems a bit pointless if the outcome of this discussion is against it. Would creating an example article for one of the positions be helpful? Rls 17:53, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC)

Template:GFMofWWII
Natural category, duplicates Category:Field Marshals of Nazi Germany, no natural order as a series, and it's IMO large and unwieldy - David Gerard 18:56, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, a category would work far better. - SimonP 20:06, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neutralitytalk 02:53, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Order is by date of attaining rank. GeneralPatton 05:57, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep I suppose it might be very marginally useful to have it organized by dates (maybe the template should indicate this more clearly). But the main reason is simply that it's not going to get any bigger. Fawcett5 22:50, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Very useful in browsing through the various field marsals --24.30.75.0 05:50, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Template:Verylarge
Perhaps a worthy attempt by an anonymous user to move out a bit of text that is used on two different categories (Category:Stub and Category:Substubs), however, those two bits are actually different and they can't really be merged and genericized. I've moved the content back and so Template:Verylarge is obsolete.

Namespace pollution ("very large") notwithstanding, even...

--Joy [shallot]   11:25, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've edited it quite a bit, so it applies to any too large or too rapidly growing category. Votes should be on the template as emended; Joy, do you still vote to delete?  —msh210 14:40, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep.  —msh210 14:40, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's okay now, but you still don't have a cause for it, there are no pages using it. :) Please don't change the aforementioned two categories, they're better as they are now. And the name is still too generic for this narrow purpose (it should be named "catverylarge" if it's just for categories). --Joy [shallot]   17:13, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, no one's used it yet, of course; in effect, I've just created it. But I've added it now to WP:TM, so people migt start using it now. —msh210 22:55, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep! Brilliant! This is exactly what I was looking for. I'm glad someone's made this. Don't worry - it will be used very soon! Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 00:05, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep. Looks good.  It would be helpful to include a link to some discussion or article about very large categories if there is one that touches on the technical problems, human problems, and multiple solutions related to very large categories.  You've included one solution, re-categorizing to existing sub-categories; another is the creation of new sub-categories where the existing ones do  not suffice, and the splitting of the large category into two or more sub-categories of the parent category.  Too much to put on a template message, but fodder for discussion on a guidelines page.  Thank you for your effort in making this. Courtland 00:42, 2005 Mar 18 (UTC)

 * Agreed. —msh210 03:16, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep. Surprised that a template like this didn't already exist.  -Sean Curtin 01:25, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Where was this template when I needed it? However, I agree with Joy and suggest we give it a more specific name. Zzyzx11 08:01, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. — Xiong (talk) 03:30, 2005 Mar 20 (UTC)
 * Keep, but rename. Something like LargeCategoryHeader? Blank Verse   ∅   09:08, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Okay, so what do we rename it to? The options offered so far are:
 * verylarge
 * catverylarge
 * LargeCategoryHeader

Anything else? --Joy [shallot]   15:14, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

How about Template: Big cat? :) Grutness|hello?  07:58, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Template:Lion? Template:Tiger? Personal opinion: I hate templates and categories that have ambiguous abbreviations (e.g. Is template:bio-stub for biology or biography?). Blank Verse   ∅   09:44, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Agreed (note the smiley). As for bio-stub, it was created before anyone thought that a biology-stub was necessary (the latter now also exists). Considering how many biography stubs there are, changing it now would be like crashing the gears on the servers. Grutness|hello? 00:10, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Template:419 warning
A very laudable purpose, first seen by me used to warn visitors to Suha Arafat about an ongoing 419 scam, but Wikipedia is not a soapbox.

In particular:
 * Wikipedia articles are not propaganda or advocacy of any kind. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view. You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views.

