User talk:S Marshall

Syed Ahmed

I have put the article as an FA please leave comments or suggestions if you can thanks! Bangali71 (talk) 23:36, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Welcome

Thank you. I am starting up by cleaning up links. Let me know if you see any issues.Grandma Dottie (talk) 02:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Philomena, Duchess of Vendôme

Hi. I'm letting you know about this suggestion since you participated in the AfD. Best, Olaf Davis (talk) 17:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh me, oh my

Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_June_6#New_Zealand_.E2.80.93_Pakistan_relations - I thought all on-wiki was fixable. If only Richard had just talked to me first, we wouldn't be in this mess. If this closes to endorse deletion, I can't very well undo it can I? Process over common sense dominates sometimes. Fritzpoll (talk) 12:46, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

It's all down to who closes it, I should think, which is unfortunately all too often the case with DRV (and AfD). If we're lucky, Aervanath will close it.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 14:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Some would say the same of AfD. With the bilaterals, it's certainly a boit of a mixed and inconsistent bag, and I wish the noms had stopped. Fritzpoll (talk) 14:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm one of those who would say the same of AfD.  :) I agree with you about wishing those stupid noms had stopped... but not as much as I wish the stupid articles had never been written in the first place.

We need a system to solve this, because a disruptive editor could create chaos by sneaking in another huge article-series like the X-Y relations one. I'm minded to suggest a mass-removal from the mainspace while good faith editors work on the material.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 15:03, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Heh, perhaps an extension of the holding pen idea I've been concocting up at WT:CSD - a sort of non-article space area for contentious but not entirely deletable articles to be examined, rescued, merged, deemed hopeless and then appropriate action (moved to articlespace or deleted) taken. Fritzpoll (talk) 16:19, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Alternative to making proposals

What do you think about merging Gapers block and rubbernecking and is there a need for an apostrophe? ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:36, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't merge them, and I'd suggest using an apostrophe as Wiktionary does.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 19:19, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

When you agree with my position I find your suggestions to be extraordinarily wise and well considered. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:59, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unsolved problems in cognitive science (2nd nomination)

Please see my comments. Can you save this one? Bearian (talk) 15:36, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't need to rescue the current version, Bearian; I don't see it's worth saving. Just a question of re-creating a different article with the same title based on proper sources, which is something I'm interested in doing, but not necessarily now.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 20:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Afd Greenfinger

Seeing as you have taken part in the conversation before I thought you should be notified of Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Greenfinger_(3rd_nomination). The previous decision seems to have been against consensus, which was more for redirect. I personally think the article should be deleted. This is not canvasing as I am informing all people involed in the previous discussions and nobody outside of the discussions. Polargeo (talk) 21:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

for your perusal:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Journal of Transatlantic Studies. Drmies (talk) 04:58, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

New essay that might interest you

Following on from your excellent explanation at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_June_17#Hispanic_Commonweal, and another contributor's suggestion that there was an essay to be written about promotion of non-profit organisations on WP, you might be interested in editing WP:NOBLECAUSE. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 17:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation, I'll take a look.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 19:13, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

I can never remember whether to use "s" or "z", or which one is "British English", and whether "American English" spelling is the same as "Oxford English", and if so which should I use.... Hey-ho. As long as it's all consistent, anyway. Strange how this has all come out of my decision to press the "delete" button on a new article! Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 23:03, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 June 17#Hispanic Commonweal

		The Socratic Barnstar
		For your plain English answer at this DRV. Sometimes you make some very good plain statements like this that many people can easily understand. MuZemike 05:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 07:23, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I was going to do this, but MuZemike beat me to it. Stifle (talk) 09:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

FECRIS leader name

WP:RS/WP:V secondary source for this info please? Cirt (talk) 06:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Translated directly from the French Wikipedia.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 07:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

But I see the information's easily available from the FECRIS website. (A minor point of fact doesn't need to come from a secondary source.)—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 07:29, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

You are mistaken, Griess is listed as "webmaster", not "leader". Please be more careful. Thanks. Cirt (talk) 07:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Apologies for the oversight on my part, I did not search the website's pages thoroughly enough for that bit of information. Care to help out and add sourced material from French WP:RS/WP:V secondary sources? Cirt (talk) 07:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I intend to do so, a little later today.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 08:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for clarification: CodeineFree

