Archives:

/Archive01

Please check out the article Ethical_challenges_to_autism_treatment -- I'm challenging its neutrality, it needs sources, and I'm proposing merging it back into the Autism_rights_movement. Please provide your thoughts/comments. Josh.Pritchard.DBA (talk) 23:52, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you rmove my quotes? how do you know there not sliders quotes?

--Gabby the kitty (talk) 14:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Larry Appleton and Jennifer Lyons.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Q0. I noticed a lot of your recent edits marked as "minor" (see the edit summaries with an m). You might have something set in your preferences which is forcing your edits to be marked as minor, even when they're not? When deleting (rightly) a lot of uncited text, I don't think the edits are supposed to be marked as minor, so you may need to review your preference settings. Keep up the good work; slowly but surely those articles are getting cleaned up and cited, and hopefully future additions will conform to policy. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:49, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. Actually, I did not have my settings that forces my edits to be marked as minor. I misunderstood the purpose of the 'minor' tag. I had the impression that adding or removing a sentence or two was a 'minor' edit, and in some cases I guess I underestimated the amount I was removing. I recently reread WP:MINOR and now see that even adding or removing one word is usually more than a minor edit, let alone a whole sentence, and that minor edits are edits to change spelling, punctuation, and formatting. It appears that I have incorrectly marked a number of my edits as minor when they are not. In the future, I'll try to be more careful about using the minor tag according to the rules in WP:MINOR. I'm sorry if my incorrect use of the minor tag has caused any confusion. Q0 (talk) 14:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were today's first edit, at exactly 00:00 you added 3 letter to an article :) --Alisyn^talk 00:05, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove this quote?

Quinn: That wave cousin Tasha that doing here in California

Tasha: old man was happening somewhere here and I decided to visit you cousin

Quinn: Old man! we are going to the pizzaria to present you to my friends

Tasha: suuuper!

--The Cool Pirate (talk) 14:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can't use wikipedia articles as a reference for another wikipedia article! I shall remove the circular references. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All the references are to the episodes of the television shows. It is not intended to use the Wikipedia pages as references. It just links to those pages because the articles exist so linking is relavent. Q0 (talk) 21:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've no problem with linking but don't add them using reference tags. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying I cannot link from within a ref tag? Q0 (talk) 21:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It does say on Wikipedia:Television episodes:

An actual episode may be used as a source for information about the episode and constitutes a primary source. Such use does not constitute original research if it is used to verify a fact. However, the episode cannot be used to justify an interpretation.

Q0 (talk) 22:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but although the episode can be used as a primary source, Our article about it can not. Ideally a source should be easily to check. Ideally a link to the television network website that confirms the data if that's possible.Theresa Knott | The otter sank 07:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I never had any intention of using Wikipedia's articles about the television episode as a reference. I only intended to use the television episodes as references. I wrote an explanation on Talk:List_of_fictional_characters_by_IQ. I am having trouble understanding why you think I had ever intended to use the Wikipedia articles about the television episodes as references. Q0 (talk) 08:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just because you used the reference tags that's all. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 08:38, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I used the reference tags because I intended to use the television episodes as references. I thought that writing the title of the television episode in reference tags was the way to use a television episode as a reference. Is the page sufficient the way it is? Even though they no longer link to the Wikipedia articles about the television episode, they still use ref tags. If not, what am I supposed to do to make it clear that I intend to use the episodes as references and not the articles the episodes as references? Q0 (talk) 08:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the page looks OK now. It's much clearer now IMO. I think you add links to the wikipedia articles , not as part of the reference, but as further info. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated List of fictional characters by IQ, 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 fictional characters by IQ 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. BJBot (talk) 07:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Q0. Based on the templates on your talk page, I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia. Article Rescue Members are not necessarily inclusionists, all wikipedians are warmly welcome to join.~~~~

I have nominated List of fictional characters by IQ, 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/List of fictional characters by IQ (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. Chillum 19:57, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but aren't you the primary author of most of the text in the article Jim Sinclair (activist)? If so, do you mind answering a few questions about it? It turns out it might be a very important article. Chrisrus (talk) 19:00, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of fictional characters on the autism spectrum 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/List of fictional characters on the autism spectrum 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. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:45, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

No evidence of WP:Notability per WP:GNG. Exists purely within Sliders universe, no secondary references of any kind.

While all constructive 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. --Animalparty-- (talk) 00:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Kromagg invasion.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:56, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lenny Schafer 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/Lenny Schafer 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. freshacconci talk to me 19:02, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Leo (That '70s Show) 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/Leo (That '70s Show) 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:06, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Quinn Mallory 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/Quinn Mallory 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. — 🦊 07:34, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Speculated to have been autistic. Since you had some involvement with the Speculated to have been autistic redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ^{[Username Needed]} 10:36, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sliders has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Dead in a Heartbeat has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced article consisting mainly of an overlong plot summary for a made for TV movie. Fails WP:GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Sliders, Part One (Sliders episode)) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 2#Sliders, Part One (Sliders episode)) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 16:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]