Meta tags:

Headings (most frequently used words):

wp, template, the, nmedia, talk, notability, sidebar, contents, general, discussion, shall, we, delete, table, move, link, to, afdp, so, reverted, noinclude, books, schools3, internet, web, content, tv, episodes, years, streets, and, roads, recent, edit, software, fonts, etc, interwiki, gng, remove, essay, from, this, vte,

Text of the page (most frequently used words):
the (128), that (51), and (45), utc (39), reply (39), discussion (39), comment (39), not (32), for (30), you (29), talk (26), are (26), wikipedia (25), this (24), edit (23), 2006 (23), notability (21), #template (21), years (21), have (21), latest (19), ago (19), should (18), with (17), comments (17), guideline (17), there (17), proposals (17), would (16), link (15), notable (15), page (14), these (13), streets (13), one (12), but (12), from (11), more (11), don (11), why (11), person (11), list (11), proposal (11), think (10), people (10), guidelines (10), some (10), roads (10), all (10), sidebar (9), see (9), march (9), pages (9), what (9), most (9), september (8), links (8), web (8), road (8), street (8), such (8), out (8), consensus (8), about (7), was (7), they (7), could (7), them (7), because (7), nmedia (7), numbered (7), main (7), considered (7), other (7), criteria (7), francis (7), then (6), can (6), which (6), any (6), active (6), schonken (6), problem (6), move (6), only (6), self (6), evident (6), pov (6), linking (6), add (5), topic (5), table (5), contents (5), may (5), using (5), agree (5), than (5), much (5), makes (5), remove (5), being (5), also (5), find (5), articles (5), just (5), major (5), few (5), were (5), general (5), content (5), good (5), idea (5), rejected (5), above (5), your (5), lists (5), category (5), february (5), search (4), view (4), use (4), 2025 (4), here (4), someone (4), new (4), sorry (4), vte (4), like (4), top (4), 2008 (4), way (4), many (4), side (4), where (4), own (4), proposed (4), internet (4), will (4), books (4), still (4), once (4), maybe (4), hide (4), policy (3), available (3), under (3), non (3), sidebars (3), ones (3), its (3), history (3), removed (3), know (3), need (3), sense (3), novem (3), linguae (3), right (3), essay (3), free (3), specific (3), added (3), gng (3), found (3), please (3), interwiki (3), thanks (3), december (3), account (3), software (3), fonts (3), made (3), example (3), recent (3), has (3), been (3), short (3), area (3), subject (3), however (3), article (3), 2007 (3), episodes (3), competing (3), without (3), schools (3), schools3 (3), existing (3), create (3), failed (3), accepted (3), note (3), incguide (3), instead (3), having (3), noinclude (3), reverted (3), version (3), explain (3), unforgettableid (3), afdp (3), confusing (3), say (3), locke (3), cole (3), meaning (3), entries (3), marked (3), reason (3), changes (3), imho (3), very (3), alternative (3), help (3), how (3), navigational (3), discussions (3), historical (3), tools (3), toggle (2), statement (2), contact (2), privacy (2), terms (2), last (2), title (2), useful (2), likely (2), want (2), extraordinary (2), writ (2), pretty (2), needs (2), wants (2), when (2), sng (2), elaborate (2), sure (2), year (2), whether (2), feel (2), contribs (2), relevant (2), anyone (2), especially (2), download (2), etc (2), deletion (2), arguments (2), afd (2), debates (2), routes (2), besides (2), route (2), january (2), close (2), generally (2), event (2), city (2), transverse (2), town (2), map (2), does (2), every (2), little (2), community (2), into (2), wikipedians (2), created (2), exist (2), bold (2), april (2), called (2), include (2), enough (2), consensual (2), far (2), lot (2), quite (2), none (2), number (2), pascal (2), tesson (2), notabilityguide (2), those (2), july (2), xyzzyplugh (2), going (2), name (2), work (2), critique (2), helpful (2), now (2), trying (2), clear (2), crow (2), didn (2), important (2), clicks (2), again (2), reverting (2), yet (2), disagree (2), encouraging (2), deserve (2), quick (2), burial (2), make (2), revert (2), course (2), thinking (2), jimbo (2), version2 (2), gave (2), encourage (2), solving (2), object (2), issues (2), give (2), even (2), instance (2), realize (2), able (2), figure (2), meant (2), user (2), related (2), otherwise (2), current (2), neither (2), various (2), selection (2), shall (2), delete (2), ardric47 (2), rob (2), appearance (2), upload (2), file (2), read (2), languages (2), log (2), donate (2), menu (2), mobile, cookie, statistics, developers, code, conduct, legal, safety, contacts, disclaimers, text, additional, apply, site, registered, trademark, profit, organization, wikimedia, foundation, inc, creative, commons, attribution, sharealike, license, rendered, parsoid, edited, retrieved, https, org, index, php, template_talk, notability_sidebar, oldid, 