User talk:WWGB

Hello WWGB! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Khoikhoi 08:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

"Redirect" Canadian, Canada

Hello WWGB. I take it from your edit to Mr. Doherty's article, that "redirects" are bad. I had understood that it wasn't necessary to have "Canada|Canadian" since simply putting "Canadian" would achieve the same end result. Okay, from now on, I'll avoid redirects! Thanks. Que-Can 23:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Que-Can. I don't think re-directs are "bad", it's just that admins and editors have pointed out to me that using the direct link is more efficient. I guess that's because direct links won't be affected by "broken" redirects. WWGB 00:25, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, just wanted to thank

you for including Colin Thurston in the roundup of the list of passings from this year (2007). I was going over to that list to try to see if his name needed to be added and was surprised to find that you'd added it, I *think* before I even started on his Wikipedia article. I added a few more details since he is noted for having produced more than just Duran Duran (cf his article for more), but it's nice that you put even that up. So thanks. (Krushsister 23:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC))

Deaths in 2007

• word to you for generally holding it down so well at Deaths in 2007. tomasz. 09:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Speedy tagging

Good work with speedy tagging, but one piece of advice: Some of the articles you tagged were only created one or two minutes before, so the creator might still have been in the process of adding material which could make notability obvious. This isn't an issue if the article is Joe Bloggs (born 1993) is a schoolkid, but be careful not to bite the newbies. Some new page patrollers advise starting from the bottom of the new page list instead of the top. Oldelpaso 08:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Great job on new article patrolling. Although it may seem redundant, I put in my edit summary something which describes my reason for speedy delete. Usually something like "no attacks please", "not notable", "WP:NFT", or somesuch. Other editors might find your reasoning in the edit history that way, even though the db-tag you choose will state your reason in the article as well. It's a courtesy to warn the article's author as well with the canned nn-warn or whatever template is suggested by the db-tag by pasting it onto the author's talk page. Keep up the good work. MKoltnow 03:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Seuss?

• just a quick note to say i'm big in favour of the rhyming edit summaries [1] :-D tomasz. 13:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I hereby award you this barnstar for your tireless contributions and upkeep of the Recent Deaths pages; your efforts are appreciated. Keep up the good work! Weatherman90 03:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Kelsey Smith

Hello. I added Kelsey Smith to the Recent Deaths article. I see that you went in and cleaned up the entry into proper Wiki format and style. Thanks for doing so. I was not 100% sure how the page is normally formatted, but I did at least want to get her name in there. Do you know of the proper way to cite her inexact date of death? That is, should we just leave it under June 2? Or should there be some notation that the date of death is unknown? What do you think? Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 15:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC))

Thanks for your input on this issue at the Recent Deaths talk page. (JosephASpadaro 23:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC))

speedy tagging - G4

G'day WWGB,

good job on the whole speedy tagging thing. Just a little point; I noticed you tagged Kishore Sen for speedy deletion because it had been previously deleted in AfD. The article, however, had only been speedy deleted. G4 exists to stop people re-creating articles and demanding a whole new AfD to get rid of them again. If an article is created where a previously-speedied one existed, it's only speediable if it meets one of the criteria for speedy deletion. Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 06:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

VPSA vs. Vpsa

Thanks, I was doing just that, and voila, it was done before I could get to it. Amazing! SBHarris 08:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Chloe Davis

Hello. Just out of curiosity, why did you remove Chloe Davis from the Recent Deaths list? You did not put any text in the edit summary box. I was tempted to revert your edit, but I figured it would be best to ask you first. Thanks. Please let me know. (JosephASpadaro 16:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC))

Hi. I deleted the entry for Chloe Davis as there is no precedent for listing an unborn foetus in the Deaths section. It seemed to be an issue for you too as you redirected the entry to the article for her mother Jessie Davis. It would be extraordinary to consider that someone who was yet to be born could be considered notable. WWGB 23:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, yes, but ... isn't Chloe Davis just as notable (or non-notable) as Jessie Davis? What's the distinction? Furthermore, I think that it is the event that is notable -- not so much the individual people. The notability of the people, I think, is an extension of the notability of the event. Your thoughts? Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 19:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC))

If I had my way, Jessie Davis would not be there either. Many editors seem to confuse Wikinews with Wikipedia. Personally, I don't think people like Jessie Davis (or her unborn daughter) have any place in Wikipedia. They will not be remembered (outside of family and friends) once the trial has been concluded. However, contributors have so far decided to retain the Jessie Davis article, so I think that the Deaths entry must fall into line and remain. As for the event being notable, well, the Deaths section is about people, so it is people rather than events that have to create the point of entry. If you really believe that Chloe Davis is worthy of a separate listing, you might like to write a WP article about her, but I doubt that it would survive speedy delete. WWGB 07:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure that you entirely read my prior post. It said, in essence, because the event is notable ... by extension, the people associated with the notable event are notable. I also asked is it not true that Chloe Davis would be just as notable (or non-notable) as Jessie Davis? (There really is not much distinction between the two.) In any event, there is a debate about deleting/retaining the Jessie Davis article -- which is rather contentious and revolves around whether or not the Davis person and the Davis murder event are notable. The debate also touches upon the appropriateness (or lack thereof) of including Davis in Wikipedia, Wikinews, or both. Furthermore, how can you be so certain that, quote, "They will not be remembered (outside of family and friends) once the trial has been concluded." ...? There have been many, many murder victims and crime victims that have been remembered for decades after the trials were concluded (for one reason or another). For example: Sharon Tate, the LaBiancas, Kitty Genovese, Laci Peterson, Chandra Levy, the Black Dahlia, Adam Walsh, etc., etc., etc. I am not claiming that each of these murder victims is necessarily parallel to Jessie Davis. I am simply providing evidence to refute your claim that it is a foregone conclusion that "[t]hey will not be remembered (outside of family and friends) once the trial has been concluded." Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 16:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC))

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Spiritofchristmas.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Spiritofchristmas.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Birtles Shorrock Goble

Hi WWGB. You are off to such a great start on the article Birtles Shorrock Goble that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 02:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)