User talk:Steviedman

Thornton

Please understand that the rule for Canadian places is as follows: the actual incorporated municipality (i.e. Essa) can always have an article, because those are always referenceable to something. Communities within the township (i.e. Thornton), however, can only have articles if you can actually add real, meaningful and encyclopedic content about the community — a tourist guide list of local attractions doesn't cut it — which is properly referenced to reliable sources (books, newspaper articles, magazine articles, etc.) that are specifically about Thornton itself.

The fact that you can reference the population of Essa to Statistics Canada census data justifies an article about Essa; it does not justify a separate article about Thornton if it's the only reference you can add. For one thing, the reference page on StatsCan's site just provides raw statistics for the whole township and doesn't mention any individual communities within Essa at all — so in and of itself, it doesn't even provide any evidence that Thornton exists. If you want Thornton to have a separate article, then you need to provide real sources which are specifically about Thornton. Bearcat (talk) 04:54, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The web pages of specific things you want to include in your touristy list are not sources. I explained to you what reliable sources are: newspaper articles, published history books, magazines. Not the web page of the local junior hockey team or the fire station or the library. Real reliable media, and only real reliable media. Bearcat (talk) 06:20, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Minor Hockey League website may not be reputable and it will be removed, but the library and fire station are as they are both from reputable government websites.

The library and the fire station are not reliable secondary sources about Thornton. It doesn't matter that they're government organizations; they're primary sources because they're they're specific things in the community, not independent sources about it. Bearcat (talk) 06:33, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to add a photo of the historical plaque which supports Steve's original article. Here is the link: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Village_of_Thornton.jpg

Deletion discussion about Sandy Hook Elementary Massacre

Hello, Steviedman,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Sandy Hook Elementary Massacre should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandy Hook Elementary Massacre .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Mikeo34 (talk) 23:53, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear if anonymous or not?

If you want me to believe that, what's his or her name? If neither of us knows, trust me, he or she has clearly remained anonymous. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:41, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes the police like to remain anonymous though, to avoid the media and press. And for their own safety as well against groups such as ISIS or other extremists in situations like this.

They do it to not avoid the press. Their own policies dictate they not discuss some aspects of ongoing cases for fear of leaking sensitive info. But it's hard to keep a secret and fun to get paid for your story. So they ask to remain anonymous to not get fired. It's become so common and acceptable that some shady journalists accredit stuff they make up to sources that don't exist at all, assuming nobody can disprove them.

But no matter why someone is anonymous, a lack of a name makes it crystal clear that they are. Better to call any kind of anonymous people anonymous than just people. Saves curious readers the trouble of checking to see who said something. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:32, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"8 nanometer" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 8 nanometer. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 31#8 nanometer until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Gaioa (T C L) 13:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]