User talk:American Eagle/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Thank you!

Hey, AE, just wanted to thank you for reverting that vandalism on the most important page in the entire encyclopedia. (Jonathan Park.) Keep up the good work! E. Novachek (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

ThankSpam

My RfA Thank you for participating in my "RecFA", which passed with a final tally of 153/39/22. There were issues raised regarding my adminship that I intend to cogitate upon, but I am grateful for the very many supportive comments I received and for the efforts of certain editors (Ceoil, Noroton and Lar especially) in responding to some issues. I wish to note how humbled I was when I read Buster7's support comment, although a fair majority gave me great pleasure. I would also note those whose opposes or neutral were based in process concerns and who otherwise commented kindly in regard to my record. I recognise that the process itself was unusual, and the format was generally considered questionable - and I accept that I was mistaken in my perception of how it would be received - but I am particularly grateful for those whose opposes and neutrals were based in perceptions of how I was not performing to the standards expected of an administrator. As much as the support I received, those comments are hopefully going to allow me to be a better contributor to the project. Thank you. Very much. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC) ~~~~~

Well, back to the office it is...

Thank you for the kind welcome!

American Eagle, thanks for helping me through my first wikipedia article. I understand that if I can't prove notability, then heck, the article's gotta go. I'll do my best to provide the sources, and then I guess it'll be up to the editors!Asterioskokkinos (talk) 04:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Great job

Excellent work on improving John Wellington Ennis!    7   ^{talk | Δ |}   01:34, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films May 2009 Newsletter

The May 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:16, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the support

I would like to thank you for coming out and participating in my Request for Adminship, which closed unsuccessfully at (48/8/6) based on my withdrawal. I withdrew because in my opinion I need to focus on problems with my content contributions before I can proceed with expanding my responsibilities. Overall I feel that the RfA has improved me as an editor and in turn some articles which in my eyes is successful. Thank you again for your support. Cheers and happy editing. --kelapstick (talk) 18:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Broken URLs

To fix your Google links, replace " with %22 (e.g. http://www.google.com/search?q=%22example%22). Sometimes you may also need to replace " "(space) with either %20 or +(Google). You may use the hex values from http://www.ascii.cl as a reference, just don't forget to precede each with a %. — Rankiri (talk) 21:35, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much! It should help me out often. :D American Eagle (talk) 21:51, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which succeeded with 56 in support, 12 in opposition and 3 neutral votes. I am truly honored by the trust that the community has placed in me. Whether you supported me, opposed me, or if you only posted questions or commented om my RfA, I thank you for your input and I will be looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas :). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). All the Best, Mifter (talk)

Mifter (talk) 23:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:The Borrowers (1997 film).jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:The Borrowers (1997 film).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:21, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films June 2009 Newsletter

The June 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The True Victory

A plea for help... the article The True Victory is in danger. I know you have stepped back to work only on Christian articles (which this article is), and as this article possibly is about to be deleted, I was hoping for some help, or some pointers on how to avoid that. Thanks! Kevinbrogers (talk) 15:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Kevinbrogers (talk) 16:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. (Replied on your talk.) American Eagle (talk) 16:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank You For Your Help!

I really appreciate the help you provided on the Second Glance (film) article! I thought it would've been speedy deleted. Thanks! Invmog (talk) 16:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

You're a very welcome! Rescuing articles is one of my favorite things to do. :D American Eagle (talk) 16:59, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Letters to God

An article that you have been involved in editing, Letters to God, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Letters to God. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 19:41, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity Newsletter - July 2009

The current edition of the newsletter is available at {{WikiProject Christianity/Outreach/July 2009}} .To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. John Carter (talk) 00:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films July 2009 Newsletter

The July 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Christian Zionist Film Categorization

Hey there, I've got a quick question for you... Someone has been categorizing several films as being Christian Zionist films, including the Left Behind films. I haven't seen the films, but just by judging from the synopsis's of them, I see no reason they should be categorized as such, going by the description of the Christian Zionism article. Should such categorizations be removed? I want to give the user that's been doing this the benefit of the doubt, but after looking at his user page and contributions, it really looks like the categorizations have been done from a quite non-neutral worldview... So anyway, I just wanted to get your opinion on it. I've been having the time lately to get back into the Christian Film Task Force that I practically abandoned for a few months. =) Blessings, Filmcom (talk) 14:02, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I think I'll go ahead and remove the articles from the category. Thanks for taking a look at it! Filmcom (talk) 01:58, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2009 Newsletter

