This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Listen, don't take whatever I write in Parentheses (This is an example) as truth, but everybody has a cow about it, then I'll stop. P.S. I'm not homophobic nor have I ever treated homosexuals with nothing but the respect I show everbody who has treated me the same respect I show them.- Some Dude You've Never Known ( talk) 21:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Think about what you say. If a gay or lesbian contributor comes across your statement, what would they think about you and the substance of what you are saying? You say that what you write in parentheses shouldn't be taken as "truth", but contributors who have not met you before do not know that. Gay or lesbian editors may think you are attacking them and people who are gay. I ask that you not use such language in the future. Cunard ( talk) 22:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Listen, before this becomes a real conversation, can I re-edit my statement on the "Octomom" page, mainly because it states that I read it in People, but can't find it online, so that if he who find it could upload it to Wikipedia. - Some Dude You've Never Known ( talk) 02:39, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, you may restore your comment on the Talk:Nadya Suleman as long as you do not use "gay" in the pejorative or violate WP:NOTFORUM and WP:BLP. Writing "I heard that the Octomom is planing to give birth to another child" (mine emphasized) is not appropriate for obvious reasons. Cunard ( talk) 06:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm probably going to write a policy page on this at some point, but for now my rationale is this:
If it takes 5 minutes for me to create a secret page, and 1 minute for someone else to sign it, how does that detract from many hours spent improving Wikipedia?
Cheers, Access Denied [FATAL ERROR] 04:09, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Where's the RfC we were promised? Is it going to be a piecemeal chipping away at them, without linking to the previous, failed, mass MfD now? DuncanHill ( talk) 10:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
You charge that I lie about what you have said. No, I have not. The diff shows that I have not misquoted you. Point out a lie, and I will retract it. Cunard ( talk) 00:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cunard, could you please point me to where it is suggested that primary schools are not de facto notable. I know it's there somewhere but I just can't locate it. Thanks. -- Kudpung ( talk) 23:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
...to notify users of pages in their userspace that you nominate for deletion, using the {{subst:MFDWarning|PageName}} ~~~~
template. Thanks,
Acps110 (
talk •
contribs) 13:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
When you tag articles for speedy deletion because of a closed MfD, please don't use the db template with a custom reason, because it puts the page in the unspecified reason category. {{ db-xfd|votepage=name of MfD subpage without slash}} was designed for this purpose, and it puts the page in the G6 category. — Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 00:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I understand your viewpoint but you can't retrodate rules, it just isn't done, since the dates on the pages in question is clearly before the guideline date then the pages stand, also 5 minutes to create a page vs. many hours spent improving wikipedia. Delete them if you MUST but be warned you WILL lose me and many others in the process. Thanks Djminisite - Talk | Sign 16:03, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the very helpful suggestions in your review of this article. Back from a trip now, and with a better understanding of Wikipedia referencing requirements, I intend to work on modifying the article in my workspace as necessary to appropriately rely on secondary sources, and believe that this can be done for at least some of the subject's notable accomplishments. I will gratefully accept your offer to look at it again after some of this work is done. Music43lover ( talk) 02:54, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I have started to gather the material to implement the changes that you have suggested. A question: many of the reliable secondary source references that can be cited are in foreign languages, including German, Russian, and Georgian, the last of which is a very little-used language. Latsabidze spent most of the first 19 years of his life in Georgia, and the rest mostly in Germany and France until about 4 years ago when he came here to attend USC and study with Gordon Stewart. (When he came here, he spoke fluent Georgian, Russian, German and French, but very little English.) Is it acceptable to cite such foreign references that are relatively inaccessable to American readers? That concern largely guided my non-use of these sources before, forcing me to rely more on the primary sources cited and on other supporting "notes". I have original (paper) copies of numerous newpaper articles about Latsabidze in these languages that can be cited, none of which are available online. There are other reliable sources in these languages, such as the German news documentary on Latsabidze in Salzberg and news interviews of Latsabidze on Georgian TV. There are relatively few secondary sources on Latsabidze in English, and I will try to maximize my use of those where they can be considered "reliable", but what about the others? Music43lover ( talk) 21:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, It was taken care of because of a request on WP:VPT, I was sure I removed this request, or noted on it. Sorry for the inconvience. -- Wolfnix • Talk • 13:36, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Could you keep an eye on the civility issues at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/What Men Know that Women Don't, or ask another disinterested admin to. It's a book by Rich Zubaty. Zubaty's interventions are escalating both in length and in the degree of personal attacks on those participating in the discussion. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 18:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
I am speechless. Such arrogant rubbish need not be dignified by a reply. I recommend that you pay 72.234.207.192 ( talk · contribs) / Lew Loot ( talk · contribs) no heed. The user seems to be afflicted with a case of WP:IDIDNTHERETHAT and a lack of common sense. Because all uninvolved editors have concluded that the subject is non-notable, and because the debate is a clear delete, I recommend that you avoid further commenting at the AfD, as it will only be a waste of your time. I am impressed by the patience and grace you exhibited in responses during the onslaught of personal attacks and ludicrousness.
