User talk:Slrubenstein
It is currently 20:38 where I am
Please place any questions or comments for me at the bottom of this page. Thanks.
[edit] Ping
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
[edit] Complaint via ANI
Hello, Slrubenstein. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
[edit] re Wikipedia:Areas for reform
A while back you asked if I was interested in contributing to the above. I demurred. However, I have now found it expedient to review the page and have noted the section "... Guideline... for administrators to... prevent or stop abuse..." at Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator. You may wish to hurry over there and yank it out as not being appropriate, or decide to join in on that page, or both, or neither (or something else). I thought I should let you know of my actions. LessHeard vanU (talk)
[edit] talk back
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
[edit] Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
[edit] ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain Occam (talk • contribs)
[edit] Rousseau
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
[edit] n
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
[edit] Talk back
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
[edit] ANI notice
Informational note: this is to let you know that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Regards,
[edit] Commodity fetishism
I have again tried to add an illustration to this article. See what you think. The article really should have some sort of illustration if possible, to help people through the jargon. 24.22.217.162 (talk) 06:55, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion review for How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?
An editor has asked for a deletion review of How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. aprock (talk) 23:30, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion review for Seamus (dog)
The reason why I believe that the A7 deletion of the Seamus (dog) should be overturned is that A7 is for lack of significance, not lack of notability. Wikipedia defines significance as a much lower standard than notability. Wikipedia's guideline for speedy deletion gives the following as grounds for an A7 speedy deletion: An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability.... The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.
This distinction between significance and notability is important because an article with a lack of significance can be immediately deleted by any administrator, whereas an article of questionable notability will be discussed on an AfD forum before it is deleted. You are correct that having 200,000 Google hits, and articles in major newspapers does not necessarily makes a topic notable, but it does make it significant, and that is why A7 should not apply here. Debbie W. 19:13, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
- You make a good point about the difference between notability and significance, and I agree with you that the distinction is important. But these also call for judgement, and in this case you and I seem to differ. But that is why it is important to have many editors involved in these discussions. Slrubenstein | Talk 19:22, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Billie Piper, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Belle de Jour (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, I think I fixed it. Slrubenstein | Talk 21:01, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Re: your comment on WP:A/R/A
I was very impressed with this statement of yours. I had planned to write a Signpost opinion piece at some point about the problems of POV pushers, and I think your statement perfectly encapsulated one of the core reasons why there are disputes on articles like these. Thanks for writing it. Best, NW (Talk) 01:26, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
[edit] Evolution as fact and theory
Hi-- I've added a few comments to the talkpage for this article, and invite you to take a look. Thanks. Milkunderwood (talk) 19:02, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