Would it be appropriate to rewrite the CodeineFree page to be in a similar style as Save the children (Another charity I work with) as well as working on a new Codeine addiction?Marksedwards

• Most contributions to Wikipedia are welcome, but I would say that at this stage, writing a scholarly treatment of the subject of Codeine addiction would be a much higher priority than an article on a cause.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 11:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bristol Indymedia (2nd nomination)

Heya Stifle, I think this should probably have been "keep" (given that "merge" is a keep outcome and the only "delete" was the nominator).—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 18:17, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

The arguments were on the weak side in my opinion. In any case, the results are functionally identical. Stifle (talk) 19:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Proofreading

 Done

Hello! I wanted to ask you, if you could proofread my first articels, that I contributed to the English WP (Alois Stöger and Doris Bures). Thanks in advance. --Geiserich77 (talk) 12:55, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I'll go look at those now, and thanks for your contributions.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 13:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Obama Beach

I thought you might like to know that I sent Obama Beach to WP:RfD - see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 June 28. (In case you forgot, you had previously PRODed this about 3 weeks ago). --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Microgrant Speedy Keep

I am wondering how the Microgrant discussion was closed before the seven days had passed. You cite WP: Snow as the reason for speedy keep, but the page for Speedy Keep explicitly states: "WP:SNOW is not a valid speedy keep criterion." (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Speedy_keep). Verity50 (talk) 16:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

It isn't, no. It does say that early closures may result from WP:SNOW, but are "discouraged".

In closing that debate, I feel I had due regard for the strength of the consensus and the weight of the arguments. But if you disagree with the closure, you have several avenues available to you.

First, you could simply revert me. As I said in my edit summary, I would not object to my closure being reverted. However, this may not be helpful in view of the length of time that's now passed.

Second, you could ask me to relist it at AfD, and I would happily do so.

Third, you could take the matter to deletion review.

Or fourth, you could ask an uninvolved admin to reassess the debate.

I would have no objection to any of these things.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 19:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

S Marshall, you're the first editor I've ever seen respond to a question about a closure by offering to relist it. What a revelation. I have no idea why that's not more common. Anyway, have a great week. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

blp

See my argument in the DRV. I suggest asking for a clarification from arb com--after it closes, no matter which way it closes. I will say I wish we had a more worthy actual article I am however not prepared to press the issue that they went outside their bounds to make policy, for the general feeling is that they were justified in doing so. After all, one can make a case under IAR for anything at all. DGG (talk) 13:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Hi. Thanks for the help you gave. I had a feeling that scanning wasn't a great idea but I just wanted to check that my article wouldn't get deleted immediately for not having sources to which one could link. ɪntəsvɛnsk 18:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome!—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 23:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Lists of dinosaurs

You're welcome! I like to try to keep up with things. J. Spencer (talk) 23:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Translation request

Hi, I noticed from your userpage that you can translate from French to English so I was wandering if you had time to help out with this (PDF). If you have the time or inclination, there's a grey box of text at the top of page 5. It appears to talk about people getting fined but I was wondering if it explains why. The google translation was unreadable and my French never progressed beyond GCSE so any help would be greatly appreciated. Happy editing, Nev1 (talk) 18:29, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Freely translated:

---

"European Patrinony" label

At the European Conference on Culture on 17 November 2005, Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres proposed the creation of a European Patrimony label modelled on the Human Patrimony one. The idea was that Europeans could learn about, and take ownership of, their heritage.

The ultimate aim was to help territories to develop their cultural heritage for tourism purposes, and engage (or "welcome") site custodians in quality conservation and restoration. Sites with this label could be given priority for structural funding grants.

The French Minister of Culture has also presented six other measures to support circulation of works and artists in Europe.

Jan Figel, European Commissioner for Culture, gave approval to implement these measures and committed himself to promptly convene a meeting with Member States concerned.

---

Hope this helps!—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 18:42, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Oops, that's the one at the top of page 2. Going on to do the page 5 one. My fault, sorry.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 18:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Freely translated:

---

Result of the trial concerning the restoration of Castle Falaise at Calvados

Last November, the Caen criminal court fined the chief architect of historic monuments and the Regional Director of Cultural affairs for violating the code of urban planning in the matter of the restoration of the Castle Falaise at Calvados.