The 419 scammers are bad guys, but Wikipedia isn't the police force. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:53, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Perhaps Tony feels that soapboxing is okay as long as you're doing it to defraud people, but I find it difficult to agree. --Brion 01:55, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * See my response to Brion at Talk:Suha Arafat. I don't like these criminals any more than Brion, but this is an encyclopedia and it should deal with them in an encyclopedic (and in my opinion no less effective) manner. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:20, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Added this to the article. In my opinion this is the way to deal with the scam--write about it.
 * In 2005, Nigerian criminal gangs used her name in some of their Advance fee fraud scams propagated thoughout the world by email .
 * and
 * Nigerian scammers use Suha Arafat's name
 * In 2005, Nigerian criminal gangs used her name in some of their Advance fee fraud scams propagated thoughout the world by email . Some of the emails used referred to the Wikipedia article about Ms Arafat. Emails sent out as part of the criminal plot, which was in no way associated with Suha Arafat, falsely purported to be from her, asking for help to recover $20,000,000, and promising the recipient a share of the money for his help. This was simply a false promise intended to prepare the victim to hand over his own money in the vain hope of seeing a share of the fictitious fortune.
 * --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:17, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:17, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep. The Wikipedia has, unfortunately, become part of the story and that needs to be noted. I have, however, edited the template to make it less prominent. Blank Verse   ∅   08:43, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete the template, but keep the warning on the page affected by this problem. Pcb21| Pete 15:11, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, don't delete, don't merge into article. Kate.
 * Keep, in either the earliest or current brief form. No, Wikipedia is not a soapbox, but it is in the business of curing ignorance, pretty much by definition. --iMb~Mw 19:55, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, as long as this is a single instance, a template might be overdoing it; but a warning is appropriate in any case, and most certainly not soapboxing. And if such a thing happens again, then surely a template is worth considering. After all, everything that grows above a certain size is bound to attract crooks. -- AlexR 19:54, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep a visible warning - as a service for anyone following a scam link. --Henrygb 10:19, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: we definitely don't need templates just for one article. Of course, the warning on the page should definitely be kept. -Sean Curtin 00:10, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Shidailun

Welcome!

'''Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my New-Users' Talk Page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language

Happy editing! Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 13:30, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. 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. Thanks.

Edit summary
Hello. Please remember to always provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy editing. JoaoRicardotalk 13:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Your Work
I would highly advise you to take things a step further and examine how, in the relationships between Han and "other" the "other" is often represented as female, inferoir and in need of conquering or "taming". The Qing gazetteers paid specific attention to the bahavior of indigenous women.Dru Gladney, Stevan Harrell and Louisa Schein have found some interesting paralells between Saidian Orientalism and Han representations of "ethnic others" as feminized subordiates of the Han majority. You can find Han representations of gender in Chen Di's Record of the Eastern Sea and Yu Yong-he's Small Sea's Dialogues. You may also want to pay attention to the story of Lady Baozhu. Emma Teng has an entire chapter on this in Taiwan's Imagined Geography.

email me for more info.Maowang 02:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Shidailun! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 22:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Chu Tien-hsin -
 * 2) Chu Tien-wen -
 * 3) Zhang Yingtai -

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Shidailun


text:
User talk:DDerby

Paul Vunak
Fair enough — though impossible to tell from the article, of course. I wish there was some way to discourage people from creating these one or two sentence stubs — it makes far more work for other editors than they realise. Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 22:07, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Copyvios
Thanks for the message. I actually did not know that copyvios weren't posted to the page automatically. I guess I've grown lazy and complacent by assuming that all squiggle-bracket functions did something cool. From now on, I will post my copyvios at the right place. Feco 23:23, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"nonsense" tags
Please be careful not to use "nonsense" tags on articles written in broken, but understandable English, like Saleh Al Shal. Kappa 23:39, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

2620's
Why did you create an article that you nominated for speedy deletion? You can use the sandbox for testing. Howabout1 01:48, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * DDerby did not create that article. There's a bug in MediaWiki where if you click the edit button, and somebody deletes the article before you save, saving it will result in the article being changed again.  I understand that your message was in good faith, but please try not to be accusatory- this user did nothing wrong. -Frazzydee|✍ 01:50, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * no hard feelings at all DDerby 01:52, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No problem :)
Thanks for tagging it! I deleted the article, so it's all good. Thanks for your message, I hope I'll see you around soon! -Frazzydee|✍ 01:48, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

America vs. Ancient Rome
NAO blanked the article America vs. Ancient Rome because he copied it to his user page and we are now trying to delete it. DDerby 06:52, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

NAO did NOT blank it, he/she changed it to say to go to his/her User space. The VfD process should proceed and then the page can be deleted. RickK 06:54, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
N/P,just trying to catch the stupidness. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:57, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Protestantism in China
The article, as the title suggests, talks about China in general, but not specific about the People's Republic of China. — Instantnood 08:20, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Thanks. :-D — Instantnood 08:28, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Hypersexuality
Please note: hypersexuality is a well-defined condition that should not be confused with "sex addiction". "Sex addiction" is a pop-psychology term. -- Karada 13:49, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Tayshaun
Yeah I agree, the Tayshaun Prince image I drew was the first in that style that I made—it's a bit squiggley—so I think I'll probably try to redo it soon. But I think the Larry Brown and Wes Anderson ones that I just made are better. No doubt though, I pick the Pistons to win it again, I don't think Miami will be a big problem (assuming they outlast the Nets and Bulls) and the West will get picked apart against Detroit (though Seattle looks good since other teams are clearing their path, I have them going far).

