User talk:Goodraise/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

I need some help with people and editing

Hello, I'm having a bit of trouble with editing the Yumeiro Pâtissière page. I was wondering what should I do when an editor and her friends (or possibly the editor herself using different accounts) change the article to what I think is a less Wikipedia-approved version? I have already tried discussing the issue with the main person, but she hasn't replied to me yet. I know I should wait a while, but I have a weird hunch that she has most definitely already at least seen my attempts to discuss the article with her. So, I don't know what to do if she continually ignores me and tries to win at this so-called editing war... In addition, I have discovered that most of the new changes taking place on this anime page are the exact same descriptions that were taken from the yumeiropatissierewikia page. (I'm too lazy to give citations right now but let me know if you want them).

But, in my opinion as of right now, the article should no longer be B-rated as it is currently.

So... what should I do when I can't even have a good discussion on what needs to be edited on this article?

If you are interested in helping me (please), then please look at this talk page on YP.

Please and thank you!!!!!!!! Reeniereindeer (talk) 02:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello Reeniereindeer and welcome to Wikipedia,

I'll try to answer your questions in order. If an editor refuses to engage in discussion, then that's considered "disruptive editing". Usually, the best thing to do in such a situation is to ask for administrator help. You can do that at the administrators' noticeboard for incidents. Before you do that, however, make sure to read WP:DDE. Using different accounts ("sock puppets" as they are called on Wikipedia) is forbidden in most cases. Simply mention your suspicion about this in your report to the noticeboard. As for inserting material into Wikipedia that has been copied from another website, that is a tricker question. If the material is in the public domain or licensed in a way that is compatible with the licenses of Wikipedia (the CC-BY-SA 3.0 and the GFDL) and is properly attributed, then there's no problem. Only copyright violations aren't tolerated. As for the rating, don't worry about it. These ratings are mainly used to track progress in article development on a large scale and to help point local editors to what can be improved at an article. Whether a particular article is rated C- or B-class, isn't that important. I hope that answers your question. You can always come to me if you need help with anything. Also, there's usually lots of editors willing to help out at WT:ANIME. Goodraise 03:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

PS: I just noticed that there are messages for you at User:Reeniereindeer. It would seem the editor you are having a conflict with is confusing your user page with your talk page. Perhaps you didn't see the messages there? The same thing happened to me when I was new, because I didn't have my own user page watchlisted. Goodraise 03:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, yeah I saw those messages. They're not very constructive, honestly, but I tried to reply to them on the talk page of Yumeiro Pâtissière. Still haven't had a good constructive discussion going on. But anyway, thank you for your help, I really appreciate it. I honestly don't have the heart to deal with all of the energy and passion that this editor has, and I'd hate to burst her bubble for something that she strongly believes in as well. I think it's great that she's fighting for something that she wants, even if she uses the wrong means to do so. But to me, this is not really worth fighting for. If she wants the article to be what she wants, then that's fine, she (and her friends?) can have the article. What she's doing anyway is voicing the opinions that everybody, including me, has while watching the show. But obviously, that's bias --not very Wikipedia-like. Anyway, with that said, I don't plan on turning her in to the Sock puppetry noticeboard.

Thanks for everything!! I really really really appreciate it!!!! :) Reeniereindeer (talk) 06:24, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

"I don't plan on turning her in to the Sock puppetry noticeboard." - Don't think of it that way. Administrators simply have the means to enforce discussion and stop foul play. But never mind, I'll take a closer look at what is going on at that article myself. Goodraise 07:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

RfC on List of One Piece manga volumes?

