User talk:Wolvereness/Archives/2007/November

References on GC articles

Hi, are you familiar with the status of the London Gazette? DuncanHill 01:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I've been looking, and I can't find where one of those articles references London Gazette. stephen-stratford.co.uk is a personal webpage, I thought. Wolvereness 02:05, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The articles refer to the London Gazette, giving date and page no. in the text. DuncanHill 02:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

This may be my fault as well, but Wikipedia:Citing_sources & Wikipedia:Citation_templates may be of help. I didn't notice the statement of the journal. I'm going to go ahead and cite it myself and removed the {{refimprove}} Wolvereness 02:15, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, cool - thanks! DuncanHill 02:16, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I got it, hows that?Wolvereness 02:26, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Good work, thank you! DuncanHill 15:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

!

Hi! I wonderful, why You want delete my pages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artur9501 (talk • contribs) 08:16, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

They all had the same problem, no significance Wolvereness 08:19, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Shaver Tansportation Company

I was going to PROD this but you beat me to it. I think the creator should have a chance to beef it up a bit, and now he has it. I'll leave a message on his talk page (unless you beat me to it again) --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 23:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad you agree. I use TW, so things go faster and it auto-notifies. I didn't think speedy was the 'best' choice, you can tell with my comment in the talk page. -- Signed by Wolvereness^{t c} 23:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Leiper Canal

Hi Wolvereness, I'm the one who just finished writing the Leiper Canal article and posting it. Your tag about notability appeared almost instantly, before I had a chance to set up a Talk page for the Leiper Canal. I've been working on the whole system of Pennsylvania canals, of which the Leiper Canal is one of the tiniest parts. You can see the main Pennsylvania Canal page I created a couple of days ago; it has a complete list of the public and private canals in the state. My long-range goal is to write articles for each of the missing pieces. Some of the bigger pieces such as the Main Line of Public Works and the Pennsylvania Canal (Delaware Division) were already done by others, and I've done a couple of the missing bigger pieces like the Beaver and Erie Canal. The remaining pieces are admittedly smaller, but they are intended to complete the larger picture. If you agree that the Leiper Canal is important in this overall context, would you mind removing the notability tag. Finetooth 04:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Makes sense, you might want to add in a bit about the relation of the Leiper Canal to the Pennsylvania_Canal, which would make notability indisputable (at least in my eyes). You're doing a fine job from what I've seen. -- Signed by Wolvereness^{t c} 04:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Your idea is good, and I just now added a sentence linking the Leiper Canal to the larger system. Finetooth 18:18, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The Darkness

Hi Wolvereness,

I am a member of Wazap.com and would like to add a review for the Darkness according to the site's rankings. It is not marketing, I just like the site and consider its rankings to be as valid if not more so than the other ones listed. The site has a large international presence and I feel it should be able to be listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jameslionelprice (talk • contribs) 19:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Wazap is almost deleted (if that link is red, that means it's gone), as a non-notable commercial website. Adding reviews from Wazap should consider this. In addition, you should go to the talk page of whichever game you wish to add it to, and discuss it there. A review from Wazap can then in turn be declared non-notable and advertisement. I recommend establishing the notability of Wazap before going around adding any Wazap reviews. -- Signed by Wolvereness^{t c} 20:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I understand that you feel that Wazap is a non-notable commercial website and that you want to make Wikipedia a better place, but you are the only user who has questioned the validity of Wazap's postings on Wikipedia. As such, your deletion of my information only constitutes as your opinion of Wazap and not the fact that its a valid gaming site. If you can specifically point to Wikipedia standards instead of reasoning as to why the site should not be listed, it would be much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jameslionelprice (talk • contribs) 22:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability, there is 1 reference with NO COVERAGE, under those guidelines, it should be deleted. Verifiability as apposed to truth, Wikipedia:No_original_research, and maintaining Wikipedia:Neutral point of view may be of note. This policy does not deny that it's a "valid" site, just that it cannot be verified as notable. Someone contested it, so you and him/her should work together on establishing notability. If you can give reliable sources that cover the content, I will have no argument! -- Signed by Wolvereness^{t c} 05:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

try Good Archive Search for a start (you might want to try some other big names in there, and compare the size of the response). -- Signed by Wolvereness^{t c} 06:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that there is reference coverage for Wazap now on their page and therefore, have established notability. Would you take issue with my posting of the rating anymore? And if so, why? I'm merely trying to be comprehensive as I'm sure you are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.186.248.2 (talk) 20:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Nope, it sounds perfectly fine to post review(s) from Wazap -- Signed by Wolvereness^{t c} 05:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

George Cross outline page

Hi there, I've set up a skeleton for producing GC articles here. If you copy and paste the text into a GC article, then drop in the content, it will produce an article formatted something like Bennett Southwell. It will do as well for newly created or existing articles and I'll try to fit it into some of the existing ones. If you have any comments, additions or suggestions please add them to the page. I'm posting this onto the user talk pages of Nick mallory, DuncanHill, Wolvereness, RHB, Woodym555, Hammer1980,David Underdown and HeartofaDog. If any of you would like to change the skeleton, please go ahead and do so! I am fairly new to Wikipedia and have probably made some gross errors. If you want to discuss any of this (and have the rest of this group see your discussion) maybe we could discuss it on the talk page for the skeleton article? Best wishes, Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 09:43, 21 November 2007 (UTC)