Thanks for the feedback though! And I'm glad you made an Antonio McDyess article, I was thinking about doing it myself when I saw there was nothing on him a few days ago. His will probably be the next drawing I do, I'm a huge Tayshaun/McDyess fan. :)

Tarnas 20:31, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Clothing
It's POV to highlight just one view, an extreme minority view. If we were to cover all religious accounts of the origin of clothing, the section would swamp the article. IF you and the other guy want to write an article about the origin of clothing from a religious perspective and cover ALL religions, we could link to that from the clothing article. Zora 22:29, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

RE: The POV comment you made on my talk page
Just wondering, what article were you referring to? Dancemaster 22:49, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Replied sorry, that was a mistake. DDerby(talk) 14:52, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh, thanks. :) Dancemaster 15:31, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

The Killers
How is where the band first started playing at "not encyclopedic"? 00:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.32.199.15 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Evangelism
Here is a verse: "There is no compulsion in religion, the path of guidance stands out clear from error" [2:256] and [60:8]. What does this mean? It means that no one is to be compelled into religion and that the righteous path is distinct from the rest. Thus Islam will gain converts (like me :) ) from those who see the right path (Islam). Ofcourse, there have been some people who did not always follow this, but we can not base the beliefs of the entire religion on them. Hope that helps. I will add this to the article. -- a-n-o-n-y-m 21:19, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

And somewhere it says that even those not searching for God would find them. Jesus said that some are ever seeing but nor perceiving. But it is better to say you are not following God and follow him, yet to say I am following God and not. --Rofthorax 20:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Journalist's RFA
I want to thank you very much for your vote on my RFA. Greatly apperciated, I owe you one! — Jo urna list |  huh?

traditional
Looking for a better word than 'primitive', with all of it's value laden issues... Any ideas? Astronaught 17:52, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Sure - just wanted to get away from 'primitive'. Astronaught 17:58, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Cold play
Cold play? musician-stub? Scott 04:14, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

In answer to your question, later today Thanks Scott 04:21, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

There's only about four of them for later today, Thanks for letting me realise that. It's late here and my promise stands. Scott 04:32, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Looks like user:Madchester got them, more than what should have been. Others needed them, Oh well. Cheers, understand about it also now Scott 10:57, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for Your Support On My RfA!
Let me know if there's anything I can do to help out in the future. Karmafist 21:46, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support on my RfA!
Thanks for your support of my adminship!! I was surprised at the turnout and support I got! If you ever have any issues with any of my actions, please notify me on my talk page! Thanks again! Ryan Norton T 03:30, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
DDerby, thanks for your support on my RFA. I very much appreciate it. If you ever need anything, don't hesitate to ask. See you around! —thames 18:28, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Saint Aloysius' College(see User talk:203.222.134.242)
Articles can not qualify for speedy deletion unless

"Material is unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider (e.g. encyclopedia, news service)"

While there was undoubtedly a copyvio, St Aloysius' College is a school, not a commercial content provider. Therefore, speedy deletion wasn't applicable. I'm not going to go to WP:VFU or anything, because I think it deserved to be deleted(through VFD). However, please take care to tag properly in the future. Thanks. Superm401 | Talk 00:03, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks, I'll be sure to note that in the future. -DDerby- (talk) 04:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Re: fandalism
Why thank you. What a nice thing to say! Well, if you like the word, go ahead and use it! (If you have music articles on your watchlist, I'm betting you're gonna need it) RMoloney 01:36, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Bob Jones jr.
Any idea how to make the info I post on Bob Jones Jr. NPOV?

BTW I to am a follower of Christ.

grazon 04:02, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

the wub's RfA
Thanks a lot for your support on my RfA, I really appreciate it. the wub  "?!"  13:27, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Voluntary Wikipedia Questionnaire
My name is Oliver Metz. I am a student at Brent International School, Manila, an International school located in the Philippines. I am doing my last year of school (12th Grade) and I am writing a research paper (about 4000 words) on Wikipedia in ITGS (Information Technology in a Global Society). Of 10 randomly picked people you have been chosen as one. If you are willing and have the time to answer a few questions I would be grateful if you could fill out a short questionnaire of 6 questions.

