User talk:King of Hearts/Archive/2010/07
The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 July 2010 edit
- Wikimania preview: Gearing up for Wikimania in Gdańsk
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Children's Literature
- Features and admins: This week's highlights
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
MfD nomination of User:King of Hearts/Notepad/Vandalism on Wheels! edit
User:King of Hearts/Notepad/Vandalism on Wheels!, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:King of Hearts/Notepad/Vandalism on Wheels! and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:King of Hearts/Notepad/Vandalism on Wheels! during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐ • ✍) 02:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010 edit
- UK COI edits: British politicians accused of WP cover-ups
- News and notes: Board changes, Wikimania, Public Policy Initiative
- Discussion report: Article ownership, WikiProjects vs. Manual of Style, Unverifiable village
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Apple Inc.
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
BattleTech clans mergers edit
Thanks for closing those AFDs to Clans (BattleTech) but given the lack of sources at Clan Jade Falcon and Clan Wolf (external, internal, reliable or not), I don't see what that produces for the new page and it's looks essentially like a redirect (other than the new non-free banners which will be the next issue). I'll let the current editors take a stab at it but if they aren't going to get the article in line with policy, I'm not waiting on this to settle and it's going to be sledgehammer approach. If you have any opinions, I'm open but otherwise, just a warning as you might get some splashback from my actions. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010 edit
- News and notes: Politician defends editing own article, Google translation, Row about a small Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: Up close with WikiProject Animals
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: ArbCom to appoint CU/OS positions after dumping election results
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Molly Lewis (musician) now notable? edit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Molly_Lewis Deleted for lack of notability, 24 April 2009:
Current musician notability criteria: "Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable.[note 1]"
Reasons to recreate a previously deleted page: "Notability status has changed: The subject matter may not have been notable at the time the page was initially deleted. For example, the article could be about a person who is just at the beginning of acheiving fame, a newly released film, or a growing company. When an article was first created, the subject was not notable, but coverage has since expanded, thereby establishing notability."
Two non-trivial published works, yadda, yadda:
- online version of newspaper article, Toronto Globe and Mail (one of three interviews), 2 July 2010
- Television interview, viewable online, KNBC Los Angeles, 16 July 2010
Is this article worth reconsidering in light of recently apparent notability, i.e. news coverage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.187.234.199 (talk) 18:56, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
- OK, it's now at Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Molly Lewis. You can work on it, and when you're done adding those sources, you can create an account in order to move it back to Molly Lewis or alternatively ask me to do so. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I've added those sources; that should be enough to prevent deletion. I'm not sure how to move it back to Molly Lewis; if you could do that, it would be great. I'll flesh it out a bit more once it's in place, maybe restoring some of the content from the older, deleted article and filling in more references. MisterFancyPants (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC).
- Should anything be done with the corresponding Talk page, or should we just start over from scratch? MisterFancyPants (talk) 14:16, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
T:ITN edit
Is there a reason for this edit? There's never been any prose update to 2010 Open Championship, which is required for the bolded article on ITN. All the updates ended up going into the players article, rightly or wrongly. Courcelles (talk) 04:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I reverted back to what it was before. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:23, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm not sure how on Earth this started, but the last few majors, Tennis and Golf, the articles on the tournaments have languished, while the winners articles received the updates. (Not that I'm convinced by any stretch we need an article on each of the tournaments, but that's a philosophical discussion for another time.) Courcelles (talk) 04:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Rollback Permission? edit
Please grant me rollback permission. I wish to help revert vandalism on Wikipedia. Ddbruce (talk) 03:28, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but it doesn't seem that you have enough experience yet. Generally, in order to be granted rollback you need at least 500 edits, but you only have 168 (see your edit count here). Also, you need get some experience reverting vandalism first; do at least 50 or so, 100 is even better. Twinkle is a good Javascript tool to use for that as well as many other things; it is almost as fast as rollback. If you have trouble using it, then you can always use the undo button, which is slower but works. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010 edit
- News and notes: New interwiki project improves biographies, and other news
- In the news: Wikipedia leads in customer satisfaction, Google Translate and India, Citizendium transition, Jimbo's media accolade
- WikiProject report: These Are the Voyages of WikiProject Star Trek
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Discussion report: Controversial e-mail proposal, Invalid AfD
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
ITN edit
Hey King, sorry to be a pain, but I reverted your edit to ITN. The trouble is that the article you bolded is currently a stub and would need quite a bit of work to meet ITN criteria. I'd bolded the section of bullfighting to get round the issue because ITN was getting stale. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:05, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not very familiar with ITN, so could you point me to where it says an article can't be a stub? I don't see anything in Wikipedia:In the news#Updated content that says the article is unacceptable. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:10, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- Irritatingly, it's one of those "unwritten" rules, but there was some discussion about the suitability of that particular article on WP:ITN/C, though I'm sure it was written somewhere. The trouble is WP:ITN has barely been updated since 2008. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:59, 31 July 2010 (UTC)