User talk:Kane5187/Archive 3

Archives

User talk:Kane5187 Archive 1: March 2005 – July 2007 Archive 2: July 2007 – October 2007 Archive 3: October 2007 – January 2008 Archive 4: January 2008 – December 2010 Archive 5: December 2010 – October 2016 Archive 6: October 2016 – May 2022

Clair Marlo Neutrality issue

I'm removing the neutrality tag. What's your issue with this article? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clair_Marlo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.122.29.82 (talk) 03:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The Green FAC

It seems you misunderstood me entirely. I wasn't at all trying to be sarcastic. I was genuinely interested. I like it when people write articles about subjects that lie off the beaten path. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• So is your next article gonna be History of Dartmouth College or do you have something else in the works? - Mgm|^(talk) 16:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Soviettes-ValentinesEP.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Soviettes-ValentinesEP.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Soviettes2002.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Soviettes2002.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:SoviettesHavenots.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:SoviettesHavenots.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 14:57, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:EuromotionHolocene.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:EuromotionHolocene.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. High on a tree 04:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Your RFA was successful

Congratulations, I have closed your RfA as successful and you are now a sysop! If you have any questions about adminship, feel free to ask me. Please consider messaging me on IRC for access to the #wikipedia-en-admins channel. Good luck! --Deskana (talk) 08:44, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations from me too. Good luck! PeaceNT 14:57, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Dittos! Pat^{Politics rule!} 17:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Cough. Miranda 06:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Might want to start spamming people about "thank you for voting in my RFA" or put a notice on your talk page about your successful RFA :-) Miranda 21:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I realize that that's what many people do, but honestly, I don't feel comfortable doing it myself.

I feel that participation in an RfA, or AfD, or any other process including regular article editing is simply a manifestation of good faith towards the project as a whole. Expressing an opinion about my fitness for the job doesn't much differ from expressing an opinion about the fitness of an article for Wikipedia, or the fitness of an article for FA, or the fitness of an external link on a page. People didn't vote for me as a personal favor; they (hopefully) did it because they believed promoting me would improve the encyclopedia. I feel like thanking editors for participating in a particular process implicitly suggests that those who chose to not to be involved in it are somehow less helpful to the project. Everything everyone does anything around here short of vandalism is helpful, and editors know that no matter what they do, they're making this place better. I don't want to imply that certain editors' chosen realms of contribution are more valuable than others.

I obviously don't intend this to mean that I'm not appreciative that so many people found me fit for adminship; I certainly am. Nor do I mean to impugn the sincerity of those who do thank their supporters after successful RfAs; I just mean to say that I personally don't feel comfortable doing so. I think that every good-faith contributor knows intuitively that they're doing is positive and helpful, and that thanks is therefore unnecessary. Kane5187 21:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Some people put a thank you notice on their talk pages to thank everyone for voting on their RFA, but it's your call. Miranda 22:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's another congrats! Have fun, I wouldn't consider the "thank you" messages to be spam, it's a nice gesture. Have fun with the tools, and use them wisely :) Qst 22:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations !

GA pass, Seal of Dartmouth College

This user helped promote Seal of Dartmouth College to good article status.

