m Signing comment by WorthingtonJones - "→Rev Keith Garner's Wikipedia page: new section" |
Ron Ritzman (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
Ron, I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and don't want to cause difficulties. I have endeavoured to edit the page ... I don't want to be deleted as many friends/colleagues access Wikipedia when I have been preaching. I am happy to re-write it if necessary ... any advice you could give me would be appreciated. Warmly, Keith Garner <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:WorthingtonJones|WorthingtonJones]] ([[User talk:WorthingtonJones|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/WorthingtonJones|contribs]]) 02:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Ron, I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and don't want to cause difficulties. I have endeavoured to edit the page ... I don't want to be deleted as many friends/colleagues access Wikipedia when I have been preaching. I am happy to re-write it if necessary ... any advice you could give me would be appreciated. Warmly, Keith Garner <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:WorthingtonJones|WorthingtonJones]] ([[User talk:WorthingtonJones|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/WorthingtonJones|contribs]]) 02:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
:I'm not really involved with the discussion of the issue of whether or not [[Keith Garner]] should be deleted. The only thing I did was relist the discussion for another 7 days. However, I strongly urge you to review our [[WP:AUTO|autobiography]] and [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]] guidelines. --[[User:Ron Ritzman|Ron Ritzman]] ([[User talk:Ron Ritzman#top|talk]]) 02:29, 6 July 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:29, 6 July 2010
Please formalize an AFD for me.
"Bonsai Kitten" (thanks) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.157.23 (talk) 06:12, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I have to decline this one. While the article in question could be better written and better sourced, I've done a google search and come to the conclusion that the subject meets our general notability guidelines. Two sources in particular are this and this. Both represent "significant coverage in reliable sources". If I saw this article at AFD I would !vote keep. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:07, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
It's time again
Hi Ron, it's time again for someone to suggest you'd be a good admin. Please consider taking up the mop. I understand your reservations, but think the project would be better with you holding the mop. Heck, you already mop up enough stuff around here. Hobit (talk) 19:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
- And I'd be happy to second that opinion. The peoject needs calm heads. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:30, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
With respects to your very proper relisting, the article has now been approved and the nomination has been withdrawn. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:27, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks Ron. Thanks MQS. Good luck Jeff. Drmies (talk) 01:30, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Now THAT was fast. Thank you both. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:33, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- That's because my pulse always races whenever I see that damn orange bar hence the parody of it on my main user page --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:36, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- (chickle) As long as the orange bar isn't bad news. :) Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:40, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- A "chickle" is a small chuckle. More orange! Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 08:31, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- That's because my pulse always races whenever I see that damn orange bar hence the parody of it on my main user page --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:36, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Now THAT was fast. Thank you both. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:33, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Your close of this AFD is exactly why non-admins shouldn't close them. Closes are supposed to be on the strength of the arguments, not a vote count. That there are no other delete comments is not relevant. I suggest that you stop closing AFDs until you actually understand the AFD process. Otto4711 (talk) 22:48, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- If helps Otto, I'm an administrator, and I support Ritzman's AFD close. There was no other way this could have possibly resulted in a deletion. –MuZemike 23:10, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I understand the nominator's frustration but it was a "low risk" article (ie not a BLP) with no "delete" !votes. If an admin closed it "delete" we would be at DRV overtuning it. I recently started a thread at the village pump about this very issue. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Rev Keith Garner's Wikipedia page
Ron, I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and don't want to cause difficulties. I have endeavoured to edit the page ... I don't want to be deleted as many friends/colleagues access Wikipedia when I have been preaching. I am happy to re-write it if necessary ... any advice you could give me would be appreciated. Warmly, Keith Garner —Preceding unsigned comment added by WorthingtonJones (talk • contribs) 02:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not really involved with the discussion of the issue of whether or not Keith Garner should be deleted. The only thing I did was relist the discussion for another 7 days. However, I strongly urge you to review our autobiography and conflict of interest guidelines. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:29, 6 July 2010 (UTC)