User talk:Skysmith

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Missing music topics[edit]

Hi, I've been going through your list at User:Skysmith/Missing topics about Music. I've found many typos or alternative spellings, which I've corrected or linked to articles in the English wikipedia. I've also looked for whether the topic has an entry on Wikidata, which will clarify what it is for future article writers. There are also some that appear to be mistaken entries, or I can't figure out what they should be. Since there are now many blue links, you should probably go through them now and delete them (as you've requested, I haven't actually deleted any) so that the lists are more useful again. Rigadoun (talk) 19:52, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

  • I have noticed that and you have done excellent work. I will edit the master copy of the list and update the page as soon as I can. Thank you - Skysmith (talk) 20:16, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Pulp stone listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Pulp stone. Since you had some involvement with the Pulp stone redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. A2soup (talk) 02:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Adumbration listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Adumbration. Since you had some involvement with the Adumbration redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 23:40, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Work life listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Work life. Since you had some involvement with the Work life redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Cnilep (talk) 05:27, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week : nominations needed![edit]

The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

Sent on behalf of Buster Seven Talk for the Editor of the Week initiative by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Refection listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

I have asked for a discussion to address the redirect Refection. Since you created the Refection redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion. Gorobay (talk) 22:17, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Harambe for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Harambe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harambe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:20, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Brendan Dassey[edit]

Greetings

I have been informed (excuse my lack of navigation I am new to Wikipedia) that the verification message on the article I've listed for inclusion has come from yourself. Thank you very much for your time.

Mr. Dassey is a very separate entity to Steven Avery even though both were involved in the Teresa Halbach case, they are protagonists of equal notability. Mr.Dassey's article is a different entity altogether, Steven Avery is mentioned once because of the trial (which would be remiss not to do so) but the article is focused on the incredible profile now afforded because of Mr Dassey's involvement on the debate surrounding coerced confessions, interrogation of minors and suggestibility and the use of the Reid Technique. Mr.Dassey had a separate trial, there are separate transcripts and I think most importantly, his involvement is a different look at the justice system compared to Steven Avery.

Also noteworthy is that Mr Dassey's involvement has now led to a petition, that is championing the rights of minors when under interrogation in the state of Wisconsin, and calls for criminal justice reform. I believe all of these factors lend themselves to a separate article and in no way have I reproduced any of the Steven Avery article.

I thank you for your time

Regards

Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 01:32, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

  • I have to say that I had no idea what you were talking about before I checked. The edit in question is 9 years old and I have no further information about the case (or recall what the redirect was all about). As far as I am concerned, you can recreate the page without the redirect or remove it alltogether. - Skysmith (talk) 15:05, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Angelman Syndrome Research Section[edit]

Hiya, what's your reasoning behind restoring the Research section of the Angelman Syndrome article? It's at least 5 years out of date, and is worse than useless because it implies that there are only 2 researchers working on it in the world. 217.156.212.244 (talk) 10:00, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Update it instead of deleting it, then - Skysmith (talk) 10:08, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Eventually yes. In the meantime, I think it's better to have nothing in its place. 217.156.212.244 (talk) 10:24, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Golden Tower (Jeddah)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Golden Tower (Jeddah) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. PamD 12:27, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

  • I created that as a redirect. People who expanded it should be more involved. - Skysmith (talk) 10:36, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Just a Thanks![edit]

Your edits in Bloop make me happy. :-) Thank you! I hope you have a pleasant week! Kothog (talk) 07:20, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Begging And Beggars listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Begging And Beggars. Since you had some involvement with the Begging And Beggars redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix (talk) 20:22, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dibasic calcium phosphate[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Dibasic calcium phosphate has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Dicalcium phosphate is a newer, more developed article on the exact same compound. Dibasic calcium phosphate is an alternative name mentioned in the Dicalcium phosphate article, so the Dibasic calcium article should be replaced with a redirect.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Neonorange (talk) 12:10, 29 August 2016 (UTC)