1309075246, anything, projectspace, mainspace, since, editors, average, reader, inspect, common, watchlist, clicking, star, promoted, bury, hope, worries, understand, keep, commmon, favifake, explained, bit, too, pushy, argumentative, started, weigh, 2021, notice, media, television, radio, programs, whose, missing, included, 2018, ijball, nfilm, tvshow, perhaps, somewhere, november, 2011, grandiose, june, 2010, tsuchiya, hikaru, 저명성, 둘러보기, secret, forth, variety, seems, fallen, through, cracks, october, largo, plazo, marvosym, section, users, hard, assistance, reasons, ukexpat, helpdesk, deleted, limit, jurisdictions, pass, either, seemingly, unimportant, happen, numbers, sebwite, small, divided, yellow, line, contained, exceptions, plays, role, popular, culture, location, news, featured, movie, highly, writing, washington, lettered, 16th, downtown, gridlike, pattern, minor, downtowns, unless, factor, else, establishes, manhattan, north, south, long, distance, mostly, avenues, west, east, narrow, lane, thru, traffic, parking, each, wider, central, park, bus, lines, operating, stand, factors, therefore, 86th, 79th, two, cities, towns, communities, type, wall, atlas, display, show, look, detailed, neighborhood, opinion, fits, following, cannot, world, inclusion, live, expanded, others, already, varying, results, resulted, opened, required, august, benbildstein, including, belay, jester, swat, episode, changed, immediately, recognisable, looking, notabiity, missed, altogether, wording, linked, cut, introduction, uses, tyrenius, personally, below, concurrent, myself, sort, believe, strongly, support, kicking222, recommendations, least, attempt, different, thus, hey, wait, minute, who, judge, things, take, time, clearly, something, useless, says, published, book, until, months, had, elapsed, incorrect, naming, conventions, referring, begin, fix, old, breaking, their, killing, redirect, confess, previous, change, broke, large, convenient, addition, fully, edits, cheers, moved, avoid, standard, camelcase, accord, transclusion, former, john, reid, replied, felt, portions, regarding, works, best, thing, discuss, further, try, gain, removing, btw, ignoring, points, interpret, run, resolve, force, behaviour, nature, convince, adhering, apparently, doesn, wasn, needing, click, definition, compelling, omit, day, irrelevant, applies, shouldn, absolutely, decide, problems, individual, appropriate, npov, prepared, negotiate, accept, piped, happens, favorite, possible, question, acceptable, centering, around, fail, thoughts, prove, unsuccessfully, tried, poll, project, fame, importance, place, aim, multiplying, shortage, encouraged, rather, solved, inviting, marking, contraproductive, overview, plaforms, publicise, system, simply, used, actual, order, breath, picks, favorable, reception, picked, unlikely, become, foreseeable, future, earth, ten, precedence, three, completely, unacceptable, process, voting, war, nonsense, wishful, care, abbreviated, result, friendly, doubt, helped, wouldn, aware, poor, choice, words, before, improve, consider, publish, publicize, via, suggested, entry, probably, won, currently, stay, designation, placing, after, usually, box, larger, space, consideration, listed, centralized, surveys, established, practice, same, qualification, explicit, big, level, quality, difference, nor, header, sensible, away, less, redundant, subcategory, contain, essays, isn, done, categories, alternatively, places, primary, interesting, said, pushing, attempts, leaving, approved, let, alone, school, adding, construction, per, thivierr, overlaps, fine, wanted, relationship, wondered, might, belong, 2005, interiot, encyclopedia, projects, printable, pdf, print, export, switch, legacy, parser, get, shortened, url, information, permanent, actions, english, supported, personal, special, portal, learn, contribute, random, events, navigation, jump,

Text of the page (random words):
wouldn t otherwise have been aware of there is no reason not to use the list if you feel it is pov a poor choice of words i m sure you ll explain before using it again then improve it don t remove it the crow 13 28 19 march 2006 utc reply i didn t say pov i said pov selection meaning pushing the non approved guideline attempts and leaving out some of the more important active ones and most of all because of not linking to the notability criteria category i don t say it isn t interesting to find the links to pages where the active discussions on such issues are going on but that should be done from talk pages from categories at most not from the top of guidelines or alternatively by a template linking these discussion places but then not as a primary navigational