Talk:Simon Schama

I think there's a technical problem here, this article keeps disappearing - this is the third time I've written it.

There was, er, sort of a misunderstanding about who Simon Schama was and whether or not this article constitutes slandanity. For now I'm willing to leave it under the condition that it gets expanded by you or someone else. Short articles like this don't usually survive, but if it's a work in progress, more power to ye. --—rc (t) 03:34, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I'm very new here, and far be it from me to challenge recieved wisdom, but can't short, snappy articles sometimes actually be funnier than longer ones? I'm not asking specifically in relationship to this article (I don't presume to rate my own funniness), but in general it seems rather arbitrary to say long=good, short=bad.

Oh, sure, they can be, just as long articles are often just boring garbage. The majority of deleted articles are short, though (trust me, we delete metric tons of horrible short articles daily), because they're easier to create and thus more abundant. As I said, I deleted Simon Schama because I thought it violated our policies about non-notable slander, not necessarily because it was bad enough that it could be deleted offhand.

That said, though, we really do have (more than) enough short, "random" articles like this (unless there's something about crabs and papier-mache that actually relates to Mr. Schama). --—rc (t) 04:30, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)

By the way, you can sign comments with --~~~~. Makes it easier to follow conversations. --—rc (t) 04:31, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, don't appear to have that wobbly thing on my keyboard. I'm on a Mac.

Macs don't got tildes? You can also click the button that looks like this on the edit screen to insert your name and timestamp: The reason I use User:Rcmurphy/sig}} is because I have my signature stored on a separate page for the moment, but you don't have to worry about that. --—rc (t) 04:47, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! --Kerry's big sex 04:50, 13 Nov 2005 (UTC)