• Great job on the article! I always try to review at least one article in my related section when I post a new GA nom myself, and I have a couple GACs up now that are relatively shorter articles, so I know the feeling of trying to get a shorter article to GA status. Nice work. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 23:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC).
• You're most welcome, it's a good article, well duh, it is now, hehe. Anyways, on the reviewing, yes, I think we should all strive to review at least one for every one GAC we post. I currently have 8 GACs pending, so I know the feeling of waiting... Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 23:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC).
  • Thank you for looking over ScienTOMogy. And yes, you're right about the reviewing. It's totally fine to use the templates they provide at WP:GAC to review - just make sure you give well thought out explanations for your reasoning on all points, whether you pass, fail or hold. I usually try not to fail, but instead put something on GA Hold if I can help it. That way, the contributors have time to incorporate my suggestions and get back to me. Just recently, this worked out very well for the article on The Chaser's War on Everything, which I first put on hold, and then passed later. Of course, lots of GACs are obvious passes from the more very highly experienced GA and FA writers, and still others are obvious fails due to lack of sourcing or using images that violate policy. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 23:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC).
    • I tried to address your concerns. After the Church of Scientology didn't do anything else to pursue actual litigation, not much more press was generated than the initial fervor in the media. Though the site is still referred to occasionally as far as its historical context to Scientology and the Internet, we'll probably have to wait for more secondary analysis to come forward in due time, as books are published, etc. But at the moment those are most of the good secondary sources explaining it I could find. Does that help? Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 00:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC).
      • I incorporated your suggestion into the article, hope it reads better now. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 01:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC).
• Thanks so much for the review, your helpful suggestions make it a better article. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 05:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC).

MOS: Linking years?

You recently noted that "Years, if not accompanied by a date, should not be wikilinked." Can you please point out where in the MOS it says that? The last time I looked, it was inconclusive and wishy washy on that exact topic. I agree that it should say that but I'd appreciate if you can help me find where it does say that. Thanks! --ElKevbo 04:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for replying! I really do wish that what you had said were true as I think the current policy is pretty stupid. I don't know who actually opposes changing that policy and maybe it's time to take another whack at it. But I appreciate your reply and admitting that the policy isn't what you thought it was; that takes a bit of bravery and candor that not everyone possesses. --ElKevbo 04:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Your GA review

Upon your suggestion, I have nominated the article as an FAC candidate. As you were the GA reviewer, any comments/suggestions would be appreciated on the article's FAC page. Thank you. Cirt 01:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC).

• Please do not comment at the FAC, for I have removed it, for now, per helpful advice from SandyGeorgia (talk · contribs) about points on how many FAC noms on different articles one user may have at a time. I will repost later, and let you know then. Thanks. Cirt 04:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC).
  • FYI, the article you reviewed as WP:GA, The Thriving Cult of Greed and Power, is now at WP:FAC. Cirt (talk) 03:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC).

University of North Dakota

Thanks for passing the article as a GA! You've made my day. I do plan to eventually attempt to get this up to FA class. I appreciate the comments you left on the talk page...they give me something to work with for the FA nomination. Thanks again. --MatthewUND^(talk) 04:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The Green FAC

You convinced me, I've changed my vote to support. I love the picture that is in the top right corner - I'm so glad you changed it to that one :) Karanacs 14:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

LOTD proposal

You have nominated a recently successful WP:FL. There have been two recent proposals to begin a List of the Day feature on the main page, which have both received majorities but have not been approved as overwhelming support sufficient to change the main page. WP:LOTDP is a new proposal to try to get the ball rolling based on the original proposal. You can voice your thoughts on its talk page. Basically, what the proposal entails is attempting to run an official trial, and then vote after the trial run on whether to change the main page. Support to run a trial requires much less consensus than support to change the main page. Should we succeed at eventually getting such a feature on the main page it would tentatively look like this. Whether or not you support an experimental trial or not you should come discuss the matter at WP:LOTDP's talk page. I apologize if you have either already voiced your opinion on this matter or already tired of hearing about it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

The Green (Dartmouth College)

I saw you removed the above article from the accomplishments list of wikiproject universities. I wanted to let you know that I put it back in and also tagged the article to the wikiproject. This is an article about a part of a college campus, I believe that makes it qualified to be within the scope because it follows the project's mission of "improving coverage of universities and colleges." KnightLago 12:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I think it is all a matter of interpretation, which has to be done on a case by case basis. This is about something on a university campus that clearly relates strongly to the university. So I think it fits. KnightLago 13:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Ref problem

In this edit to Tuck School of Business, you appear to have specified the title for the url parameter. Pagrashtak 15:05, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of Time 100

