User talk:RegentsPark: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
AE
Line 131: Line 131:
== Sai Baba ==
== Sai Baba ==
Hi RegentsPark, there is a thread on the Sai Baba article at [[WP:AE]]. Could you weigh in, given that you commented in the recent RfC? Cheers, <font color="#0000FF">[[User:Jayen466|Jayen]]</font>''<font color=" #FFBF00">[[User_Talk:Jayen466|466]]</font>'' 17:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi RegentsPark, there is a thread on the Sai Baba article at [[WP:AE]]. Could you weigh in, given that you commented in the recent RfC? Cheers, <font color="#0000FF">[[User:Jayen466|Jayen]]</font>''<font color=" #FFBF00">[[User_Talk:Jayen466|466]]</font>'' 17:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

== Sonal Shah and hindu terrorist organisation ==
what was wrong with my addition its been all over the news ? [[Special:Contributions/86.156.208.231|86.156.208.231]] ([[User talk:86.156.208.231|talk]]) 18:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:08, 17 March 2009


Greenfinder

You deleted this: greenfinger. It got transwiki'd before, because it was a definition not a proper article. I've added specific instances and shown the term s being used more generally. I think you should have AfD'd it, not done an instant. I could build it up further if needed, there's more stuff out there. Pls TP meAndrewjlockley (talk) 02:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I restored it. But do note that the references are sketchy and don't assert notability. You should consider adding better references. Regards. --Regent Spark (crackle and burn) 02:36, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why you restored this. It's already been through AfD, what more is needed? -Atmoz (talk) 04:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was transwikid as a dictionary item. Since then I've added a whole bunch of encyclopaedic info, but it got stripped. Not sure how/why. Gotta restore it to a proper WP article now!Andrewjlockley (talk) 11:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 02:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Ajay Bruno

Why did you delete and block the article? I gave ample proof of his notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmericanPatriot2009 (talk • contribs) 00:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blogs don't make a reliable source and the fact that someone has been on talk shows does not either. If you think you can recreate the article with an acceptable source (read WP:RS for what constitutes one), let me know and I'll unprotect the article. --Regent Spark (crackle and burn) 00:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ajay Bruno- Tell me what sources you and others would find acceptable. Please unprotect it and I agree I won't attempt to reinstate it until I have such sources available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AmericanPatriot2009 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For something like this, I would look for mainstream newspapers that discuss the notability of the person (not mention him in a general context). --Regent Spark (crackle and burn) 00:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Lopretto

You deleted Ryan Lopretto and rightly so. Could you close the afd also? Thanks—Sandahl (talk) 02:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]

StarM got there first. --Regent Spark (crackle and burn) 02:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Provinces and presidencies of British India

Hi there RS, Let me know what you think of the proposal at the end of section Talk:Provinces_of_India#What_to_do_now. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 13:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your views

...are welcome at WT:RFA#Badgers and bullies and pricks, oh my!. (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 19:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Novels Newsletter - March 2009

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greenfinger

There isn't going to be a lot of the original article left by the time you get through.   :-)   Thank you and keep up the great work! – 74  04:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since I sort of saved the article, I guess I bear the responsibility of taking care of it (isn't there a Chinese adage about this?). :-) --RegentsPark (Maida Hill Tunnel) 12:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Thanks

Hi mate, just a quick note to say thanks for your support in my RfA, which passed successfully with 83 support votes, 0 oppose votes and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately, that million Euros hasn't materialised yet, so in the meantime I'll press on and be a good administrator... Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 15:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More on Callback verification

I'm looking for advice on how to proceed with the Callback verification article. Contrary to your suggestion that if Marcperkel could not agree to a "limitations" section in some form, that he should proceed with an RfC, he just deleted it. I waited a few days for him to put up a RfC and then added one myself. However, no one ever made a comment. Marc refuses to allow anything negative about this subject that his email filtering company uses, and I think that removing information about the limitations violates WP:NPOV, WP:NOTCENSORED, WP:UNDUEWEIGHT, etc. Any ideas what I should do next? Wrs1864 (talk) 18:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you. belated congratulations for your admin nomination. --Docku: What's up? 21:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:33, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WP India

Would it be possible for you to remove full protection of this article for sometime. I wish to add the image Image:Orissa small.png for Wikiproject Orissa. Thanks-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 06:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot!:-) I've finished.-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 17:30, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reg religious views

Hello, I had question related to expression religious opinions and you seem to be the best editor to consult regarding this . Religious accounts always describe about visions, supernatural events etc., what is the best way to include them in the article in a encyclopedic way? For ex, Is this the right way : "According to the traditional accounts, there was so-and-so vision"? Pls share your inputs, Thanks. --Nvineeth (talk) 10:27, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can include it that way but it would be preferable to provide a citation (reliable) that backs up the statement. "According to traditional accounts, there was so-and-so vision.<citation for the traditional account>". IMO, well cited traditional accounts should always be included in an article on religion.--RegentsPark (Maida Hill Tunnel) 14:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for your inputs. --Nvineeth (talk) 06:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roy

Hey admin, hope you're enjoying the high life! So--I was a bit bold, and redid the section in the Arundhati Roy article on US military activity. I thought it focused way too much on one minor point, her enumeration of countries the US had been at war with, and I opted to replace practically the entire section with a summary of her (lenghty) argument that, I hope, will give better weight to the different issues she is trying to tackle in that editorial. See what you think. Take care, and keep the faith, Drmies (talk) 04:37, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't seen that the "peanut butter" editorial in The Guardian fulfilled a double function--I have combined two sections into one. Drmies (talk) 04:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I remember that editorial from way back when. 'Alms race' - I love that turn of phrase! --RegentsPark (Maida Hill Tunnel) 13:20, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Careful now: "love" is political. Later! Drmies (talk) 21:31, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you put a copy in my sandbox?

Sorry for troubling you again! I had created an article Database Console Commands (Transact-SQL) a long time back but it was deleted and the reason given as copyright infringement. I wish to recreate the article by modifying its contents. Could you retrieve and post a copy of the article in my sandbox here? Thanks-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 14:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Done. You have a week to fix the copyright issue. --RegentsPark (Maida Hill Tunnel) 15:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanx a lot!-The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 17:30, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and another favor to ask?

Thanks for protecting my talk page. Can you also protect my user page as well? The IP also vandalized it. Thanks! ----Ðysepsion † Speak your mind 01:49, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. indef semi-protected. --RegentsPark (Maida Hill Tunnel) 02:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost  — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sai Baba

Hi RegentsPark, there is a thread on the Sai Baba article at WP:AE. Could you weigh in, given that you commented in the recent RfC? Cheers, Jayen466 17:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sonal Shah and hindu terrorist organisation

what was wrong with my addition its been all over the news ? 86.156.208.231 (talk) 18:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RegentsPark&oldid=277914312"