User talk:Omassey

Hello, world. Omassey 09:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Thomas

Hello, and welcome to WP. This is a peculiar place.

The page you have edited on Sarah Thomas has been listed by someone who didn't recognize the importance for almost immediate deletion. I have removed the deletion tag, which stops the process for the moment, but just for a very short while.

She is unquestionably a worthy subject for an article, but it must be in the WP style, which includes:

looking like an full encyclopedia article not a sketch
saying in the first sentence something to demonstrate notability, like "A.b. is professor of X at, winner of the XYZ prize and 10 honorary doctorates" (whatever applies). Use the exact wording I recommend, including either the word "notable" or "internationally-known" or "nationally-known"; do not use "famous" -- May sound silly, but that is what many people look for here. --I did this for you just now.
listing college degrees and previous positions with university and year -- and putting the university names in double brackets
listing important awards
listing important memberships and offices held
listing any publications, say how many total. State the importance the journals are.

and, most important, giving some 3rd party sources. A website at a university etc. can be one, but it cannot be the only one. Book reviews are fine, or a newspaper stories. Print or web is OK, but not from a list or a blog. There should certainly have been some news accounts of her appointment. These is, very unfortunately, some prejudice against people from the academic world. And there is, as would only be expected, the usual extraordinary prejudice against librarians being important. Even Bodley's.

If the article does get deleted before it can be fixed, just re-create it, but take your time--maybe in a week after careful preparation; do it outside WP, or on a subpage of your user page--call it User:Omassey/sandbox.

I will keep track of the article and help as needed. I have, alas, a great deal of experience getting articles about prominent academics into the style they want around here. And I'm a librarian myself, of no particular distinction. Ask me any questions on the article talk page. or my user talk page. DGG 06:37, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. Omassey 18:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject University of Oxford

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the University of Oxford. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! Casper Gutman 16:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Osney pics

I like your photographs (see my notes to User talk:Nancy) - I have put them into infoboxes to match the others which I hope is OK with you.

I have not got round to adding the last two Oxford footbridges - to complete Crossings of the River Thames up to Lechlade - because I know nothing about them. I am hoping someone with local knowledge can help. Regards Motmit (talk) 22:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for placing the photographs appropriately! That'd be Oxford Footbridge and Medley Footbridge, then? I can probably write stubs and take photos when I get a round tuit. Omassey (talk) 20:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done on Medley. Re Osney Footbridge, if there is another so called and there is a better name for the gasworks bridge then I think you should apply your local knowledge. The "smoothie" is a brilliant piece of work but I have found the odd discrepancy. Fred Thacker does not help here either. 10 out of 10 for catching the train on the railway bridge. I took a picture of a rather nondescript piece of lattice-work across the river above Folly Bridge, which I suspect is Oxford Footbridge. Unless you have already got something good I will kick this off to complete the link. Regards Motmit (talk) 21:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I have a photo of the lattice-work bridge (which I'll upload) but I didn't see anything on the bridge itself to confirm its name or date. Omassey (talk) 13:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was a stamp on the ironwork with the date 1927 and manufacturer something like Read Wrighton & Co. However the brickwork looks much more modern. Regards Motmit (talk) 20:34, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Ashmolean Museum; Peckwater Quadrangle; Myron Scholes; Sackler Library; Michaelmas term; Hong Kong Public Library; Colleges of the University of Oxford; John Butterfield, Baron Butterfield; Distributed library; A420 road; Doe Memorial Library; Jaring; Tom Quad; List of libraries in Hong Kong; Wing; Taylor Institution; Shah Alam; Research library; Oxford University Press

Cleanup: Open access; Maxtor; Habitat (retailer)
Merge: J. I. M. Stewart; Library school; National flag
Add Sources: Online Books Page; Advocates' Library; List of Oxbridge sister colleges
Wikify: Institutional damage; Belles-lettres; Easton Press
Expand: Stanton Library; Ironbridge; Jasper Fforde

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Library scientist

Controversial literature

Good work - your further cleaup. Much appreciated. Best to you! --Ludvikus (talk) 17:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I've read that reference that the LOC no longer uses this classification regarding recent works. That fact should be incorporated therein. --Ludvikus (talk) 18:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to check out this Page which would benefit from your knowledge of Library Science --Ludvikus (talk) 18:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work! I noticed. --Ludvikus (talk) 10:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uniform title

I appreciate your skills regarding Library Science very much. You deserve the recognition I'm posting here. Ludvikus (talk) 15:30, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Good, fine, work of editing Library Science related articles. Ludvikus (talk) 15:26, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! How are you? I still remember your good work in Library of science WP areas! --Ludvikus (talk) 14:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Singerman & the Singerman list

The above also might be of interest to you. Robert Singerman is the Librarian whose written the standard work, an annotated bibliography ("Antisemitic Lierature" I recollect), used by antisemitica book dealers. By the way, some of these linked items might also benefit from your expert input. Ludvikus (talk) 15:37, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you participate in the above if I started such a project? --Ludvikus (talk) 10:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Librarians already exists - unfortunately it's been moribund for years, but no one has bothered to kill it off )-: Omassey (talk) 21:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

8 edits in 2008, about 30 in 2007. Not all that active, but still alive. Reinvigoration welcome. DGG (talk) 03:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Standard work

This {{stub}} I started is hard for me to develop. I wonder if you could contribute anything to it (if it interests you)? --Ludvikus (talk) 10:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was away/busy when this was nominated for deletion; I fear, though, there's not much more one could say about the concept (alternatively, it merits a whole essay about sources and subjectivity!) Omassey (talk) 21:07, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could I have your help?

Hi Omassey! I have seen you have edited on the page Tyndale House.

On the SSBE page, I wanted to include the mention of a Tyndale House article which is about the Sacred Scriptures Bethel Editon Bible page, but the page seems very hazardous at the moment, with loads of people getting banned for doing edits on it. What should I do?

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Golden_rainbow • http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sacred_Scriptures_Bethel_Edition&diff=251186702&oldid=251153968

I would be honored if I could have your help and your aid regarding this area. I've been trying to get the right people to help me with different articles in good faith, and they have really done a great job in helping me. Even if you had some general advice, it would be appreciated. One of many articles on TyndaleThank you for your time. In Citer (talk) 12:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cambridge Concert Orchestra

The article Cambridge Concert Orchestra has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Devoid of coverage in reliable, independent sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Oo7565 (talk) 10:56, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]