Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:44, 1 October 2008

Hello!

Letter To America

Letter To America has been proposed for deletion. An editor Awesimo 00:18, 9 March 2007 (UTC) felt this website might not yet be notable enough for an article. Please review Misplaced Pages:Notability (websites) for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that it meets Misplaced Pages guidelines, it may be sent to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion for consensus. NickelShoe (Talk) 05:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

My opinion is that Letter To America is indeed notable enough for a Misplaced Pages article based upon the size of its audience (you can check the Frappr map on the "LTA website", nomination and competition in several high-profile blog competitions such as the Irish Blog Awards, and notoriety of its creator, Jett Loe. In short, I think LTA has earned its place and is continuing to grow. FlyingToaster 07:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

FlyingToaster 03:50, 2 April 2007

SIGBOVIK

As much as I want SIGBOVIK to live a thousand years, as its only mentions come from Livejournals at the moment, do you think that section should perhaps be removed until there is some attributable source for the conference? In my opinion it would make sense to leave it in the links at the bottom... Sirmob 06:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Sirmob - I did attribute the "SIGBOVIK website" in the article. I'll assume you didn't see it, but if you did and don't feel this is enough please let me know. FlyingToaster 03:50, 2 April 2007

That's a self reference, obviously, even though I think I think it is reasonable to get away with leaving that link under external links. I gave a talk at SIGBOVIK today, it's not like I want to delete the information, but I think having the section on SIGBOVIK risks the page being deleted, which I also wouldn't want. And I suppose this is pretty close to a thing we made up in grad school one day, at least this time around :). Sirmob 07:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed it is self-reference, and for SIGBOVIK I doubt anything better will surface. So, I'll leave it up to you whether to get rid of it or not. The sentence or two seems innocent enough, but if you feel it's approaching thing we made up in grad school one day deleteable level, please feel free to get rid of it.  :) FlyingToaster 07:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I sentence-ified the link reference at the end - and don't be so sure that "nothing better will surface," if we keep this up multiple years I suspect people will take note. And failing that, I suppose we could just talk to someone at The Tartan ;-) Sirmob 13:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: HOMOSEXUALS ARE GAY

I cannot tell you how embarassed I am about reverting the page back to its vandalized state. I have just been through a similar situation with another editor, and clearly need to be more careful about which versions I revert. My best guess as to what happened is either 1) both 68.50.239.168 and I tried to correct the article at the same time, or 2) I saw that the edit summary for user 68.50.239.168 was described as "HOMOSEXUALS ARE GAY," I assumed that they had been the one commiting the vandalism, instead of correcting it. Though you probably already know this, it was as far as I can tell, anonymous user 58.165.154.122 who originally renamed that section. Either way, I'm very sorry for my carelessness, hope you forgive me, and thank you for correcting my mistake and bringing it to my attention. :) --Friginator 03:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)