Jump to content

User talk:Lemnaminor/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

In response to your feedback

See Help:tables and Help:sources.

Lectonar (talk) 10:00, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

 

April 2013

Hello, I'm Josve05a. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Kurt Seifert, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Josve05a (talk) 15:54, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Antoni Bolesław Dobrowolski

Hi! I saw your request for Biography reassessment on their project page and so reviewed the article. It surely deserves a "start" class and I have amended it thusly. However, I know nothing about the Poland WikiProject, so I'm a bit timid about amending their class from "stub"....I suggest you try to prod them and meanwhile, I'll watch the article. If no one comes along after a a bit of waiting, perhaps I'll make the change just for cohesiveness' sake. Oh, and I'm going to delete your request from Biography's project page now. Cheers! Fylbecatulous talk 22:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC) ‎

After reading the project page for WikiProject Poland, I feel comfortable assuming permission to make a change to "start" class on their share of the template...I have done so. ツ All the best! Fylbecatulous talk 14:43, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited HMCS Wallaceburg (J336), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georges Lecointe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:23, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Licauquén River may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:50, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Plant-based diet

Hi Lemnaminor, I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't remove any more links to plant-based diet. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 21:39, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Why? It's a disambiguation page, and I linked those to more specific forms of plant-based diets. See also https://toolserver.org/~dpl/ch/monthly_list.php ... (talk) 21:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
I think what has happened is that someone had gone around removing vegan diet, and substituting plant-based, and now you're removing plant-based and substituting something else. I'm going to read the relevant articles and sources and link to whichever is most appropriate depending on context. In the absence of clarification from the sources, best to stick to plant-based. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:04, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Looking more closely, there is a mismatch between the description of the whole foods diet on the disambiguation page as a vegan diet (e.g. engine 2 diet), and the whole foods page itself, where dairy is included. Maybe a paragraph on the whole foods page should be added to describe the vegan variant? (talk) 22:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jared Y. Sanders, Jr. may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Long, Jr.]], and his support of the [[States' Rights Party of Louisiana|States' Rights Party]]] in 1960.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:29, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Translation of an article.

Could you help to translate an article, please ? I need somebody to do it. You can write me a message on my discussion page.

Articles to translate:

Say me when you can translate the articles for me.

Thanks. Bye bye.

92.134.13.136 (talk) 16:51, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Translation of an article.

Could you help to translate an article, please ? I need somebody to do it. You can write me a message on my discussion page.

Articles to translate:

Say me when you can translate the articles for me.

Thanks. Bye bye.

92.136.136.149 (talk) 15:37, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2013

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Carnival in the Netherlands, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boundary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 20:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 October 2013

The Signpost: 06 November 2013

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cornelius Gurlitt (art historian), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gymnasium (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 November 2013

The Signpost: 20 November 2013

The Signpost: 04 December 2013

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

The Signpost: 25 December 2013

The Signpost: 01 January 2014

The Signpost: 08 January 2014

The Signpost: 15 January 2014

The Signpost: 22 January 2014

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

Template:KMI 30

Are you sure it is the French company and not the British cement and tarmac maker? The Banner talk 23:18, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, see here. Sorry for the clumsy editing! -- (talk) 23:20, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
I surrender! British building companies in this former British territory are far more likely, so I got wrong footed. The Banner talk 23:25, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 February 2014

The Signpost: 19 February 2014

The Signpost: 26 February 2014

(test) The Signpost: 05 March 2014

The Signpost: 12 March 2014

The Signpost: 19 March 2014

The Signpost: 26 March 2014

Nomination for merging of Template:Largest cities of Norway

Template:Largest cities of Norway has been nominated for merging with Template:Most populous urban areas of Norway. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Waldir talk 19:17, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2014

The Signpost: 09 April 2014

The Signpost: 23 April 2014

May 2014 disambig contest: let's do it again!

Greetings fellow disambiguator! Remember back in February when we made history by clearing the board for the first time ever, for the monthly disambiguation contest? Let's do it again in May! I personally will be aiming to lead the board next month, but for anyone who thinks they can put in a better effort, I will give a $10 Amazon gift card to any editor who scores more disambiguation points in May. Also, I will be setting up a one-day contest later in the month, and will try to set up more prizes and other ways to make this a fun and productive month. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:48, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2014

The Signpost: 07 May 2014

The Signpost: 14 May 2014

The Signpost: 21 May 2014

The Signpost: 28 May 2014

The Signpost: 04 June 2014

The Signpost: 11 June 2014

The Signpost: 18 June 2014

The Signpost: 25 June 2014

The Signpost: 02 July 2014

The Signpost: 09 July 2014

The Signpost: 16 July 2014

The Signpost: 23 July 2014

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jeff Wilson (professor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page STEM. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2014

A kitten for you!