template on top of the active guidelines otherwise and maybe i think this the most sensible proposal we could do away with the subject specific notability criteria category and have the incguide navigational template instead of that more or less redundant subcategory of category wikipedia notability criteria that still can contain essays and guideline proposals with active discussions h and p is not established practice enough to be self evident for most wikipedians neither do i think it a good idea to make links to various proposals and rejected guidelines in the same list even if the qualification would be more explicit especially because there is a big level of quality difference in these various proposals and rejected guidelines note that neither a rejected nor a proposed but not yet accepted guideline should go under a header guidelines as for linking proposals with an active discussion please consider to publish such list for instance at wikipedia current surveys or maybe publicize via wikipedia centralized discussion or as suggested above from talk pages of guideline proposals francis schonken 17 09 19 march 2006 utc reply the idea of linking proposals is to help encourage discussion the designation p is because placing proposal after the name usually makes the box a lot larger it s a space consideration once people go to the page and realize it s a proposal they should be able to figure out that p meant proposal as for historical entries i don t know that those should be listed in any event i ll be reverting you if you want to remove the historical entry i probably won t object but the pages currently marked as proposed should stay locke cole t c 21 10 19 march 2006 utc reply i don t care why proposal is abbreviated to p the result of it in the table is not self evident in a general user friendly way i don t see how anyone can doubt that once people go to the page and realize it s a proposal they should be able to figure out that p meant proposal nonsense in a wishful thinking way i don t know what gave you the idea that wikipedia would be a place where we aim at multiplying discussion as much as we can we don t need to help encourage discussion as if there would be a shortage of discussion if a problem needs solving it should be encouraged that it is rather solved by discussion than by revert war or voting but this inviting to discussion without marking the object of such discussion is contraproductive above i gave a short overview of how discussion plaforms for guideline issues that need solving are created and how to publicise them but this out of process system by navigational template is simply no good it is used on actual guidelines in order to give more breath to proposals that maybe only deserve a quick burial some of them have competing proposals and the template only picks one maybe not even the one with the most favorable reception for instance for lists it picked wikipedia lists in wikipedia its talk page makes clear that it is very very unlikely it will become guideline in any foreseeable future then there are also the competing proposals wikipedia lists in wikipedia alternative version and wikipedia lists in wikipedia alternative version2 why on earth should a template that is on some ten guidelines and proposals give precedence to any of these three proposals for list notability this is of course completely unacceptable so i revert your changes to the template the only proposal i would be prepared to negotiate about is the one for the list notability i could accept it to be a piped link to wikipedia lists in wikipedia alternative version2 that happens to be my favorite if that is not possible none of the other proposals are imho rejected guideline proposals are of course out of the question what were you thinking the only link in that sense that would be acceptable to me is a link to wikipedia talk fame and importance no jimbo s comments there explain why most guideline proposals centering around notability fail these thoughts by jimbo would imho prove to be very useful to many people that unsuccessfully tried to work out notability criteria so linking to that poll makes imho much more sense than linking to any other failed notability project francis schonken 22 30 19 march 2006 utc reply the meaning of p is self evident once someone clicks on one of the entries marked as such i disagree that these are pov and pov is irrelevant npov only applies to articles not the policy pages i also disagree that we shouldn t be encouraging discussion absolutely we should be encouraging discussion whether or not these proposals deserve a quick burial is not for you to decide all on your own if you have problems with individual proposals make such a statement on the appropriate talk page