User talk:Lankiveil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

TUSC token 0b59228b9d55f658b15a2fa9c42d1fdd[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Books and Bytes - Issue 7[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 7, June-July 2014
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • Seven new donations, two expanded partnerships
  • TWL's Final Report up, read the summary
  • Adventures in Las Vegas, WikiConference USA, and updates from TWL coordinators
  • Spotlight: Blog post on BNA's impact on one editor's research

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day[edit]

Nuvola apps cookie.svg Happy First Edit Day, Lankiveil, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Anastasia (talk) 14:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grace Wong (immunologist) finis[edit]

I am sorry that you are unable to give further guidance (see your last edit comment). I have consolidated this thread on my talk page. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:54, 19 August 2014 (UTC).

Discussion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 August 16#File:Hearts XP.png[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2014 August 16#File:Hearts XP.png. Thanks. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 18:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Terence M. Vinson[edit]

A while back, consensus was gained for the deletion of an article about Terence M. Vinson. Because of that consensus, you closed the discussion and the article was deleted/redirected. In the interim, proposals have been made to delete other articles about current or former members of the Second Quorum of the Seventy. Some gained consensus for deletion, some did not. But also in the meantime, Vojen presented a concrete argument against deletion of such articles (on Wikipedia: Articles for Deletion/Randy D. Funk) that has resulted in all subsequent nominations failing. My question is this: Would you consider restoring the Vinson article if it could be shown that the consensus was for it? I think if a proposal was made to restore or recreate it, the result would be much different in light of Vojen's argument. So I was just curious about how you would feel on the issue. Please post any reply to my talk page, as I don't habitually check other user's talk pages for responses. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 05:59, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I understand your concerns about restoring an article where sources may be biased and where a COI exists. But I still believe that if the article were to be restored and relisted, the result would be much different today than it was then, especially in light of Vojen's argument, which, by your own admission, you have only skimmed the surface of. I would be very grateful if you were to restore the article and relist it at AfD for a second look. That would be more than I could ever have hoped for. And that's all I wanted: a second chance for the consensus to decide whether or not the article is worth keeping in light of the new argument that has been presented. So I would be very grateful if you would do that for me. Just let me know when it is done and where to comment and I will do so. Thanks for giving this another chance at life. --Jgstokes (talk) 19:27, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Lankiveil. You have new messages at Jgstokes's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Jgstokes (talk) 05:01, 30 August 2014 (UTC)