User talk:Geo Swan/archive/2009-July-to-September

2004, 2005, 2006-01--2006-06, 2006-07--2006-10, 2006-10--2005-12, 2007-01--2007-06, 2007-07--2007-09, 2007-10--2007-12, 2008-01--2008-06, 2008-07--2008-09, 2008-10--2008-12, 2009-01--2009-03, 2009-04--2009-06, 2009-07--2009-09, 2009-10--2009-12, 2010-01, 2010-02, 2010-03, 2010-04, 2010-05, 2010-06, 2010-07, 2010-08, 2010-09, 2010-10, 2010-11, 2010-12, 2011-01, 2011-02, 2011-03, 2011-04, 2011-05, 2011-06, 2011-07, 2011-08, 2011-09, 2011-10, 2011-11, 2011-12, 2012-01, 2012-02, 2012-03, 2012-04, 2012-05, 2012-06, 2012-07, 2012-08, 2012-09, 2012-10, 2012-11, 2012-12, 2013-01, 2013-02, 2013-03, 2013-04, 2013-05, 2013-06, 2013-07, 2013-08, 2013-09, 2013-10, 2013-11, 2013-12, 2014-01, 2014-02, 2014-03, 2014-04, 2014-05, 2014-06, 2014-07, 2014-08, 2014-09, 2014-10, 2014-11, 2014-12, 2015-01, 2015-02, 2015-03, 2015-04, 2015-05, 2015-06, 2015-07, 2015-08, 2015-09, 2015-10, 2015-11, 2015-12, 2016-01, 2016-02, 2016-03, 2016-04, 2016-05, 2016-06, 2016-07, 2016-08, 2016-09, 2016-10, 2016-11, 2016-12, 2017-01, 2017-02, 2017-03, 2017-04, 2017-05, 2017-06, 2017-07, 2017-08, 2017-09, 2017-10, 2017-11, 2017-12, 2018-01, 2018-02, 2018-03, 2018-04, 2018-05, 2018-06, 2018-07, 2018-08, 2018-09, 2018-10, 2018-11, 2018-12, 2019-01, 2019-02, 2019-03, 2019-04, 2019-05, 2019-06, 2019-07, 2019-08, 2019-09, 2019-10, 2019-11, 2019-12, 2020-01, 2020-02, 2020-03, 2020-04, 2020-05, 2020-06, 2020-07, 2020-08, 2020-09, 2020-10, 2020-11, User Talk:Geo Swan/archive/list

Norwitz after January.

With Norwitz it appears that he spoke at the UN this year and actually it was on the 5th Febuary at the U.N. High-Level Symposium on Water Security so *after* January and he was also awarded the Superior Civilian Service Medal (which we don't have much information on but I'll start that article and it is 3rd in rank just behind the Meritorious Civilian Service Award. That means that he was really very much a public figure known to many to get a UN invite but certainly now he is notable though more due to events in 2009 and so after the date on your initial article. You should restart it. Ttiotsw (talk) 06:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Wikireader41's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikireader41 (talk) 22:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Wikireader41's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikireader41 (talk) 14:39, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Barnie

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		I hereby award Geo Swan this barnstar in his trenchant defense of free speech and opposition to arbitrary political actions aimed at curtailing the free flow of information. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:49, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Bad News

I was prepared for that little eventuality. I think there's a massive Witch Hunt on this site against Home and Away and it's articles and it's been an ongoing battle for a long time now.

A lot of people do their level best on articles but STILL it's not enough.

The Articles'll probably be shaved, reconstructed and then torn down again. Rinse, lather, repeat Conquistador2k6 5 July 2009 21:01 (UTC)

File:Yasser Hamdi in Afghanistan.jpg

Just to let you know the copyright of the above image is the Associated Press [1]. Polly (Parrot) 02:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Home and Away character list

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Talk:List of Home and Away characters.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Matthewedwards's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Matthewedwards :  Chat  01:35, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at User:Matthewedwards.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--VS ^talk 02:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Polar Foundation

