User talk:Biscuittin/Archive1

Article lede paragraphs

Hi. I noted you had added the heading 'Overview' to Crane (machine). While I agree that it makes a certain amount of sense to divide the article up like that, I presume you hadn't realised you are actually going against Wiki policy.

Can I recommend you take a read of WP:LEDE? I only discovered it fairly recently, and have found it to be very helpful. It is quite worrying to realise how many articles fall short of its recommendations. A significant point I noted is that "Wikipedia 1.0" (the CD-ROM version) may use ONLY the lede paragraph of an article, which must therefore stand alone to describe the entire article in four paragraphs! I have modified crane(machine) to suit, retaining your heading for the paragraph which would not be appropriate in a stand-alone lede. This particular lede was written with WP:LEDE in mind, although I think it still requires further work.

I have noted you applying similar changes to other articles, and the issue of breaking WP:LEDE has not occurred to me before. You may want to re-examine some of these articles with this in mind.

('In good faith'!) Regards, EdJogg 21:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't agree with your interpretation of WP:LEDE. The word "Overview" is simply a heading and is not part of the the lede. Your modification also fails to comply with WP:LEDE because it is not concise. I don't think this is an issue of Wikipedia policy, just a matter of opinion. Biscuittin 08:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

My edits

I thought it might be useful if I explained what I've been doing. I've seen a lot of articles on Wikipedia which look a mess and are difficult to read for two main reasons. (1) They have no headings or (2) they have headings but the lead paragraph is so long that it has pushed the Table of Contents (TOC) box half-way down the page. I am tidying up these articles and I think they now look better but, of course, others may disagree. My aim is to produce articles which are clear and easy to read. I may, sometimes, be breaking some rules but I would draw the reader's attention to Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. Biscuittin 12:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

OWW

Please find my comments about your proposed merge at the OWW Line talk page.

While I agree in principle, the truth is that the Oxford-Worcester-Wolverhampton Line is a railway line - which is distinctly different from the Oxford, Worcester and Wolverhampton Railway, which was a railway company.

Feel free to disagree. I agree with your plan to merge West Midlands Railway with the article however. Worley-d 02:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, point taken. Biscuittin 08:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Multiplexing and multiple access

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Multiplexing and multiple access, by Salaskan, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Multiplexing and multiple access fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

very funny, though ^_^

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Multiplexing and multiple access, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Multiplexing and multiple access itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of 01189 problem

01189 problem, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that 01189 problem satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/01189 problem and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of 01189 problem during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 15:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I've suggested a merge into a section of 0207 and 0208. Judging by the comments so far, I think this is your best bet. Nunquam Dormio 19:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. That's a good suggestion. Biscuittin 19:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Watches

I had seen that but most people will not expect to arrive at Pilot watch which is one type of wristwatch. To my mind watch is the more logical target. However, you could try Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting potentially controversial moves. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 12:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello! Interesting article on the OKTA refinery! I read on the company (Hellenic Petroleum) documents that the OKTA refinery covers 86% of the needs of your country. Are you sure of your numbers (4 million tons/1,25 million tons)? KostasG 16:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Peak Inverse Voltage

I have Replied to you here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Peak_Inverse_Voltage --TvKimi 12:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Radiobiology

When I deleted this, it was a redirect to the nonexistent page Radiobiologist. I should have looked at the history and reverted. I've restored the article. Thanks! NawlinWiki 22:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Radiation biology

I deleted Radiation biology per WP:CSD#R1. It had been turned into a redirect in 2005 after the article was merged with Radiobiology. Radiobiology was subsequently deleted, leaving a broken redirect. Cheers. --MZMcBride 01:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Cabbage patch dance

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Cabbage patch dance, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Cabbage patch. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 14:06, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Chinese locomotives

I have started a naming convention discussion at Category talk:Chinese rolling stock, which I believe may be of interest to you.--QuantumEngineer 18:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of DLM AG

A tag has been placed on DLM AG, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD A1.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Jerm (^Talk/ _Contrib) 21:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The article was deleted since it does not assert notablity and is possible spam. If you are going to add an article about a company, you need to look at WP:CORP. Articles must meet that notability guideline. Contesting a deletion does not mean it will not be deleted without consultation. If the article meets the speedy deletion criteria, it can be deleted. If you can create an article that meets the nobility guidelines, feel free to do so. Vegaswikian 08:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Your article has been restored in your userspace at User:Biscuittin/DLM AG. The idea is to give you the content to allow you to work on it to bring it up to encyclopedic standard. Please take the time to read the following policies and guidelines. notability; verifyability and sourcing. Once you have brought the article up to standard, it can be moved back to main space, but please check with me first as for licensing reasons we need to move the article back from your userspace not recreate it. Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

1. why is the company notable (the article doesn't say)?
2. where are the multiple independant spources from published media?

Honestly? The article hasn't got a hope of surviving in mainspace unless you can address these two questions satisfactily. Please see the links I added above for relevant policies. Cheers Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Extragratis

An article that you have been involved in editing, Extragratis, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Extragratis. Thank you. --Explodicle (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Your article on SHS virus

Please do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to SHS virus. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. antilived^{T | C | G} 22:43, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Notability of 7/8

A tag has been placed on 7/8 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. WWGB (talk) 11:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)