I have reverted the withdrawal from this AfD nomination, since it's a copyvio, too, and the nominator can't withdraw a nomination that has delete !votes. Corvus cornix 18:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem.  :) Corvus cornix 19:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured List of the Day Experiment

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all WP:FL's in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at WP:LOTD. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to WP:LOTD and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Dartmouth College

Hello:

I count ten libraries instead of nine because I include the Storage Library, from which students do recall books and actively use. I can see the argument for keeping the number at nine, but I think that the Storage Library deserves to be counted. My figure for the library comes from the Dartmouth College Factbook at http://www.dartmouth.edu/~oir/pdfs/library.pdf. I will change the library figure again to match the Factbook's, but as I said before, I'm not going to dispute the nine-library inaccuracy, as it is debatable. Bchaosf 19:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

congrats

Congrats on your successful RFA. I was checking the results of the ones that I commented on and find that you have won! Mrs.EasterBunny (talk) 22:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TheSoviettes LP.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:TheSoviettes LP.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. WebHamster 12:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

{{featured article}}

It's customary at FA for the main author or nominator to do the honors. Gimmetrow 07:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Tool fac restarted

Hi Dylan.. thought I'd let you know that the Tool fac has been restarted by Raul to reach consensus. Would by nice to hear your thoughts. Greetings, Johnnyw talk 19:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyedit request

Hi, I was wondering whether you could copyedit the article Holden, which is currently a featured article candidate. The remaining concerns are to do with the prose, and If you could take a look, it would be greatly appreciated. OSX (talk • contributions) 09:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		I am awarding you this barnstar to show my appreciation of your recent copyedit to the Holden article. Keep up the good work! OSX (talk • contributions) 07:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

University of Houston GA status

Dylan,

I believe I've made all the appropriate changes to the article as per your concerns. Let me know if there is anything else I need to do. Thanks again for all your help! Brianreading (talk) 06:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Baltimore City College logo.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Baltimore City College logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 18:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Tuck

Congrats on Tuck FA. Madcoverboy 07:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your amazing ability to contribute as much as you do and still be in good standing at Dartmouth...great job on the Tuck article! Back to paper-writing :-( DMCer 12:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:FerryHallSchool Logo.gif

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:FerryHallSchool Logo.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Zedla (talk) 23:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

GA review of Alfred University

Thanks for your review of the Alfred University article! As you mentioned, it does have a number of problems… hopefully I'll be able to fix those and have the article promoted to GA status someday. --bdesham ★ 20:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Michigan State University image

While there is no explicit limit for fair-use images, WP:FU calls for the absolute minimum use of fair-use images. To quote: "Multiple items are not used if one will suffice". One possibility is to remove the image from the bottom of the infobox for the main MSU article and keep the image as fair-use for the other articles. Zedla (talk) 03:50, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

A quick browse thru education FA's shows only Cornell University as having 3 fair-use images in the infobox. Most others have one or two (seal and mascot). I think the essential question is does the addition of the third image (which I've argued conveys the same notion of identification as the seal) really add to the article when balanced against fair-use/copyright guidelines? I don't see the MSU article being degraded if the image in question is disused. I'll remove the di-tag since the image has value in the other articles but still think it should be removed from the main MSU article. Zedla (talk) 00:57, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Looking at edu GA's my estimate is less than 10% of those have 3 more than 2 fair use images in the infobox. Zedla (talk) 01:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Tuck School of Business

Congrats on FA! I only just now saw that it made it. Guess I quit watching too soon after the copy-edit. By the way, it's still on the list waiting for a proofread at the League of Copy-Editors Requests page. It's up to you whether you want to take it off the list now that it's FA, or leave it there for another pair of eyes to look at. Again, congrats to all involved. Unimaginative Username (talk) 05:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for addressing. You're right, the League has had internal discussions about whether to proofread copy-edits that have already made FA. Congrats again, Unimaginative Username (talk) 03:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

