Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:52, 10 May 2009

WikiProject Films

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Misplaced Pages's film-related articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Films? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall quality of Misplaced Pages's film-related content. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. We also have a number of regional and topical task forces that you may be interested in joining as well. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! —Erik (talk • contrib) 14:50, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

The Kindly Ones

Wow you did a heroic job on the Kindly Ones. A quick glance leads me to say an excellent job. My one quibble is that with so many small edits, it is hard to hard to react or particpate as you go along. In any case a big bouquet, you really improved the article on an important book.--Joel Mc (talk) 13:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the Le Débat ref. I do read French, but hadn't seen it. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be on line and I am traveling during the next 5 weeks, mainly behind the Great Firewall of China, but will look it up when I get back to a library in June. Likewise, I will try to read the two pieces but may find it difficult to give much of a reaction before June.--Joel Mc (talk) 13:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure how to answer the question of references in other languages. I believe that there a certain resistance to that in general on Misplaced Pages--but maybe that happens when editors use a reference in language few know to justify a statement. One possible solution would be to see that the French references appear in the French Misplaced Pages version and the German etc. Then it might be useful to put a note in the English article that for those who read other languages, they might want to consult the references in the other language versions. Anyway, just an idea.--Joel Mc (talk) 09:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Encyclopaedia Metallum

Greetings. Since when there was a consensus in this discussion? 9x6 doesn't look like a consensus to me. Besides, some of those who wanted to delete the article were heavily biased against it, trying hard invalidate anything I came up with.

When I presented the following article as a notable references, two of them said that it didn't count, because the guy who wrote it is a member of the site. Encyclopaedia Metallum has almost 140,000 members. It's completely stupid to say that everyone who has an account there cannot write anything that can be considered as independent source. The member who wrote it cannot be considered an active member by any stretch of imagination. He barely used the forum and his only contribution to the database was to write two reviews out of more than 43,000.

When I firmly established the notability (see my last few posts in the discussion) of a magazine that printed an interview with the creators of the site (translation here), they said that the interview didn't count because it was "Self-promotion and product placement", which is completely absurd, since the magazine is 100% independent from Encyclopaedia Metallum, and the interviewer "only asked questions. That's trivial.", which looks like some rule invented by him. Since when interviews should be considered trivial if the interviewer only asks questions? Thanks. Evenfiel (talk) 01:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question could have been answered and resolved more quickly if you had used my message wizard. It's linked as "Talk" after my name and at the top of my talk page. Why not try it next time?

I'm happy with my closure, and I feel that it correctly represented the consensus of the discussion. Indeed, several of the "keep" arguments were straight out of WP:AADD. You're welcome to list at DRV. Stifle (talk) 13:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)