The August 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Voting

The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:28, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2009 Newsletter

The September 2009 issue of the Films 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:23, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey

I read your reasons for stepping away from Wikipedia and I can defiantly appreciate how hard that can be. I stepped away for the same reasons. The whole vandalism debate on Simple last year (which I freely admit was my fault) helped me to re-examine the way I was spending my time. And wouldn’t you know spending hours of every day editing Wikipedia isn’t exactly the most God-honoring thing to do :). Every now and then I’ll find myself wasting hours on end editing Wikipedia but God is kind to me and doesn’t let it last very long. I check back in every now and then to see what folks are up to and your user page was one that I checked. It was really encouraging to see that you had made the same decision! --Andrew Kelly (talk) 04:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC) (formerly Andrew from NC)

Hey, Andrew! I was just thinking about you yesterday! How great it is to hear from you. Thank you for your message, and I fully agree. Wikipedia is a great resource, and can be fun if used correctly, but it can really be a waste of time. It became too much of an addiction for me, so I had to give it up (to God). I still edit here occasionally (mostly to work on Christian films), but it's no longer pulling me away from God! I'm not bound by the same pull it had on me before. Praise Him! It's great to hear from you again, and thanks for explaining your changed username. :) American Eagle (talk) 21:02, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

"Ganfyd" AfD

I have submitted "Ganfyd" to AfD. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:The River Within.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The River Within.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. Skier Dude (talk) 02:41, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jonathan Park

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Jonathan Park. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Park (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:19, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Bye

Your story is very touching, I am glad you have made a good choice to strengthen your relationship with the Lord Our Savior. You will be missed.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{S†rawberry Fields (sign)} 16:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS October Newsletter

The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. 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. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Courageous (film)

I have nominated Courageous (film), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Courageous (film). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Dougweller (talk) 09:30, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Holyman Undercover

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Holyman Undercover, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://movie.holymanundercover.com. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 01:31, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Film categorisation

i've noticed that you are redefining movie categories, primarily away from christian/catholic films. I think that this removes relevant categorisation information. I think the solution would be for you to create several categories: "christian films", "films about christianity", "catholic films", "films about catholicism", etc. It's going to be highly debatable if these films fall into those categories or not as the perspective on what a christian is varies considerablyUtopial (talk) 05:31, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at cleaning up this category. I looked at it a few weeks ago out of interest, so it's good to see that it's being maintained. Just be careful if u try create new categories - u dont want it to end up being a value judgement on if the director/producer/film is christian-like. Kierkegaard wrote critically of christianity, but was a christian himself and proposed a new approach/form of christianity.

I think a few of the films you removed from the christian category have some christian relevance: "Brother Sun, Sister Moon" (st francis' philosophy), "Quo Vadis" (christian persecution, christian generosity & conversion), "Andrei Rublev" (banned in atheist Soviet Union due to religious themes)Utopial (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC).

Re: Come What May (film)

I am participating to the 2009 Tag & Assess Drive for the Films WikiProject. I reassessed the article from Start to C-Class. I think that Come What May can easily become B-Class simply by adding some references and by expanding the cast section (Please, see: Start to B-Class upgrading instructions for films, Cast and crew section, WP:BETTER, WP:LEAD, WP:REF, WP:WAF). I do not like those templates very much, but, in that case, I thought it might serve as a stimulus for editors to improve the quality of the article. Feel free to remove it if you think it is wrongly placed and/or not necessary. Thanks! –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome. If you need help, just ask me on my talk page.... :) –pjoef (talk • contribs) 17:59, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wager (2007 film)

Pasted as requested. Good luck with the improvements. Euryalus (talk) 11:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Firehouse Dog.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Firehouse Dog.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. Skier Dude (talk) 06:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sherwood Baptist Church

The article Sherwood Baptist Church has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very little mainstream coverage other than promotional sources, little assertion of notability beyond the film "Fireproof" (which has a separate article)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SuaveArt (talk) 01:31, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Stephen Kendrick

The article Stephen Kendrick has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No assertion of notability outside of Fireproof (film), which has an article

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SuaveArt (talk) 01:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Sherwood Pictures

