User talk:Bearcat/Archive 8
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Bearcat. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Matany airport categorization
Hi Bearcat. Perhaps I'm confused about categorization. I have "Categories: East African airport stubs/ Ugandan building and structure stubs" showing at the bottom of the Matany Airport page. How is this uncategorized?
Cptmrmcmillan (talk) 09:44, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll work on it.Cptmrmcmillan (talk) 22:36, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Deletion Question ?
Hey, Can you let me know why the page "Vivienne Hu " is deleted ? What is the version of your resorted one ? The references are from New York Fashion Week official website. The updated version is different from the deleted version, many have been changed. Please reach out to me for an explanation and cancel the deletion please. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by LInda878988 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Christine Beaulieu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Le Nouvelliste. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
FYI, in future cases, withdrawing a nomination is ok even when other people have weighed in with delete !votes, but in that case you shouldn't close the nomination. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Alliance Entertainment
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Alliance Entertainment requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. SummerPhDv2.0 04:13, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Absolute Whores for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Absolute Whores is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Absolute Whores until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mr. Guye (talk) 18:14, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of 2022 Summer Youth Olympic Games
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as 2022 Summer Youth Olympic Games, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Legacypac (talk) 19:11, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Ellen White
Hi Bearcat! I agree that most individual vegetarians should not be included in the category "vegetarianism." However, Ellen White was one of the earliest and most influential, and is the reason why the entire Seventh-Day Adventist movement is know for promoting vegetarianism. Under the circumstances, do you think it is best to remove that category? Thanks for your thoughts. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 03:43, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the thoughts. I agree that random personalities who are vegetarian should not be included, although if I were setting the category criteria, thought leaders on the topic would be included. I would not have a problem with including the few dozen people more influential than White in the category, that seems a reasonable, but certainly including every vegetarian would be overkill. I would leave it up to the experts as to whether or not Lisa Simpson is a thought leader on eschewing meat.
Again, thanks for answering my question. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Help?
Can someone help out? An editor is deleting text that is footnoted to major media like the New York Times, and attracted an editorial by the New York Daily News. Because the editor calls it "minor"??? I don't want to fight with this person -- they are editing like someone who has a conflict of interest, and seem to have done this sort of thing before, and think its obviously better to have someone else look at it. Thank you very much. --199.102.168.8 (talk) 22:50, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Request on 08:23:52, 9 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Deels12
Dear Bearcat,
Apologies for my recent submission (new article for Close Counters) that didn't meet referencing guidelines, and thank you for taking the time to explain the problems. I'm not sure what happened with the triple j referencing as it worked when I checked before submission, but I'll go back and re-do those links.
I'm a bit unsure as to how the best way is to proceed with referencing this new page, as I used this band page [1] as a model to some extent. I'm aware that there are referencing problems with this, but it primarily uses blogs as citations as I did for my page, and yet it's been accepted for publication?
Many thanks, Delia Deels12 (talk) 08:23, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for cleaning up the mess
Re:Desktop/2016-02 Goldsmiths/DAO Disability Arts II Goldsmith's 9690.JPG- Thanks for the needed deletion - glad to know you are around. -- Clem Rutter (talk) 00:09, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Declined submission of Draft:Joseph Swensen
Hello, Bearcat. @Balquhidder2013: asked me to take a look at this article, and I would like to clarify your review comment please.
When you declined this submission, your comment was: "Almost every single reference here is either a primary source or an invalid circular reference to another Wikipedia article..." However, when I followed up on these references I found that they had been entered wrongly - every single one showed that the author was Joseph Swensen (the subject of the article), but that is wrong. I have corrected the references so they now show correctly, and to my eye they now seem to support his notability.
