User talk:S Marshall/Archive

Welcome!

Hello, S Marshall, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  AdamBiswanger1 13:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

'Fuchs in der Mythologie'

Answering here, since the page is now gone: the whole page was a copyright violation, from a couple of different websites, so I've deleted it instead of transwiki'ing it to the German wikipedia. Just letting you know since you commented on the talk page. - Bobet 17:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nyrva Dragonrhyne

You say you are not a meanie. But you joined your friends in a "mob" hunt on my article before I could finish it. there are so many admins against it, nothing I can do will save it. I am not sure how to put more info that these monsters will find acceptable.

To me you're all just hatemongers.

But at least good old "Neo" will have some new material to do art with. He said he's already drawing a pic of Wikipedia with a nazi symbol on it trying to "erase" his character "Nyrva".

He pointed out to me a lot of things on here (like the movies I mentioned) that have no real notability either, but because they are big time "Hollywood" and not an underground artist, they can get ON this site.

You have a LOT of stuff that isn't "notable" on here.

In fact, I saw a news byte a year ago how some kids got in trouble at their school for using Wikipedia, and the info they used was not correct. So your site is nothing more than an elitist club that only allows what you people who RUN it say.

Prove me wrong! If this article is deleted, you make a martyr out of me, and make me RIGHT!

I won't bother trying to get other stuff on your elitist site if you erase this!

Have fun, haters!!

(sorry but you and your friends on that "discussion" page are all just haters to me!)

Witaku (talk) 01:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Help Life from the Inside

Please tell me if it makes any sence to continue and put work in this article by reading and answering my talk on the talk page of the article. I would be most greatful to you!! --Bufi (talk) 17:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Looking now, mate.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 17:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

An admin seems to have deleted the article before I had finished editing the talk page. I think that was overzealous.

If you're struggling to write the article in English, please write it in German and I will translate it for you.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 17:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, your offer is more than friendly. My question is: do you have any hopes that I can ever proof the importance of the article? I have very bad experiance in that, that´s why i really stopped whriting in the german Wikipedia,--Bufi (talk) 17:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

This was the entire article, minus sections for "plot", "cast list", and a link to the site itself: "LFTI is a small internet-series started out in 2007. It got some attention on video-sites like YouTube and made it to many other video sharing websites. It has come up with seven episodes so far.". That fails to assert notability per WP:WEB and is subject to speedy deletion. We get dozens of articles on peoples' YouTube videos every day -- we would be overwhelmed if we had to leave them all posted for extended periods. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

"we would be overwhelmed" i take for an ironic remark? I think your answer helps me to wait until "Life from the inside" gets more attention in different media so by that I could proove importance. But if it never does I will always "Die Finger davon lassen" (Let it Be). Thank you very much for all the help you gave me, of course, I made it all too fast. It was only a trial and I admit that I know, that Wikipedia doesnt like trials. Greetings to Brittain, --Bufi (talk) 18:01, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Was there a hangon template on this article? And did the author explain he was having trouble with English and was looking for help? And did he actually come to me for help? And did you delete the article before I could provide it?

I'm afraid, NawlinWiki, that you've just bitten a newbie so you get the trout. :P Should have userfied rather than deleting if you couldn't possibly hang on another minute.

I do agree that on the basis of my brief look around with a search engine, the topic failed WP:SNOW, though.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 18:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Paul Byrd aka Pigface

Comment le défi vous retournent le mon édite sur l'article de Paul Byrd?!?! Vous avez-aucun sens de décence? L'homme ressemble à un porc et chacun l'appelle Pigface. N'importe qui avec la moitié d'un esprit peut voir cela. Cessez l'éditer-lutte. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Faethon Ghost (talk • contribs) 15:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Il faut faire attention à ne pas sembler insulter Paul Byrd parce que WP:BIO.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 17:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to yank your chain

Please don't americanise British English where you find it. This is an international site, and there's very clear Wikipedia guidance on the matter.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 01:54, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that -- I didn't realise! I will endeavour to preserve the local colour of each article as I find it in the future. :-) Cheers! --Alan Cano (talk) 02:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Wait before Deleting

The article on Norma (female name) is now into a deletion notice, but instead of deleting the section entirely, somehow can somebody merge Norma (female name) under Wikipedia article Norman (name) rather than deleting Norma, because the female name Norma has connections through Norman. Also, sections require information and time and blossoming to actual articles. Neurotic heart (talk) 17:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

