User talk:Davnor/Archive 1

WWW2

Hello. I noticed that you created the redirect Www2. I am trying to find out exactly why "www2" exists, as opposed to simply "www". I did not see anything that described it in the target article. Since you are a computer programmer, I thought you might know, and also explain why this information wouldn't be in the article. Thanks! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 12:33, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

notifying users of CSD tagging

Could you possibly lay a CSD notice on the creators of articles tagged for deletion? I believe it's at least as important to educate as it is to delete. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 20:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will do - thanks for the pointer.Davnor (talk) 20:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speed deletion of John King, USA

It's a legit article. Very little is known about it at this time. Hot Steam Valve (talk) 21:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the speedy deletion tag. Thanks! Davnor (talk) 21:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Iain Tyrrell Benson

Hello Davnor. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Iain Tyrrell Benson, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I think this asserts enough importance to pass A7 - which is a lower standard than WP:BIO - but feel free to PROD or take to AfD. I note that only one of the references actually mentions him, and that's a CV on the website of a university where he's a research associate. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 21:03, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - thanks for your help. Davnor (talk) 21:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have a Little Faith

I am relatively new in terms of Wikipedia, and am working on the page for Have a Little Faith (Mitch Albom book). I saw you tagged it with the note that it reads more like a book review. Could you please look again and see if the additions I have made have gone beyond the book-review point, and that tag can be removed -- or if I'm not there yet? Resnicoff (talk) 20:44, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a lot better. I've removed the "review" tag from the article. My only other suggestion is to break the content after the introduction into appropriate sections, for example:

• Synopsis
• Reception
• Inspiration

Thanks! Davnor (talk) 21:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Working on it now! Resnicoff (talk) 21:35, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Davnor i tell you oppose that I declined the speedy deletion of article Veena Pandey

hello Devnor i declined regarding the declining the speedy deletion of article of Veena Pandey as i think wikipedia is an Encyclopedia and it has importance for all people rather than a group. you are a experienced person know many things but you also have to take care of other countries also as you see in your wikipedia there are many Womens in Asian countires for them there should be information in encyclopedia but due to lack of knowledge of online information they dont have much information but in print media they have important presence like Mr. atal bihari Vajpayee Prime Minister of India , Indra Gandhi , Mahadevi Verma and other likewise Dr. Veena Pandey is also an important personality that's why we are adding about her as i know your online one of the aim of your encyclopedia is to give information about those where most popular encyclopedia dont have information as we know Veena Pandey is a Social worker ,Politician work for Women right she is popular in asian countries she is also member of Common wealth countries she is also Member of Parliament which is a important postion she is also Prominant literature writer who have written more than 46 books she is among top 100 womens of Asian countries . as we get more information we will add more contents you can also see about mahadevi verma in your encyclopedia and other person. we have respect for your site make it constant for us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumudd (talk • contribs) 11:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kumudd, thank you; I appreciate you taking the time to offer feedback regarding the speedy deletion of the Veena pandey article. However, I believe you have misinterpreted the reasons the article was tagged. I agree with you that Wikipedia should be open to articles about notable people, regardless of gender, country of origin, or any other arbitrary distinction. There are many such fine articles in Wikipedia, and more are added all the time. The key, however, is that the subject of an article must notable; as defined by Wikipedia policy, that means the article must include citations from credible, third-party sources establishing that the subject meets the requirements for notable biographies. Simply listing the reasons a person is notable is not sufficient; they must be supported by citations. Unfortunately, the Veena pandey article had no such sources, thus qualifying it for speedy deletion. If you would like to create a new article with sufficient citations to establish notability, you are welcome and encouraged to do so. Thanks again for your comments! Davnor (talk) 15:26, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Parke

Hi, There were two persons named Stephen Parke included in the one article with that name. I have tried to separate them with a disambiguation page, but really do not know how to. Parhaps you could help. Perhaps both articles should be renamed with a "Stephen Parke" page to serve them both. The two articles should be named perhaps "Stephen J Parke" and "Stephen A Parke". They are both scientists. I would be grateful for your help.Rick570 (talk) 21:59, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, I think there are a couple options:

1. Keep the two existing articles, Stephen Parke and Stephen A. Parke, adding a disambiguation link from Stephen A. Parke to Stephen Parke (there is already a link going the other way), and don't create a separate disambiguation page.
2. Create a new article titled Stephen John Parke or Stephen J Parke, move the entire contents of the Stephen Parke article to your new article, and make Stephen Parke a disambiguation page that links to Stephen A. Parke and the newly created Stephen John Parke or Stephen J Parke article.