University of Bristol GA review

Hi. I see you put University of Bristol on hold. How long are articles usually kept on hold, a week? I'm asking because the nominator doesn't seem to be very active and I may be able to deal with a number of the concerns you brought up. Thanks, Chris.B (talk) 21:53, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Well with Christmas in the way and what have you, I'll be a little pressed for time. But I'll see what I can do. Regards, Chris.B (talk) 13:12, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Caulfield Grammar School

Thanks for some good comments on this GA nomination. I've replied on the talk about my thoughts and am starting to work through some of them. Any help would be appreciated, particularly encouraging you to be bold and just move stuff from history to academics as appropriate. User:Harro5 02:51, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I've addressed most of your comments for putting the GA on hold. Your feedback would be very useful. Harro5 00:00, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Long range TFA requests

Please see our discussion at Wikipedia talk:Long range TFA requests. Thanks, Sarsaparilla (talk) 05:20, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Please reverse

SVG, as fully scalable images, inherently violate the size restrictions on non-free images.

Please delete the SVG Cal logo, restore the GIF and fix the pages you changed. Dragons flight (talk) 19:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thayer School of Engineering

The article Thayer School of Engineering, which you substantially contributed to, has passed the GAN process. I would like to thank you for your great work on the article, and well done. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} 12:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

DMS CE

Hi Kane,

This is just to let you know that I plan on reading and copyediting the DMS article, and I am just asking to see if you have the time to help out with any questions I might have in the process. If you do, then great! Leave a note here or on the article talk page, and I'll get started! --Malachirality (talk) 02:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry to see the FA on DMS close. I think we learned that it has to be done first and then acted upon quickly once on the FAC board.

I'm interested in that article. I'm a bit overcommitted now because I agreed to help the Seton Hall University article. I don't want to change my mind too much but I'm interested in doing DMS before Seton Hall. You can count on me helping DMS unless you want me to stay away for now. In WP, article ownership is seen as bad but I don't mind staying away for a short while if someone wants to work on an article alone.

I think the strategy I'll use is to examine each section at a time to make sure it's FA quality (or what I think is FA quality). I'll also look at the article as a whole to see that all major points are covered.Congolese fufu (talk) 23:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

DMS GA

I see DMS is nominated for GA. If it passes, good! However, the article is not up to its potential.

I need more than a few days to improve it and have you comment on the improvements and help, too.

Let's cheer for GA but the article is worthy of FA with just some work! I will post a question on the DMS talk page. Can you help ansewr it?Congolese fufu (talk) 04:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR

...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "H"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "I"s, "J"s, and "K"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++Lar: t/c 20:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Help With Seton Hall University

Hip hip Cherrio and all that good stuff.. ye who failed seton hall for ga on the 1st may now go to it and pass it for a ga only 5 days later..... Rankun (talk) 09:34, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Dartmouth College Alma Mater

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Dartmouth College Alma Mater, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 16:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:LOTD

In the last month, you have created a new WP:FL. From what I can tell, you are a veteran and have produced others in the past. Congratulations! You may be aware of WP:LOTD and have probably heard from me in prior months. We are experimenting with selecting Lists of the Day so similar to the current WP:TFA and WP:POTD features that run on the main page. I am invite those who have created new FLs in the last month to participate.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Drowning Roses/NOFX Split

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Drowning Roses/NOFX Split, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 01:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: List of Dartmouth College alumni

It is a new thing to do nowadays, that's why it is still unknown for you. The FL rating has been created a week or so ago. As you can see at WP:ASSESS, all lists that have been promoted to be a "featured list" should be provided a "FL" rating. "Stub", "Start", "B", and "A" rating are up to wikiproject members to give, but the ratings "GA", "FA", and "FL" are reserved for the pages that are listed at WP:GA, WP:FA, and WP:FL respectively. And since I see List of Dartmouth College alumni listed at WP:FL, I changed the rating to "FL". --Crzycheetah 04:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)