Some Information about my essay:

My essay topic is about the freedom to collaborate and the usage of the Internet as a tool to do so. I will analyze topics such as Altruism versus Egoism as well as the Product Wikipedia itself.

My Thesis Statement: The Internet is not only a medium for communication, information and marketing but also a place for altruism, collaboration and cooperation. Wikipedia is the product of a voluntary collaborative effort that defies commonly held beliefs about human nature.

If you have any further questions or requests you would like to pose before filling out the questionnaire I'd gladly answer them.

you can write to: taklung@gmx.net (I check this e-mail address regularly)

Questionnaire:

Please answer the following questions by either inserting the answers or sending them to me via e-mail. (*are not necessarily required).

Name*: Age*: Nationality*:

1. How long have you been contributing to Wikipedia?

2. Have you or are you planning to donate money to the Wikipedia cause?

3. When you first heard of Wikipedia and the concepts it is based on, what did you think about it and did you believe it could work? What do you think now?

4. Why do you think people contribute to Wikipedia? With it being voluntary what interests do/did you follow when contributing to Wikipedia?

5. Do you think that Wikipedia appeals to Altruism? If yes, do you think such a thing can exist in our society in which greed and consumption apparently drive the world?

6. What do you think makes Wikipedia most beneficial to society?

Further comments*:

With kind regards,

Oliver Metz --TakLung 05:18, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Re: Recent revisions to 'Guitar' entry
Hi DDerby,

Just a quick note to let you know it wasn't me that made the edits on the Guitar page re. G3! i only made the first reference to 'pickups' into a link. - Thoughtactivist 07:35, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Matao Herrera
I was about to sort out the mess on this entry when I saw your note about it being deleted. I only got there because I'd been sorting out entries made under "deaths" on 18 July and knew nothing about the discussion at the time. You might like to take a look at both of those articles given that you have been involved. --SMeeds 21:23, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

re:2005 article
Thanks for properly linking the French riots in the 2005 page; I figured that it was an accident when it was removed.Trilemma 18:43, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

will work tomarrow
thanks for saying nice things but I'm half asleep and need to go 8)

University of Michigan
From the Wikiproject:Michigan, I saw that you are a fan of (if not somewhat connected to) the University of Michigan (don't know which campus, but I'll assume Ann Arbor). Recently, I have placed the article up for Featured Article Candidacy and so far there are few responses. I was wondering if you wouldn't mind looking over the article and commenting on it. Thanks. Pentawing 00:08, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Patrick Henry College is being vandalised
The Patrick Henry College article is being attacked in concert by three anonymous IP addresses. Please protect the page and block the editors, they have allready been warned and are acting in unison. Yamaguchi先生 05:49, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

 * 1) 67.20.172.91 (talk • contribs • [ page moves ] • block • [ block log ])
 * 2) 71.240.230.65 (talk • contribs • [ page moves ] • block • [ block log ])
 * 3) 12.179.243.131 (talk • contribs • [ page moves ] • block • [ block log ])

Jeff Flake & stuff
Thanks for being fair oh and if you want to see the Flake interview it can be found here; dailyshow.com

Brian Fellow's
It was my understanding that just about everybody on this site was interested in turning stubs into full articles. By putting all the SNL characters into categories and posting their write-ups there, we have fewer stubs. I started doing it because articles like Gay Hitler and Zagat's started attracting attention from deletionists. Leadpipevigilante 03:44, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Crystalcherry
Crystalcherry has been recreated, I believe it lacks notability as per the previous AfD. I got involved in this when User:Cherryrain went "Opps", twice on Avril Lavigne and then requested my [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:RoyBoy#Roy_Oops.__I_need_your_help. assistance] after I reverted. I suspect this user has been biten/slighted by the AfD, and is not acting entirely in good faith. Cherryrain mentioned User:Drini's agreement for a rewrite; I'm not optimistic that will be sufficient to satisfy all users involved in this issue. (suggest replies/discussion should be directed to Talk:Crystalcherry) (CC'd to multiple users) - RoyBoy 800 05:59, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Grazon RFC
Unfortunately it seems Grazon/49 has not improved his edits, although I have tried it seems my attmpts were an effort in futility. Perhaps this will alert him to improve his editing capabilities. If you need any help just leave a note on my talk page. Derktar 22:35, 21 November 2005 (UTC).

