Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:49, 9 November 2007

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20

This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

AFD determination

Could you please give a ruling on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Eponimous it would appear relatively straight forward - no-one else seems interested in the debate and I was wondering if someone could close the matter for me. Thnx Dan arndt 08:46, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Block durations

Whilst i do not agree with his actions, i think like a 48-hr block would have been more appropriate, but i trust your judgement, and i didnt look at all of the "incidents". It sucks to be an admin at times like these. Obviously, i do recall him engaging in some "bad activities" but under the blocking policy i dont think hes ever like wrongfully accused someone of vandalism. Then on the other hand, you could claim it was disruptive, and well we all seem to think hes done that before. I think to get the issue across a 48-hr block would have been enough, but 7 days isnt excessive. Im not going to pursue the matter, because if i were in your position, i wouldnt like it. You are doing what you think is best, and the community trusts you. Twenty Years 15:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Not to butt in, but I looked at the warnings and the editing diffs from the new users. As an independent (non-Australia projects) editor, those warnings were indeed disruptive. Considering the user in question, I think the block was completely justified. Unfortunately, based on my past interactions with Auroranorth, I doubt it will be enough. IvoShandor 15:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

In no way did i say that they werent. A block is justified and there is no doubt about that, its the length that was the issue. Twenty Years 15:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:Cricket articles

Hi, I just noticed that a template you created, Template:Cricket articles, is unused and appears to be abandoned. I've marked it as deprecated, meaning it'll be deleted in two weeks' time if nobody objects. If there's a reason to keep it please leave a note at Misplaced Pages talk:Deprecated and orphaned templates and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. Thanks. Bryan Derksen 09:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. —Moondyne 09:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Bradman graph

Yes, my chart could easily mislead I suppose. I don't mind either way which is used. Perhaps it's a good idea to bring it up at either WP:CRICKET or at Talk:Donald Bradman to see what the community think. Thanks for letting me know! The Rambling Man 10:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

?

My curiosity a few weeks back made me take a drive out Chidlow, Western Australia, and I can report that the site is a vacant paddock, and despite the impression given in the article, it is a planned community only - they have geunuinely done more than that in their dealings with the mundaring shire and other bodies - it mightnt show in the paddock though :) - you should have called in!  :| I could have given you an off wiki version of it all :( SatuSuro 06:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Robert Young (longevity claims researcher)

Why am I here? Because I respect your opinion. And in regards to this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Robert_Young_%28longevity_claims_researcher%29

I see it as a case already for 'deletion review.' Why? Because I'm being judged on being an 'academic,' which is not the current claim to 'notability.' I claim to be notable as an expert on the world's oldest people, which has been recognized through Guinness World Records, BBC, CNN, etc.

Now, let me say this: the very field of gerontology is 'fairly new'. The Gerontology Society of America only started in 1945. The very gerontology department at Georgia State University only started in 1973. Further, I find it incredulous to judge me based on 'academic' accomplishment, for several reasons:

1. I was well-known BEFORE I enrolled in the current program. I am a pioneer. One of my classes had an article with me in it.

2. The field I'm in is very new for academia, but is primed for growth. A search for the word 'supercentenarian' in Academic Search Premier shows that all nine articles date to the 2000's. And while there were a few mentions prior as 'super-centenarians' in the 1970's, that earlier movement didn't really take off. This one is. In the past seven years, the governments of major countries such as the USA, France, etc have moved to fund research in this area.

To be fair, OK, if this article is deleted, it's not the end of the world. But if every biography in the English Misplaced Pages were held to this standard being employed here, half would be gone. Guitarists in minor rock bands, minor college football players, etc are littered across Misplaced Pages. And to claim 'local fame' when I'm cited internationally is really unfair.Ryoung122 15:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)