Welcome to my Talk page. Please add all new discussion to the bottom of the page, and sign your comments with ~~~~ everytime.
I saw your idea on Talk:Youth ministry and I beleive we should definetly move the article and create a new one about all youth ministries. This would be more accurate and not inherantly POV. The best way to do this I think would be to move the article and then immediately write a new one with some quality (even if it is a stub) on the Youth Ministry namespace, deleting the redirect. This would make it impossible for anyone to move the old article back to that title, because they would have to go through AfD to delete our article, and they would almost certainly fail. If someone opposed to a neutral article really got ballsy, they might move our article to a different page entirely and move the old one back to the original page, but that would be vandalism and the user could be banned for it. Overall, wikipedia is constructed to encourage neutrality this way.
After this is done, relevant information from the old article can easily be incorperated into the new article, possibly making it irrelevant and elligible for deletion.
Would you be willing to move the current article and write a decent stub for a new article if I contributed to it? Thanks--Musaabdulrashid 05:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
- I beleive Youth ministry (Evangelical) would be more appropriate, but as of now an AfD is underway for the article and we should wait for it to finish. It isn't very important what the AfD decides because, as I said before, we can always move it anyway.--Musaabdulrashid 06:29, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
YRUU individual Districts
I am willing to undelete the three articles, but I need some questions answered first. None of the articles I deleted had a notice on their Talk page of having passed AfD, so I had no way of knowing they had done so. Can you link to some of the AfD discussions? And by what standards are these organizations notable? I am not trying to quell your desire to expand the Wikipedia project, I just want to know more information before I make a decision to undelete. P.S. I have nothing against UU (I have a lot of UU friends and probably respect the UU them more than any other religious organization). If the articles were about junior astronomy clubs or stamp-collector clubs which made no claim to notability, I'd have done the same thing. Andrew Levine 15:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed quite a few short stub articles for organizations with a relationship to UUA that do not appear to be mentioned in reliable sources. I've nominated a few of these that for AfD and prodded a couple where it's obvious that they do not meet typical inclusion criteria. There are some other articles that I have my doubts about; you have created some of these. Since you are an established editor here, I thought I would contact you before just proceeding to deletion. Can these articles be improved or merged? I would appreciate your thoughts on the matter. JChap2007 02:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
I will restore the articles for the three districts which Winhunter deleted, based on the AfD you point to. Andrew Levine 00:00, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for seeing this through, Andrew. HellaNorCal 03:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
UU Deletion/Merger discussions
Hi HellaNorCal. Thanks for your note. I have watchlisted several of the discussions and will contribute if I can. Best Regards, -MrFizyx 04:40, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry (and UUA substubs)
HellaNorCal/Canaen--I have been talking to you for a while and just now happened to see that you are the same person.  Could you pick one identity for purposes of communicating with me: either User: HellaNorCal (from California) or User:Canaen (from Scotland)? Once you determine which one of these you want to be your identity, let's sit down with either a nice merlot or a glass of Lagavulin and discuss what to do about the UUA substub articles. You want to merge them into a list of such organizations. I believe this is problemmatic for reasons I explain in AfD. Such a list seems to be likely to be deleted for the same reason that the stubs are so problematic: lack of sources about the organization. Some editors would no doubt also feel that such a list is crufty and basically just a linkfarm. Rather than waste your time on this, might I suggest that you work to add knowledge (rather than just stubs with links) to WP by expanding those stub articles whose subjects are covered in reliable sources. For example, our article on Covenant of Unitarian Universalist Pagans, which is discussed in a small number of books . Specifically, "A Community of Witches: Contemporary Neo-Paganism and Witchcraft in the United States" by Helen A. Berger seems from the index to have some information about the organization. Other books referenced on that page may also be useful. This could be turned into a nice article.
I notice that your alternate accounts do not note that you are, in fact, the same person. This would normally be strongly encouraged per WP:SOCK. In any event, please pick one name to use when you are communicating with me. JChap2007 16:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hi UserJChap2007, you are right that I am from California. My intent is to have this discussion in a more open, and relevent space: Talk:Unitarian Universalist Independent Affiliate organizations. As far as contributing to CUUPS is concerned, I don't know much of the organization. I know who they are, but not enough to add much to the article without first researching. I thank you for your suggestion. In turn, may I suggest that rather than forcing users such as myself to deal with AfDs and the threat of losing information, you instead switch your focus to adding content to the Wikipedia? Sure even watching the recent changes list as a member of the CVU would be more productive. I hope to see you there, HellaNorCal 23:59, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I'll talk about the UUA stubs on that talk page. However, I'm also concerned about your sock puppetry. I was talking to you as both Canaen and HellaNorCal for a while and was under the impression that I was dealing with two separate people. I only happened to find out by accident that this was not the case: . I shared my concerns above and you have given a completely unsatisfactory response.
- In addition, the fact that you have edited one of my comments thusly to remove mention of sock puppetry from the header does not instill a lot of confidence that you intend to be forthright about this. Using two separate accounts to edit in the same narrow topic (and especially to create so many stubs in that topic) is fairly suspicious. I strongly urge you to do the right thing voluntarily and identify the User:HellaNorCal and User:Canaen accounts as being owned by the same RL person, as recommended by WP:SOCK.
- To respond to your concerns about my editing patterns and the nomination of articles in AfD:
- These are the first articles I have nominated in quite some time. I only noticed these particular stubs because I had been editing a crappy, POV essay called Unitarian Christianity, whose only purpose had been to show that the UUA and Trinitarians were all wrong. I am currently proposing that it be merged, not deleted, into Unitarianism, per a suggestion from another editor on its talk page. Also, let me bring to your attention Wikipedia: Articles for deletion/Starbucks Workers Union. I don't say this to be defensive, but merely to suggest that someone who is not really a deletionist took a look at the numerous substub articles you created (many of which were six months or more old, by the way and still hadn't been expanded) and saw that they did not in fact convey information, but only a link. If you had wanted them to not be deleted, you could have written them so that they actually contained infomation and provided reliable sources for such information. If you could not find reliable sources, you could have waited to write the article until you could find such sources. JChap2007 02:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- If you must know, I share my computer. My room-mate and I are both UUs -- go figure. We share one computer, and both have an interest in Wikipedia. Once in awhile, one of us will forget to log in with our own account. Normally that would just result in an anonymous comment, but in this case it can result in a comment signed by the wrong username.
- Thanks for pointing out these things. I admit I do have a tendency to jump to conclusions; I simply have very inclusionary thoughts as to Wikipedia. We'll talk more about it on the relevant page. HellaNorCal 17:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Unitarian Universalist Youth Conferences Article
I noticed on your user page that you are interested in YRUU related articles. And as a result of this, I would like to know if you would like to help me improve the article I created on the subject of Unitarian Universalist Youth Conferences.--Devin Murphy 21:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Wondering what you think about the deletion of the brand-new Youth Empowerment info box. - Freechild 04:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Also, I wasn't sure if you'd like to know about Category:Youth councils. - Freechild 03:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion
I received this message thought it mite be something of interest to you. "You may want to know that Young Religious Unitarian Universalists and Unitarian Universalist Youth Conferences have been nominated for deletion. You may want to comment on the nomination. Aleta 18:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)" --Devin Murphy 02:45, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Unitarian Universalism work group
You may be interested to know that there is now a work group for all things UU. It's at Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion/Unitarian Universalism work group. --Devin Murphy 04:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)