Hoopstats links
No problem. We were alerted to it in the wikipedia room on IRC so we had a bunch on it. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 08:35, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

War on Christmas
DDerby,

I wanted to ask you if you could revert your edit to the War on Christmas page, because if you follow that link it describes the situation outlined in that small paragraph you deleted. Without it the entry changes from "Wal-Mart is nice and inclusive" to "What does this have to do with their signs, and how did they upset the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights". ;-)

Thank you, Thawa

DDerby,

Thank you too. I try to make things as clear as possible, yet know that sometimes what I say comes over POV. Thank you for your help. Thawa

cal militia
thanks

grazon 21:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

It's over
I apologized and so did he.

grazon 00:22, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Other Wikipedian's page
Yes the stuff on my talk page was old and could you please not mess with other people's pages!!! -- TrojanMan 23:23, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Long as some people think O'Reilly only speaks the truth
I will post his lies.

--grazon 07:47, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

SusanLarson's talk page and NewsMax.com talk
I have responded to your comment on my talk page. I have also updated the talk for POV on the NewsMax.com page. Figured I would let you know! :) -- SusanLarson (User Talk, New talk, Contribs) 09:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

BD2412's RFA
Thank you, DDerby, for carefully reviewing each of my edits and deciding thereafter to support my RfA. I'll do my best to help make the dream of Wikipedia into a reality! BD2412 T 21:53, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks again! BD2412  T 22:36, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Help
An amusing fellow who is also an admin. is refusing to let Ed Gein be added to the category of LGBT serial killers.

Is this evidence enough?
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/crime/serial-killers/ed-gein/

but...
what about ed's considering a sex change?

doesn't that make him a transexual of some sort?

Changes
I've read what you had to say and my opinion of you has changed for the better.

grazon 22:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

8)

monkey can be a racial insult
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs#M

grazon 23:06, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Patrick Henry College/University
hehe I know they're different, I just put that in there to be playful. Sorry if I caused any trouble for you guys, and thank you!! I'm really looking forward to studying under Dr. Akston :)

Hi!
Hi, DD! Nice to "meet" you. Thank you very much for your nice note on my talk page. It's great to find other "on fire" Christians out there...they seem to be few and far between. As for "no compromises", this seems to be a theme God keeps reiterating in my life. (I'm assuming you read my User:ViolinGirl/Statement?) It's not easy, but I always think of Luke 9:26-"For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed..."

Six sisters and brothers? Hey, that's great! :D I only have one of two brothers still living at home, but generally enjoy it. ;) You play an instrument?

Thanks for the wishes for my goals...may God accomplish His goals in your life, as well. Cheers!-- Violin  G  irl ♪ 23:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Twelve? That's terrific! Wow...God has sure blessed you and your family! You said, "You must be quite skilled at the violin to aspire to solo." Well, there's a big difference between wanting to solo, and being good enough to solo. Only God knows where I'll really end up, but these are my dreams for now. As for Edison: I'm taking private lessons right now, and then I'll portfolio for the music courses. So, that's how it works. Cheers!-- Violin  G  irl ♪ 22:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Hey, Happy Mozart's Birthday to you too! Isn't it exciting?!!!! (Can you believe all I've played today is Jean Baptiste-Accolay, Fritz Kreisler, etc? I feel almost guilty! ;))-- Violin  G  irl ♪ 21:39, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * To be honest, once in a while I do play "Twinkle,..." every once in a while to remind myself...or if I'm really depressed with my practice, it's encouraging to be able to play one thing well. Actually, I didn't start with Suzuki, but with All For Strings. I then changed teachers and began in the middle of Suzuki book one...quit Suzuki somewhere around book 5/6, and now I'm just working on repertoire that my teacher selects for me. So...that's probably more than you asked for with your two-line message, but...you got it anyway! Ciao!-- Violin  G  irl ♪ 22:35, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi there. I guess you're right about warnings working, I'll try to get involved there more. Cheers  Ban  e  z  08:15, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
For your kind support of my Rfa, which passed. If you should ever have any complaints about my admin actions, please let me know. Also, should you ever need my help with anything, please do not hesitate to ask! Thanks again! All the best  Ban  e  z  17:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