Option 1 is easier, buy I'd be tempted to go with Option 2. Either way, if you need any help with the changes, let me know. Thanks! Davnor (talk) 23:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Goaling is getting deleted?

I wanted to let you know that I was going to temporararily use the 'Goaling' page to film for a training video. We are non profit and the hope is that this video will have an impact on the way we/systems help people help people with disabilities. I only ask for temporary usage of this page to film...Ideally I wanted to add an image after the 4 day window but that is not necessary. Please advise, ed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmais07 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I see that Kingpin13 has already left a message for you on your talk page that addresses your questions regarding the deletion of the Goaling article. I concur with Kignpin13's remarks, but if you have any further questions, please feel free to ask. Thanks! Davnor (talk) 16:59, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Supportlets

Hello Davnor. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Supportlets, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not blatantly vandalism or a hoax; try PROD or WP:AfD instead. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help. I agree - in hindsight the article does not seem rise to the level of CSD, so I have tagged the article for proposed deletion instead. Thanks! Davnor (talk) 13:52, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Knot, Inc.

I am working on The Knot, Inc. page. I am trying to make this as little like an advertisement as possible so if there are any additional recommendations you could make that would be very helpful.

Thank you, Kristi Serrano —Preceding unsigned comment added by KSerrano (talk • contribs) 18:16, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. The key is that the article should present its subject from a neutral point of view. In the case of a company, it must not promote the company in any way, but rather objectively describe what makes the company notable (see the notability guidelines for companies), supported by reliable, third-party sources. Some specific things to avoid:

• A press-release-style list of the company's accomplishments, acquisitions, products, etc., as in the History section of the article.
• Content taken directory from the company's web site, press releases, or any other material generated by the company, such as the Industry Background section. This particular section may also be a copyright violation, since it's an exact copy-and-paste of the original source.

In addition to the actual content of the article, there is one other potential problem. On the basis of the name you provided, it appears that you may have a direct financial connection with the company[1] [2], which would constitute a conflict of interest. Wikipedia's guidelines strongly discourage editing where a conflict of interest exists. One option to resolve this conflict is to request the assistance of neutral editors in updating the content of the article; an easy way to do this is to place the {{Request edit}} tag on the article's talk page. Davnor (talk) 19:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It wont let me edit the talk page to place the {{Request edit}} tag there. Can you please assist me. We are working on the other changes.

Thank you, Kristi

• Comment Kristi, I went ahead and refactored your comment above so that your post wouldn't show up as requesting an edit. Hope you don't mind. ThemFromSpace 23:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kristi, I've added the {{Request edit}} tag to the article's talk page. ThemFromSpace, thanks for the assist! Davnor (talk) 15:57, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War averted, un-Piping as well

Davnor, my apologies re your note for James P. O'Shaughnessy (disambiguation) The edit war was with myself, more like "friendly fire" I suppose. I was unaware of the 3-revert rule and failed horribly to make clean article postings on my first attempts. Also I failed to observe the piping rule on this disambiguation page. The former and latter also hold true for James P. O'shaughnessy (disambiguation). Though I'll have to wait to edit the piping there because I have exceeded the 3-rev/24hr on that page as well. Thank you for your help in this matter. All the best, Emerson2009 (talk) 14:36, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No apology needed. :-) Wikipedia has many policies and guidelines, so it's easy to accidentally violate one from time to time. I know I certainly have! That's where the collaborative nature of Wikipedia comes in, so we can all help guide each other. Regarding these particular articles, I've replaced the second one, James P. O'shaughnessy (disambiguation), with a redirect to the first. Generally, it's a good idea to avoid duplicating content whenever possible, whether it's a regular article or a disambiguation page. Judicious use of redirects is extraordinarily helpful in this regard. Happy editing! Davnor (talk) 15:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank You for adding on to The Capture Of Tucson. Zeuz101 (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :-) Davnor (talk) 15:14, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]