Romanian Wikipedia can be a little strange, so I'm sorry that happened to you. I'm assuming they won't give you any trouble over pages in your own userspace, though. If you'd like, I can come fix your translation once you do it again. By the way, what do you think of my suggestion to move the English page to Romanian Antarctic Foundation or some such? Is there a particular reason we should have the title in Romanian? Because if not, WP:UE would seem to apply. Best, Biruitorul ^Talk 15:32, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I had read WP:UE before. It was surprisingly interested. I am happy to defer to your knowledge of Romanian in general, and I specifically am on board for your suggestion WRT this foundation. Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 18:25, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

AFD notification

You asked if there was a reason why I didn't notify the article's originator (that is, you) when I nominated it for deletion. The short answer is: no, there was no reason, at least not one that I thought about. As far as I'm aware, there's no requirement to leave personal notifications about an AFD, and when I make an AFD nomination, all I do is go through the three steps listed at WP:AFD. If there was a fourth step listed, "leave this template on the Talk page of the article's originator," I would probably follow it, but as it is I don't think about it. I suppose I assume that anyone interested in keeping the article should have it on their Watchlist and should therefore see the AFD nom at the article (and in this case it was discussed on the Talk page for a couple days beforehand). But I didn't mean any harm in failing to notify you, and I apologize if any harm was incurred. Propaniac (talk) 03:17, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Sheberghan mass graves, 2004, 2006, 2007.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Sheberghan mass graves, 2004, 2006, 2007.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:52, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Zefnoon Safai, Legham Province, Afghanistan.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Zefnoon Safai, Legham Province, Afghanistan.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 02:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Moharam Khan Nasiri, Legham Province, Afghanistan.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Moharam Khan Nasiri, Legham Province, Afghanistan.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Polly (Parrot) 03:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Above Images

The pdf source you list is the Naval Postgraduate School isn't that part of the US Federal Government? Polly (Parrot) 03:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Lake Iroquois Shoreline

I proposed the merger in May 2008. After one year there was no discussion so I performed the merge.

The shoreline is a part of the geology of Lake Iroquois. Therefore it makes sense to talk about it on the Glacial Lake Iroquois article. The remnant shoreline is only visible in the vicinity of Toronto which is only a small part of the total shoreline of the ancient lake. IMO it isn't notable enough to warrant a separate article. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 12:19, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

You are incorrect. The ancient shoreline is observable at various places, including near Fort Drum, on the New York shore at the other end of the lake. I got the original image used for Lake Iroquois from a web-site from the Army base at Fort Drum that discussed the Lake Iroquois shoreline. Geo Swan (talk) 16:11, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

None of that information was on either page. Please add it to the current page. If enough evidence surfaces to make the shoreline significant in respects other than its glacial origins (has it factored into human history?) than maybe the article might deserve to be reinstated. However, to date, nothing like that has appeared. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Chukchi Cap

I've added links to the Chukchi Cap today.--86.25.15.141 (talk) 11:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Your assistance please...

Hi,

No the deleted image (File:Asadullah Khalid asad.jpg) is not the same as the images you mentioned, it was a low resolution, very tightly cropped (top of head missing) image of him facing the camera and aparently speaking into a microphone. My guess would be it's a screenshot from a TV broadcast or simmilar. --Sherool (talk) 16:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge

Debating merging Libyan training camp and LIFG training camp, going to look for more information tonight after work. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 18:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I have wondered whether "The Libyan camp" might refer to Khalden, because its long term director was a Libyan. Geo Swan (talk) 18:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

AN/I

You've been fingered at WP:ANI. Crafty (talk) 04:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Craftyminion's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shona Holmes

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. —Sean Whitton / 13:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Shona Holmes

Shona Holmes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View AfD)

This person doesn't deserve to have her own page. She isn't notably in any way and should either be deleted or merged into the Health care reform in the United States. I feel we should just delete this article Fire 55 (talk) 07:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

