User talk:Awbfiend/Archive 1

Would you please consider taking another look at Jenny Mikakos? Although the edit which you reverted had broken the markup with nowiki tags and may have appeared haphazard / spur of the moment, the issue itself has been the subject of some media coverage, the issue seems to be notable relative to the notability of the subject, and its inclusion in the article would avoid suggestions of bias in suppressing controversy. Thanks Awbfiend (talk) 01:23, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

This is a one-day story in a 21-year career. We have no other details about her entire career as Health Minister beyond the mere fact that she is. If we had enough information for a whole section about her stint as Health Minister, it could credibly warrant a sentence in it; otherwise it's a serious case of undue weight. The Drover's Wife (talk) 06:29, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Your recent edit of the Jenny Mikakos article went beyond the 'minor edits & trimming' mentioned within the article comment. The edit deleted parts of the article that were most relevant to the controversy (e.g. the large number of signatures on a petition directed at the minister, & the minister's specific comments that led to the outcry). Please avoid making edits that appear censorious, especially when those edits are not mentioned within the edit comment. Wikiparlproject (talk) 02:25, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I should have clarified that trimming was the main purpose of the edit. I think the details removed can fairly be described as trimming - while trying to avoid an edit war with others who feel that this item should not be mentioned at all on the page due to undue weight, I think the details removed were at a level of detail not seen elsewhere in the article and were not required. Awbfiend (talk) 00:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Level of detail is not relevant for undue weight, its the length of the section. Either way, the section is only two paragraphs now. I think the section has the relevant info and doesn't need further editing. Thanks. Wikiparlproject (talk) 01:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

The article Pam Triolo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Subject does not meet the notability guidelines of either WP:GNG or WP:POLITICIAN; a single newsworthy event does not create notability

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. Donald Albury 16:24, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pam Triolo 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/Pam Triolo 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. Donald Albury 23:29, 23 March 2020 (UTC)