User talk:Ged UK/Archives/2013/April
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Ged UK. 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. |
The Signpost: 01 April 2013
- Special report: Who reads which Wikipedia?
- WikiProject report: Special: FAQs
- Featured content: What the ?
- Arbitration report: Three open cases
- Technology report: Wikidata phase 2 deployment timetable in doubt
The Signpost: 08 April 2013
- Wikizine: WMF scales back feature after outcry
- WikiProject report: Earthshattering WikiProject Earthquakes
- News and notes: French intelligence agents threaten Wikimedia volunteer
- Arbitration report: Subject experts needed for Argentine History
- Featured content: Wikipedia loves poetry
- Technology report: Testing week
Talkback
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Rao Ravindra (talk) 18:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Rao Ravindra (talk) 18:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I read it. The issue is not censorship, and I don't doubt for a moment that main thrust of the content you want included will be in the future, but of edit warring. Repeating and repeating, especially when your edits are in conflict with WP:UNDUE, is not acceptable. GedUK 19:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
List of american rappers
That article is literally exactly the kind of thing Wikipedia doesn't have - unencyclopedic, impossible-to-maintain lists. We already have a category that serves the same purpose (Category:American rappers), but is dynamically updated, avoids piles of redlinks and isn't a page 100 miles long that will inevitably be orphaned. Also, we already have List of hip hop musicians so this article would seem entirely redundant. But I suppose a simple merge/redirect does the same trick. :) polarscribe (talk) 15:42, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not suggesting this is a good list, a list we need, or anything like that. Categories and lists have always lived side-by-side. But there's no CSD criteria that fits it; there's no CSD policy reason that the list can't stay, so I couldn't delete it. Sorry!
- And, of course, I think you've identified the solution; redirect/merge it to a better list :) GedUK 11:37, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
List of fastest production cars
Hi - can you keep the lock on the article pending the outcome of Guinness' determination of what constitutes the fastest production car. See the discussion on the articles talk page. NealeFamily (talk) 05:21, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 15 April 2013
- WikiProject report: Unity in Diversity: South Africa
- News and notes: Another admin reform attempt flops
- Featured content: The featured process swings into high gear
Can you extended semi-protection time? There have been reverts lately mainly due to either unsourced content or content disputes this month and last month. --George Ho (talk) 18:38, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- Well, the issues you've had recently won't go away with protection, as it's already protected. If problematic edits start from IPs after protection is over, we can reinstate it, but I don't want to extend it unnecessarily. GedUK 10:42, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Los Mismos Para Toda La Vida
THANK YOU MAN that's how I wanted it to look in the first place but I couldn't do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.65.116 (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- No worries. GedUK 11:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 22 April 2013
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Editor Retention
- News and notes: Milan conference a mixed bag
- Featured content: Batfish in the Red Sea
- Arbitration report: Sexology case nears closure after stalling over topic ban
- Technology report: A flurry of deployments
I think this is a subpage of Talk:Ceiling effect, which is the talk page of ceiling effect, rather than the talk page of article namespace Ceiling effect/workpage. Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:10, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
- Possibly, yes, but he said he didn't need it anymore. It all seems like a weird way of working anyway. GedUK 21:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 22:35, 25 April 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Pussy
I agree about the decline - the article is about a drink not a company (in theory, at least), so A7 can't apply (and was putting a note on the talk page before declining myself). I don't know if you noticed, but the three refs are in fact one. They all go to The Guardian. I've tried to remove the Pussy and Metro ones, but seem to be having a problem (I always have problems with inline citations - when doing quick rescues, I just stick them at the bottom and leave them for the gnomes...). Peridon (talk) 12:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- yeah, it's dancing on the boundary between drink and company really, but whichever, it's notable enough for A7. I've fixed the ref (i think). GedUK 13:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- I have never used cites like this before, so was playing with them. The drink is the sole/main product of the company, so the two seem interchangable. Note I am not connected with them.Martin451 (talk) 13:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- No, I've not seen cites done like that, though it makes plenty of sense actually. I didn't think yuo were connected with them ;) GedUK 13:23, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- I have never used cites like this before, so was playing with them. The drink is the sole/main product of the company, so the two seem interchangable. Note I am not connected with them.Martin451 (talk) 13:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Reply : Speedy deletion declined Of Mahabharat (2008 TV series)
Are You Dumbo Or Something The Meaning For Deletion Was Clearly Stated That This Show Was Just Projected To Come But Was Scraped And Never Came And According To CSD G6 This Page Was Not Created Ambitiously And Was Even Not Required To Be Put Up So It Meets With Words "deleting pages unambiguously created in error." As This Show Never Went On Air On TV So How Can You Not Say That "Unambiguously Created Page In Error" And It Become AFD Or Even Though If It Meets Any AFD That Delete Page According To That And Not To Remove The Deletion Request 124.125.72.177 (talk) 10:29, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- Firstly, there's no need to insult me.
- Secondly, there's no need to Use Capital Letters On Every Word.
- Thirdly, whether it was actually made into a film is irrelevant. The CSD criteria is about whether it made a credible claim to notability, which as it is sourced, it clearly does.
- Fourthly, the page was not created in error; clearly it was intended to talk about a future film, and had sources provided. If you actually read criteria G6 you'd understand what the criteria means. GedUK 12:22, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Artice Writing Problem
Dear Admin When I Am Writing About A Famous Person In wikipedia. Wikipedia Is Not Accepting My Article its saying i am writing about my self Or My Biography but its not true i am not writing about my self i am writing about another famous person whose significance is important and genuine to be included in wikipedia my article page is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Sourabh_Kumar please verify that page and respond to me writing about a genuine person whose significance is important is the policy of wikipedia and only that i am doing but then also wikipedia is removing my article its worst you should accept it only the thing is i am not able to do citing and reference please give me the tutorial of citing and reference hope you will verify that page --Sourabh242 (talk) 07:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hi there. You should probably contact Bbb23 (talk · contribs) who deleted it. The critical issue is why is this person, and it can be you, notable? The notability guidelines set out what this means; essentially it need external sources that talk about the subject. In this case it's likely to be newspaper, internet or TV/radio reports.
- Citations are pretty easy; the simplest way is to just put the link in text, like this [http://www.example.com]. You can also use more complex formatting called 'inline citations' to make it display in a reference section at the end. You can look at this help page to see more about this.
- I hope this helps! GedUK 12:33, 29 April 2013 (UTC)