LBT
there is some wierd editing going on at the Longview Baptist Temple page. i thought an experinced wikipedian should handle it. RhettFester 07:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC) i just thought i should ask you as you seemed interested in the article and i have handled the situation poorly so far. RhettFester 09:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

 * If media accounts and documentation are provided, I will not omit the information; not on kidnapping charges, not on child abuse scandals, and not on children being baptized without their parents' consent. You do not seem familiar with the entity at hand, and I would encourage you to research them (especially their "bus ministry") yourself.  I will trust a "Christ-believing" person like yourself to avoid conflict of interest with regard to the article. 206.255.21.134 06:34, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Please come back... I'm pretty much in danger of violating 3RR if I try to do any more work as it's more or less just me attempting to deal with a random fighting fundy. --Vengeful Cynic 03:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad to help keep an eye on it. I really wish the anonymous posters would engage so we could get a decent article about the topic. I hope one day to have enough time to research it properly, but for now I'm glad to at least keep rolling back the cruft. Regards, William Pietri 03:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject External links
Hey, DDerby! I'm Arknascar44, and I was wondering if you're still interested in helping out over at WP:WPEL. I've done some work on the project page and created a couple subpages and some templates, and am really interested in reviving it! Cheers,  A r k y  ¡Hablar!  17:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

POV deletion nomination
The article Instant-runoff voting controversies has been nominated for deletion. Please consider reviewing it and weigh in. We're having trouble coming to a consensus. Thanks. QuirkyAndSuch (talk) 08:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject National Basketball Association June 2008 Newsletter
 The message above has been delivered by Diligent Terrier Bot, a bot operated by Diligent Terrier.

AfD nomination of Paul Vunak
An article that you have been involved in editing, Paul Vunak, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. jmcw (talk) 09:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Institute in Basic Life Principles for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Institute in Basic Life Principles is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Institute in Basic Life Principles until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. jps (talk) 13:08, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:59, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who like NationStates
Hey! If you're interested, I started a series of userboxes for the game NationStates. Feel free to add any or add your own!- 🐦Do☭torWho42 ( ⭐ ) 05:13, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:DDerby


text: Category:Geography of Libya

title: Category:Geography of Libya


text:
Joan Maetsuycker

Joan Maetsuycker (14 October 1606 – 24 January 1678) was the Governor of Zeylan during the Dutch period in Ceylon, and Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies from 1653 to 1678.

Early life and education
Joan Maetsuycker was born in Amsterdam on 14 October 1606.

He studied law in Leuven, and was a lawyer first in The Hague, and later in Amsterdam.

Career
From 1636, Maetsuycker lived in the Dutch East Indies. He was appointed as Governor of Zeylan on 24 March 1646 and was governor until 26 February 1650. He was succeeded by Jacob van Kittensteyn. He was the third Dutch governor of Zeylan.

Seven years later, in 1657 he became the Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies. He stayed on that post for 25 years, which is the longest period for any governor-general. The Dutch colony in the Indies flourished under Maetsuycker. Under his rule, the Portuguese lost Ceylon (1658), the coast of Coromandel (1658) and Malabar (1663); Makassar was conquered (1667), the west coast of Sumatra was occupied, and the first expedition to the interior of Java was held.

As Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies, he also issued edicts in the Dutch Cape Colony, including one in 1657 which allowed those Muslims brought from the Dutch East Indies to the Cape as servants or slaves to practise their religion, but not in public. They were also prohibited from attempting to convert anyone, on pain of death. Between the years 1671 and 1678 Maetsuycker worked closely with Pieter de Graeff, bewindhebber of Dutch East India Company at Amsterdam.

Personal life
In 1663 Maetsuycker's wife, Haesje Berckmans, died. In 1664, he married the 24-year-old Elisabeth Abbema, daughter of the preacher Fredericus Abbema and widow of Simon Cos, governor of Ambon. In 1671 the splendour-loving Elisabeth caused some controversy when she had gold coins imported from [apan, outside of the rule of the Dutch East India Company (VOC). Her aim was to have her brother-in-law in Suratte buy them.

He died on 4 January 1678 in Batavia, Dutch East Indies.

title: Joan Maetsuycker


text:
User talk:Jovibon

Welcome!

'''Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my New-Users' Talk Page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language

Happy editing! Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 13:36, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image source
Thank you for uploading Image:Ansaldofuelcells 2tw.jpg. Its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. Please leave a note on the image page about the source of the image. Thank you.

