User talk:Mike Klaassen

Jessica Page Morrell[edit]

As covered at Talk:Jessica Page Morrell, the article does not meet notability guidelines, per WP:BIO the tag was re-added to allow those authors who work on the article to attempt to fix it before it is taken to deletion. But since you do not seem interested in addressing the concern by adding citations to Wikipedia defined reliable sources that are independent of the subject and provide substantial coverage of the subject, then we can just move to the AFD. Aboutmovies (talk) 04:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Taken in the context of your actions (see what I wrote above), you have a lot of bridge rebuilding before you will get much help from me. The article was tagged, and instead of reading the rules linked in the message, you simply removed the message without addressing the concern. I have little sympathy for people who do that. I am happy to work with those editors who either address the concern or ask about the concern. You will likely find a similar attitude from many of the experienced editors.

That said, I did not delete the article. If you click on the article link it tells you who deleted it, and in this case User:Rjd0060 (an Admin) deleted the article. If you would like it restored, any Admin can do so, but only Admins. To keep it from being deleted, make sure it passes WP:BIO. Basically, ensure the subject has received coverage in Wikipedia defined reliable sources (click here to read what that mean) by sources that are independent of the subject (and no press releases either). Additionally, it needs to be substantial coverage, as in her name being mentioned in an article about subject X is not substantial coverage. Aboutmovies (talk) 23:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Trimmer[edit]

Hi Mike, I've noticed you contributed a fair bit to the page on young adult literature and was wondering if you could help me with a burning question! I'm currently researching YA lit for my PhD thesis, and I really need to know the source for the comment that Sarah Trimmer was the first to note the period of adolescence (ages 14 - 21 )in 1802. I urgently need this and would really appreciate if you could tell me where its from. My email address is charlene.okane@gmail.com

Many thanks, Charlene O'Kane.

Charlene87 (talk) 16:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Charlene: I've worked around the Timmer reference to adolescents, but I don't know its source. As I recall, it was part of the text when I first signed on to Wikipedia. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. Mike Klaassen

CfD nomination of Category:Young adult novels for boys[edit]

Category:Young adult novels for boys, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold (talk) 21:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Description[edit]

A tag has been placed on Description requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Terrillja (talk) 15:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of History of fiction[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article History of fiction, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

This list appears pointless. Wikipedia is should not be used for a repository for internal links.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 19:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A suggestion: It's an interesting attempt but I don't think it quite works as it is. You might add all the entries on that page, including the shortcuts, to Category:History of literature. - Fayenatic (talk) 19:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

nice work on Plot[edit]

I like your recent additions to the Plot article. Fleshed it out nicely. --Armchair info guy (talk) 00:38, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It's a start, at least.Mike Klaassen (talk) 19:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Page blanking[edit]

Please do not replace Wikipedia pages with blank content, as you did to Fiction writing. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. --Allen3 ^talk 22:47, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Helium[edit]

Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. However I notice that many of them involve adding links to your articles on Helium.com. If I understand correctly, the authors of Helium articles receive revenue based on how many visits their articles receive. Also, the site does not appear to qualify as a reliable source. So there do not appear to be any good reasons for adding the links. See WP:EL, WP:COI , and WP:RS for applicable guidelines. Will Beback talk 19:03, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have now read the WP guidelines you suggested and will edit accordingly.Mike Klaassen (talk) 20:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Character (arts)#Gathering material on character into one article[edit]

Hello, Mike. You probably do not remember me, but we have talked before (as seen on the article talk page I linked to above). Would you mind commenting on this discussion (within that link)? Flyer22 (talk) 04:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CfD nomination of Category:Descriptive technique[edit]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Plot[edit]

Category:Plot, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — ξ ^xplicit 21:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Authors of books about writing fiction[edit]

Category:Authors of books about writing fiction, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 00:01, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jessica Page Morrell for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jessica Page Morrell is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessica Page Morrell until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 19:01, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Mike Klaassen. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gloria Kempton[edit]

The article Gloria Kempton has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails WP:NAUTHOR, never had any appropriate sourcing, no reviews in the typical outlets, no coverage of Kempton or her work to the point that this is likely an a7 candidate.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Praxidicae (talk) 19:12, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Les Edgerton for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Les Edgerton is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Les Edgerton until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. blameless 01:45, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ron Rozelle[edit]

The article Ron Rozelle has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional unref BLP; he does not seem to meet WP:AUTHOR / WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 19:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]