The Quiet Earth (film)

Dear S. Marshall, I would like to ask you if you could please be so kind as to look on that Article: I had written a section on "The interpertation of the end" that you can find in the history – Interpretation of the ending – just before it was completely removed now with the remark, that it is original research. I must admit, it is. And I know – and hate - this discussion on Wikipedia. Just could you take a short look, if you agree, that my whole passage must be deleted, just because it seems to be OR? That would be very friendly of you! --Bufi (talk) 18:51, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

THANK YOU

WikiThanks

S Marshall, thanks for taking the time to comment on Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Final_adoption_as_a_guideline. I am glad you also see how important this guideline will be, since it will determine the inclusion or exclusion of television character and television episodes. I agree with you, SoWhy, AfD hero, MichaelQSchmidt, and Townlake that it is "unnecessary rule-creep". Ikip (talk) 14:49, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Every Sperm Is Sacred

Thanks for your kind words! Drmies (talk) 20:07, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Richly deserved.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 21:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

• Hey, I'm sorry we don't see things the same way on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom: I actually meant what I said there--but I do enjoy a bit of honest and courteous disagreement every now and then. Take care, Drmies (talk) 15:14, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

It's no problem! Nice to be disagreed with so respectfully.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 15:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject

Hi S (if I may ;)),

I think that such a proposal would serve WP well. I've never been involved with a WikiProject, and don't rightly know how to go about it. How would we? We could write up a draft proposal/guideline, and put that up there somewhere? And do you know if they can be speedied? I didn't find that at WP:CSD, but I also didn't see where it says that a book can't be speedied (which was mentioned in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Urban bible). One more thing: you mentioned trade journals, and WP:JOURNAL focuses explicitly on academic journals; WP:MAGAZINE does not included "journals" at all. Where does a trade journal fall? No doubt the publisher would call it 'academic,' since that has a better reputation... Hey, thanks for the Wiki smile, and I look forward to more agreement. Drmies (talk) 18:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi D.  ;)

I've not been involved in a WikiProject either, so maybe we can learn together!

I've put together a draft essay that I'd like to refine. I was thinking that once we've tweaked the wording a bit, we could go to the talk page for WP:JOURNAL and ask for their thoughts on it too. If they like it, then we can ask where we should go with it next.

What do you think?--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 20:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Nice start, nice start. I have made a couple of suggestions, most of them small and one of them based in part on the link DGG provided in the AfD (the COI business--since ostentsibly these journals were added by the company that owns them). In the last sentence, I have made some modifications, hoping that I understood your meaning correctly. See what you think. Thanks for getting the ball rolling! Drmies (talk) 15:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Drmies. Your suggestions are definitely improvements!

I'll take it to the talk page for WP:JOURNAL, if you're happy? --S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 15:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks--you are too kind, as usual. But note at the bottom of my talk page: I've (well, we've) received an invitation to join in here. The big whigs are talking there ;). Anyway, let's see what they think. After looking at their conversation I've added a sentence to the first paragraph--see what you think about that. Thanks, and go ahead and post it, Drmies (talk) 16:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

You know, what's problematic is the terminology. Academic journals and trade journals are in many ways very different, and I've tried to bridge that gap by saying "peer-reviewed." I think those seven journals up for deletion were all peer-reviewed, but to which extent were they trade journals? (I'm trying to forestall objections from the "academic journals" forum, which may well object to what they might see as a lumping together of things that are too different.) As far as I'm concerned, I'm more interested in the practicality of a guideline, not a scientific assessment, and I think that's what you had in mind too. But again, let's see what they think. Drmies (talk) 16:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Good thoughts. Thanks for your support with this, and I'll do as you suggest -- I'll take it to that talk page.  :-) --S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 16:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Terms of Endearment

Yes, I can see why you want to keep the article. You believe it is a page that is appropriate to be included in the encyclopedia. The AfD that resulted in a merge was not overturned at DRV, and so still stands. seresin ( ¡? )  20:49, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm a bit perplexed by that, to be honest. My understanding was that when there's no consensus on a DRV, the article would be re-listed on AfD. Will that not be done?

