User talk:DavidCooke

talk page

thank you

For stating an opinion at the Rfc against me. Terryeo 07:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your addition to my draft writeup. I hope to pull that together soon. --Justanother 15:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rons Org article

As you've noticed the Origins section has unreferenced and disputed claims. Actually the opening paragraphs are worse, treating one of the principal claims of Rons Org - that the Church have been squirreling Source since 1986 - as fact.

However, I think a warning on the discussion page - I see there has been no discussion at all up to now - would be appropriate before doing anything major, if only to see if anyone else out there is watching this page. --Hartley Patterson 03:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Santiniketan Park Association

Hi DavidCooke. You are off to such a great start on the article Santiniketan Park Association that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 18:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Fripp

Bredonburgh does not exist. If you read his diary you can compare his photos with this: [1] Marco bisello 23:35, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Marco. I've never been there, so I'll let the matter rest. DavidCooke 00:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Convulsive therapy

Hi,

I notice you've edited the convulsive therapy article in the past. Currently it has numerous fact tags dating back to June/July of this year, and without the unverified facts there isn't much of an article left. If you know of any appropriate sources, I wonder if you could add them? If not, I'm going to propose the article for deletion. Thanks. Nmg20 17:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Convulsive therapy

An article that you have been involved in editing, Convulsive therapy, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Convulsive therapy. Thank you. Nmg20 (talk) 12:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Phoenix Lectures

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The Phoenix Lectures, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of The Phoenix Lectures. Cirt (talk) 13:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The Phoenix Lectures

I have nominated The Phoenix Lectures, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Phoenix Lectures. 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. Cirt (talk) 04:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mordialloc Secondary College for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mordialloc Secondary College, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mordialloc Secondary College until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]