The chief architect of historic monuments and master of the restoration and modification work from 1995 was fined € 3,000. The Regional Director of Cultural Affairs of Lower Normandy has also been fined € 2,000. The judge reproached them for having authorised and executed restoration and modification work to the castle without consulting the High Commission of Historical Monuments.

The case began with a complaint filed by several groups after the construction of a concrete structure in front of the castle dungeon, built in the 12th century. The case, which had originally been brought in the civil court, focused on the law of the Planning and historic monuments. The court warned the two that their sentences were recorded in the criminal court, in view of their responsibilities to the public and in the absence of precedent.

Falaise Castle, known in the UK, was the birthplace of William the Conqueror, Duke of Normandy (1035-1087) and King of England (1066-1087).

---

Hope this helps!—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 18:54, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much, I think that should help with a dispute over the content of the Château de Falaise‎ article. Nev1 (talk) 18:58, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Bill Verna deletion review

Thanks for commenting on this review. I am confused about a couple of your comments. You said that you found my remarks very concerning, but I am unclear on what you mean. If you could also let me know what you would like diffs for, I am sure that I can provide them. Thanks,GaryColemanFan (talk) 19:33, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

• Sure. In a spirit of openness, I'll elaborate at the DRV.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 19:35, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I have replied at the DRV with all the information I have access to as a non-administrator. GaryColemanFan (talk) 20:12, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment regarding conduct of User:Frei Hans

I have requested comment on the conduct of User:Frei Hans. As you have been involved in this dispute to some extent, I would appreciate it if you could comment. Papa November (talk) 14:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but I'm afraid I decline to participate.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 17:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Adminship

Over the last year or so, I've become concerned about something I've seen around Wikipedia that nags at me, and noticed a question at WP:RFA recently that crystalized the point. It's this one: "Do you believe that Wikipedians have rights?" My answer to that is that users should be able (i.e. ought to have the right) to rely on the encyclopædia, acting through its adminstrators, to enforce rules and standards determined before the particular controversy in an even-handed, fair, and consistent manner.

This isn't meant as a slam against any particular admin, least of all you, but while I've had many good experiences with admins, some have been less positive. It has often seemed to me that the resolution of a question is not so much what the policy says or fairly implies, but the luck of the draw as to which admin reviews the issue. See WT:RFPP#Solving the randomness problem and [1]

In response, I've been wondering if I should put my money where my mouth is and submit an WP:RFA. My purpose would be to try to bring clearer standards to the handling of RFPs and stricter enforcement of 3RR at the edit warring noticeboard. (To the extent I have time to participate at AFD, a process I enjoy, I hope that I'm already setting a pretty good example of the kind of thing I'm talking about as a regular user.) ctually doing strikes me as being far better than grumbling in the wilderness.

Nevertheless, I'm hesitant because I don't really think of myself as admin material, because I don't have a lot of specific examples of these issues, and because one must suspect that existing admins may take personally the concerns that I'm raising. It may well be that the incidents animating my concerns have been exceptional, abberational incidents that are very uncommon, in which case, I don't think that the concerns themselves are damaging, and may well be positive.

At any rate, I wanted to ask an admin with whom I've interacted before, but not for a while, for their thoughts. Does it seem like I might make a good admin for the purposes above, or am I barking up the wrong tree? - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 00:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I must also add that part of what leads me to ask is my astonishment at seeing admins with far far less time at WP. I've been here for a while, I believe I've learned a lot in that time and settled in with a feel for the place.- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 00:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Simon

Flattered though I am that you would mistake me for an admin, I'm afraid I need to disappoint you. I'm a very ordinary user.

May I recommend Editor Review as an excellent place to ask your question?—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 07:32, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I had no idea! I have some doubts about whether I'd be a good fit for an adminship, but I have no reservations at all that you would be. It's something you should perhaps consider. :) - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 13:49, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Not everyone would agree with you.  :)—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 15:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Prevention of Genocide Act of 1988

Sorry about not following correct procedure. New to AfD's. Snori (talk)

response

i've tried to tone down my rhetoric - if it could use further improvement, let me know! Exactmaybe (talk) 06:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Cleaning up List of topics related to Black and African people

We've been cleaning this up.

What else needs to be done to it?

Please answer at Talk:List of topics related to Black and African people#Clean up.

Thank you.

The Transhumanist    23:01, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah, Thanks!

I appreciate that. Some people on here can be really mean.