• Merge with Health care reform in the United States. Don't think it deserves its own article but should be mentioned. Jujutacular ^talk_contribs 11:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
• Comment -- Here is a reference I found today, to an article about Palmira Holmes, a fellow resident of the town were Shona Holmes lived, who has been inundated with calls from other Canadians outraged over Shona's apparent betrayal of Canada. A wikipedia article about Palmira Holmes would be a BLP1E. But Shona Holmes has multiple claims to notability, beyond her appearance in the ad: (1) there is the discussion over the credibility of her claim; (2) there is the strength of the feeling of betrayal from ordinary Canadians; (3) there are the comments in reaction from senior Canadian political leaders; (4) there is the Democrats Abroad counter-reaction. Geo Swan (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Carmela Fragomeni (2009-07-23). "You have the wrong S. Holmes". Hamilton Spectator. Retrieved 2009-07-25. Palmira Holmes has been inundated with phone calls from people trying to express their fury over Shona Holmes' decision to become the face of an aggressive American TV ad that slams Canadian-style health care.
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. -- –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
• Comment -- If, for the sake of argument, there was a strong argument for merging this article into another article, why would we merge it into Health care reform in the United States, as opposed to:

• Canadian health care system -- Holmes is, after all, a Canadian...
• Canadian and American health care compared -- her youtube video is, after all, part of a comparison of the two systems...

It seems to me that when there are multiple potential targets for a merge and redirection that is a very strong counter-argument to merging, it is a very strong argument that the topic of the article is of sufficient notability that it should remain a stand-alone article, and should not be merged. Geo Swan (talk) 16:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Comment Rememeber someone isn't notable because shes in the news as this link explans. The only reason why see is getting this coverage is because of the health care reform in the US and therefore either deserves to be deleted or linked to their. She is a part of the debate on health card reform and that's where the info belongs.--Fire 55 (talk) 21:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Because what she's "notable" for is an advertisement which aired in the United States pertaining to a debate about American health care reform. Bearcat (talk) 16:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

• Keep -- for the reasons I offered above. Geo Swan (talk) 16:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - As per WP:BIO1E Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 18:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. WP:BLP1E. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - Not notable and the ad she was in has more to do with Patients United Now's efforts to block/direct U.S. health care reform than her specifically. --Ctbwiki (talk) 14:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
• Certainly worth mentioning somewhere, but essentially a WP:BLP1E. The debate she's a part of is notable, but that doesn't mean that she is — which is proven by the fact that this article is almost entirely about the advertisement she filmed, and contains almost no biographical information whatsoever. Perhaps an article about the advertising campaign itself might be in order — but absent other proof of notability, we don't particularly need an article about her. Merge to an appropriate target or delete. Bearcat (talk) 16:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Excuse me, you refer to just a single debate. But surely there are multiple debates?
• Comment May I remind everyone that the wikipedia is not solely an American project? There is a separate, different debate triggered by Holmes claims up here in Canada. Geo Swan (talk) 01:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Her

• Keep -- What makes wikipedia useful is that when, in a debate with some fox news viewers, this woman I've never heard of before is mentioned, I can get a quick summary of the facts from a source that I can trust. Keep, keep, keep. --69.134.163.9 (talk) 01:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment' The ip users comment is very fishy since not only was it the persons first edit, but only seconds after Geo Swans. Second if you are getting facts from wikipedia and you trust it you need to really look at wikipedia again because no university will accept facts from wikipedia. Nevertheless the fact that you are in the news DOES NOT mean you get an article. Which you can't seem to get Geo Swan. Please read this again WP:BLP1E. Holmes is only getting coverage because of the fact there is a health care reform in US. --Fire 55 (talk) 02:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Are you accusing me of being a sockpuppet master? In my five years of contributing to the wikipedia I have faced three or four irresponsible and unsubstantiated accusations that I am a sockpuppet or sockpuppet master. But I declare this is the the one with slimmest justification. Geo Swan (talk) 03:54, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

