User talk:ParkerJones2007

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, ParkerJones2007, 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! --AnonGuy 12:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prolog standards compliance

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Prolog standards compliance, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest 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. -FisherQueen (Talk) 10:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate that this article is in the early stage of development, but as you can see from the history it has not been abandoned and is currently undergoing changes. The article section headings are definitely in need of attention. If you are familiar with the Prolog programming language the content already makes some sense. Also if you have heard of ISO International Organisation for Standardisation, you'll know their work too on standardisation is very notable. I've removed the template because it frightens away contributors and as I'm sure you'll agree it needs contributions. Could you please come back in a week or so to reconsider. ParkerJones2007 10:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not familiar with those things at all, and I shouldn't have to be familiar with them in order to understand any Wikipedia article. This is an encyclopedia for general readers, so an article needs to be comprehensible to any English-speaking reader, and this isn't an encyclopedia article, it's simply a group of charts which appear, to me, to be an indiscriminate collection of information. I'm going to send this on to Articles for Deletion, unless you'd rather restore the tag you removed in order to gain the extra few days to add context to it. Let me rephrase to make that clear: The tag you removed is the one that gives you a week or so to work on the article, and removing it means that it goes directly to WP:AFD. -FisherQueen (Talk) 10:49, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it belongs in a sandbox for a bit longer but it is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Secondly, I don't appreciate your tone. As a Wikipedia administrator I'd expect you to be a little less aggressive. If you'd encourage the article's development rather than threaten it, you might be pleasantly surprised. ParkerJones2007 11:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I'm sorry if my tone seems unhelpful to you; I just hate to see you wasting too much of your time on an article that my experience tells me is most likely to be deleted per WP:NOT. Secondly, I'm not an administrator, and never claimed to be one. Thirdly, the purpose of the {prod} tag, which you removed, is to give you time to develop the article, since I thought there might be some information there that could be turned into an encyclopedia article. If I thought the article were hopelessly non-notable, I would have tagged it for speedy deletion instead, and it would have been deleted immediately. I chose a tag that gave you time to develop the article, and now I'm helping again by giving you a chance to replace it yourself before I send the article to AFD, where the fact that it doesn't actually contain any content besides charts which are utterly incomprehensible to a layman will pretty much guarantee quick deletion. I am doing everything I can to help you out. -FisherQueen (Talk) 11:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Prolog standards compliance

I've nominated Prolog standards compliance, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Prolog standards compliance satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prolog standards compliance and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Prolog standards compliance during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -FisherQueen (Talk) 11:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am doing everything I can to help you out.FisherQueen

Well you're certainly doing a great job! ParkerJones2007 12:38, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. If there's anything else I can do to help, please feel free to let me know. -FisherQueen (Talk) 13:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AFD nomination for Comparison of Prolog standards compliance

This article was nominated for deletion on 22 August 2009 and closed as "userfy". The article is now located here. Before being moved back into article space, the issues bought up in the discussion should be resolved. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:14, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]