This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Geo Swan (talk | contribs) at 11:35, 11 May 2008 (→Could you please explain more fully?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 11:35, 11 May 2008 by Geo Swan (talk | contribs) (→Could you please explain more fully?)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Request for The Stinger Report Deletion
This is the second time that some one has just turned up made a sweeping statement, then asked for Deletion. We entered this Page after a number of Wiki sites used information or sources from The Stinger Report - I can not see how creating an entry is not going to promote ANY service or business. Though I do not see a order for deletion from the Computer Games magazine entries or the other Newsletters? Is there a specific area of this page that could be changed that would not be seen as claimed promotion - or was this comment just made as a simple sweeping statement rather than a way to be constructive. We have done EVERYTHING asked to change alter or add to made this site suitable! Stingerreport (talk) 12:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Sally Morningstar
Please see my reply to your statement "many books but they all appear to be self-published or from small, non notable presses". Actually, her books ARE from notable presses, and as far as I can see, NONE of them are self-published. You'll find descriptions of and links to information about these notable presses on that page. In all fairness, if that is your argument, you should reverse your vote. Rosencomet (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- I still don't see any notable presses. Were any published by a company like St. Martins, Penguin, Ballantine, Random House? KleenupKrew (talk) 11:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Tim Eyman.
Sure I will love to supply some references to critisim of Tim Eyman. Tim Eyman is probably the most controversial figure in the entire state. --8bitJake (talk) 21:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- Jake, I don't doubt that he may be but criticism of a living person has to be specific and sourced. "Some charge he uses media manipulation and scare tactics" is never acceptable in a biographical article because it does not cite who says this, nor does it refer to anything specific - "media manipulation and scare tactics" could mean anything. While this sort of wording may have been agreed upon in the past, Misplaced Pages is really tightening the standards for biographies of living persons because of a number of legal concerns. By all means please do help provide sources and clean up the article, it can only improve it. The article has several other problems but I only hit the one that was most obviously in need of immediate attention. KleenupKrew (talk) 21:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Could you please explain more fully?
Is there any way you could see your way clear to explain more fully why you expressed a delete for Toufiq Saber Muhammad Al Marwa’i?
There are all kinds of different ideas as to what is notable. I think the wikipedia project would work best if we were prepared to try to engage in dialogs over our different interpretations.
Yes, I know some people think their view of what is notable is so "obviously" correct that no explanations are necessary. Personally, I don't believe in anything so obvious explanations are unnecessary. I am very sorry to note that some people take requests for explanations of what they regard as too obvious to require an explanation as some kind of personal attack.
Please don't consider this request a personal attack.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 03:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Is there any evidence he was a major Taliban figure? The article says he was a cook. Has he been a party to any precedent-setting U.S. court case? I don't see anything there either. There is nothing at all to indicate enough notability for his own article. KleenupKrew (talk) 11:54, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Rumsfeld, and other senior members of the Bush Presidency claimed that all the Guantanamo captives were "the worst of the worst". To my way of thinking that means any captive who unquestionably faced allegation that supported the claim they were one of the "worst of th worst" merits coverage. And, I think it means that any captives who faced allegations that may not measure up to the label "worst of the worst", like possibly Towfiq, also merits coverage. When a guy accused of a serious crime turns out to be an innocent victim of mistaken identity I suggest this is at least as significant as someone turning out to be established to have committed that serious crime. Geo Swan (talk) 11:35, 11 May 2008 (UTC)