User talk:Kristod/Archive/Archive 01

Durrus and District History

Article Durrus and District History is almost 160k of nonsense. What should be sone with it? User:Durrus is adding a lot of stuff.

If that stuff is relevant, keep it. If not, you can revert it by going to the page, selecting the 'History' tab, selecting the last version the he did not add to, then click 'Edit this Page', which will give you a warning, ignore it and 'Save this Page' along with an edit summary including RV for revert. Teh tennisman 19:44, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Now I see the problem. Your best bet is to ignore it all and take it up with an administrator. Teh tennisman speak your piece! 19:46, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK to answer here? Well Durrus has made the whole page. It was split from the Durrus page. With good reason to, I guess. --Kristod 19:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where do I ask admins for this? --Kristod 19:49, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a list of admins at WP:LAP eople Powered 20:49, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taggging if for cleanup (as has been done is a good start). Try cleaning it up, remove stuff which is nonsense, mark stuff which lacks citation and bring it into an encyclopaedia format. If you believe it is beyond saving you can try taking it to articles for deletion and get a general view on it. --pgk 21:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks. Think I'll just let it go and maybe check it later. Doesn't hurt to have it there, and maybe somebody will work with it. Bit to complex to start editing. Durrus isn't the most exciting theme and I don't want to use a lot of time on this. - Kris to d 11:35, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of references to Damocles

An editor has nominated List of references to Damocles, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of references to Damocles and 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. Thank you. 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. Jayden54Bot 18:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

sovereign wealth fund

I have no particular doubt that it's notable and all that, but could you add some references showing that the term is generally used for the subject? If you're still in the process of working on the article, you should consider adding {{undersconstruction}} at the top, which will lessen the chance of someone accidentally or ignorantly deleting it. DGG 21:42, 27 May 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Damocles

Please read what I have written regarding your removal of trivia back in December from the Damocles article. Thank you.
Bistromaths 14:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]