User talk:Faithlessthewonderboy/Archive 20

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Faithlessthewonderboy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 15

←

Archive 18

→

nice comment

I liked the comment about the cocaine use on the Freddie Mercury article haha :) Macromonkey (talk) 18:40, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I aim to please. :-) faithless (^speak) 19:11, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Europa League article

Can you give an opinion at Talk:UEFA Europa League 2009–10#Listing teams. Thanks. Kingjeff (talk) 04:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Faithless, thanks for your work in keeping the Western Branch High School wiki page clean. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Westyjoe (talk • contribs) 17:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Happy to help. :-) faithless (^speak) 01:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Robert Cornhole

Hi, I would like to create a page about Robert Cornhole, he was mentioned on the colbert report. It's nothing lewd, or anything. Anyway, I would appreciate it if you could lift the block. Thanks man. CadronPickett (talk) 01:16, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

The page was protected for a reason. On the off chance that you don't realize this, there is no such person as Robert Cornhole. It was just a throwaway joke Colbert made, and is not notable in the least. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a place to document every random, inconsequential thing that someone says on television. Best, faithless (^speak) 01:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Larissa Kelly

What is notable about the fact she mentioned Wikipedia on Jeopardy! is that she was referring to her own article and the debate regarding its lack of notability. This is worth mentioning. 67.79.157.50 (talk) 13:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

In what way is saying "Wikipedia" on TV notable? What reliable source has covered it? Wikipedia is one of the biggest sites in the world, people mention it all the time; it isn't noteworthy. faithless (^speak) 20:04, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I stumbled across this in a roundabout way and hope you don't mind my adding my two cents. I think you're missing the point here. She didn't just casually mention Wikipedia, she was discussing her own article and raised the issue of its lack of notability. That's definitely not a common occurrence and I think it's worth noting in the article about her. 209.247.22.164 (talk) 20:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I certainly don't mind you adding your $0.02, but I think you are both missing the point. Look at it this way: what is the purpose of an encyclopedia entry? To give a concise overview of a topic. We don't get into stuff like, "What is this person's favorite color?" or "Which sports team do they support?" Why? Because it's completely trivial. Now, consider this: Would any other encyclopedia contain this fact (assuming they had an article for Larissa Kelly)? Of course not! You would never open up the Encyclopædia Britannica and see such self-referential nonsense in one of its entries! Why should Wikipedia be any different!? That 30-second discussion is in no way, shape, or form an important event in the life of Larissa Kelly, and there is absolutely no justification for including it in an encyclopedia entry. faithless (^speak) 20:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I suppose this falls into that long general debate about what Wikipedia is supposed to be all about. At the risk of re-hashing a point that many have made before, Wikipedia *is not* the Encyclopædia Britannica and *should not* be--that the open-source nature of Wikipedia is not an ends, but rather a means towards a more inclusive repository of information. That having been said, I agree that it is trivia, and as much as having a trivia section is an anathema to some, it is undeniable that there are people who do care about trivial details (as evidenced by the amusing edit wars in the article), and so I think that it may be worthwhile to open a trivia section in the article and place this information there.--71.111.226.123 (talk) 03:13, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Dineshkshiv

Hi,

I am trying to explain to you about the page I have started Dineshkshiv. As I explained in my talk page, Mr Shiv has pioneered the teleconference in India and that has helped lot of people. He comes from a middle class back ground, but has lent so much back to the society. His story is an inspiration to lot of young kids in India and around the globe. I also want to tell you, I have started this article under his name as I have lot of respect and high regards to this person. I want to make sure I am not Dinesh K shiv and one of his admirer, who has great vision for India. Hope this helps you and you will be able to undelete my artcile. PLEASE POST YOUR REPLY ON MY TALK PAGE Thanks Dineshkshiv (talk) 05:16, 27 March 2009 (UTC)