User talk:Purplebackpack89/Archive 6
 Archives |
|---|
Patroller[change source]
Hey. I've given you the Patroller flag, which marks all your new pages as patrolled automatically, and lets you patrol pages in Special:NewPages, if that interests you. Thanks!--Gordonrox24 | Talk 23:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Notability of Market East Station[change source]
I suppose the notability guidelines here are different? This is the 3rd most important rail station in Philadelphia. --Highspeedrailguy (talk) 14:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- If you expand the article beyond a sub-stub, add a photo, inbobox, some links etc, and rename it to the proper naming conventions (Market East station) then it's perfectly notable in my opinion. I don't see where the suggestion for a merge is coming from, as there's nothing to support it if those changes are made. Goblin 17:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton!
- SEPTA calls it "Market East Station", not Market East station. WP:PRECISION --Highspeedrailguy (talk) 18:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- Doesn't really matter. Many British stations are called "Station", but all use "station" for their articles, so it's no different here. Goblin 18:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton!
- (And, fwiw, PRECISION doesn't really apply here. Goblin 18:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Jersey!
- (change conflict) Re:Both of you...I am not contesting the notability (though I do personally believe we shouldn't have articles here just because there are articles on ENWP), merely feeling that three very short articles is not the way to go in this case. If the article is expanded to reasonable length (say a paragraph or two), it can be kept. Same for the other Philly railway stations. Purplebackpack89 18:50, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- ...which is basically what I have said. Be nice of you to actually read my comments, for once, rather than attacking me unnecessarily. Goblin 18:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton!
- I'm not attacking anybody...though I would appreciate it if the naming convention discussion were moved to the talk page of the article in question Purplebackpack89 18:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't see any attacking here. By the way, I've expanded the article. Goodvac (talk) 19:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not attacking anybody...though I would appreciate it if the naming convention discussion were moved to the talk page of the article in question Purplebackpack89 18:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- ...which is basically what I have said. Be nice of you to actually read my comments, for once, rather than attacking me unnecessarily. Goblin 18:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Juliancolton!
- SEPTA calls it "Market East Station", not Market East station. WP:PRECISION --Highspeedrailguy (talk) 18:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Not only are the misrepresentations in this essay incorrect, the interwiki link to en (Wikipedia:You do need to cite that the sky is blue) also counters your essay. Goodvac (talk) 23:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
- Try en:Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue...it corroborates what is in that essay, as does WP:GACN. And I think might have accidentally mixed up NOTBLUE and BLUE, and you and Gotanda Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 00:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
- Actually it says the exact opposite of what yours is trying to say. I quote "Even the most obvious and simple assertion may need an explanation. It is better to do some research, and then cite the reliable sources consulted, than to make assumptions about people's knowledge." Most of the page explains that there are many times when even simple facts need cites. Its basically arguing the opposite of what you are trying to say. -DJSasso (talk) 00:18, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
- Um, that's you DO need...my essay is you DON'T need, which, as of 5:22 PDT, doesn't contain the quoted text Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 00:23, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
- I think you missed the point...the interwiki on your essay is going to that one... -DJSasso (talk) 00:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
- Um, that's you DO need...my essay is you DON'T need, which, as of 5:22 PDT, doesn't contain the quoted text Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 00:23, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
- Actually it says the exact opposite of what yours is trying to say. I quote "Even the most obvious and simple assertion may need an explanation. It is better to do some research, and then cite the reliable sources consulted, than to make assumptions about people's knowledge." Most of the page explains that there are many times when even simple facts need cites. Its basically arguing the opposite of what you are trying to say. -DJSasso (talk) 00:18, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
I noticed how you put the quick deletion tag up there. I just wanted to tell you that, even though it is correct, the guy probably was wanting to help the Simple English Wikipedia. I mean, it doesn't have nonsense in it, nor vandalism, it makes an iffy article. Sounds like a good faith edit. Reverter (talk) 20:01, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- I've removed the warning and replaced it with {{firstarticle}} 20:23, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, my fault. Should have Left a message on their TP. Yottie =talk= 22:07, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
Hey. Just wanted to let you know that I did delete User talk:Juanfu with the same reasoning as the first deletion, however A4 could not be used in this case because A4 is only for content that has already been deleted through an RFD, not a QD. Just wanted to let you know. Thanks! :) --Gordonrox24 | Talk 21:25, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Re: The extensions you made[change source]
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Chenzw Talk 01:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
gay nigger association of america[change source]
it is an article on the english wiki Lugurr (talk) 19:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC)