User talk:Coldupnorth/Archive2

An article that you have been involved in editing, City of Portsmouth Boys' School, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/City of Portsmouth Boys' School. Thank you. Adam 21:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hnsampat (talk • contribs) 22:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC).

Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of [unassessed articles] tagged with {{WPBiography}}. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 21:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

If I'd seen that page I'd have already voted to keep. Thanks for informing me. If you click on the "watch" tab at the top of this page Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Schools you can keep tabs on schools articles as they come up for deletion discussions, IF somebody tags them to place them in the category. I saw your user page and took that political test. It put me almost smack in the middle, slightly authoritarian (only one degree from center) and slightly right-wing (only one degree from center). I totally disagree with that, I consider myself proudly Neanderthal or Ghengis Khan conservative, but no test can ever be totally accurate about these things. Anyway, best of luck. If the voting keeps up like this, there's no way that a consensus will form to delete, and if some administrator eventually closes the debate with a "delete" on a close vote, I suggest you contest it. Cheers, Noroton 04:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Afraid not, but thanks for bringing the changes to my attention. I'd like to explain my reasoning, though.

Churchill school: Sources number 5 and 9 are the key. They're both secondary (not lists of statistics or reports, not produced by the school, its parent city, or any other organization affilited with it), and non-trivial (they don't just name-drop the school as somewhere an athlete happened to come from or the place where an event happened to happen, the pieces are about the school). That establishes that the school is notable. It's not our place as editors to decide what is or is not notable (unless, of course, we have a real-life gig as writers of reliable sources, but even then an editor or peer-review process makes the final call.)

Let's look at Portsmouth's sources, in comparison. There's a long list, but it's rather meaningless.

1. A recruiter, which will by definition be a biased source. I also see no indication that this source undergoes peer review or editorial control, or maintains even a pretense of neutrality.
2. Lists of statistics are always primary. Only an interpretation of those statistics by a qualified expert is secondary.
3. Statistics.
4. Statistics.
5. The school's own publication, which is of course primary (though very nice-looking, I must admit).
6. The government is the parent organization of a school, therefore, government reports in relation to a school are primary, just like a corporate report on a subsidiary.
7. Name-drops the school, trivial.
8. Name-drops the school, it's about a sculpture which happened to be made there.

The external links suffer from the same flaws. It's too bad, it's a nice looking article. I agree schools should receive more attention in the press and media. But that is not to us to "fix", or to decide that "all schools are notable" when those we rely on for our source material do not agree. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 17:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Your thought is greatly appreciated, and in actuality I may consider going for RfA again soon. I'll have to see how things go. (Regardless of my personal beliefs, admins should never delete against consensus, the only time that should happen is if it's WP:OFFICE or Jimbo, and in that case it's not an admin that'll be doing the deletion anyway.) There's certainly a lot of good points raised on both sides of the debate, and in reality, I don't think real "deletionists" and "inclusionists" are that far apart. I've seen people go to ridiculous extremes on both sides, of course, but well...that'll always happen at some point. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 04:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Good luck with your article - but I fear we may lose out and it may be deleted. Some suggestions. 1. Do make sure you save an archive copy of the text, it is good work and hopefully can find a place somewhere! Maybe if CoPB ever get round to producing their own website, or if you have your own website you could put a CoPB section on it and link to it! 2. The historic material for all Portsmouth schools (evolution, amalgamations etc) would warrant a separate article (probably mainly as a table) which would cover a wide range and therefore not be subject to the individual notability criteria. I have an idea how this could be done, but am not sure when I will have the time to do it. 3. Thanks for the warning about MS, one thing I could do is quote some bibliographic sources (e.g. school archives, Portsmouth Education Committee records, The News) and you might also be able to quote these. Not living in Portsmouth, neither of us wouldd find it easy to ferret around for precise sources available locally but not on the web. Hyperman 42 22:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Black hole was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 01:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The March 2007 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Mocko13 22:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Your Lordship, you deleted vandalism from Gordon Brown, but you did not delete the vandalism far enough back. This made the vandalism that you did not delete harder for other editors to spot, and consequently it survived for much longer than it would otherwise have done. When deleting vandalism, please revert to the last correct version, not the last version. Viewfinder 03:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, and I appreciate your invitation to message you when a discussion looks crucial. I just noticed that you commented about the same way I did on the Emirates school discussion, one second after me. Great minds think alike! Oh, and by the way, condolences on the House of Commons vote on the House of Lords. ... Noroton 00:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting out the layout problem on the UCL page. Those bunched up [edit] links were rather annoying. I raised the issue on the discussion page. Rueful Rabbit 16:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

It's not there yet. Considering it could come across as original research, I'm considering merging changes from the book with production, and Release is still messy and unreferenced. WikiNew 16:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Sounds great! Thanks for the positive edit. KevinPuj 02:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Vladimir Lenin was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 01:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey see my proposals at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Actor and Filmmakers and the main WP Film and Biography talk page. Know anybody who is interested? Actors and all film people articles need a body on wikipedia to upkeep them asthey need more focus -it would be a part of Biogrpahy and Film. If you are interested or know somebody who would be, please let them know and whether you think it is a good progession for the project or not. Please leave your views at the council or biogrpahy main talk page. THanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 14:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi! i put your picture of Hitler on WikiCommons, [[1]]--82.66.246.203 17:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello,

Thanks for creating article on Malcolm Grant. Just for your information, I have nominated a DYK on this article, by having the following hook.

• ...that professor Malcolm Grant, the Provost and President of University College London, agreed to shave off his moustache if UCL students raised £1500 for Comic Relief, on Red Nose Day in 2005?

Thanks, - KNM ^Talk 17:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Thats really nice! Thank you, it certainly helps. - KNM ^Talk 17:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:AdolfHitlerParis.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Yonatan ^talk 04:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for support in my unsuccessful RfA. I appreciate the support, and am disappointed on being judged by what in most opinions seem to be the wrong things. Until next time, edit on! :) — RevRagnarok ^{Talk Contrib} 03:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi LordHarris, thank you for your support of my RFA! I'm pleased to say that it was successful. Thanks again! SGGH 20:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

On 26 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Malcolm Grant, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 19:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)