I would suggest to have have an RfC on the issue as it seemed no one else wanted to really comment on that one way or another.陣内_Jinnai 22:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm in no hurry and I'm short on time right now. Therefore I'd rather not start more fires than I have burning already. It's probably unnecessary to mention this, but I'd appreciate it if you would refrain from opening an RfC on the matter as well. Thanks. Goodraise 22:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Serial Experiments Lain overhaul

Hey, just wanted to let you know that you've done well on getting Serial Experiments Lain more in-line with the current style. :) --Malkinann (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I came to work on that article after reading the FAR. Unfortunately, that review barely scratched the surface on what is wrong with that article. To think that this C-class article was promoted to featured status less than four years ago... Goodraise 17:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

The past is a different country, they do things strangely there. ;) --Malkinann (talk) 19:45, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Twitch Film reviews

Hi,

just to point to that FAC where that source is mentioned. In addition i saw that source in Summer Wars and in AfD. I would give it enough weight to be worth mention on a Wikipedia article. --KrebMarkt (talk) 20:42, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Nice find. I'll look into it, once I find the time. Goodraise 21:19, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Redline – Article name & DYK hook

Any idea? Either Redline (movie) or Redline (Anime)? I leave the choice to you and can you move it to mainspace. Thanks.

Meanwhile i'm trying to figure out the remaining loses ends and a DYK hook.

Did you know "that It took 7 years and 100,000 hand-made drawings to make Redline, Madhouse latest anime movie"

Did you know "that Redline, Madhouse latest anime movie, screened/toured over one year in anime festivals before opening in Japan on October 6, 2010"

I'm running out of brain fuel sorry :p

--KrebMarkt (talk) 20:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Done. Goodraise 21:19, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Update

Added not one but two Twitch Film reviews. It happened that those two reviewers got into screening in different anime festivals.

Put it into DYK discussion here.

Crossing fingers now ;) --KrebMarkt (talk) 21:29, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Redline (2010 film)

The DYK project (nominate) 18:05, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Not that bad

Around 4.4K views for this DYK. We did well after all. Cheers ;) --KrebMarkt (talk) 18:54, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Guess so. 'Twas even more than 5K, depending on how you count. Goodraise 19:18, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

List of Spice and Wolf episodes

Hey, long time no chat. I just finished rewriting List of Spice and Wolf episodes and was planning on submitting it to FLC. I do recall you giving me great advice last time I tried to run to FLC, so would you mind taking a look at it and telling me what you think? Thanks. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR^♯♭ 17:04, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Ye, it's been a while. You even "retired" at some point, didn't you? I'm not as active anymore myself, but sure thing: I'll look it over for you as soon as I find the time. Goodraise 21:29, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Haha, story's not quite as interesting as it sounds, and yeah, I can't sustain activity for as long as I could back then. Take your time, there's no real rush for FLC; I look forward to your review. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR^♯♭ 22:48, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

See Talk:List of Spice and Wolf episodes#Requested review. Goodraise 20:26, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm slow too... I've just attempted to clarify the plot as best I can. Hopefully it makes sense now. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR^talk 01:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

End of year awards (The Anime and Manga BarnSakura Award)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 18:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

	The Anime and Manga BarnSakura Award
	I award you this BarnSakura in recondition of your contributions to anime and manga articles during 2010 and because everyone deserves a little recondition every once in a while. ;) —Farix (t | c) 13:15, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Note: Replied to at WT:ANIME. Goodraise 16:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Just have to say (The Barnstar of Diplomacy)

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 18:01, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		For demonstrating an excellent response to a complicated discussion here. Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi. The diplomacy barnstar is typically "awarded to users who have helped to resolve, peacefully, conflicts on Wikipedia", but even though this one is not yet resolved, I am so impressed with your approach to it that I just had to say so. :) I like the way you cordially and collegially get to the point, providing the guidance that may be necessary to help another user engage in the project constructively. So, well done! <clap clap> I hope it proves successful. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 16:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Nice to feel appreciated once in a while. :) Goodraise 18:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Manga character list reference style

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 20:46, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I implemented the new style you showed of citing volumes in List of Naruto characters. It looks very good! Anyway, do you think it would work with the Fullmetal Alchemist lists as some volumes also contain Gaiden chapters apart from the regulars and do not use volume titles? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 02:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Glad you like it. Though I'm still not satisfied. When citing a page number, one must specify which version the number is referring to. And that just looks clusmy like this.^{[vol. 21:39 (ja)]} Anyway, you could cite a gaiden chapter like this.^{[vol. 57:gaiden]} Or like this.^{[vol. 24:"Daughter of the Dusk—Prologue"]} Or you could use a normal <ref ...>-footnote and link to the volume entry from there without using {{gnr}}. Perhaps like this:

Fullmetal Alchemist: Volume #24. Gaiden chapter: "Daughter of the Dusk—Prologue".

