User talk:GeoffBarrenger

Hello, GeoffBarrenger, and

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

A page you created, Den Schliker, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how they are important or significant, and thus why they should be included in an encyclopedia. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and the guidelines for biographies in particular.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our

Thank you. Killiondude (talk) 20:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the speedy deletion notice after a second reading of the article. At first reading it was hard to see how the photographer was

WP:BIO). I could help a little in this, perhaps later today or sometime in the next few days. Feel free to ask me any questions here (I'll keep your talk page on my watchlist) or on my talk page, if you have any questions about this or anything else. Killiondude (talk) 21:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

Did you get my response to you (on my talk page) about the photo of Den Schliker? Killiondude (talk) 23:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got in touch with Den Schliker. Here's the page, as per your request. Now you can legally upload the photo. http://www.denschliker.com/wikipedia.htm

Hi there. Thanks for getting in touch with Den Schliker. Unfortunately, there was a small hiccup in the way he presented his permission. You can read about it here:

Wikipedia:MCQ#This_photo. I have emailed Mr. Schliker explaining the nature of the problem and will let you know what we come up with. -Seidenstud (talk) 11:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

okay. pls, keep me informed. thanx GeoffBarrenger (talk) 18:38, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Den Schliker, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Den Schliker. Thank you. MagazineHound (talk) 06:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on the AfD listing if you get a chance. Also, if you speak Russian or Ukranian and find any references that are written in those languages, you can use them even on the English language Wikipedia. Those would help this article's case very much. Killiondude (talk) 23:00, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article you created: Den Schliker may be deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Den Schliker .

The faster you respond on this page, the better chance the article you created can be saved.

Finding sources which mention the topic of your article is the very best way to avoid an article being deleted {{

Findsources3}}:

Find sources for Den Schliker : google news recent, google news old, google books, google scholar, NYT recent, NYT old, a9, msbooks, msacademic ...You can then cite these results in the Article for deletion discussion.

Also, there are several tools and helpful editors on Wikipedia who can help you:

1. List the page up for deletion on
   Article Rescue Squadron. You can get help listing your page on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page
   .
2. You can request a mentor to help explain all of the complex rules that editors use to get a page deleted:
   Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User
   . But don't wait for a mentor to respond to you before responding on the article for deletion page.
3. When trying to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of
   WP:Deletion debate acronyms
   which may support the page you created being kept.
4. You can vote to merge the article into a larger or better established article on the same topic.

If your page is deleted, you still

On this edit of yours: Please do not tamper with others' signed comments; it is considered vandalism. -- Hoary (talk) 15:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, didn't know that.. GeoffBarrenger (talk) 20:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geoff, I am surprised that Vogue is not important to you, since I work here; and I've personally seen your photography, I'll be sure to let everyone know its not a magazine you would be interested in working with. I hope that you understand my postition on the photographer which should be deleted, he is not relevant to the fashion community. I know, because I book the photographers. MagazineHound (talk) 17:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My young fellow, if I were u - I would not throw words in such a manner to people you do not know personally. Would it be me or any other people. Please, speak respectfully. As to your claim - I did not say Vogue is not important, it's a pretty good mag, but anyway it is not The Lord and it is not the criterion. If a fashion photographer does not have his works in Vogue - you cannot take it as an explanation that he's not notable. There are many other fashion magz. So, be impartial in what you say in future.. P.S. - actually I am not sure that you really work for Vogue. What's your exact position there? GeoffBarrenger (talk) 20:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Um.

civil. Killiondude (talk) 23:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Geoff, I've warned MagazineHound not to repeat remarks such as those at the top of this section. I hope they don't recur; if they do, please ignore them. -- Hoary (talk) 02:20, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geoff-- I placed the {{dead link}} tag after the third link in Den Schliker's article because I can't get the page to open (on multiple attempts). Does it work for you? I'm asking because you removed the tag I placed. Killiondude (talk) 23:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hm..surprised..it's a working link. Anyway, look what I found:

1) http://www.ozon.ru/context/detail/id/3429938/

2) http://www.books.ru/shop/books/543315

3) http://www.bookvoed.ru/searching_for_shop347119.html

Also I added 4 more references here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Den_Schliker GeoffBarrenger (talk) 23:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still undecided about the merits of Den Schliker. However, if you think he merits an article, you're free to improve that article, and to argue his case in the AfD. -- Hoary (talk) 02:20, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The AfD for Den Schliker has been closed as keep. Keep an eye out for any more references on the net or in print so that we can make sure this sort of thing doesn't happen again. Thanks for your work on the article and in the discussion. Killiondude (talk) 00:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article about Den Schliker is a mere stub, or little more than this. It claims (without seeming to present any particular supporting evidence) that he's from Sevastopol. I don't understand this edit of yours at all. Could you explain? -- Hoary (talk) 04:25, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]