Orfeo Programme
Please don't delete the context header until you explain just what the heck the Orfeo Programme is. OK, it's a group of satellites. For what purpose? RickK 19:53, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Ansaldofuelcells 2tw.jpg
Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 05:27, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Artemissilex.JPG

 * Sorry, can you leave a note on the image page about the source of the image? Thank you Sassospicco 16:56, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Pleiades.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Pleiades.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 23:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Cosmo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Cosmo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL-self to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 22:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Artemissilex.JPG)
Thanks for uploading Image:Artemissilex.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jovibon


text:
User talk:Alcobendas~enwiki

Welcome!

'''Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my New-Users' Talk Page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language

Happy editing! Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 13:36, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Alcobendas. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Alcobendas~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 21:47, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 10:19, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alcobendas~enwiki


text:
Wikipedia talk:People by year/to do

 * Rewrite main page/improve layout
 * Build/better present separate maintenance lists for
 * incoherences
 * bot errors
 * missing year categories in biography articles
 * sortkeys (for these categories and others)
 * expansion/overview lists by field/nationality (e.g. Canadians)
 * stats
 * Automatize rebuilding of stats/maintenance lists
 * Improve layout of Template:birthyr Template:deathyr
 * Automatize addition of interwikis (similar to year pages)
 * Add sql to build lists like Canadians for other fields/nationalities
 * Build lists of birthdays etc from category and initial article text (request from PedanticallySpeaking)
 * convert Template:Lived to categories

title: Wikipedia talk:People by year/to do


text:
Talk:Coneflower

There seems to be a problem with this article. What does it describe? A genus or a species? If it is a species, what is its Latin name?

The taxobox is that of a genus. In the List of Asteraceae genera it is listed as the genus Dracopis. The article text mentions a member of Rudbeckia or Echinacea. That's 3 genera. The words 'a member of' suggests it is a species.

TeunSpaans 13:36, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Coneflower is a common name used by two (or three is you also take Dracopis) different genera. Dracopis is a monotypic genus with Dracopis amplexicaulis, the accepted name of the synonym Rudbeckia amplexicaulis JoJan 16:01, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Good edit - now it's clear we are dealing with a genus, not with a species. Could you also included a bit on the Dracopis in the article? Else visitors coming from List of Asteraceae genera are a bit lost as to why they have been redirected here. TeunSpaans 18:12, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup and split-up
I strongly suggest we split this article up into 3 separate articles, each one dealing with one and only one genus. As for the term Coneflower, it deserves a disambiguation page which points to different genera in different articles (plus a few explanation for the origine of the term perhaps). Moreover, a cleanup is necessary and taxon names used in this article are very messy (coneflowers, black-eyed susan...). What do you think ?Qwertzy2 1 July 2005 18:45 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I'll do it if no-one else gets in first - MPF 14:41, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Coneflower


text:
San Ġwann

San Ġwann is a town in the Northern Region of Malta, with a population of 14,244 as of 2021. Before it got its own local council, the town used to form part of two separate localities, Birkirkara and St. Julian's.

Places and monuments in San Ġwann

 * Tal-Mensija cart ruts - San Ġwann Cart Ruts - prehistoric marks on natural rock
 * Ta' Ċieda Tower - Punic-Roman tower
 * Ta' Xindi Farmhouse - former San Ġwann Batallian headquarters
 * Castello Lanzun - fortified farmhouse, now the headquarters of the Order of St. Lazarus
 * Santa Margerita Chapel - Tal-Imsierah ChapelTal-Mensija_Chapel,_San_Gwann.jpeg
 * Tal-Gharghar Chapel
 * Mensija Chapel - Chapel of the Annunciation- formerly dedicated to St. Leonard St_Philip_and_St_James_Chapel,_San_Gwann,_Malta.jpeg
 * St. Philip and St. James Chapel
 * Our Lady of Lourdes Parish Church
 * San Ġwann Rural Structure with WWII Observation Post
 * Embassy of the Russian Federation in Malta
 * Karin Grech Garden - Central Garden in San Ġwann
 * Kolonna Eterna - Eternal Column (by Paul Vella Critien)
 * WW2 observation post

Local council

The current local council members are: Executive secretary: Kurt Guillaumier
 * Trevor Fenech (Mayor, PL)
 * Anthony Mifsud Bonnici Giordani (Deputy Mayor, PL)
 * Etienne Bonello Depuis (PN)
 * Violet Bajada (PL)
 * David Dalli (PN)
 * Dominic Cassar ( PN)
 * Tania Borg (PL)
 * Joseph Aquilina (PN)

