User talk:Scottwiki

Welcome

Hello, Scottwiki, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

--Goatrider 08:22, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

H.R. 4437

Thank you for catching my inadvertent deletion of some information from the opening paragraph. I was working on an off-line copy and didn't notice there were intervening edits when I saved my changes. Also, thanks for your efforts in improving the article. Regards, Accurizer 12:00, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COTW

I don't quite understand how to nominate articles on the COTW. Can you help? I would like to nominate Spoon (band), and my reason is this band is well-known and influential, known for their creative techniques. The article doesn't do them justice. --Osbus 21:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Osbus 00:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COTW Project

You voted for Demographics of Europe, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. --Avala 20:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flora nomination change?

I have tagged Flora (plants) as a stub, as a first step to change it to a WP:COTW nomination. I personally believe there should be a complete re-write of the article. Do you all agree to make the change? --Francisco Valverde 08:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Vote

In response to your comment, a person that only has 1 contribution, which is to vote for the AID, is as good as a IP user, for the fact that they may not be real accounts. Otherwise, why do we not allow IP users to vote on AID as well?--Steven 21:53, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have not reason to stop you from restoring the vote, for I do see what your point of view. However, I strongly suggest a vote on the talk page, so that there is some sort of group decision on this topic. --Steven 22:55, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I now agree with Steven; see my comment on the Amazon Rainforest nomination. -Scottwiki 08:08, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vote #7: Removal of voters with only votes as contributions

There is currently a vote taking place to help set a limit on who can vote. You might want to voice your opinion on the matter. --Steven 22:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why was new COTW proclaimed so late? Luka Jačov 08:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the reply I made to your vote--Steven 20:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COTW voting

EncycloPetey made an interesting addition on 25 April 2006: "Only vote for articles that you will personally help to improve, either with research or with writing." Should this be the rule? I don't believe that it should. What if a person agrees that the article needs editing and expanding, but feels incapable (e.g., due to insufficient subject knowledge) or reluctant (e.g., due to relative experience on Wikipedia) to do it personally? What if the person doesn't have time to work on the article during the particular week when it is COTW (which might one among several weeks after the person submits a vote)? Accordingly, I'll remove the addition, but notify EncycloPetey, who can restore the rule and reply to my view here if he wishes. -Scottwiki 05:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The articles already had the statement: "Do not vote for all of the nominations. If you do, your votes will be discounted, as people can't expect you to work on all of them." This implies strongly that votes are from people who will actively improve articles, so I only added an explicit statement of something that was already implicit. The alternative is to accept voting for articles that "should be improved" by a cabal of people of have no intention of improving the article" (as with the Lipovians, where a huge number of people voted for the article, but none of those people improved it.) I added nothing that was not already implicit. --EncycloPetey 10:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suri Cruise (2nd nomination)

Hello. You previously voted in the 2006 AfD for Suri Cruise. At the time, Suri was less than 10 days old, and the ultimate verdict was to turn the article into a redirect to her mother's page.

Since then, Suri has become much more notable in her own right as a toddler fashion icon, with over 13 million hits on google image search. After getting an administrator to lift the protection on the redirect, I recently restored the article as a stub, but an editor who believes that "6 year olds are not inherently notable" has again requested deletion.

If it's not too much trouble, I'd appreciate your making your opinion known at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suri Cruise (2nd nomination) Warren Dew (talk) 07:38, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of K. A. Paul

The article K. A. Paul has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This's squarely BLPCRIME and BLP1E territory.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ∯WBG^converse 13:02, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]