I feel as if I'm confronted with an un-challengeable fait accompli following what I see as Secret's blatantly incorrect decision.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 20:58, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles are shortly relisted at AFD after a DRV if the DRV directly mandates an AfD, or, sometimes, if the DRV is closed without prejudice toward another AfD nomination. (That is what happened in this case after DRV #1) No consensus closures do not automatically result in a new AfD. You may feel that Secret's closure was incorrect, but your venue for challenging, DRV, did not find consensus for that opinion. seresin ( ¡? )  21:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

So would it be true to say that I have (a) a consensus to keep the article, (b) a small majority in agreement with me at the DRV, and yet (c) an unchallengeable fait accompli that things will be done as Secret has mandated, in the sense that there's nowhere else to take it?

If so, I find that incomprehensible and extremely frustrating.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 22:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Meh. On reading Secret's long and controversial history, your own historical position on this article and the amount of drama that's gone on with it... forget it. I do think you're in the wrong but it isn't worth fighting over. :-)--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 01:11, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: proposed deletion of Sindhi ethnicity

I am continuing the discussion that started on the talk page of the above article.

You suggested that I ask for mediation in the dispute with User:Skatergal. I have already done this. If you look at her talk page you will see that two admins have asked her to come to the table, but she has ignored them. As long as this discussion does not take place, the main bone of contention (Sindhi people) will remain unresolved and protected. In turn, she will probably continue to create POV forks like this one.

Your vote was for a merge, but that cannot happen until the other article is unprotected, which is not going to happen until a discussion begins. I could get into an edit war here, but really don't feel like it. Finally, I don't feel comfortable taking the extreme step of asking for her to be banned, because she clearly is much more knowledgable on the subject than I am.

Since you stopped by, I thought I would Shanghai you and ask for an opinion. What would you do under the circumstances? Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 00:52, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd take it to mediation, and if that failed, I'd take it to arbitration.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 13:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

our brilliant essay on journal notability

Hmm...not much response to our contribution, is there? What do we do, if anything? Take care, Drmies (talk) 03:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I guess we could begin to cite it in deletion discussions? That might attract comment! --S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 08:19, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Haha, yes--and I should try plugging my own scholarship the same way! Oh wait, I do that already. Today I advertised the bacon explosion to a class full of Southerners. Alright then, see you at AfD! Drmies (talk) 22:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

While still in fresh memory

Hi S Marshall regarding Level bomber. The book "The bomber war : Arthur Harris and the Allied bomber offensive, 1939-1945" by Robin Neillands - is it the 2001 edition and at what pages are the citations? What is the name of the Price book from 1980? One of the google sources is refering to high-level bomber ie bombs released from high altitude. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 22:35, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Hiya! Yes, this is the 2001 hardcover, ISBN 079155637. I'll add page citations directly to the article. The Price book is "Aircraft Versus Submarine: The Evolution of the Anti-Submarine Aircraft, 1912 to 1980", published 1980 under ISBN 0710600089 but on looking at it again, I don't know what I was thinking in citing it; I should have stuck to Neillands for the Battle of Britain and used Price as a reference for the naval stuff.

I need to go over that article again paying careful attention to the citations, which I can do today.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 23:21, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

You and I both began our Wiki careers in 2006 so I hate to say this - when wikifying e.g. machineguns [1] it's enough to write [[machinegun]]s instead of [[machinegun|machineguns]]. --Regards, Necessary Evil (talk) 23:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Alternative to notability

Hello! I am working on an objective alternate to notability in my userspace. Please read User:A Nobody/Inclusion guidelines and offer any suggestions on its talk page, which I will consider for revision purposes. If you do not do so, no worries, but if you wish to help, it is appreciated. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 01:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for thinking of me. I'll reply there.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 02:01, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chaotics

Hi there. Can you please check out my response at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chaotics? NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 23:04, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

• Sure.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 14:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Julie Ferrier

A tag has been placed on Julie Ferrier 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 a person or group of people, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Rtphokie (talk) 18:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Ya, would you read WP:DEMOLISH please? One minute after the first edit is a bit much.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 18:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Julie Ferrier, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Rtphokie (talk) 19:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Julie Ferrier

A tag has been placed on Julie Ferrier 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 a person or group of people, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Rtphokie (talk) 19:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Julie Ferrier

If you wish to continue editing this page and possibly bring it to a notable point, please follow the instructions displayed by the db tag and add {{hangon}} to the page rather than removing the db tag.--Rtphokie (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Gee, thanks for all the templates! Please read the message at the top of this page and then stop doing it. Thank you.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 19:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Templates are very commonly used. They ensure people are consistently notified of problems.--Rtphokie (talk) 19:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)