User talk:Greg Grahame/Archives

Welcome[edit]

Hello Greg Grahame/Archives, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, they have helped improve Wikipedia and make it more informative. I hope you enjoy using Wikipedia and decide to make additional contributions. Some resources to help new Wikipedians include:

How to edit a page

Editing tutorial

Picture tutorial

How to write a great article

Naming conventions

Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~; this will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you have any questions, please see Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, try the Wikipedia:Help desk, or ask me on my talk page. Thank you for signing up!

Arktos ^talk 10:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recat[edit]

Huh? Guettarda 16:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why Biota of Lithuania? Guettarda 14:51, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Dozens of countries have such a category"? So that's why you want to change Category:Wildlife of Trinidad and Tobago to Category:Biota of Lithuania? Guettarda 02:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you know your link above originally went to the wrong place, so I had no idea what you were on about. Greg Grahame 11:18, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Military brat[edit]

Hi Greg, I have a serious question that I wanted to follow up on, from a serious not confrontational manner, what makes a subject encyclopedic? If this was merely a slang term used by the target audience I would completely agree. But the fact that it is a term used by sociologist to describe a definable subculture, IMHO, elevates it above a slang term and makes it encyclopedic. We are talking about a definable studied subculture. On that spirit, I encourage you to take a look at my proposal in the discussion. I am seriously looking for why this would not be encyclopedic.Balloonman 17:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pop culture articles[edit]

Skull and Bones[edit]

In reference to the discussion about the article Skull and Bones being merged into another article, I strongly agree that the title should be kept. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_April_26#Category:Bonesmen -Signaleer 08:37, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnohgraphic village[edit]

Thank you for your attention. I think ethnographic village is more specific form of an open air museum, and the term is quite popular in Lithuania , and other Eastern European states [1] and it is used to denote specific regional villages, thta did preserve traditional structure and look (Lithuanian - "Etnografinis kaimas") . There are several dozens of those villages, and i think this category can be easily populated. --Lokyz 16:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC) P.S. Please do not remove category from pages, while deletion of this category is discussed.[reply]

Speedy renaming of Category:Market Research companies of Australia[edit]

Yes, that is a good call and my fault for incorrect capitalisation. I just never got round to running thru the process to fix it, on account of being tied up at a long winded AfD. Cheers, Thewinchester ^(talk) 14:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of British companies[edit]

Just a quick question re List of British companies; what was the rational behind reinstating it? From it's talk page, it looks as though it was deleted previously? (See afd discussion) Nuwewsco 22:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pretty basic thing to have a list of. It exists in at least 4 other Wikipedias. It just needs a lot of work. Greg Grahame 14:10, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2007 UK terrorist incidents[edit]

I have added two terrorist related sections to broaden the article. However, I appreciate your support for the article, which I don't want to lose, so please let me know if you think this was a bad idea. TerriersFan 19:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your !vote on school notability may be ignored[edit]

Your !vote in favor of keeping the article Krum High School at this AfD is at risk of being ignored by a closing administrator who may decide that your vote did not properly explain why the school was notable. While many people think that all schools are notable, or that the existence of other school articles justifies retention of this one, we need to make specific claims that the specific school (or anything else you're !voting to keep) is notable. I strongly encourage you to review the requirements of Wikipedia:notability and to consider modifying the justification of your decision to keep an article in any future AfD, school or otherwise. If based on your review of Wikipedia policy and a particular article you feel that the school is indeed notable, a variation of the text "Keep because notability is demonstrated by citation to multiple reliable sources that discuss the subject significantly", (as suggested here), will clearly state why you feel that the article meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. If you do not properly support your vote, you take the risk that your participation will be ignored if the closing administrator so chooses, as has already happened to your vote at this AfD. Please review the WP:N policy and modify the justification for your !vote if you believe that the article meets these criteria. Alansohn 21:17, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion welcome at deletion review for Plot of Les Mis[edit]

After Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plot of Les Misérables closed as a deletion, I'm challenging the way the closing administrator acted as in violation of Wikipedia rules. Your participation is welcome at that discussion, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 14. Please keep in mind that only arguments related to either new information or to how Wikipedia rules were violated or not violated in closing the discussion will be considered. It isn't a replay of the original AfD. I'm familiar with WP:CANVASSING and I am alerting everyone who participated in that discussion to the deletion review. I won't contact anyone again on this topic, and I apologize if you consider this note distracting. Noroton 04:07, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Haye[edit]

You removed a fact tag from the above article without providing a reference or any reason. Can you please explain this. regards--Vintagekits 16:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it was very trivial and there are hundreds of thousands more of these things than will ever be dealt with. It is self-defeating to use them indiscriminately, rather than focusing on things that matter. Greg Grahame (talk) 23:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Daly[edit]

Thanks for correcting my Tony to Tom Daly. Wasn't concentrating, obviously! I didn't bother linking through to Tony Daly because it was the wrong one (the footballer), and assumed that the diver didn't have a page, and put it on my list of ones to research, so you've saved me a job there! Ged UK (talk) 21:08, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Improving on Sculptures in the Schönbrunn Garden[edit]

Hi Greg, as you did some editing on Schönbrunn Palace, not too long ago, and as I did some test edits on the deWP equivalent to "Sculptures...", de:Diskussion:Schlosspark Schönbrunn Steinfiguren/Neufassung, today, I'd like to read your opinion on my approach.

In case it feels like a good idea, I might like to create an English version, which I however perferably would host on Commons, as it is almost a plain gallery page.

So, even if you do not speak German, please just have a look at my new layout and leave a note here what you think about. As there are still a couple of questions on poor or questionnable picture descriptions, which arose but today, I would anyways spend the next 4-5 days or so on de deWP article(s), so you have time to think about, in case you like to.

Best, Wolfgang WeHaWoe (talk) 16:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The House on the Cliff[edit]

Re: Your edit summary "The list appears to be for the U.S. only, though in typical American fashion, the source article forgets that the rest of the world exists, and doesn't provide certainty"

From the source article: "The lists are based on actual sales as reported by publishers; they reflect domestic sales only, and do not include book club and international sales." [2]

--GentlemanGhost (talk) 23:36, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fort Lauderdale diving meet[edit]

Yes, I know what FINA is, but ALL Google News reports until last night referred to the Fort Lauderdale meet as the "AT&T USA Diving Grand Prix" with no mention of FINA. Some reports today have started mentioning FINA. I see from this page on the FINA site that the meet is simultaneously both the 39th USA Diving Grand Prix and the 15th FINA Diving Grand Prix, so I'm not going to quibble. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 12:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is the fact that it is one of FINA's Grand Prix series that is relevant to Tom Daley's results record. Wikipedia has no reason whatsoever to promote the individual meet's sponsor. Greg Grahame (talk) 12:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]