It's the fact that the comment by the person is just stupid. I said it was fishy I didn't accuse you. First, it's really fishy that a persons first edit is on a deletion debate. Which more ip user don't even do let alone the first edit they make. Either way this page is going to get deleted because the people that know wikipedia guidelines agree with me.--Fire 55 (talk) 04:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• Have you ever heard of reverse DNS? In the interests of your credibility you might consider using it before you accuse anyone else of sockpuppetry. Geo Swan (talk) 05:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Have you heard of proxy servers. I bet you have. I'll come back with a message that says I'm from Japan then from one in France.--Fire 55 (talk) 06:06, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• (1) Please don't call other contributors stupid. Doing so never helps cultivates reasoned civil discussion. 2 You called the IP post "fishy" because it came "seconds" after mine. It came eight minutes after mine. That is 480 seconds. Geo Swan (talk) 16:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I never called anyone stupid. You purposely are putting words in my mouth (this is the second time). I said the comment was stupid and I have every right to say that a comment someone made is stupid.--Fire 55 (talk) 12:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• Nominator claims: "Holmes is only getting coverage because of the fact there is a health care reform in US." But, if that were true, why is it the following articles which discuss her precedent setting court case don't mention the US health care debate?
  • Tanya Talaga (2007-09-06). "Patients suing province over wait times: Man, woman who couldn't get quick treatment travelled to U.S. to get brain tumours removed". Toronto Star. Retrieved 2009-07-27.
  • Sam Solomon (2007-09-30). "New lawsuit threatens Ontario private care ban: "Ontario Chaoulli" case seeks to catalyze healthcare reform". Vol. 4, no. 16. National Review of Medicine. Retrieved 2009-07-27.
  • "Auditor says Ontario should post wait times for every surgeon". CBC News. 2008-10-08. Retrieved 2009-07-27.
  • Kevin Gaudet (2007-12-01). "Patients Sue for Private Health Insurance in Ontario". Canadian Free Press. Retrieved 2009-07-27.

TY Geo Swan (next time sign your posts) you still don't get it. YOU DON'T get an article if you are in the news. These stories are middle in the newspaper articles not the front page stuff she's getting because of her ad. If see is so important why did you create the article years after these stories. BECAUSE OF HER AD.--Fire 55 (talk) 06:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• Fire 55, here on the wikipedia we are supposed to reach decisions through cool, meaningful, collegial, civil discussion. This means that those who comply with the wikipedia's civility policies do their best to actually read what the other person wrote. They do their best to confine their comments to editorial matters. I read what you wrote, blp1e, blp1e, blp1e. Could you please show me the courtesy of trying to actually read what I wrote before you respond? The four references I cited above date to 2007 and 2008 -- over a year before she appeared in the US ad. As I pointed out above those references were to her lawsuit against the government of Ontario. I suggest this is a separate event from the US ad, by any reasonable measure. Geo Swan (talk) 13:04, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment Since you still don't get it I'll quote the page "Wikipedia is not a newspaper. The bare fact that someone has been in the news does not in itself imply that they should be the subject of an encyclopedia entry. Where a person is mentioned by name in a Wikipedia article about a larger subject, but essentially remains a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them."--Fire 55 (talk) 23:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• She is not notable; the events are: WP:BLP1E. Either merge to an appropriate article or delete. DoubleBlue (talk) 06:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

• Obvious BLP1E. Besides, the article doesn't even make any effort to assert her (nonexistent) notability. 195.14.197.53 (talk) 22:54, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Rename. The case is now sufficiently notable that the public has a right to a balanced account. That being said, this is only a small part of this woman's life and an article under her name would be problematic for all the reasons mentioned above. I suggest renaming the article something like "The Holmes-Advertisement Controversy". (Perhaps someone can find a better title, ideally one that doesn't use her name, though the fact that Holmes is not this woman's professional name may mitigate that problem.) Bucketsofg 00:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Keep, but rename, per Buck's reasoning. If she has a nasty divorce, it doesn't belong in here...make the article more clearly about the advertisement and her medical context. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 04:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Keep-or-Rename: She appears on Fox TV, Mayo has edited her Patient Story, she's been mentioned in the Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail, the Vancouver Sun, the Canadian Press, the Halifax Chronicle Herald, Bloomberg, the Calgary Herald, the Ottawa Citizen, Fox Business, The Guardian (.co.uk). It might be "one event" but the clear response to "one event" is rename, not delete. - BalthCat (talk) 00:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

• Note to potential closing administrator -- since those who voiced a delete opinion, based on BLP1E, mainly did so before the article was expanded, and generally haven't returned here, to meaningfully address the counter-arguments, I'd like to request their opinions be discounted, because this is supposed to be a discussion -- not a vote. These {{afd}} are supposed to be discussions where there is a meaningful exchange of views. I am going to suggest this article be relisted, to get the opinions of individuals who have read the article in its current state. Geo Swan (talk) 15:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