<3 thanks for the love, little kitten!

Unilarity (talk) 13:53, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2014

The Signpost: 13 August 2014

The Signpost: 20 August 2014

The Signpost: 27 August 2014

The Signpost: 03 September 2014

September 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jozef De Beenhouwer may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 07:20, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2014

Signature

For some reason your username isn't showing up in your signature, just a link to your talkpage. That's probably what User:Silverfish8088 was talking about. — Gwalla | Talk 20:45, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Strange... seems to work now though. Thanks for the heads up! Lemnaminor (talk) 20:52, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2014

The Signpost: 24 September 2014

The Signpost: 01 October 2014

The Signpost: 08 October 2014

The Signpost: 15 October 2014

The Signpost: 22 October 2014

The Signpost: 29 October 2014

The Signpost: 05 November 2014

Reference Errors on 12 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:36, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Dear Editor,

I have no idea about how to prove this, but you couldn't be more wrong about this copyright. I wrote, 2 years ago, all of that Wikipedia page word for word, on my own. Unless it is a quote and then it is quotationed. Other areas are paraphrased in concordance with standard academic rules.

The Family Life Today author bio which you have mentioned was taken directly FROM the Wikipedia page. They copied the Wikipedia page, not the other way around. I can contact them and ask them to remove it if necessary.

I have no idea how to prove when their article was published, but I can guarantee that the Wikipedia article is the original and their's is a copy. Can you please inspect the time of published on their site. Can you also please remove the tag from the Gary Thomas page? I respect you, but please do more DUE DILIGENCE before making these accusations and drastic edits.

Brookspowell629 (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2014 (UTC)Brookspowell629

Hi Brookspowell629, the page footer claims copyright on the text: "© Copyright 2014 FamilyLife®. All Rights Reserved." Please don't take this personally - it's just that there are two conflicting claims of copyright, one from WP and one from FamilyLife. I did not see any indication that the wiki page was published before the FamilyLife page. An admin will now investigate what happened and if s/he finds that FamilyLife copied Wikipedia's text it will be restored and the template removed. See WP:CP, especially section #2 and #5 on how to assist: I am sure that your help as page creator would be very useful and much appreciated. Thanks for your contributions and again, I am assuming good faith. This is merely a request for somebody to look into it. The templates probably make it sound worse than it is. --Lemnaminor (talk) 19:27, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi Lemnaminor,
In many ways it feels that it was not in good faith because you followed me from another page and then the benefit on the doubt is for the article because it can easily be seen that the Wikipedia page was written in 2013--not to mention you had to do a backsearch on why the article may be wrong. It definitely was not a randomized check.
Can you please speed up the rate at which the tag is removed? I would like if we had a professional relationship on Wikipedia, but it seems right now that you have it out for me and are being ad hominem.
Brookspowell629 (talk) 20:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)Brookspowell629
I certainly do not have it out for you. Copyright is a serious issue for Wikipedia though, and maybe you can see where I am coming from: why would an organization like FamilyLife copy content from Wikipedia? It seemed better to mark the paragraph as problematic and have somebody with more experience in these matters check it out. According to WP:CP, it takes 5 days or so for them to handle the case. You need to present your evidence there, as the guidelines allow only admins and some other users to remove the tag.--Lemnaminor (talk) 20:59, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
That paragraph is not gone, by the way: it will remain in the history of the page until a decision has been made. It's very easy to restore it if it turns out that FamilyLife copied Wikipedia and not the other way round. --Lemnaminor (talk) 21:03, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Brookspowell629, Lemnaminor, I'm one of those "other users". I'm afraid that a lot more than the statutory five days have gone by. After over-hastily editing the article and removing the tag, I've now looked at the history with some care. I'm satisfied that, however odd it may seem, FamilyLife Today did indeed copy its content, without attribution, from us (details at Talk:Gary Thomas (author)). Just in case there's any doubt, I also believe that Lemnaminor acted 100% correctly in blanking and listing the article – copyright is indeed a serious issue. Thanks to both for your patience, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:24, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your time and effort, Justlettersandnumbers. --Lemnaminor (talk) 19:20, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Lemnaminor, You are doing awesome job in Wikipedia:Disambiguation_pages_with_links#DAB_Challenge_leaderboard. I need your guidance in filling Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links. I wish to learn about tool you are using for this case, because earlier when i use to click on FIX for any particular list in Articles With Multiple Dablinks or at Disambiguation pages with links it use to forward our page to URL where we could automatically correct dabs(Example: https://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py?page=Lifeforce_%28film%29). But now it can't be done. Now i have to manually enter article name in link at http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/view/Dab_solver & then only i can edit. Please suggest any smarter way to accomplish this tedious job. Thanks.( !dea4u  11:16, 22 December 2014 (UTC))