I have nominated Category:Sherwood Pictures (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. SuaveArt (talk) 02:11, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Erin Bethea and Kirk Cameron in Fireproof.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Erin Bethea and Kirk Cameron in Fireproof.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. Skier Dude (talk) 02:47, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Erin Bethea and Kirk Cameron in Fireproof.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Erin Bethea and Kirk Cameron in Fireproof.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. ZooFari 02:48, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sherwood Pictures Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sherwood Pictures Logo.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 "file" 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 "File" 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. ZooFari 02:59, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:PROD

Everyone of those articles was basically a promo filled with trivia and unencyclopedic drivel such as Facebook and Twitter links, along with plenty of unsourced content before I edited them down. Other than the film Fireproof (and possibly Facing the Giants), none of them have any credit to notability - they were simply promotionals for Sherwood Films and related. Please read WP:NOT.--SuaveArt (talk) 04:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Flywheel (film)

I agree that it probably is notable and should be kept however I'm not in a position to do a lot of work on it now and SuaveArt is intent on deleting it so unless you or perhaps some other editors who favor Christian movies works on it then it will most likely go under for now. Keep up the good work, by the way. Invmog (talk) 01:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

*sigh* There's so much to do... I wish this all would've never happened. But, I'll go ahead and do some research on Flywheel; it should be overhauled and sourced soon. Thanks for the encouragement, and the same to you. :) American Eagle (talk) 02:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much, American Eagle, you've basically single-handedly saved the Flywheel article and I'll support you and put in some work myself if they keep trying to delete it. Soli Deo Gloria! Invmog (talk) 03:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

You're very welcome! I'm a fan of Christ-honoring films, so it's my pleasure working on them. I think most of this Sherwood Pictures conundrum has been taken care of. :) Flywheel has been shown fully notable, and it looks good-to-go, plsu I don't see any other issues on the other articles. Thankfully. ;) In Christ alone, American Eagle (talk) 05:09, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Redlinks in lists

What is specific about List of Christian films that permits redlinks "in this case" when they are routinely removed from other List of articles? 98.248.33.198 (talk) 19:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

List of Christian films

You'll note the work I've done on this list. My intent is to highlight movies put out by Jefferson Moore's studio Kelly's Filmworks, that have also been Christ-honoring films. Maybe not to the wide distribution of Sherwood Pictures flicks, but still very well done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.33.198 (talk • contribs) 15:34, January 1, 2010

I would definitely appreciate some input in eventually developing the pages that go along with these "Redlinks".

Steve03Mills (talk) 19:41, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh yes, I failed to mention in my first note....these have been pages I have developed in the past, but got marked for deletion due to their lack of noteriety. Rather than keep them out there, I wished to get them in better shape before placing them out there a second time. Any hints on building noteworthy pages would be much appreciated.

Steve03Mills (talk) 19:55, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for not replying more quickly. 98.248.33.198, I don't know about redlinks in lists. WP:REDDEAL says "In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article..." That is what I was basing it on. I could be wrong, though. If you can quote a policy against this, please feel free to remove the red links. Steve03Mills, it's good to meet you! The only tip I can think of right now is to include reliable sources that back up the good information you write about. If you create an article about a film, drop me a note and I'd love to help out when I can! Blessings on you both. :) American Eagle (talk) 03:44, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the hints. Nice to meet you as well. And good work on the "The Perfect Stranger (film)" entry!

Steve03Mills (talk) 20:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

AIO Episodes

Hey AE, I can do wikitext, but wikipedia's documentation and policies are a lttle too confusing ... do you have any ideas on how we could revamp this list incorporating something like this? I'm not sure if the sources are acceptable, and/or if new pages should be used for each season, etc. The list can be made for all other seasons besides the example one as well. Erwin Springer [talk] 02:41, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that looks very good! I don't have the time to work on it myself, but everything looks perfect thus far. Those sources are unneeded (and The Odyssey Scoop isn't an acceptable source), so remove them. Otherwise, it looks great! I think that individual pages for the seasons would be deleted. Each season wouldn't be considered notable anyway... that's all I have to say. ;) Good work! American Eagle (talk) 03:37, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Sarah's Choice

I have nominated Sarah's Choice, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah's Choice. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SuaveArt (talk) 04:57, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment opened on your username