Lack of volume titles isn't really a problem, since {{gnn}} doesn't take care of the reference numbering and its |ref= parameter is freestyle. You could do it like this:

Volume No. 24: Vol. 24 (ch. 21–24): March 7, 2001. ISBN XXX-X-XXXX-XXXX-X. (in Japanese). and August 1, 2004. ISBN XXX-X-XXXXX-XXX-X. (in English).

In any case, there's still massive room for improvement. Suggestions and criticism more than welcome. Goodraise 04:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I find this one better as it links to the specific volume noted. Maybe placing a "p. #" or "pp. #" for plural would help to explain readers it is referring to a page. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 15:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, there's nothing stopping you from doing it like that.^{[vol. 24, p. 16]} Much like {{rp}}, {{gnr}} allows for a variety of styles. Something else: Do you think there should be a space after the period,^{ch. 84} like this?^{vol. 13} Goodraise 01:58, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I suppose considering the size it has in the articles.Tintor2 (talk) 02:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're saying. Are you in favor of the space after the period or in opposition to it? Goodraise 02:32, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

In favor.Tintor2 (talk) 15:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Contributor copyright investigations notice regarding User:Ohhellomai

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 20:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Relevant diffs: [1] and [2] Goodraise 20:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello,

I received a CCI Notice from you for my latest Wiki edits. I work as the PR for a magazine and I have been editing our news onto Wikipedia, but apparently I have violated some rules by doing so. I think I was confused before as I thought if I completely cited our website as well as directly linking the exact news article I posted information from would suffice as a proper citation. I have re-edited my earlier posts, in hopes of editing the Wiki pages in an appropriate manner. From this point on, if I were to refer to our news articles as a source of information and re-write our news in a Wiki edit, would it be possible to have this CCI Notice revoked? I apologize for still being unfamiliar with all the editing rules on Wikipedia and violating these rules, but now that I am fully aware of my errors, I would greatly appreciate it if I could be forgiven for my errors and given another chance to properly contribute to the Wiki pages.Ohhellomai (talk) 09:21, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response & withdrawal of the notice. I will review the pages and information you have sent me soon.Ohhellomai (talk) 11:31, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Where to report incivility?

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 20:38, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

This has officially gotten out of hand with me and gwern and I can't figure out how to report. Can you tell me how or go someplace to do it?Lucia Black (talk) 05:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

That depends on what you want to report. I don't know what is going on between you, because I'm not following you around. As I see it, your options at this point are as follows:

• Look for the answer yourself. It should be somewhere in Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
• Tell me what happened and I'll advise you further.
• Go directly to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, tell them what happend and ask for help.

Going straight to ANI is certainly the easiest option, but probably not the best. Goodraise 16:32, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Usually for incivility shown here. Lucia Black (talk) 21:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I see. Well, whatever comes next, first we should try to talk with him about it. Just tell me the next time he makes such a comment to you, okay? Don't worry, we'll get this worked out. Goodraise 08:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

I have no hope of this ending well....I just want to report it. Because its gone long enough, and his version of uncivility is based on things that wikipedia doesn't cover. This is annoying and I'm sincerely thinking this is WP:OWN.Lucia Black (talk) 17:19, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Request for elaboration on prose-based opposition to FLC

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 20:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

At Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Latin Grammy Award for Album of the Year/archive1, you opposed by saying that it "Fails criterion 1" but didn't elaborate. For prose-based opposes, those of us who are directors like to see some examples provided that show a failure of the criterion. It adds weight to an oppose and helps us in our decision-making. If you get the opportunity, please consider returning to the FLC and posting a few representative weaknesses in the list. Thanks. Giants2008 (Talk) 19:42, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate your taking the time to inform me. That said, I am aware of how decisions are made at FLC and I'm content with my opposes being given less weight when I provide fewer details than is common practice. Regards, Goodraise 20:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Access comment at Erik B and Rakim discog

