This is an archive of past discussions. 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
I screwed up, just to say hello, or anything else! I won't bite! I have a few requests that I hope you'll respect while posting here:
Regarding COII appreciate your vigour in trying to establish good practice at Wikipedia. WP:COI is a guideline, however, not a policy, and its adherence is in no way required. The term "conflict of interest" typically implies a monetary gain and having an employer, as the article mentions. The fact that I am a Baha'i doesn't in itself imply a COI, it's whether I fail to comply with policies, which I do. I contribute productively to articles, and just like Jeff3000, have often upheld policy of Wikipedia over what one could easily see as the best interests of the Baha'i Faith. The reasons you listed are irrelevant to establishing COI, and I think your assumption that I "feel strongly against homosexuality" is false, and its relevancy to my comment on the AFD discussion is a major red herring. I believe without doubt that the article on Unitarian Baha'ism does not meet notability and verifiability requirements, and I'll stand by that. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 08:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
General apologyFor the last several month 've been suffering from extreme insomnia. My doctor says it's from a combination of pain and stress. in the last few weeks I've averaged about 20 hours of sleep per week. If I seem irritable please forgive me. - Stillwaterising ( talk) 20:10, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pedophilia Article WatchPlease see the above page for a response to your query there. __ meco ( talk) 22:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC) another case of rescueing an article if you are interestedIt's one of my early articles and I never went back to it for a long time. Because of the discussion about deleting it I went ahead and cleaned it up allot. I'd be interested in how you see things having been experienced in the issues of rescuing articles.see A Practical Reference to Religious Diversity for Operational Police and Emergency Services Smkolins ( talk) 17:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
First off, if you mean "notability", then please say say "notability", instead of using a confusing and cryptic obscure acronym like "GNG"[sic] -- I clicked on Wikipedia:GNG, and I still have no idea whatsoever what "GNG"[sic] is supposed to stand for... Second, your deletion tagging doesn't provide any explanation as to what has changed since this article went through a formal deletion nomination and survived, and I'm removing it for that reason... AnonMoos ( talk) 16:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
":::are you aware of the difficulty of finding conventional sources in this sort of subject, where most material is published via mainstream routes? I agree they need to be sourced, and I am prepared to source them, but it takes me a week or so to deal with a single one of them, unless I drop everything else entirely. I think you;re being a little unfair to the possibilities of keeping these articles in WP. DGG ( talk ) 04:01, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion contested: Pandora's Box (BDSM)Hello Stillwaterising. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Pandora's Box (BDSM), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of notability, including being the topic of a documentary film and of newspaper coverage. Thank you. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 17:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Reverted change on page Stephan-Xavier TranoHello :) Thank you for your help with this page. I had suspended it for a few hours in order to review the biography paragraph and work about the need of references. But I can do it while the page is online actually. Sorry for any convience caused :) |
This is an archive of past discussions. 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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
I screwed up, just to say hello, or anything else! I won't bite! I have a few requests that I hope you'll respect while posting here:
Regarding COII appreciate your vigour in trying to establish good practice at Wikipedia. WP:COI is a guideline, however, not a policy, and its adherence is in no way required. The term "conflict of interest" typically implies a monetary gain and having an employer, as the article mentions. The fact that I am a Baha'i doesn't in itself imply a COI, it's whether I fail to comply with policies, which I do. I contribute productively to articles, and just like Jeff3000, have often upheld policy of Wikipedia over what one could easily see as the best interests of the Baha'i Faith. The reasons you listed are irrelevant to establishing COI, and I think your assumption that I "feel strongly against homosexuality" is false, and its relevancy to my comment on the AFD discussion is a major red herring. I believe without doubt that the article on Unitarian Baha'ism does not meet notability and verifiability requirements, and I'll stand by that. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 08:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
General apologyFor the last several month 've been suffering from extreme insomnia. My doctor says it's from a combination of pain and stress. in the last few weeks I've averaged about 20 hours of sleep per week. If I seem irritable please forgive me. - Stillwaterising ( talk) 20:10, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pedophilia Article WatchPlease see the above page for a response to your query there. __ meco ( talk) 22:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC) another case of rescueing an article if you are interestedIt's one of my early articles and I never went back to it for a long time. Because of the discussion about deleting it I went ahead and cleaned it up allot. I'd be interested in how you see things having been experienced in the issues of rescuing articles.see A Practical Reference to Religious Diversity for Operational Police and Emergency Services Smkolins ( talk) 17:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
First off, if you mean "notability", then please say say "notability", instead of using a confusing and cryptic obscure acronym like "GNG"[sic] -- I clicked on Wikipedia:GNG, and I still have no idea whatsoever what "GNG"[sic] is supposed to stand for... Second, your deletion tagging doesn't provide any explanation as to what has changed since this article went through a formal deletion nomination and survived, and I'm removing it for that reason... AnonMoos ( talk) 16:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
":::are you aware of the difficulty of finding conventional sources in this sort of subject, where most material is published via mainstream routes? I agree they need to be sourced, and I am prepared to source them, but it takes me a week or so to deal with a single one of them, unless I drop everything else entirely. I think you;re being a little unfair to the possibilities of keeping these articles in WP. DGG ( talk ) 04:01, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion contested: Pandora's Box (BDSM)Hello Stillwaterising. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Pandora's Box (BDSM), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of notability, including being the topic of a documentary film and of newspaper coverage. Thank you. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 17:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Reverted change on page Stephan-Xavier TranoHello :) Thank you for your help with this page. I had suspended it for a few hours in order to review the biography paragraph and work about the need of references. But I can do it while the page is online actually. Sorry for any convience caused :) |