User talk:RadManCF

This user may have left Wikipedia. RadManCF has not edited Wikipedia since 19 April 2020. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

My Talk Archives

User talk:RadManCF/archive 1

Since you voted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sherman Halsey, you might want to look at a similar AFD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kristin Barlowe. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 21:29, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for doing the GA review of Tabqa Dam - it's good to have someone else willing help out on the GA backlog! There is no record, however of the review. It is useful for a reviewer to leave some comments on the review process, especially in regard to checking sources and ensuring the article's coverage is appropriate. Having a record of the review enables others to check that the review process was appropriate. No worries that it hasn't been done on your first Review, especially as I don't think anyone would challenge the outcome. It would be great if you did some more GA Reviews, and it would be useful if you left some comments as you did the review. If you need any advise on this, please get in touch. Regards SilkTork *^YES! 11:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the area? You're invited to the
May 2018 Minnesota User Group Meeting
	Date: 31 October 2010
	Time: noon
	Place: Midtown Exchange Global Market, East Lake Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 44°56′57″N 93°15′40″W / 44.9493°N 93.2612°W / 44.9493; -93.2612

As you participated in the ban discussion of SkagitRiverQueen, you are being notified of this Proposal to amend ban on SRQ imposed at ANI: from 1 year to indef. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:05, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the area? You're invited to the
May 2018 Minnesota User Group Meeting
	Date: 20 November 2010
	Time: 1:00-3:30 (click here for full agenda) R.S.V.P. by Nov. 17 for free lunch + parking
	Place: Minnesota History Center 345 Kellogg Blvd, St. Paul, Minnesota 44°57′00″N 93°06′20″W / 44.95°N 93.1055°W / 44.95; -93.1055

Thank you. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 18:27, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the BLP/sticky prod tag you placed on Roberto Sebastián Brum, as it contains at least one reliable source that verifies some portion of the article. If you still believe the article should be deleted, feel free to use regular prod or AfD. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support at WP:VPR. It's a theme I've been thinking about a bit; sometimes we modify policies because we realize the old one wasn't right or not workable, but sometimes policies should change because circumstances have changed. Policies that were perfectly reasonable when WP was small, and Google search items were on page three might not be the right policies when there are over 3 million articles and many of the article will be one of the top search items in a search.

A stub is better than nothing when expectations are low, but a stub might literally be worse than nothing when expectations are high.--SPhilbrickT 00:00, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. On a related note, I've noticed that, in policy discussions, almost no thought is given to how our policies affect our public image (BLP being one of the main exceptions). In my experience, very little thought seems to be given to the fact that many people take the view that, since our content is user generated, we cannot be trusted (Not the more moderate view that, since we are a tertiary source of information, we should be used as a general reference, not as a definitive source, which, to me, seems to be the view that we promote). I used to be one of them, and as you can probably tell, that has had a very strong effect on my opinions of policy. It's the main reason I'm a deletionist and immediatist. I would argue that having lots of poorly written, poorly sourced stubs doesn't help our public image. That issue is pretty much the core reason for most of my policy stances. Regards, RadManCF ☢ open frequency 01:19, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did read your user page, and some of your experiences mirror mine. I've known about Wikipedia for a long time, but frankly, thought about the model, and decided it couldn't possibly work. I'd love to use bumblebee analogy (bumblebees are unable to fly, yet they do anyway) but unfortunately it's flawed, and I don't have a good replacement. After I noticed that WP didn't implode, I decide to get involved. I still don't understand why it works, but it seems to. Frankly, I'm now concerned, but there's a fair amount of life left. --SPhilbrickT 01:37, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, the bumble bee analogy, the reason it fails is that, in the time since the analogy was created, they actually figured out how they can fly, its something to do with how the fuzz on their bodies creates a turbulent boundary layer in the air flowing past their bodies which generates lift. I would argue that the reason WP works is because of all our policies and back end processes that the general public is unaware of. RadManCF ☢ open frequency 02:00, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RadManCF, last year you added a {{notability}} tag to this article. Would you mind if I remove this tag? Pain was one of the four principal architects of the Board of Ecclesiastical Commissioners in the time from 1833 to 1843 which made him one of the leading Irish ecclesiastical architects in a time when an unparalleled number of churches was built in Ireland. --AFBorchert (talk) 17:56, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go right ahead. The article as it currently stands looks good, and does not seem to have notability issues at the present time. Regards, RadManCF ☢ open frequency 23:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, RadManCF. --AFBorchert (talk) 05:38, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello RadManCF! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)