Organisations

 * Għaqda Abbatini Parroċċa Marija Mmakulata ta' Lourdes
 * Mixja Neokatekumenali, San Gwann
 * San Ġwann Band (Għaqda Mużikali Banda San Ġwann)
 * San Ġwann Scout Group
 * San Ġwann F.C.
 * Our Lady of Lourdes Choir (Kor tal-Parroċċa)
 * San Ġwann Knights AFC (swan amateur football club)
 * Wirt Ġwann (Heritage NGO)
 * Ghaqda Piroteknika 11 ta' Frar, San Gwann (pyrotechnics group)

Zones in San Ġwann

 * Fuq Wied Għomor
 * Kappara
 * Mensija
 * Misraħ Lewża
 * Monte Rosa Gardens
 * San Ġwann Industrial Estate
 * Ta' Raddiena
 * Ta' Tuta
 * Tal-Balal
 * Tal-Mejda
 * Tat-Tuffieh
 * Taż-Żwejt
 * The Village
 * Wied l-Għomor
 * Wied Għollieqa

San Ġwann Main Roads

 * Triq Bella Vista (Bella Vista Road)
 * Triq Birkirkara (Birkirkara Road)
 * Triq tal-Mensija (Mensija Road)
 * Triq in-Naxxar (Naxxar Road)
 * Triq is-Santwarju (Sanctuary Street)
 * Triq is-Sebuqa
 * Triq Pawlu Galea (Paul Galea Street)
 * Triq Tal-Balal (Tal-Balal Road)
 * Triq Tas-Sliema (Kappara Hill)
 * Triq Ta' Żwejt (Ta' Zwejt Road)
 * Vjal ir-Riħan (Rihan Avenue)
 * Vjal in-Naspli (Medlar Avenue)

Twin towns – sister cities
San Ġwann is twinned with:
 * 🇮🇹 Monreale, Italy
 * 🇫🇷 Caraman, France

title: San Ġwann


text: User talk:80.90.9.18

title: User talk:80.90.9.18


text:
Talk:Phog Allen

Untitled
Did Allen coach for a total of 48 seasons, or 49? This obvious internal contradiction in the article destroys its otherwise tremendous credibility, and needs to be rectified by a knowledgable KU or other fan. Rlquall 13:41, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Naismith Hall of Fame says 49... so we'll go with that. ESkog 19:03, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

A quite strange sentence in the article
"...who originally incorporated Jameson in 1876 and the doctor who delivered Allen..."

So, the person incorporated Jameson and also incorporated the doctor.... That's odd treatment for doctors. 98.67.164.144 (talk) 05:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Phog Allen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081026084538/http://nabc.cstv.com/about/about-history-keydates.html to http://nabc.cstv.com/about/about-history-keydates.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:40, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Phog Allen Statue 1.jpg

title: Talk:Phog Allen


text:
Wikipedia talk:Countdown deletion/The single-author requirement

The single-author requirement
Based on the objections below that were raised to the single-author requirement, it has been removed from the proposal.

Should it go?
If no one but the original author edits the page, it is automatically deleted. Frankly, some subjects are too obscure for other Wikipedians to get involved with, but they are still encyclopedic. For example, I've written a number of biographies of New Zealand scientists. I think they're worthy of including in Wikipedia, but the chances are that no other current Wikipedian is knowledgable about the history of mycology in New Zealand. I'd be happy to defend them on VfD, but under your proposal, they'd be indefensible unless I could find someone else to make a contribution to the articles.

Perhaps, if the article has been substantially changed even by the original author in the first seven days, it should be voted on.-gadfium 02:13, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * As it stands, the provision on single-user editing would probably hurt more than it would help. In the "worst case", all that happens is a vote that might have been unnecessary. Countdown votes would still go far quicker than VfD votes. We should toss the provision out. JRM 08:57, 2004 Nov 8 (UTC)

How do we deal with dynamic IPs?
If an anonymous user is on dial-up, then each edit they make may be with a different IP address, without them attempting to circumvent the rules. If they get an account part way through the process, then they have both the original edits, and signed edits.-gadfium 02:13, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Significant improvement is more important
I don't really care how many people edit an article. If the original author is able to improve it in time, it should be allowed to stay. Mgm|(talk) 07:58, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)