User talk:5 albert square

Admins: If I have erred in one of my admin actions, or my rationale for the action no longer applies, please don't hesitate to reverse it. I have no objection to my actions being reversed, as long you leave me a polite note explaining what you did and why. Thanks.

Please place awards on my awards page.

Today is Tuesday, 13 August 2024, and the current time is 08:03 (UTC/GMT). There are currently 6,866,826 articles. this page for a new update.

Hi everyone

Welcome to my talk page!

If you post a message here then please add this page to your watchlist as I will reply here. If I ask you a question on your talk page then please reply on your talk page as I will be watching it.

Finally please remember to sign your signature using the button.

Re:

Hello, 5 albert square. You have new messages at MegastarLV's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GOCE March drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive update GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graphs Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! Here's the mid-drive newsletter. Participation: We have had 58 people sign up for this drive so far, which compares favorably with our last drive, and 27 have copy-edited at least one article. If you have signed up but have not yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us! Progress report: Our target of completing the 2010 articles has almost been reached, with only 56 remaining of the 194 we had at the start of the drive. The last ones are always the most difficult, so thank you if you are able to help copy-edit any of the remaining articles. We have reduced the total backlog by 163 articles so far. Special thanks: Special thanks to Stfg, who has been going through the backlog and doing some preliminary vetting of the articles—removing copyright violations, doing initial clean-up, and nominating some for deletion. This work has helped make the drive a more pleasant experience for all our volunteers. Your drive coordinators – Dianna (talk), Stfg (talk), and Dank (talk) To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

About Wisconsin Valley Improvement Company

Hi 5 albert square.
I have to head out for lunch, but I'll be back in a little while. There were two opposes to the speedy deletion, one based on historical reasons and the other (mine) purely technical. I don't think it should have been speedied in the first place, but, well it was. Could you possibly userfy it for me, and let me know who the person who started the article and the other opposer were? I'd be more than happy to work it up to something acceptable with them.
Thanks!--Shirt58 (talk) 02:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Sure it's now at User:Shirt58/Wisconsin Valley Improvement Company. Give me a sec and I'll try and get the other info--5 albert square (talk) 02:13, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

User:Jonwurl started the article and User:Kudpung nominated it for deletion--5 albert square (talk) 02:16, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I am user User:Jonwurl but I sign these Laurentian Shield. Anyway, I am glad at least someone sees that speedy deletion may have been inappropriate. I am going to add one sentence at the beginning that should make the issue clear. Please let me know what you think. This company is responsible for the flow of the entire river, and as such is of interest to every organism in the ecosystem. The article may not be elaborate enough, but I did call it a stub. Thanks. Laurentian Shield (talk) 02:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

The article was deleted accrding to guidelines but I have no objections to it being recreated if appropriately sourced for notability. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:03, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I thought I did -- Richard Durbin's book is authoritative, and he spends two pages on the topic. Also I quoted from the Wisconsin Statutes as to the company's charter. This establishes notability from two separate neutral sources. I strengthened the opening to make it clear that the company affects the economy and exosystem of the whole river, and resubmitted it. Thanks. Laurentian Shield (talk) 03:13, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi all. Thank you for the userfication, 5 albert square. To be quite frank, it would appear to me to have been deleted for precisely the reasons WP:NPPers are sometimes quite rightly criticised, in this case, "it's about company, therefore it must be promotional". Probably best if I just go ahead and say this explicitly, rather than snippy insinuations. In the case of this article, and this article alone:

• User:Kudpung, I question your judgement in nominating it for speedy deletion
• User:5 albert square, I question your judgement in the speedy deletion of the article

There, I've said my piece. You are both admins, selected for amongst other things, your good judgement. Lets move on. I suggest that it might be more productive to continue to discuss the deleted article here.
--Shirt58 (talk) 11:05, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Those are snippy insinuations, if not directly snide, and you could perhaps be slightly more tolerant of the fact that even experienced admins are not perfect. That said, the deletion was recommended and carried out as you correctly note, by 2 admins. The promotional tag was added because Wikipedia is not a corporate listing site and in my opinion, brief company articles that do not assert notability at the time of creation fall under this category. I have no objections whatsoever with the article being recreated if it is appropriately referenced to independent 3rd party sources in number, in number, depth, and focus. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:37, 9 December 2012 (UTC)