User talk:Nick mallory

To Visit the Queen

The page you created, To Visit the Queen, has also been nominated for deletion as described above. --Coppertwig 01:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for having caused you unnecessary annoyance. I realized later that it would have been better if I had waited for a while for a response after nominating one page for deletion before also nonminating other similar pages. It's still not clear to me whether these articles are appropriate for Wikipedia or not, though. As a suggestion, one way to proceed with this sort of topic might be to start an article about a trilogy or about a group of similar or related books by the same author, and later after the article grows to contain a substantial amount of material it can perhaps be split into individual pages about each book. I think Wikipedia tends to avoid very short articles, perhaps because they can be targets of vandalism, or perhaps because they're thought to be of little use to the reader. --Coppertwig 02:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, you merely spurred me to improve them a bit which is a good thing. You had a good point that they were pretty thin when you found them, but that's the nature of most new articles here. There's nothing really wrong with stubs by themselves though as they soon grow of their own accord. Many more people will add to an article they find rather than start a new one when they can't find what they're looking for. I might suggest popping by an editor's talk page and asking if they could expand an article, rather than just prodding it if it's not obviously rubbish, but I'm sure you're right nine times out of ten. I apologise for being short with you when it wasn't warranted but I've had rather a lot of people (often, but not always slightly bossy fifteen year old Americans) try to speedily delete articles on first class cricketers, Royal Navy ships and winners of the George Cross and having to explain things ten times gets wearing as you know. I also, to be honest, enjoy a bit of an argument so it wasn't an imposition at all. Nick mallory 04:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your courteous message. I found the AfD you were mentioning; I hadn't thought of including the "The". (I haven't actually read these books but that situation may change.) Excellent! I retract my request that you add stub tags: while I believe it's helpful, it wasn't worth making any fuss about. --Coppertwig (talk) 02:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Help with rational insertions in pseudoscience

A good place to keep on your watchlist if you are interested in this thankless activity is Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard. Welcome aboard! ScienceApologist 02:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that's just the sort of page I was looking for. I'll keep my eye on it and wade in when I can. Nick mallory 04:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Your destroyer articles

G'day. I see you deleted my reference tag. The reference you provide does not back up the information provided in the articles. A better ref is required. It gives good photos but not adequate detail. Gillyweed 09:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I deleted it because your automated tag said the articles didn't have ANY sources, which was clearly not the case, um, cobber. What part of "This article does not cite any references or sources" was true when you twice tagged them? Nick mallory 09:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I admit overkill on my behalf. Please don't take offence. May I suggest that you use standard referencing using inline reference tags next time. This is the preferred way of referencing on WP. Cheers Gillyweed 09:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem and no offence taken. I've added an additional reference, the book I used for the extra information. I know you're doing a good job insisting on references and I have no problem with that. Nick mallory 10:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Good work on the referencing. Thank you.Gillyweed 11:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

A discussion which may interest you

Hello again - hope you are well. There is a discussion here - Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Overly_high_standards_for_new_articles.3F - which may interest you. Best wishes, DuncanHill 18:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I hope all the GC articles have survived so far! Nick mallory (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Bravo! For your eloquent remarks at the Village Pump, you get the Socratic barnstar. Sarsaparilla (talk) 23:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, although Socrates famously didn't write anything down did he? Maybe it should be a Platonic barnstar. It's a good debate, so thanks for starting it. It won't change anything of course as everyone who should read it is actually putting speedy tags on obscure Greek philosophers.

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XIX - December 2007

The December 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 12:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for pointing it out, I'll get to it. --Palatinus Regni^!!! 09:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)