i will again be reverting you if you have a problem with that i m sorry but i ve yet to see any compelling reason to omit them just because you have a problem with them good day locke cole t c 13 07 26 march 2006 utc reply the meaning of p is self evident once someone clicks on one of the entries marked as such no it wasn t see above besides if needing to click it is by definition not self evident if i have a problem with it then there s no consensus to include sorry your behaviour close to wp own is not of a nature to convince me into adhering to a consensus that apparently doesn t exist you didn t reply to my most important points of critique so i can only interpret that as you having run out of arguments and trying to resolve this without discussion by force francis schonken 13 51 26 march 2006 utc reply i replied to what i felt were the relevant portions of your critique regarding consensus that s not quite the way it works as you can see above the crow found it helpful and not confusing at all the best thing for you to do right now would be to discuss this further or try to gain consensus for removing it as you don t have consensus for it right now btw please don t say i m trying to own the page when it s clear you re the one ignoring the discussion so far locke cole t c 14 00 26 march 2006 utc reply move edit latest comment 20 years ago 2 comments 2 people in discussion i moved this template to notabilityguide to avoid non standard camelcase title for a template also to accord with the topic transclusion using the former name will still work john reid 03 48 7 april 2006 utc reply thanks unforgettableid talk to me 12 36 22 may 2006 utc reply link to wp afdp edit latest comment 20 years ago 2 comments 2 people in discussion francis do you think having a link to wp afdp is a problem why i think it s convenient in addition could you fully explain why you reverted my edits cheers unforgettableid talk to me 12 36 22 may 2006 utc reply i have no problem with your last version why would i francis schonken 13 19 22 may 2006 utc reply so i reverted the noinclude edit latest comment 20 years ago 2 comments 1 person in discussion i confess to having no idea what s going on here however the previous noinclude change broke links in a large number of articles which were using this template this is not good xyzzyplugh 05 39 9 july 2006 utc reply note that the above is referring to template incguide if someone wants to begin using notabilityguide instead of incguide they should go fix all those articles which still use the old one instead of breaking all their links by killing the redirect to here xyzzyplugh 05 47 9 july 2006 utc reply books edit latest comment 20 years ago 3 comments 2 people in discussion it s incorrect to list the naming conventions guideline for books in the list of accepted consensual guidelines for notability pascal tesson 19 03 15 september 2006 utc reply the new proposal is rejected the notability recommendations in the existing books nc guideline are at least consensual the attempt to create a new different consensus failed thus far francis schonken 07 14 16 september 2006 utc reply hey wait a minute why are you the one who should judge that the proposal has failed these things take a lot of time and i think there clearly is consensus to have something other than the useless existing guideline which pretty much says that any published book is notable the discussion is still quite active on the talk page none of the existing guidelines were accepted until a number of months had elapsed pascal tesson 07 38 16 september 2006 utc reply schools3 edit latest comment 19 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion i personally think we should include a link to wikipedia schools3 below the link to wikipedia schools as they are concurrent if not competing proposals i m not bold enough to do it myself without some sort of consensus but i believe it s a good idea and not just because i strongly support s3 kicking222 01 56 7 december 2006 utc reply internet web content edit latest comment 19 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion i have changed internet content to web content as i think this will be more immediately recognisable i was looking for the web notabiity guideline link and missed this altogether because of the wording the page linked to is called wikipedia notability web and the short cut is wp web the introduction on the page uses web and not internet tyrenius 01 10 9 january 2007 utc reply tv episodes edit latest comment 19 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion i m being bold and including the tv episodes guideline from wp episode swat jester on belay 04 55 15 april 2007 utc reply years edit latest comment 19 