I've contacted Bongwarrior ( talk · contribs) to keep an eye on the AfD if the personal attacks resume. Best, Cunard ( talk) 09:18, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
According to CSD, criteria that is listed on WP:NOT is not enough criteria to delete a page... A p3rson ‽ 01:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but even if it is in my usersapce, the criteria provided shouldn't apply, per WP:NOT, because what is on WP:NOT is not enough to request deletion of a page. A p3rson ‽ 00:40, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Could you please explain as to why you think you are in any position to demand editors delete their own user pages? The link you have provided to the discussion is worthless as it does not indicate any change in policy it merely affirms what is already stated. Whilst secret pages are sometimes frowned upon if there is excess usage of it or it detracts from the project, they are not in essence banned or written into policy as outright disallowed. I would request you stop demanding editors to CSD tag their user pages or you may find yourself being warned for such actions. Regards Zoo Pro 04:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi SandyGeorgia. Would you take a look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#About.com sources from Hyde Flippo? I want to know if two articles by Hyde Flippo at About.com pass FA 1(c). (I plan to use those sources in Have a nice day.) No one has commented at RSN after one day. Because you provided valuable insight at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 16#Huffington Post, Gawker and About.com, I hope you can provide advice for these sources as well. Thank you! Cunard ( talk) 06:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acer Clear.fi. Could you put those citations properly in the Acer Clear.fi article and improve the article including a specific assertion of why it is notable? Otherwise it will be subject to Afd nomination again. -- Bejnar ( talk) 18:29, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Advanced search for: "Search" | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL ·
page history ·
Books Ngram Viewer
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL ·
toolserver ·
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL
On 18 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Michel Maxwell Philip, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 18:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Cunard - I am not sure why you reverted back all the updates for Empower Orphans. I had updated the 'Projects' area and summarized the information and made it up to date. The info currently on wiki is a year old.
Anvcomp ( talk) 16:03, 19 October 2010 (UTC)anvcomp
Cunard - The details in http://www.empowerorphans.org/civicrm/contribute/pcp/info?reset=1&id=31 have been changed. Hopefully now it is acceptable. Thanks Anvcomp ( talk) 20:49, 22 October 2010 (UTC)anvcomp
Hello Cunard
The following email has been sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org
We own the copyright to the text mentioned in Wikipedia for "Empower Orphans" and permit its use under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).
Can you please remove the Possible Copyright Infringement note on our article.
Details requested by Wikimedia: Original Publication (website) - http://www.empowerorphans.org/civicrm/contribute/pcp/info?reset=1&id=31 Owner of copyrighted material - Empower Orphans (Neha Gupta) Copyright being released - Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts) Link to uploaded material - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empower_Orphans
Anvcomp ( talk) 13:46, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Would you please create your user page? If you can't think of anything to put on it, could you at least redirect it to your talk page (this page)? That way, the link to your user page is no longer red, and you won't be mistaken for a newbie. ~ Nerdy Science Dude 01:04, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Response to NerdyScienceDude. Uncle G ( talk · contribs)'s statement at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Uncle G sums up why I have chosen not to have a userpage:
|
Cunard ( talk) 05:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
The Article Rescue Barnstar | ||
For rewriting Yahoo! Kids with reliable sources to save it from deletion. Narthring ( talk • contribs) 13:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC) |
Please see Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_October_25#Wikipedia:Sandbox.2FWord_Association.2FUltra_Game. -- Cirt ( talk) 13:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey Cunard, thanks for looking over it before. I think I've done all I can... but I've tried to be thorough. I am here to take you up on your offer, please copyedit/review when you get a chance. - Theornamentalist ( talk) 22:11, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Cunard ( talk) 07:50, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
<-- new one :)
Hi,
This page was created by the marketing department of BlueMorpho. I know the guy who created this page; his name is Malcolm. I have exchanged emails with him and Hamilton (the owner) and asked them to edit this page. This is purely an ad for their center created by them posted by them. I have been to this Center three times and I am friendly with the people at the center. I love Wikipedia and would like to see its integraty stay intact. Thank you, Daemon777
Here is one email that was sent to them:
Hi Malcolm,
Erm, yeah, [sic] drew my attention to this, so I've had a read and I bounced it off some other Blue Morpho Alumni and the reaction was universally negative, ok thats only 4 people but it's also 100%. I was a little surprised to read you have been talking to representatives of wikipedia as wikipedia has no editorial board and does not review pages, they are particularly proud of that fact. Could you let me know the user ids of whoever claimed to represent wikipedia please so I can discuss this with them
To quote the contact us page (their emphasis, not mine)
"Wikipedia has no editorial board. Revisions are not reviewed before they appear on the site. Content is not the result of an editorial decision by the Wikimedia Foundation or its staff."