Thanks! I just forward toolserver links do dispenser's tools. There is a number of ways to accomplish this: I use a firefox add-on called redirector. The redirect rule is probably not the best, but for what it's worth: *toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py?page=* to http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py?page=$2. Good luck! --Lemnaminor (talk) 12:33, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

January 2015

The Disambiguator's Barnstar
The Disambiguator's Barnstar is awarded to Wikipedians who are prolific disambiguators.
This is for fixing 2221 ambiguous links during December 2014. Rcsprinter123 (tell) @ 17:40, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations, you have won a free Wikimedia t-shirt! Details are in the mail.

Hello, Lemnaminor. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Cheers! bd2412 T 16:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, BD2412! Much appreciated.--Lemnaminor (talk) 16:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for the advice Nishaged (talk) 07:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Request for your opinion

Good morning Lemnaminor! I noticed you've edited the topic Jimmy Edgar somewhat recently, and was hoping to collect viewpoints on an aesthetic issue. If you had a minute to contribute to the discussion/vote on the infobox photo, that would be very helpful. Earflaps (talk) 11:06, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Richard Pyle

Hi, I came across your draft about Richard Pyle as it was last modified on 1 March 2014, but not published yet. I am working on Pyle stops and tackled slightly part of Richard Pyle's life. Now I am requested to chop-off everything related to Pyle, in order to keep the article pure with "Pyle Stops" only before it gets endorsed.

Can you publish your article about Richard so that I could move some sections to it? or otherwise can I copy your article and add my part then publish it? Just wanted to go through with both articles together and close them :) Yahia. User talk:Yahia.Mokhtar 23 June 2015

Hi Yahia! Feel free to copy it! --Lemnaminor (talk) 19:24, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

The article Ivana Raymonda van der Veen has been created again

Hello,

I see that you were very determined to delete the article about Ivana Raymonda van der Veen, and your efforts were fruitful. Having read the deletion discussion, I found the following comment of yours: "This article is rather sad, desperately trying to push a non-notable artist." I believe that tone was unnecessary and perhaps uncivil. Furthermore, you wrote, "In addition, it is a straight cut-and-paste job from the subject's own website - even if she was notable, the article should be deleted as a copyright violation".

First of all, you were aware that the subject was one of the contributors to the article, so since you noticed the copyright violation, why didn't you notify her on her talk page and tell her to read WP:MYTEXT? She should have had the chance to decide whether or not she wanted to release the text under a free license, to at least avoid the speedy deletion, but you either opted to withhold that information, or you were unaware of it. And I really cannot understand how a Wikipedian can think that even if a subject is notable, the article should be deleted anyway. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to provide knowledge. If you believe the subject of an article is notable, but the article has issues, you should try to fix them or at least tag the article appropriately.

It really looks like you took advantage of the inexperience of those editors to get the article deleted. Very well then. I have created the article again (after making some improvements that you refused to make), and I cordially invite you to nominate it for deletion once more. You wouldn't be dealing exclusively with newbies this time. Have a nice day. Dontreader (talk) 00:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Please assume good faith, Don. --Lemnaminor (talk) 19:27, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I do, but it's no secret that some Wikipedians will do everything possible to get a delete consensus when they nominate an article for deletion, even if it's bad for the project, because a Wikipedian's track record in AfDs is examined if they ever wish to become administrators. However, I would never assume that you eventually resorted to that technicality for that reason. It may well have been that you were unaware of WP:MYTEXT. Have a nice day. Dontreader (talk) 19:55, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. WP:AUTOBIO and WP:COI are probably of interest to Ivana and her management.--Lemnaminor (talk) 20:09, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Crusades introduction

It would be great to offer a bit of background for our students. They rely on wiki and am interested in the background of the causes of the Crusades. Example of the dual conflict that exists today...

