Jump to content

User talk:Teiresias84

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

party state branches

[edit]

Hi Teiresias, regarding your note at Talk:Liberal Party of Australia‎, I agree that we should create articles for the state branches of the major parties (see previous discussion at User talk:WikiTownsvillian/Archive 1#Nats). Thanks, WikiTownsvillian 09:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Watts

[edit]

Is the article notable enough? I added a lot of links (and will work on it more later.) I also added a category for him. --Vitalmove 04:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to your question, I am not sure. The reason I tagged the article is that it is not enough context for me as someone who knows nothing about him whether he is sufficently notable or not. (Read up on WP:N and you will see what I mean).
If I were to guess, I would say being a host of a television would probably make him notable enough for him to have a page here. But it would depend on how important this television show is. As a rule of thumb, are there secondary sources (i.e. reliable websites, books, magazine artciles etc) about him in existance?
Your article is good enough that if someone thought it should be deleted, it wouldn't be deleted immediately but it would probably go to an AFD. That would give you about a week to improve it.Teiresias84 04:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Yes there are secondary sources. I linked seven mainstream media sources on him in the article. Edit: actually I think only four of them are mainstream media (guardian, pressgazette, times, telegraph.) There are probably hundreds more on the net. Press TV is also a worldwide network beamed to televisions in every country, and streamed on the internet. --Vitalmove 05:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Don't stress. I don't want to delete your article. I am just concerned that it might not be notable enough.
It's good to see that you are adding references from mainstream sources. I think the sources you have provided are reliable enough. However there are other problems with some of them. I'll run through them.


  • [1] Reliable source. Good. However it terms of adding to Mark Watts notablity, it only mentions that he wrote a book, which in itself is not enough for inclusion. This should stay in the article for it is a reference for the fact he wrote a book, but it dosen't get him about WP:N.
  • [2] This is written by Watts himself, which only proves himself to be a freelance journalist. Which again, by itself, is not sufficent.
  • [3] proves only he was sued for slander. Lots of people are sued for slander.
  • [4] Again, written by Watts. Adds nothing to notablity.
  • [5] Good. Shows that he is the add of FOIA. If you can show FOIA to have had secondary sources, then that'll help alot.
  • [6] Again backs up his journalistic credentals, although I saw nothing here that showed he was the chief investigative reporter.
  • [7] Another example of his work as a freelance journalist.
My feeling is that this is a real boderline case. I was hoping for an article or two specifically about him, not involving him (hope that makes sense). Can you add something about his TV show. I think that is what potential makes him notable. But you only say he is the host of a show on a network I've never heard of (I am living on the other side of the world, granted. But that is the auidence you need to write for) in the introduction and never come back to it. Add some more on his show and it should be ok.
I hope this made sense. The point I am trying to make is just because an reliable source is written by someone or mentions someone, it doesn't make the subject inhertiely notable. I really don't mean to sound harsh either. The article is well written and you have used references which is a lot better than most other new editors. You just need to establish notability a little more. Any more questions, don't hesitate to ask.Teiresias84 06:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Still, any mainstream article can be described as "only saying" this and that about a person. The slander lawsuit was related to his successful book. I'll add another source for his prior title. The television station can be viewed on one of ten satellite bands as noted here http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=15384&sectionid=351020105 . Or you can view the internet stream here: mms://217.218.67.244/presslive . It's on twice a day I think. Have a nice day. --Vitalmove 06:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Bernau

[edit]

If it's a hoax then why did it take over a week for you to delete it...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robbie Cottle (talkcontribs) 05:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

[edit]

Thank you, i now feel reassured and am not so confused. I hate conpsiracy theories, i believe it is a great source for fiction, but should not be accpeted as a fact. I do beleive it is an attempt to get money and stuff. I appreciate your help. Yoda317 04:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Abolished Victorian Upper House Provinces

[edit]

Hi Teiresias84, can you please add into Victorian Legislative Council abolished provinces prior to 2002 as well ie Boronia and South Eastern etc. Thanks Cheers --CatonB (talk) 10:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A new task force - ESA

[edit]

Hello,

I've noticed that you are active in the area of space exploration. I just wanted to let you know that a European Space Agency task force has been set up to improve the presently very poor condition of articles about ESA and related topics. If you are interested, please join the task force here. We sure could use your help. Thanks.U5K0 (talk) 11:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs

[edit]

Hello Teiresias84! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 199 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article: My friend is sally ride →165.155.194.180 (talk) 17:56, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Gordon Rich-Phillips - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spaceflight portals

[edit]

Hello! As an member editor of one or more of the Spaceflight, Human spaceflight, Unmanned spaceflight, Timeline of spaceflight or Space colonisation WikiProjects, I'd like to draw to your attention a proposal I have made with regards to the future of the spaceflight-related portals, which can be found at Portal talk:Spaceflight#Portal merge. I'd very much appreciate any suggestions or feedback you'd be able to offer! Many thanks,

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Human spaceflight at 08:54, 9 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

WikiProject Spaceflight activity

[edit]

Hello there! As part of an effort to determine how many active editors are present in the spaceflight-related WikiProjects, changes have been made to the list of members of WikiProject Spaceflight. If you still consider yourself to be an active editor in this project, it would be appreciated if you would please edit the list so that your name is not struck out - thus a clearer idea of the number of active editors can be determined. Many thanks in advance!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 18:04, 3 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

WikiProject Spaceflight reboot

[edit]

Hello there! As you may or may not be aware, a recent discussion on the future of the Space-related WikiProjects has concluded, leading to the abolition of WP:SPACE and leading to a major reorganisation of WP:SPACEFLIGHT. It would be much appreciated if you would like to participate in the various ongoing discussions at the reorganisation page and the WikiProject Spaceflight talk page. If you are a member of one of WP:SPACEFLIGHT's child projects but not WP:SPACEFLIGHT itself, it would also be very useful if you could please add your name to the member list here. Many thanks!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 00:19, 6 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

The Downlink: Issue 0

[edit]
 
   The Downlink   
 
    Your source for news on WikiProject Spaceflight Issue 0, December 2010  
 
You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 16:28, 16 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

The Downlink: Issue 1

[edit]
 
   The Downlink   
 
    Your source for news on WikiProject Spaceflight Issue 1, January 2011  
 
You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 15:12, 1 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]

The Downlink: Issue 2

[edit]
 
   The Downlink   
 
    Your source for news on WikiProject Spaceflight Issue 2, February 2011  
 
You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Spaceflight at 00:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

The Downlink: Issue 3

[edit]
 
   The Downlink   
 
    Your source for news on WikiProject Spaceflight Issue 3, March 2011  
 
You have recieved this newsletter because you are currently listed as a member of WikiProject Spaceflight, or because you are not a member but have requested it. If you do not wish to receive future issues, please add your name to the opt-out list.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Spaceflight at 09:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Possibly unfree File:HollwayERL1952.png

[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:HollwayERL1952.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]