But things are rarely that simple, so I would be grateful if you would take a quick look at the revised article and comment on whether this has addressed your concern, or is there something else that needs to be done... --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:59, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Biased 'Lucy DeCoutere' Edit
You have blocked my attempt to add details to the Ghomeshi trial regarding the love letter read in court by DeCoutere confirming her condoning Ghomeshi's actions. You have done this under the guise of 'Violations of the biographies of living persons policy: persistent addition of Ghomeshi-related trial content not relevant to her biography'. So, it is relevant to Lucy DeCoutere's biography that she accused the defendant of abuse yet it is not relevant that evidence was brought to light which invalidates her accusation? Were you not biased and enforced the biographies of living person policy evenly and consistently, you would remove the content related to the Ghomeshi trial in it's entirety. You are not acting from a neutral point of view and should face judgement by other wikipedia members.Whateverthrowaway (talk) 01:07, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Request on 13:07:13, 11 February 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Prinshukr
Prinshukr (talk) 13:07, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
as per your instruction i have made adequate change in citation and references https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Authorspress
please look into
Unprotection: Expiration date. Mo
- For the millionth time: provide an actual reason why unprotection is needed — the specific details of a specific edit you want to make to the article — or it's not happening. Bearcat (talk) 17:02, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
17:20:14, 11 February 2016 review of submission by Armand Cucciniello
Hello Bearcat. thank you for your recent feedback to my Wikipedia article on the artist Andreá Cassar. I will find more 3rd party information to course the story properly. However I notice there are a fair number of articles on Wikipedia that do NOT meet the standards on which, for example, my article was rejected. A good example is "Bryan Rich." That article provides little to no information about the subject, uses sources that only provide context to the person's name (and nothing about the person) --- however, the article still exists in the wiki. Why is this? Armand Cucciniello (talk) 17:20, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Change to speedy criteria WP:CSD#A9
Hi. Just a quick note to say that I have passed your proposal at WT:CSD to extend WP:CSD#A9 to cover discographies as it has an obvious consensus. This is now documented in the policy and templates, and I've created a new template {{db-discog}} that can be used as an alias to {{db-a9}}. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:20, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Deletion / Redirect -- Todd Wilcox (candidate)
Hi --
I take the point that a candidate for a nomination is not per se notable under Wiki rules. However, if someone like Todd Wilcox (not previously notable) wins the nomination of a major party for a major office (in this case, U.S. Senate), I would strenuously argue that this electoral win pushes him (or her) across the threshold into notability. The idea that a major-party nominee for U.S. Senate is not notable strikes me as absurd. Indeed, look at the precedent of Greg Orman, candidate for Senator from Kansas. Orman was an Independent -- he was never nominated by any political party. Yet he was the main challenger in a U.S. Senate race (Kansas 2014) and a page was approved for him in mid-August 2014, and survives to this day (despite his loss). The fact that voters will be looking to Wikipedia for reliable information about someone running for U.S. Senate should lead the Powers That Be to approve notability for any winner of a major-party nomination, as well as any significant Independent challenger. (You may define significant as you will -- Orman certainly qualified.) The Wilcox piece was intended to use independent sources to describe a new candidate for a major office in a large urban state -- and yes, he had not been notable previously (or no one had written a piece, anyway). I just think there should be some consistency concerning threshold of notability for political candidates. Thank you as always. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GaryWMaloney (talk • contribs) 21:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Your remarks to me re creation of page for Mary Bettwy
I was taken aback, not so much by the combative tone of your response, and not so much by your conclusory statements, but by the apparent gender and racial bias of your analysis. I did a quick search on Google and discovered that, indeed, much has been written about Gender bias on Wikipedia. Your analysis of whether my grandmother (whom I never knew) was notable was made without any consideration of the historical context and without ever taking into consideration that she was a Hispanic female (the first to be elected to office in Arizona), living in a very male-dominated world, especially in southern Arizona in the 1930s. Even one of your colleagues expressly dismissed these factors as unimportant (again, by pure fiat). You also cite the conflict of interest policy, which I understand, but which is insensitive to the fact that the historical accomplishments of women and minorities often went unnoticed by anyone but family members and the fact that it would be only the descendants (as in my case) who know, through oral histories, about the accomplishments. Evidence of such accomplishments is naturally scattered, circumstantial and hard to find. To discourage the descendants of an otherwise notable person from creating or editing in Wikipedia tends to favor a white-dominated history and works against females and minorities. In other words, the policy, as applied, appears to be sexist and racist. I have always defended Wikipedia as an excellent tertiary source, but I am now concerned that the lack of diversity among editors has resulted in a cultural bias that discriminates against both females and minorities. I do not know whether Mary Bettwy was notable, but I have lost confidence in Wikipedia’s definition of what is notable for females and minorities. Sbettwy (talk) 01:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
I wrote the above per instructions to seek assistance at "the reviewer's talk page," and you responded to me on my talk page (thank you). I replied to your response on my talk page, assuming you would rather have the discussion there. Sbettwy (talk) 23:29, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Apology
Bearcat, I (usually) edit logged in via a very powerful search engines. Sometimes I forget that stuff that pops right up on my screen, does not pop up on screens of people not blessed with the connections that I automatically access. I ought to have known that I was seeing through paywalls and that you always check before nominating articles for AFD. mea culpa.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:21, 15 February 2016 (UTC)