The Crusades were a series of military campaigns during the time of Medieval England against the Muslims of the Middle East. In 1076, the Muslims had captured Jerusalem – the most holy of holy places for Christians. Jesus had been born in nearby Bethlehem and Jesus had spent most of his life in Jerusalem. He was crucified on Calvary Hill, also in Jerusalem. There was no more important place on Earth than Jerusalem for a true Christian which is why Christians called Jerusalem the “City of God”.


However, Jerusalem was also extremely important for the Muslims as Muhammad, the founder of the Muslim faith, had been there and there was great joy in the Muslim world when Jerusalem was captured. A beautiful dome – called the Dome of the Rock – was built on the rock where Muhammad was said to have sat and prayed. The rock was so holy that no Muslim was allowed to tread on it or touch it when visiting the Dome.

Thus the Christians fought to get Jerusalem back while the Muslims fought to keep Jerusalem. These wars were to last nearly 200 years. 


Fuckinusername (talk) 03:20, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Patreon logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Patreon logo.png. 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. --B-bot (talk) 18:42, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 17:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Re: Apocalypse Peaks

I apologize for tagging your articles in that manner. It appears that my browser was(and still is)encountering an issue that makes some links go into a redirect loop, and that this issue applied to the USGS links you provided. Thus, these links appeared not to direct to any sources. Again, I am sorry this I did not investigate this error more carefully and that I let it affect the page reviewing process. --"Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit" -Aeneid, Book I, Line 203 (talk) 04:30, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Landy Ice Rises for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Landy Ice Rises 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/Landy Ice Rises 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:23, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Lobeck Glacier for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lobeck Glacier 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/Lobeck Glacier 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:30, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Liadov Glacier for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Liadov Glacier 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/Liadov Glacier 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Rutherford Ridge for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rutherford Ridge 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/Rutherford Ridge 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:35, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Kuivinen Ridge for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kuivinen Ridge 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/Kuivinen Ridge 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:37, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Mount Novak for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mount Novak 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/Mount Novak 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:38, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Lots of Antarctica articles

Hi, and I have noticed you're making lots of articles on various Antarctic features. You may want to review the guidelines on notability for geographic features. From the guideline:

  • Named natural features are often notable, provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist. This includes mountains, lakes, streams, islands, etc. The number of known sources should be considered to ensure there is enough verifiable content for an encyclopedic article. If a Wikipedia article cannot be developed using known sources, information on the feature can instead be included in a more general article on local geography. For example, a river island with no information available except name and location should probably be described in an article on the river.

I would suggest that rather than creating tons of articles that will clog up the AfD process, you slow down and put information on these features into other articles. You can look at any of my AfD nominations for ideas on where they would go. For example, Saint Johns Range is barely a stub itself. Rather than creating more stubs about features on Saint Johns Range, perhaps you could expand the Saint Johns Range article to good or even Featured Article status by simply adding this content to the Saint Johns Range page. You've obviously done a lot of work and research, and I'm not questioning the validity of your contributions. I'm merely attempting to suggest a more productive way you could go about implementing them. Cheers! J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:43, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Brahms Inlet for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brahms Inlet 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/Brahms Inlet 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:33, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Harris Peninsula for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Harris Peninsula 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/Harris Peninsula 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Rohss Bay for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rohss Bay 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/Rohss Bay 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:44, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Low Nunatak for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Low Nunatak 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/Low Nunatak 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:47, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Notification of discussion at AN/I

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding creating lots of stub articles that may not meet WP:GEOLAND. The thread is User:Lemnaminor and Antarctica. Thank you. J♯m (talk | contribs) 19:58, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Alexander Valley (Antarctica) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alexander Valley (Antarctica) 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/Alexander Valley (Antarctica) 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 20:01, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Mount Isaac for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mount Isaac 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/Mount Isaac 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 20:02, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Kreutz Snowfield for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kreutz Snowfield 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/Kreutz Snowfield 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 20:03, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Koi Peak for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Koi Peak 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/Koi Peak 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 20:04, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Kennicutt Point for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kennicutt Point 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/Kennicutt Point 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 20:04, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Karoro Pond for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Karoro Pond 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/Karoro Pond 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 20:16, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Kaki Ponds for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kaki Ponds 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/Kaki Ponds 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. J♯m (talk | contribs) 20:16, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lemnaminor/Archive_1&oldid=1168303643"