"I don't use a screen reader, but I suspect users of such software are likely to miss explanatory text to a table if that text is stored in the very last line of that table." this is a very good point. Would you prefer to see it as a key at the top of each section that uses such symbology? Surprising that it's not been picked up before. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that would be preferable. Goodraise 18:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll raise it at DISCOGSTYLE and see what our resident ACCESS expert has to say about it. It's a great spot. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I suppose. Just being my usual, overcritical, nitpicking self. Goodraise 20:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

It looks like User:RexxS has responded at the FLC, perhaps, if you haven't already, you could see what you think of his explanation. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:28, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Commented there. Goodraise 00:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Reply to Cookie given to TRM

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 18:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Relevant diff: [3]. Goodraise 18:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, Goodraise, no need for apologies or a cookie, but thanks nevertheless. I have no issue with anything you've brought up, and I'm sorry to read that you have "dissatisfaction over the FLC process". Is there anything specific that we need to do better? I'd hate for this to turn into a counselling session, but there's no way I'd want one of most senior contributors to harbour some kind of issue without us getting an opportunity to perhaps do (or at least, start to do) something about it, improve the process and make it better for all. Times at WP:FLC are tough at the moment, we're down to our lowest ever turnover of featured lists (gone, perhaps thankfully, are the days of most cookie-cutter FLs, but nominations are few and reviewers fewer). Your comments on any FLC are always welcome, and I hope you know that. I've saved you half a cookie, just in case you pop back..... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:06, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Good to know I didn't step on too many toes. My usual reaction, when I realize my contributions are colored by an emotional state, is for me to get away from editing for a while. That's what I'm doing now. Of course I'll be back though. And of course I will, as I have planned for quite a while now, bring my thoughts to discussion at WT:FLC, but only after I've sorted them out. Until then. Goodraise 17:56, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Muhammad images

Hi Goodraise. I just wanted to ask you to reconsider your opposition to the functional hatnote. I picked you because your wording is so similar to how I think of the situation. Wikipedia doesn't need to get mixed up in censorship. Our readers should, in every browser, have the ability to view without images-- every browser has that.

I feel like pointing this out to our users, that their own browser can do this job for them, is the ideal solution. Once upon a time, my ideal solution was exactly the same as yours: Just educate readers about what their browser can do-- no images is a standard option.

Unfortunately, when I initially made that conclusion, I dramatically underestimated the cultural and technical barriers to IT education. Consider that I routinely am unable to help my grandparents understand very simple, user-friendly technology like a GPS or a cell phone. Now remember that my grandparents are unusually intelligent and highly educated-- they spent 12+ years of life in full time study, they learned to read as small children, they had every advantage, but they still could never figure out how to turn off images in their webbrowser. That's just the truth-- I know of no way to teach them how to do something that complicated.

Now, consider the population that is reading Wikipedia. They may not be fluent in English. They may not be highly literate. They may not be technically literate. Walking them through every possible language/browser combination with instructions on turning off images is very very difficult. I couldn't write a good walkthrough in English, how could I write one in Farsi?

The simple truth is that while telling users to turn off images using their browser is the IDEAL solution, philosophically speaking-- it doesn't work. We do not successfully communicate the instructions to our readers-- it's just a little too much.

It doesn't need to be this difficult though. Instead of making users click on talk, then on a subpage, then on instructions, then on their browser options-- we just need to have one simple box that toggles images.

I'm promise, I'm not trying to harass ya :). It's just your reasoning is right on. This should be handled in browser.

Two lines of javascript could end the whole "controversial images" debate. And with an in-page image toggle, NOTCENSORED would be even stronger. No valid complaints from readers-- we would seize the moral highground by pointing to the image toggle box any time someone brings up the notion of deletion. It would be a stable solution that educates are readons about how we don't censor, but we don't force images on people either.

