User talk:Jackal lady luck

This user may have left Wikipedia. Jackal lady luck has not edited Wikipedia since 2011. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome!

Hello, Jackal lady luck, 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:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Welcome!

Hello, Jackal lady luck, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as RWNJ, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dmol (talk) 08:39, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of RWNJ

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

Dictionary term, no evidence of notability for 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dmol (talk) 08:39, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of The Jackal (blogsite)

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

A tag has been placed on The Jackal (blogsite) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you can assert the notability of the subject, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

See the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. Ish dar ian 03:10, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Jackal (blogsite) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Jackal (blogsite) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jackal (blogsite) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

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 template from the top of the article. Pichpich (talk) 18:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your Questions

Hi JLL. The term bitey is a reference to WP:BITE. That article should clear that up for you. Also, there are three varying stages for deletion:

Speedy Deletions which deal with several different issues. There are generally used to remove an article quickly which fail to meet certain criteria without drawing the issue out at AfD.
Proposed Deletions which are used on articles which a user or users think would be uncontroversial.
Articles for Deletion which are used to gain consensus on whether the article stays or goes. This is where things get a bit more in-depth.

To answer your question at User:Pichpich's talk page: if an article fails a speedy deleting, it may be sent to AfD for further discussion. In this case, Lifebaka gave benefit of the doubt and declined the SD. However, the article was then sent to AfD to gain consensus on the issue of notability. This actually happens frequently on Wikipedia and is perfectly acceptable, as long as it is done in good faith. I hope this clears things up for you! :) Ish dar ian 11:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information Ishdarian. I appreciate the time you've taken to explain the process. Just a few more questions if you don't mind:

Is there a standard or policy to dismiss an AfD because the nominator is uncivil? I would have thought that an uncivilized display shows a lack of good faith.
How might I find a deleted edit from The Jackal (blogsite) talk page that was further to the decision not to speedy delete? It does not seem to be in the edit history after comments I made were deleted from the AfD. I know about compare, but it doesn't seem to be there at all. Would this be what is refereed to as vandalism? It concerned criteria 1 being met.
I would have thought all edits were available on Wikipedia?
Is there any relevance to it being a new article, that needs further work which will give it more notability?
Is there any relevance to furthering an argument concerning other Wikipedia content, that is far less notable but remains intact?

J L L 12:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No. The nomination itself was in good faith. It was a minor incident and I already spoke to Pich about it.
The history of the article's talk page would be a good place to start, however, I see no mention of deleted posts. If it was an accident, it's not vandalism.
Yes, on the history pages of articles.
The fact that it is a new article is usually a key talking point when an article is flagged for having little content. When it comes to notability, the age tends to not matter as much.
The essay at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS can explain things. Just because there may be an article with less to no notability that slips through the cracks, it doesn't mean we have to let everything through.The discussion is supposed to focus on the article at hand; not others.

Hope this helps! If you have any other questions, I'll try to answer as best as possible, or at least point you in the right direction. Cheers! Ish dar ian 13:53, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ishdarian. I appreciate the information. J L L 04:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hi Pichpich, could you please warn me if you believe any of my edits are vandalism prior to reporting. Please read and follow Wikipedia:AIAV. J L L 09:11, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure... I guess? But I have absolutely no intention of specifically monitoring your activity on Wikipedia and I'm utterly confident that you're smart enough to know which of your edits are vandalism. Best, Pichpich (talk) 15:56, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Jackal (blogsite) deletion

Hi Ron Ritzman, Today you deleted The Jackal (blogsite). However the proper notification was not given. I was notified through an anonymous comment on The Jackal (blogsite) instead, which seems strange. The deletion nomination was not in good faith and the nominator was uncivil. I therefore request that the article be included as it meets Wikipedia notability requirements. Please re-introduce it for discussion. J L L 03:04, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but the consensus was clear in the discussion. You participated in the discussion and everybody but you said "delete". It couldn't have been closed any other way and if it weren't me it would have been some other admin. Also, you were notified here on your talk page. If you still disagree then you are welcome to have the deletion reviewed but for now the article will stay deleted. However, I do agree that the nominator's comments about how other bloggers view you was completely inappropriate and irrelevant to the issue of whether or not the article should be deleted. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:19, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of RWNJ for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article RWNJ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RWNJ until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

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 template from the top of the article. Ish dar ian 05:24, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Jackal lady luck! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

MfD nomination of User:Jackal lady luck/The Jackal

User:Jackal lady luck/The Jackal, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jackal lady luck/The Jackal and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Jackal lady luck/The Jackal during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:56, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers

Hi Jackal lady luck,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to an in-person meetup in Mohua / Golden Bay

Thinking about your summer break? Think about joining other Wikipedians and Wikimedians in Golden Bay / Mohua! Details are on the meetup page. There's heaps of interesting stuff to work on e.g. the oldest extant waka or New Zealand's oldest ongoing legal case. Or you may spend your time taking photos and then upload them.

Golden Bay is hard to get to and the airline flying into Tākaka uses small planes, so we are holding some seats from and to Wellington and we are offering attendees a $200 travel subsidy to help with costs.

Be in touch with Schwede66 if this event interests you and you'd like to discuss logistics. Schwede 66 09:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]