• Comment I have seen the changes and as can only be expected it is still only about the event not her. DoubleBlue (talk) 05:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Not to mention the fact the article doesn't even mention where she was born, her birthdate, or even her age. Even if you google them you get nothing. No one knows or cares because she's not notable.--Fire 55 (talk) 12:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

• Merge to somewhere appropriate. This woman is a pawn in the healthcare debate, she is not personally notable. Sueing over medical treatment does not make someone worthy of an encyclopedia entry. Fences&Windows 02:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Category:Guantanamo Bay attorneys

Was wondering if you were aware there is a CfD for this. Guessing you may have created the original (now changed) category, as you are the only talk page contributor.John Z (talk) 08:40, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Updated Link on Bill Roggio Page

Hi- It seems that the third link on the "Bill Roggio" article is no longer valid. The following is a link that leads to the article referenced ("W's Biggest Hit"): http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=457549

I'm rather new to the editing side of Wikipedia, so I'm not sure, etiquette-wise, if this is something that I should request you to edit, or if you're fine with me making the edit. Please just let me know.

Best,

Koschei D (talk) 06:47, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Bill Roggio

Glad I could help! Thanks for filling me in on the update.

Best, Koschei D (talk) 14:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Padsha Wazir (disambiguation)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Padsha Wazir (disambiguation). 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 "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/Padsha Wazir (disambiguation). 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, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

AFD

I'm nominating Shona Holmes for deletion.--Fire 55 (talk) 21:01, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

ANI for article Jeffrey_D._Gordon

I thought you might like to know that I reported this article on the ANI board because of the removal of your added edits to this article and my attempts to restore it. Although I reviewed the content and it appears to be properly sourced and not in violation of WP:BLP, there are two editors who apparently disagree and insist on censorship of the material while also refraining from discussing the matter including specific objections on the article's talk page. Your comments would probably be appropriate at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Jeffrey_D._Gordon and would be welcomed by me. Cheers!   bsmithme  05:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bashir Ahmed Maktal

The article Bashir Ahmed Maktal has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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. IQinn (talk) 04:36, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Philosopher's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Articles for deletion nomination of Abdul Salam (Taliban leader, Karabak front, 2001)

I have nominated Abdul Salam (Taliban leader, Karabak front, 2001), 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/Abdul Salam (Taliban leader, Karabak front, 2001). 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. Ironholds (talk) 22:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Abdullah Abu Masood camp

I have nominated Abdullah Abu Masood camp, 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/Abdullah Abu Masood camp. 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. Ironholds (talk) 23:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Abdul Salam (Taliban leader, Kabul front, 2001)

I have nominated Abdul Salam (Taliban leader, Kabul front, 2001), 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/Abdul Salam (Taliban leader, Kabul front, 2001). 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. A new name 2008 (talk) 16:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Abdul Basit (terrorist suspect)

You are right, I forgot to inform you of that deletion request. Didn't think there would be a real Wikipedian behind an article like that. I'm sorry. RobbertS 6:58 2009 August 17

my reply. Geo Swan (talk) 16:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you fully that I should have given you the opportunity to give your opinion about the page. There is a reason I had nominated it for deletion though, and I think you don't really get that point.

My point is this: "Abdul Basit" is a name like the English "John Smith". It's a very common name in Arabic culture. You aren't making a Wikipedia page about every reference to a John Smith on the internet, you know? Furthermore, "Abdul Basit" is a very well known celebrity to the Arabic people, as it's one of the best reciters of the holy Quran of our time. That being said, it wouldn't surprise anyone that many Arabic people name their sons after this guy. Also, "Abdul" is one of the 99 names of "Allah" (Names of God in the Qur'an), and many people name their children after one of those names.

Hope this clears things up. I hope you're not re-entering that page to Wikipedia, because to me, it's near the edge of racism (don't get me wrong, I'm not an Arab). ::RobbertS 15:23, 2009 August 17

Let me say first I have realized that Arabic names are tricky, and, without representing myself as any kind of expert, I have tried to tell others when I think they are mishandling them. I'd be happy to learn more from you of further wrinkles.