Hello, American_Eagle, and thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! Wikipedia has a policy on what usernames editors can use. Unfortunately, concerns have been raised that your username may be incompatible with that policy. You can contribute to the discussion about it here. Alternatively, if you agree that your username may be problematic and are willing to change it, it is possible for you to keep your present contributions history under a new name. Simply request a new name here following the guidelines on that page, rather than creating a whole new account. Thank you. Draftydoor (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I would not worry about this, as your name is well within our policy. Chillum ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:21, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Clarification, I did not mean to imply that you were using your username to promote a product, I was trying to explain a situation where your username would be inappropriate. That is to say, if your username is explicitly that if a company and you are using it to promote said company, there is an issue. However it is very obvious that this is not the case here. Not sure if my rationale made sense at the RfC, I just wanted to make sure you knew what I was talking about. Sometimes I don't know what I am talking about. Cheers, and happy editing. --kelapstick (talk) 16:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Chillum. :) kelapstick, I know; I didn't feel accused or anything by you. Thanks for taking the time to explain yourself. All is well, and have a great day. :) American Eagle (talk) 17:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello, American Eagle. While there had been some discussion here about whether your username met Wikipedia policy on what usernames editors can use, the result was to allow it, and that discussion has now been closed. If you would like to see what concerns were raised, you can find a link to the discussion in the archive. You do not need to change your username. Thank you. Draftydoor (talk) 17:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

The nomination in itself was a disruptive attempt to target an opponent. I'm surprised it was taken seriously. The nominator has been blocked again unsurprisingly (not for this though); the "mentorship" the user was "under" completely illusory. Auntie E. (talk) 01:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tracy Goode

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Tracy Goode. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tracy Goode. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey, American Eagle, the Tracy Goode article was relisted for deletion (I didn't know if that means that you should vote 'keep' again or not so I thought I'd let you know) and so far most of the editors and their arguments are against the article being kept; have a nice day though! Invmog (talk) 17:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Irony

Noted here. I mean, good gosh, the guy has a page (such as it is) on Rotten Tomatoes[1], so obviously that means he's notable! Right? Isn't Rotten Tomatoes a mark of notability according to - *ahem* - certain people? Seregain (talk) 04:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually I was talking about Rotten Tomatoes reviews. The films that were deleted had a Rotton Tomatoes listing, but no reviews. Think before you speak.--SuaveArt (talk) 08:31, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree. When the user's dealing with Christian films, they must be held to a perfect standard: Rotten Tomatoes reviews, many non-Christian sources, etc. But when an article he likes is nominated, sources don't really matter, self-published ones are okay, and it doesn't have to be "mainstream" anymore; what? Tracy Goode should've been kept, and the skeptic Bible shouldn't be. *sigh* American Eagle (talk) 04:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I'll be sure to make a note of this comment on the AFD for Skeptic's Annotated Bible, if this is your actual rationale for your delete vote (ex. "If my article deleted then this one should too" - that sort of conflicts with what you commented on the AFD). Furthermore, vote stacking is considered disruptive (which seems to be taking place here, as well as what happened on the AFD for Tracy Goode). Also please take WP:SOAP into account - it applies to your userspace as well.

As for "Christian sources", they don't convey a general notability since they are fringe sources and often very biased and purposely inaccurate, so articles based on Christian sources alone should be subject to more scrutiny than normal sources, since Wikipedia is dedicated to establishing a broader degree of notability, not just notability within some fringe circle.--SuaveArt (talk) 08:31, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

SuaveArt, please answer me this. You say Christian news publications don't convey a general notability to the subject. Why then are sources like this and this (both self-published), and this (a self-proclaimed "educational group dedicated to supporting local atheists" website) allowed? I neither "vote stacked" nor claimed Tracy Goode should be kept simply because another article was kept, so I won't replty to either false accusations. American Eagle (talk) 19:30, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Autoreviewer

Hi, just wanted to let you know that I have granted autoreviewer rights on your account, as you have created numerous valid articles. This will have little or no effect on your editing, and is intended mainly to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information see Wikipedia:Autoreviewer, and feel free to ask if you have any questions. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 02:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. I've worked with WP:NPP, and it can be very difficult with so many pages to do. Thanks again! American Eagle (talk) 03:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

No, thank you!! Keep it up! Take care, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 04:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6