User talk:Bsherr/Archives/2007

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Bsherr. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Welcome!

Hello, Bsherr/Archives, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --AW 15:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

For noticing this! Not sure how I missed that, lol. Thanks a ton! Ariel♥Gold 16:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Any other changes, or suggestions, feel free to make them or comment on the talk page, as it is still a work in progress. Someday I'll get around to finishing it and moving it to WP space, I hope, lol. Ariel♥Gold 16:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:Status of migration to standard warnings

There was a master plan for the migration of warnings to the uw format at Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings/Overview. I wasn't heavily involved with that effort, but it's my understanding that there was significant push back from some long term editors who didn't want their favorite templates migrated. So, the process was only partially completed. You may want to ask User:Khukri for more details, as he was the mastermind.

My own feeling is that we should allow time for people to continue to adjust to the new system, then slowly move forward with the less controversial aspects of the migration. Some of the old warnings may end up continuing into perpetuity, but I personally don't have any huge problem with that. The idea is to provide a complete and useful set of templates for the convenience of our editors. If they prefer to use the older ones or their own personal templates, then so be it.--Kubigula (talk) 21:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Notability of Tips Productions

Yes I know what notability is, but lack of notability is not the test for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#A7. That only allows for speedy deletion of an article which "does not indicate why its subject is important or significant". It also says "This is distinct from questions of notability, verifiability and reliability of sources". The procedures for deletion on grounds of notability and lack of sources are WP:PROD and WP:AFD. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:03, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Redirections for Deletion

Hello there,

I see you know how to delete redirect pages. Can you please get some deleted for me? On this template, there are a few inconsistencies. Every presidency page should not, in theory, link to the president himself. For example, the article Presidency of James Monroe does not exist, and consequently, does not redirect to James Monroe. However, a few presidency links on here due indeed redirect to the actual president, and these redirection pages should be deleted. The following articles are:

Thanks! =) --MosheA (talk) 21:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Discography

Hi Bsherr. The main issue at the AfD was whether those extra charts should be apart of her discography at all. Consensus was to delete them, not merge. Moving all the charts from Nelly Furtado extended discography into Nelly Furtado discography is essentially reposting deleted material. Moving them would've been ok if consensus was to merge, but it wasn't. Discographies that are featured lists (such as Gwen Stefani discography and Hilary Duff discography) limit the number of markets. Spellcast (talk) 09:53, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

re: Nelly Furtado discography

I had reverted your edit before I saw your message on my Talk Page. Anyway, my reasons for the revert are the same now as they were when I nominated the "extended discography" for deletion. The information is excessive and goes way beyond what any other discography page in Wikipedia does. It is the same reasoning behind why component charts and minor markets should also not be in individual song articles, otherwise they become cumbersome and excessive in the same way. Additionally, none of the "extended" info was sourced. There is no need for chart placings from all of those minor world music markets - it's not a bias against those countries. I see Spellcast's comments above - I'd agree with those statements as well. - eo (talk) 02:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Explosive forming

I'm sorry, the edit summary wasn't meant at you (and it appears that your application of it was correct). I just have strong feelings about people abusing CSD for encyclopedic topics. Again, I apologize if you took any offense or thought that I was commenting on you. east.718 at 10:05, November 24, 2007