WRT to "John Smith" -- I think homonyms, notable individuals with names shared with others, are less common in European languages than in Arabic. But we do get them. And when we do we have a disambiguation page, and the individual "John Smith" articles are modified by a disambiguating suffix. So we do start to cover every "John Smith" who is worth covering.

I have no intention of adding racist material. I don't see however, how either the version you nominated, or the version at User:Geo Swan/review/Abdul Basit (terrorist suspect) is racist, or near racist. And I would very much appreciate hearing your reasoning.

In general, when thinking about how to handle material on controversial topics, I try to think about how I would like to see the wikipedia handle the topic of legal, large-scale slavery, if slavery was still being practiced in western industrial nations. Back when slavery was legal and accepted it is my impression that it was the abolitionists -- those whose views is most close to the modern attitude on the equality of all individuals, who were regarded as the kooks. I'd like to think that the wikipedia could rise to the occasion. The mainstream view would have to be neutrally represented. And the modern view, that all humans have the same innate abilities and rights, would also have to be fairly and neutrally represented, without edging into advocacy.

Was Abdul Basit unfairly profiled, and unfairly suspected, on flimsy evidence? We don't know. Whatever evidence existed about him remains secret. Covering that he existed, was suspected, was reported to have been held taken into secret custody doesn't need to imply that the allegations have been confirmed. If you think the current wording implies that it is confirmed that he played a role in terrorism, or that it comes near to implying this, do you think it is possible to draft wording that doesn't imply confirmation?

On some other issues some of my correspondents think that it is best to not cover material when they think it contains allegations that they don't (personally) consider credible. I think that is a mistake. WP:VER says "verifiabiliy, not truth". I think we have two choices when there is a topic that interests us, but the references available to us present conclusions at odds with our own conclusions. I think we can hold our nose, and fairly and faithfully present contributions that fairly and neutrally presents what the WP:RS say, even if we disagree with it. Or, we can choose to hold off on covering that topic. We can leave it, and possibly let someone else work on it. Or we can leave it, and wait, and maybe additional WP:RS will be published we won't have to hold our nose to present.

I don't think there is any topic, no matter how controversial, that can't be represented in a neutral fashion, with enough effort.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 20:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for using the time template, was looking for a quick way to type the UTC time without losing the signature. Thanks for that one.

I still think you're missing the point. My point is you're gathering news topics on an Abdul Basit. But there's no way of knowing that the Abdul Basit named in topic #1 on website X is the same as in topic #2 on website Y, because there are many Arabic people carrying that name. Of course, if you do have evidence that all of the Abdul Basits you had gathered are one and the same person, I'm not complaining at all. Hey, freedom of speech! Write what you want!

Let me put it in an other way. It's nonsense to create a topic "Peter" and citing many sources of a "Peter" who had been involved in different crimes, with no evidence at all that those Peters are one person. The result of that page would be that neutral knowledge database Wikipedia says that everybody called Peter is bad.

Since it regards terrorism and not petty crimes, I found the page to be near the edge of racism. I didn't mean to say I'm insulted or anything! Not at all! I'm just trying to say the page loses its neutrality, in my opinion, when you haven't got evidence that those Abdul Basits are one and the same person. Like Wikipedia says Peter is a bad guy cause you found a few Peters on the net that committed a crime. Catching my drift?

Hope this settles the case, 'cause it's not like I'll loose a nights sleep if you really want to keep that article. :)

I'm also sorry if the message hadn't gotten across clearly enough on my first try. I'm Dutch, it's not easy to make your point in a different language.

With kind regards, RobbertS 00:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

A quick note just to clear up any misunderstanding, "Abdul" is not one of the names of Allah, it is the combination of "abd" (servant) with "al" (the). However, "Basit" is one of the 99 names (as is every other name that follows "Abdul", Abdulrahman, Abdulkareem, Abdul Sayyaf, etc).