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion i ve added a link to the proposal on years wikipedia notability years benbildstein 06 41 27 august 2007 utc reply streets and roads edit latest comment 18 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion all wikipedians agree that there cannot be an article about every little side street in the world but there should be a general guideline as to what makes a street or road notable for inclusion in an article of its own i have created many articles on roads where i live and expanded on others that already exist a few have been proposed for deletion with varying results the afd debates that have resulted have opened up the discussion as to what is required for a road to be notable in my opinion a road is notable if it fits into one or more of the following criteria roads that link two or more cities towns or communities should generally be considered notable these are the type of roads you would find on a wall map or road atlas that does not display every little side street but does show main roads if you were to look at a detailed street map of a neighborhood these would be the roads that you would view as the main road or few roads of the community or town in the downtown area of a major city with a gridlike pattern of streets the major streets that are considered the city s main streets would be considered notable however more minor streets which there are in most downtowns would not be considered notable unless some other factor else establishes them as such for example in manhattan where there are a few major north south streets which transverse the town a long distance mostly numbered avenues these would be considered notable however not all west east numbered streets would be considered notable most of these are narrow with one lane for thru traffic and parking on each side a few like 79th and 86th streets for example are wider transverse central park have bus lines operating on the streets and other stand out factors like these and therefore would be considered notable in washington dc not all lettered or numbered streets are notable but a few major ones like k street or 16th street are notable a side street or small road divided by a yellow line that is contained to one area and is not close to being the main road in the area is generally not notable exceptions are if the street plays some role in popular culture such as being the location of a major news event or is featured in a movie or is the subject of some highly notable writing one of the arguments that has made been made in some afd debates is that a road has to be numbered this in no way is a limit to what streets and roads could have articles there are many streets that are not numbered routes that all agree are notable besides some jurisdictions do not have numbered routes being a numbered route is no free pass to notability either there are many short seemingly unimportant roads that just happen to have route numbers sebwite talk 00 04 24 january 2008 utc reply recent edit edit latest comment 17 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion i have added why was my page deleted to the see also section there was some discussion on the helpdesk that new users find it hard to find assistance with the reasons for deletion and what they can do about it ukexpat talk 22 16 29 september 2008 utc reply software fonts etc edit latest comment 17 years ago 2 comments 2 people in discussion anyone up for guidelines on software fonts and so forth especially of the variety being made available for download this seems to have fallen through the cracks see marvosym for example largo plazo talk 14 17 7 october 2008 utc reply see wp web secret account 16 30 3 december 2008 utc reply interwiki edit latest comment 16 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion please add ko 틀 저명성 지침 둘러보기 interwiki thanks tsuchiya hikaru talk 04 53 29 june 2010 utc reply gng edit latest comment 14 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion perhaps we could link to the gng at the top somewhere likely to relevant to the pages this is found on grandiose me talk contribs 13 40 24 november 2011 utc reply wp nmedia edit latest comment 8 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion i notice that wp nmedia the notability guideline for media e g television and radio programs whose specific guideline is wp tvshow is missing this should be added to the template list if wp nfilm is included ijball contribs talk 16 18 30 march 2018 utc reply remove essay wp nmedia from this template edit latest comment 5 years ago 1 comment 1 person in discussion i ve started a discussion on whether we should remove the essay wp nmedia from this template at wt n should wp nmedia be removed from the sng sid...