This is an old revision of this page, as edited by GRBerry (talk | contribs) at 23:48, 23 December 2009 (→Help with notability issue on Häagen-Dazs article?: reply related to the other article in question). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 23:48, 23 December 2009 by GRBerry (talk | contribs) (→Help with notability issue on Häagen-Dazs article?: reply related to the other article in question)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Template:WPChristianity sidebar • {{ChristianityWikiProject}} • Category:Unassessed-Class Christianity articles
Christianity Recognized Content • AFD results by nominator
I am also user GRBerry on Commons, Wikispecies, Meta, and (although I speak no German) de.Misplaced Pages. Messages intended for me on any of those projects may be left here, in which case I ask the poster to indicate which project they are talking about. GRBerry diffmeta diff I've also signed up for single user login.
This talk page is automatically archived by User:MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 31 days are automatically archived to User talk:GRBerry/Archive 11. Sections without timestamps are not archived. |
Email advice: When able to be active on Misplaced Pages, I am more likely to read this talk page than I am to read email, as the email goes to my work email. So please reserve email for items requiring 1) confidentiality, 2) the format (forwarding other emails), or 3) some other really good reason for using email. Also, to help it get through my spam filters and to my attention, have the email subject line begin with "Misplaced Pages". If at all possible, I will respond on Misplaced Pages, because I believe that transparency is important, and each user I email lessens my privacy. GRBerry
- Archive 1: April 20 to June 26, 2006
- Archive 2: June 27 to September 10, 2006
- Archive 3: September 11 to December 30, 2006
At this point I became an admin. Subsequent archives are by bot in the order conversations became stale rather than the order they were created.
- Archive 4: December 31, 2006 to January 27, 2007
- Archive 5: January 31, 2007 to May 31, 2007
- Archive 6: June 1, 2007 to September 1, 2007
- Archive 7: September 2, 2007 to October 29, 2007
- Archive 8: October 30, 2007 to December 31, 2007
- Archive 9: January 1, 2008 to March 31, 2008
- Archive 10: April 1, 2008 to August 31, 2008
- Archive 11: September 1, 2008 to ongoing
Early in period I voluntarily resigned as an admin. I do not currently have access to the administrative tools.
- New sections belong at the bottom, not here.
Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop
As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
New Testament Christian Churches of America, Inc.
Hello,
I have recently been editing the above article. There is some question in my mind whether Misplaced Pages should have the article at all. However, as i say here, I believe that if WP is to have such an article, that all sides of this controversial subject should be covered. Would you mind giving an opinion? Thank you, Becritical (talk) 01:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Help with notability issue on Häagen-Dazs article?
Hi Glenn.
Re: Talk:Häagen-Dazs#local_management_mistake_not_encyclopedic.
I appreciate any revieww, nput, insight, or help you could offer here, as an editor +/or as an admin. Is this a case where some level of article protection is called for? I thought of pointing then @ wikinews, but don't edit or use it, so don't know if it fits there. I note the article has other issues and needs. I prefer you reply here, not my talk page, to keep our discussion in one place. Thanks either way. yilfs, Lentower (talk) 12:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
- And the article hasn't been touched in the last day. Hopefully, I clued a few editors into what WP is really about. Thanks anyway. Lentower (talk) 23:44, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
- I spoke too soon. Your review would be appreciated. Note one of the editors has made deletions to Leonard H. Tower, Jr., The GCC/GNU diff part hould probably be reversed.
I support Lentower's request for inputs. The discussion among just the two of us is not getting anywhere. Regarding the article he started on himself, even if we reverse the GCC/diff part, I think we should definitely leave out stuff about him never owning a car because that seems to be irrelevant, unsourced and self-aggrandizing. Wwmargera (talk) 12:51, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
- He may have started it, but the community reviewed and decided that he merited an article. That issue was addressed years ago in AFD #2. he first AFD was erroneously closed, as the DRV I started established.
- On the gnu diff, you misunderstood the citations in the article. The cite in the lead to his autobiography was for the cyclist/pedestrian/never a car bit. The cite for the gnu diff part was in the GNU Project section of the article and was to an authoritative primary source. Actually, that cite is still in that section of the article. The fact was in the lead without citation there, which is perfectly acceptable when it is cited in the body of the article. Without the cyclist/pedestrian bit, the sentence would need rewording if that fact remained in the lead. I don't have a strong opinion on whether it should be in the lead or only in the body; I could be satisfied either way.
- On the cyclist bit; if Len were known for being a big industry spokesperson or an environmental activist, we'd call it relevant to his notability and keep it in. For his actual notability in free software, it was a fact that humanized and made his biography more interesting, but certainly isn't a requirement to have in the article at all.
- Also, it is troublesome wikietiquette to get involved in a dispute with another editor and then go edit a biography about them. Over the years, we've seen some serious abuses by editors doing that, and other times where they found real problems that needed addressing in the biography. I believe that best practice is always to get a second opinion from a neutral party before editing the biography of an editor with whom one is in a dispute, and preferably to leave it to them to edit instead of doing it yourself.
- I know this article, so it is easy for me to reply to quickly. The Haagen-Dazs article will take longer for me to figure out what is going on... GRBerry 23:48, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Happy Holidays
Haven't seen you around lately, but I just wanted to wish a Merry Christmas, Happy New Year's, and Happy Holidays to you and your family. Best wishes, and I hope things are going well. MastCell 05:43, 22 December 2009 (UTC)