People name their children "Abdul (servant of)" + "[insert one of 99 names]". That way, their child is "Servant of the Just One", or "Servant of the Charitable One", or in this case, "Servant of the One Who Lays Things Out". Just for future reference! Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 01:39, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm no expert either. I was told Abdul was one of the names of Allah by an Arabic man, but I guess I didn't get that right. The guy doesn't speak my native language that good. Anyway: thank you for clearing that up! :) RobbertS 18:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Alan Kay (judge)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Alan Kay (judge), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nandor Vadas. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Geoff Plourde (talk) 20:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Al Qaida guest house, Kabul

I have nominated Al Qaida guest house, Kabul, 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/Al Qaida guest house, Kabul. 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. Ironholds (talk) 12:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Al Qaida safe house, Karachi

I have nominated Al Qaida safe house, Karachi, 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/Al Qaida safe house, Karachi. 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. Ironholds (talk) 12:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Al Fand training camp

I have nominated Al Fand training camp, 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/Al Fand training camp. 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. Ironholds (talk) 12:26, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Al Aqua military training camp

I have nominated Al Aqua military training camp, 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/Al Aqua military training camp. 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. Ironholds (talk) 12:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Suspect guest house, Jalalabad

I have nominated Suspect guest house, Jalalabad, 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/Suspect guest house, Jalalabad. 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. Ironholds (talk) 14:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Asil training camp

I have nominated Asil training camp, 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/Asil training camp. 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. Ironholds (talk) 15:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: A request

Certainly: I'll bookmark any more I see and we can discuss them. The main flaw (and something to avoid in the future) is that they don't pass WP:N despite the references because the references don't go into any detail - they're not about the safe houses, they only briefly mention them in relation to other stuff, that sort of thing. Ironholds (talk) 18:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

replied. Geo Swan (talk) 18:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Notice of a reverted edit

I have reverted (rolled-back) your edit here in the assumption that you did not mean to take out all of Jennavecia's talk page when posting? If necessary please repost your comment without removing all of the other material.--VirtualSteve ^{need admin support?} 11:52, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Did I? That is unexpected. I had that edit window open for a couple of days. But when I opened it, I had clicked on the "add a new section" tab. Odd. Thanks. Geo Swan (talk) 11:56, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

• That is odd. Glad I could be of assistance.--VirtualSteve ^{need admin support?} 11:58, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Abu Zubaydah's Picture

Hi Geoswan, thanks for all your posts on the Abu Zubaydah page. I think the picture you recently posted is actually from his capture when he was piled into the back of a pickup truck with the other captured detainees that night, not from his interrogation. As far as I know there are no pictures of Abu Zubaydah from his interrogation. ArthurThomas24 (talk) 01:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Drilnoth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Drilnoth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Drilnoth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:19, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Drilnoth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

–Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Ryan Bell

I have nominated Ryan Bell, 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/Ryan Bell (2nd nomination). 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. Eastmain (talk) 00:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply

I do appreciate a candid response. Perhaps now we can follow my suggestion about two days ago and drop this matter, since we're obviously not going to agree over editorial issues and I see no point in perusing user ones. Ironholds (talk) 23:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Suspect guest house, Konduz

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Suspect guest house, Konduz. 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/Suspect guest house, Konduz. 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) 01:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Mike Moran

Hi Geo, In reply to your query - the article was first created on 10 November 2004 by IP 63.196.241.140, it was prodded on 27 September 2008 and deleted 5 days later. It was then moved to your userspace on 26 December 2008 and you requested deletion moments later. As far as I can see the only edit you made to it as Geo Swan in its entire history was to request the delete. Hope this helps, best, Nancy ^talk 12:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello alter-ego

Hey mate, just came across reference to a "Jawr" and a "al-Jabal" training camp in the 90s, both in AFG. Any ideas/sources so we can add these two? Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 00:59, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Abu Hureira Qasm al-Rimi

I have nominated Abu Hureira Qasm al-Rimi, 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/Abu Hureira Qasm al-Rimi. 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. UltraMagnus (talk) 19:38, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Could you please explain further...