Anyway, that's my pitch.  :) Either way, thank you for participating in the RFC. :) --HectorMoffet (talk) 06:09, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm warming up to the idea somewhat, but I could only support such a hatnote if it were placed on each and every article, not just this one. And even then, I'm not sure I would. I'll have to give it some thought. Goodraise 06:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Request for FLC image review

Hi Goodraise. You have shown yourself to be a skilled image reviewer, and with that in mind I have a request for you. At Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of reptiles of Michigan/archive1, a supporter asked for an image review, and nobody has undertaken one yet. Would you please consider doing the honors? The list is otherwise ready for promotion, and I don't want to leave it at FLC for much longer if possible. Giants2008 (Talk) 20:10, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I have looked into it. Found one possible problem. Commented there. Goodraise 23:05, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of that. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:48, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Always glad to help. Goodraise 21:53, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reassessing List of Highschool of the Dead characters

Note: Title changed. Goodraise 00:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the assessment on List of Highschool of the Dead characters. I'm adding a Reception section, and hopefully can find some sources for Creation and Conception. AngusWOOF (talk) 21:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I didn't realize nobody was taking care of requests for reassessment anymore. I'll try to be more active there again in the future. Goodraise 00:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I dug out some references for the creation/conception section. There isn't much from the creator himself but the series director had some interesting quotes about fanservice, and the reviewers had some worthy observations in the adaptations. AngusWOOF (talk) 19:23, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, could you review that part of the article again? I threw in whatever information I could find for Conception, and I think I have enough for the Reception section now. AngusWOOF (talk) 05:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Done. Goodraise 06:22, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Reversal of redirection of Kochikame chapter lists to volumes list

Note: Original title of this thread was "Bravo". Goodraise 21:48, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I assume you're going to be sourcing, translating, adding real-world context and useful content to all these pointless articles yourself? Quite a brave project to take on yourself, good luck with that. Or you could accept that they existed for nearly 2 years without any noticeable improvement to suggest they warranted an article, and that in the following year nobody objected to their removal--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I accept your premises, but not your conclusion. Now, if you're done with your sarcastic venting in my direction, I'll be on my way, but if you happen to be in the mood to resume our discussion from back then, I'd be happy to participate. Goodraise 21:48, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Some help with graphic novel list

I tried to use the Sublist feature on List of JoJo's Bizarre Adventure volumes, but this did not end up working as planned and the chapter lists were never hidden in the substituted page (I've commented out the substitutions). It seems to be working fine on List of One Piece manga volumes, but I can't figure out why it's not working on the subpages here. Could you take a look seeing as you've worked on the template so much?—Ryulong (琉竜) 19:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Always happy to help! Use |SublistOf=List of JoJo's Bizarre Adventure volumes. Template documentation updated. Goodraise 03:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

That was it?—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:18, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that was it. What did you expect? Goodraise 04:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Backend as a Service

Hi Goodraise, Thanks so much for coming over to Talk:Backend as a service and providing some insight about the inclusion of various company names in regards to WP:FLC. I agree with you that WP:FLC probably isn't the best to use for the issue at hand, but I like your suggestion of WP:DUE. I've posted some additional thoughts at Talk:Backend as a service. If you have time, I'd certainly appreciate your continued insight over there. Thanks! ChrisPond (Talk · COI) 15:41, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome! However, I don't really have anything more to say about the matter. If you want to know something about lists, I'm your man, but that kind of article is out of my comfort zone. Have you asked for input from a relevant WikiProject? Wikipedia:WikiProject Business perhaps? Goodraise 01:39, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

List of nature reserves in Barnet

I have nominated Nature reserves in Barnet for FL and The Rambling Man has suggested at [4] that I ask you to look over it. Any suggestions appreciated. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll try to make the time. Goodraise 18:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

(Because I know you'll improve it! Thanks.) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:36, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I tried, but apparently it's been closed now. Let me know if and when it's re-nominated, hopefully I'll have more spare time and energy then. In the meantime, you may want to enlist the help of a copyeditor. WP:GOCE is usually a good place to look. Goodraise 04:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Barry Yandell for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Barry Yandell is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barry Yandell until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Mark Stoddard for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mark Stoddard is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Stoddard until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:16, 5 July 2016 (UTC)