Jump to content

User talk:Ju66l3r

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ju66l3r (talk | contribs) at 18:35, 24 October 2006 (→‎Speedy Tags). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics.
If you comment here, then I will respond here unless you ask otherwise. Thank you.

Archive
Archives


FEATS

Hi, thanks for looking at the new FEATS page. You're absolutely right - it has been composed by an insider, apparently the first one to take the trouble to do so. I have been involved in FEATS since 1988, as a competitor, served on the Steering Committee for many years, was the founder of the FEATS website in its present form and have myself headed up the organisation of three festivals in Bad Homburg. I think, therefore, that I'm well qualified to describe it objectively.

I'm not certain where you find neutrality a problem but guess that it's the opening sentence of 'The Participants'. It is a widely expressed and internationally accepted fact, supported by the opinion of everyone that I've ever spoken to in the field over more than 30 years that amateur dramatics is (and here I quote the introduction of the FEATS 1998 Antwerp programme) ...very hard work, but [is] also satisfying, rewarding and above all great fun. I therefore posed the rhetorical question of who would dedicate themselves to so much hard work without pay, followed by the answer as demonstrated each year in practice.

The article should, in my opinion, not be too dry but lightly amusing in order to convey to someone who does not know of FEATS the fun aspect of taking part, and I see nothing wrong in this formulation. I doubt that there will be any conflicting points of view, but let's see what happens.

And finally, I'd be grateful if you would point out the improper grammar usage, bearing in mind the European origin. This Brit thought he paid attention at school during English lessons but is still willing to learn.

The existence of this entry has been made aware to the FEATS Steering Committee who will, no doubt, be expressing their opinion to me quite soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muso55 (talkcontribs)

The fact that you are a founder/member/invested party makes you entirely unqualified to describe it objectively almost by the very definition of the word. You have provided absolutely no reliable sources to maintain any sense of verifiability, which is one of the 3 main tenets of Wikipedia. The storybook rhetoric chosen is unencyclopedic and that in itself is the problem. This is an encyclopedia, not an advertisement for the attitude of the fun aspects of FEATS. If this article is to remain, it should be redrafted AND sourced or I'll recommend it for deletion in its current state. Please also take a look at WP:AUTO to better understand why you shouldn't write about a group that you're a part of for neutrality issues. ju66l3r 15:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Tags

May I suggest that you check whether the person removing your tag is an admin before you restore it? Especially if you are going to leave them a message about it. --Spartaz 15:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "dpon.." user is not an administrator. I looked and can not find them at the full list. Since I had already had the tag removed by a non-adminstrator on the page, I was leary of meatpuppetry and other things. So, I looked for mikkalai on the list and did not see their name either. I have gone back and found it this time. Honest mistake in missing his name when I checked; I also looked at his userpage for this information but he does not carry the admin category which makes it next to impossible to tell what's going on with his level of access. He could just as easily tell me so, but thanks for your comments. ju66l3r 15:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May I also suggest that you review the WP:CSD. It seems that you are too liberal with db-bio tags. In the case of Tom Denton the artcle clearly had notability claims: 11 books published. I can understand that these books may well be garbage, but this is to be decided by voting, not by a single speedying admin. Anyway, thank you for your efforts to keep useless things off wikipedia. `'mikkanarxi 17:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks for the advice. I'll make sure it's a total non-assertion of notability that gets speedied and the rest get prodded or AfD nominations when they don't rise to WP:BIO. ju66l3r 18:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]