Could you please explain why you deleted File:Great Bear Lake a.png?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 23:26, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

It's an image description page without an image. It looks like the image was deleted in 2005 by User:TheCoffee (back when image deletion was permanent) for not having a source, the description page was restored in late 2007, and I deleted it a week later when OrphanBot informed me that it had found a description page without an image. --Carnildo (talk) 20:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Zaid Muhamamd Sa'id Al Husayn

Zaid Muhamamd Sa'id Al Husayn needs to have his CSRT allegations added. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 15:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Will do. Geo Swan (talk) 15:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Khalid_Sheikh_Mohammed_image_widely_published_in_September_2009_-a.jpg

I have tagged File:Khalid_Sheikh_Mohammed_image_widely_published_in_September_2009_-a.jpg as {{orphaned fairuse}}. In order for the image to be kept at Wikipedia, it must be included in at least one article. Otherwise, it will be deleted in seven days. feydey (talk) 08:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Yellowknife Airport Terminal.jpg

I noticed that you added Category:Yellowknife airport to that page. The actual file is hosted at Commons so adding a category has the effect of creating a page on Wikipedia. I've deleted the page but of course it still looks like it exists, File:Yellowknife Airport Terminal.jpg but it isn't and should not have categories. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 02:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Padsha Wazir (disambiguation)

See User:Geo Swan/Padsha Wazir (disambiguation) for the userfied page. JForget 19:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Category sorting

Just a reminder that the DEFAULTSORT magic word uses a colon, not a pipe; for instance {{DEFAULTSORT:Aberdeen}}, not {{DEFAULTSORT|Aberdeen}}. —Paul A (talk) 00:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

More Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Thinking of England's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ToE^T 02:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Avoiding this problem in the future...

Apologies once more for the confusion. In any case, I've made a suggestion on the RFD discussion which I think will avoid the sorts of the misunderstanding behind both the red link removal today and the creation of those redirects before. Let me know what you think. —mako๛ 04:31, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Also, thanks for reverting the relevant changes. I appreciate the help. —mako๛ 19:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Mysteries

I noticed your "are detainees allowed to talk to one another?" question. I am sorry I can't remember the names but I have read of one detainee who was wearing orange overalls because he ha been in a disagreement with another detainee. Also one who had discussed certain aspects of his story with another detainee. So it would seem likely that some at least of the detainees were mixing, and certainly we know that was the case with the younger detainees. Rich Farmbrough, 00:34, 19 September 2009 (UTC).

Speedy deletion nomination of Muhammad Jafar Jamal al-Kahtani

A tag has been placed on Muhammad Jafar Jamal al-Kahtani requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Frmatt (talk) 03:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Shona Holmes

I have nominated Shona Holmes, 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/Shona Holmes. 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. Fire 55 (talk) 21:04, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

AFD for Shona Holmes

First, let me say thank you for pointing me towards the podcast. I still don't think it warrants Shona having a whole article to herself but it certainly reinforces the need to have a section on her with relation to the healthcare debate, which I believe already exists.

However, could I suggest that you and Fire22 go to WP:TEA. I know this is his third time nominating the article for deletion in a very short space of time and that is something that should be discussed but anything other than civil discourse isn't going to make either of you look good! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 14:04, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

You may have seen that I'm now sitting on the fence. I hadn't considered the impact of Holmes' case in Canada before, I assumed she'd be laughed out of court. Surely nobody takes her seriously? Anyway, my argument to delete was partly based on Fire22's inexpert copy-and-paste, and probably a generous side serving of IDONTLIKEIT, so I'm staying out of the debate now. Fences&Windows 16:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Mazca's talk page.
Message added 06:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

~ mazca ^talk 06:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Iqinn's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

IQinn (talk) 15:17, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Iqinn's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

IQinn (talk) 03:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Iqinn's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

IQinn (talk) 06:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Geo Swan. You have new messages at Iqinn's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

IQinn (talk) 06:42, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Shona Holmes

An unresolved lawsuit isn't "precedent-setting"; by definition, a precedent isn't set until a lawsuit is resolved, because the resolution is what the precedent is. And by the same token, a lawsuit isn't notable until it sets a precedent, and therefore isn't notable until it's resolved — which means that as things currently stand, she's still only notable for 1E. Bearcat (talk) 14:19, 29 September 2009 (UTC)