|
Ok, thanks, but there's no way I'm reading all those links. I think I made it half way through "Getting started."
Sharksaredangerous (
talk)
22:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas K. Dye as merge. User:Barberio disputed this close and opened a deletion review, which was closed as the admin argued that merge closes are not considered at DRV. I merged the material to Newshounds and redirected the article; Barberio has reverted the redirect, though the material remains merged. A discussion on the merge is at Talk:Newshounds#Merge of Thomas K. Dye; your participation would be welcome. Fences& Windows 01:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Since you commented on a similar sourcing problem at the Better Days AFD, could you take a look at the discussion over at Talk:Wizards (film)/Archive 2#David Brin, where a disgruntled editor has taken it upon himself to repeatedly add statement by David Brin that is not relevant to the reception of the film, nor objective in any way, shape or form. ( Sugar Bear ( talk) 20:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC))
On December 21 2009, you added the {{ Notability}} template to this article, commenting that it may not meet the general notability guideline. I agree with you, and have nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neglected Mario Characters (2nd nomination). Robofish ( talk) 15:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
The article had been vandalised. See my comment at the AfD and check out the unvandalised version which I have restored. JohnCD ( talk) 18:27, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Are you still around? It appears other editors aren't even content to wait until the Eisner award winners are announced, and are pushing for the Notability tag to be removed. I've become Mr. Unpopular by pointing out that it seems COI for someone who's already interested in preserving the article to propose removing the tag, and that this would seem to violate our earlier consensus to wait a couple of months, without a good reason for doing so. I'd like to hear your take on the current situation, but it appears you may be away or such? Doniago ( talk) 04:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
It's there if you want to work on it to improve it further, and then discuss moving it back into article mainspace. Think about it. :) — Cirt ( talk) 18:37, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
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)
13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)