User talk:Refsworldlee
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Archives |
|---|
 |
Ref is taking a long wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia at some point in the future. Good luck to all in the meantime. |
Contents |
[edit] Bowie
Hi. The interview he says Tadcaster with Parkinson is actually on YouTube.com [1] I think its this one (in 2002). Thanks. - Yorkshirian (talk) 00:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Bobby Driscoll - Bylot
Hello, I want to request a new rating of my article on Bobby Driscoll - up to a GA-rating. What is your opinion. - Can I dare it? - What is still missing, what too much? - Grammar etc.? Concerning the copyrights, I had problems with the images I had embedded and had to remove them, except the one in the info-box, which is apparently accepted now. Since you're probably busy with your editing-job, take your time. I'm not in a hurry. Thanks in advance. Regards - --Bylot (talk) 09:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Nashville Homeless Power Project
An article that you have been involved in editing, Nashville Homeless Power Project, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nashville Homeless Power Project. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Eastmain (talk) 18:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for your help on the Martin Postle article
I realize how there is so much for to do to make it better. I will work to identify source information to get more information. Right now all the info comes from the internet and article found there. It is me i think (talk) 14:47, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] June Mathis
Thanks for the upgrade on June Mathis. I hadn't intended to give her a rewrite but she kinda needed it. If you can make suggestions on how to move my other ladies up a grade, I'd appreciate it. I don't think more than one of two of my articles will ever be worth submitting for GA, but I'd like to at least get them to B-status. I still have more research materials to scour. EraserGirl (talk) 18:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Mike Pike (referee)
Hey. I never knew that articles being assessed by the author was frowned upon... fair enough. And wouldn't it pass as start by "a particularly useful picture or graphic", depending on how a picture/graphic is defined as "particularly useful". Mattythewhite (talk) 18:36, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, I'll keep putting articles up for assessment in mind for future articles. And the article is certainly in need of a good expansion and gets into start class by the skin of its teeth. Any good sources for refs you can think of? Mattythewhite (talk) 20:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fay Kanin
Thanks for the rethink on Fay, I couldn't see how she differed from my other articles of the same ilk. Dorothy on the other hand will always be a problem child. I was hoping I would get by because what was there was well represented. I am now sifting through all of Clare Boothe Luce's works with the hope that she may have mentioned Dorothy at length. I am not holding out much hope. EraserGirl (talk) 16:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
- Well, as I said on your talk page, I'm so unsure of how much more there is that I've dug my heels in! So good luck with it. Thanks for your post. Ref (chew)(do) 16:03, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] John Leonard Orr
Just for giggles, I cleaned up the citations on John Leonard Orr and I was wondering what is the preferred point where the citations should be sectioned into footnotes and bibliography? when it merely LOOKS unwieldy or has a certainly level of detail? EraserGirl (talk) 04:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Accidentally found another source today. This article is not on my TODO list, why do I keep playing with it?....I also found nice juicy section on Dorothy Hale in a Luce bio. Enough to give it some lovely texture. EraserGirl (talk) 22:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Mike Dean
where shall I start. 'harshly sent off' = npov, whether it's cited or not! numerous selective citations and references supporting Chelsea's view against a single card, selective reference to only a Chelsea appeal. 'being scored marginally after the declared added time had been played at the end of the first half' = weasel words. further, a single game in an article on the whole referee's career - and a not especially important one at the time, played in september - does not warrant a paragraph nearly as long as the ref's background.
wikipedia is a neutral source of facts. it is not for selective citation based bashing of a particular referee for fans of one team for a single match. this is an article on the refereee Mike Dean, not an opinion piece on his performance in any game.
i am very much aware that this game was contentious, and 'could' have changed the outcome of the league, but it is clearly opinion masked through selective citations in a game that for all other clubs in the football league was meaningless. if every ref had a paragraph like this in their article, each of their pages would be never ending gripes on games long past. this article should be a neutral, factual background piece about the ref, summing his whole - many game - career.
if you are able to point out exactly why this should be a special case, exactly why it is notable, and make a neutral, well balanced, short piece, and include all other similar incidents in the entire career of mike, and keep the page within wikipedia's length guidance, then by all means go for it!
(i've also added this to the talk page of the article, you are welcome to respond there)81.96.251.179 (talk) 20:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Mike Dean
ok, if you want to play it this way.
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Mike Dean (referee). Your edits appeared to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.81.96.251.179 (talk) 22:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
please read what I have said. It is not possible to have a detailed discussion of every refereeing decision in the career of a ref on their page. what you have added simply is not notable, as per WP:NOTE. you have picked out one game where one side has an aggrievance and posted it on a page noting the entire career of a referee - this is neither npov, or even fair. If you wish to discuss the article, with myself and other users, please use the talk page of the article and draw up a cogent arguement as to why what you have written should remain. If not will continue to revert this, and shall also analyse other edits you have made to the same topic for other such errors. 81.96.251.179 (talk) 22:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Dorothy Hale
Dorothy has had a tiny growth spurt, probably not enough to rate a reassessment, but you may see some improvements. EraserGirl (talk) 03:30, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
Jeff Winter
Lee, I think you should be aware of this comment on jeffwinter.co.uk:
'Probably none. I don't know Lee Probert personally, although he does appear to be one of the blue eyed boys who is being pushed by his southern mentors.
I understand he is responsible for entries on Wikipedia about refs. I have personally tried to contact him about inaccuracies but he fails to respond.
God knows why he does this and who he thinks he is in putting personal information online about people he does not even know. Maybe that is a similar arrogance that he shows on the field of play.'
He's obviously misguided, please put him right!
[edit] Jeff Winter
lee, I think you should be aware of this comment on Jeff Winter's website (jeffwinter.co.uk)
'Probably none. I don't know Lee Probert personally, although he does appear to be one of the blue eyed boys who is being pushed by his southern mentors.
I understand he is responsible for entries on Wikipedia about refs. I have personally tried to contact him about inaccuracies but he fails to respond.
God knows why he does this and who he thinks he is in putting personal information online about people he does not even know. Maybe that is a similar arrogance that he shows on the field of play.'
Obviously reference to you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.28.183 (talk) 16:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] David Allen Hulse
The work of you and others have successfully removed the speedy deletion box on my David Allen Hulse Article. Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tad Slamp (talk • contribs) 02:51, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
