Notes and Sketches for Future Edits edit

mark-up edit

[[Image:Information.png|25px]]

[[Image:Stop hand.svg|left|30px]]

Collapsible sections edit

{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" |- ! style="background-color: #f2dfce;" | {{{1|{{{reason|section declaration}}}}}} |- | style="text-align:center; font-style:italic;" | {{{2|section declaration}}} |- | style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" | Stuff to squish. |}

Collapsed archive
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Thrilling, eh?

Punctuation edit

“ ‘ ’ ” – …

Especially useful guides edit

Help:Displaying a formula

Templates of note edit

Category:Speedy deletion templates

French edit

French Liberal School

AfD nomination notice edit

== AfD nomination of Page_Name_Here ==

[[Image:Ambox warning pn.svg|48px|left]] “[[Page_Name_Here]]”, an article that you created, has been nominated for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|'''deletion''']], in the belief that it does not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. An explanation may be found at the start of “[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Page_Name_Here]]”. So long as you are not otherwise subject to a block or ban, your opinions on the matter are '''welcome''' at that same discussion page; also, you and others are '''quite allowed to continue editing the article''' to address these concerns. (In some cases, such edits may persuade those participating in discussion that the article should be kept.) —~~~~

Example: edit

“Gutbuster”, an article that you created, has been nominated for deletion, in the belief that it does not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. An explanation may be found at the start of “Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gutbuster”. So long as you are not otherwise subject to a block or ban, your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you and others are quite allowed to continue editing the article to address these concerns. (In some cases, such edits may persuade those participating in discussion that the article should be kept.) —SlamDiego_←T 17:39, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Lauren Grandcolas (next nomination) edit

Keep.
1. While WP:ONEEVENT cautions against articles on low profile people merely associated with one notable event, Ms Grandcolas is not low profile. Whether it should be the case or not, there is considerably more general interest (that is to say interest on the part of readers) directed at the people who placed phone calls from Flight 93 than on the nearly 3K other victims of 9/11. Indeed, googling provides evidence that there is more general interest in Ms Grandcolas than in some of the hijackers of Flight 175. (In past discussion, there were repeated attempts to dismiss general interest with by reference to WP:DEMOCRACY, so I remind everyone now that WP:DEMOCRACY is a policy about weighing the opinions of editors per se, not a policy to refuse to answer the questions of readers.)
2. It has repeatedly been argued that an article about one Flight 93 caller should be deleted on the grounds that others have been deleted. (On at least one occasion, an editor used this excuse to turn an article into a redirect immediately after it had survived AfD!) However, not only does thisargument violate WP:WAX, but examining the AfDs of some of these articles show that some were given the bum's rush. For example, the article on Edward P. Felt was deleted with just 3 editors having expressed an opinion. If I had more time and energy to devote to the issue, I would push for deletion review in some of these cases.

—~~~~

Principles edit

It is not acceptable when contributors are not given what they were promised in exchange for adding value to Wikipedia. When administrators and other persons granted special status act contrary to Wikipedia's representations of its ethos (for example as expressed in its various statements of policy), the result is that contributors are not given what they were promised. —~~~~~