I've listed the objections I have below, I don't really want to get into an email discussion though, I'd prefer it carried on on the wikipedia discussion page.
Notability Subjects on wikipedia should be 'notable' a really good rule of thumb about notability is that if you had to write it yourself it probably wasn't notable otherwise it gives rise to a conflict of interest, there are plenty of guidelines on wikipedia about conflicts of interest, I include below a quote from the guidelines that an article should be..
"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.[4] Significant media coverage can be an indicator of notability; I understand that being so close to Blue Morpho you may think it is really famous, but outside of the 'community' it's actually not, even inside the community; it's not like it's world famous.
Verifiable. That Blue Morpho page falls very far short, comments like "Blue Morpho Ayahuasca center is the largest Ayahuasca shamanism and Universal shamanism center in the Amazon jungle." largest in what respect? land mass? turnover? staff numbers? visitors? where are the references to support that claim? this is why people are discouraged from writing about themselves, people close to the subject will find it extremely difficult to maintain neutrality. The rest of the page is just advertising blurb again with no supporting information and some more promotion of related items at the end. I can't point at a section of the page and say 'this is wrong, this should be changed' because the whole page just looks like marketing and bears little resemblance to an encyclopaedia article.
Independant I think it's obvious that an article written to promote an organisation by staff of that organisation is not independant.
I actually agree with [sic] it's my opinion the page is not notable and does not contain any significant information, maybe one day it will become so famous as to justify a page but wikipedia is not the tool to get there. It has no merit on it's own and should be deleted, I see it's already been recommended for deletion a couple of times. In fact, it is clear that the page exists only because it is linked to from the ayahuasca page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daemon777 ( talk • contribs) 16:48, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
On 2 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Yahoo! Kids, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
-- Cirt ( talk) 06:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Umm... In fact I participated in the 3rd discussion. (And might still say a few words there.) I was notified through WikiProject Deletion sorting, like all others who monitor the Croatian or other WPDS subpages. Thanks for letting me know anyway. GregorB ( talk) 08:10, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the thumbs up !
( Whohe! ( talk) 14:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC))
{{adminhelp}}
Would an admin revert the move of
User talk:Lehla to
User talk:Laura Fletcher/user? Thanks,
Cunard (
talk) 20:18, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
You may be interested in the comments that I have posted at User talk:SmokeyJoe#About my MFDs of old userspace drafts. -- RL0919 ( talk) 16:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cunard. Not meaning to be personal, but I am wondering.... Did you previously edit under a different account and did we interact back then? Did you have any involvement in Esperanza? I observed, but did not get involved. Why is your talk page move-protected? Not that it is a problem, but it's unusual. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 10:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
My talk page is move-protected to prevent page-move vandalism. I've dealt with this user before and my talk page undoubtedly would have been targeted had it not been protected at the time. Cunard ( talk) 23:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Most of the recent {{ mfd}} from Iqinn are similar situations.
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 18:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Cunard, instead of one-by-one dealing with things at MFD per WP:NOTWEBHOST and WP:BLP issues, for example, specifically with regard to numerous discussions lately involving userspace-drafts by Geo Swan ( talk · contribs), might it be more logical to have one centralized discussion, perhaps in the form of WP:RFC/U? Cheers, -- Cirt ( talk) 00:37, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Userspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles, old revisions, or deleted content, or your preferred version of disputed content. Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion. Short term hosting of potentially valid articles and other reasonable content under development or in active use is usually acceptable (the template {{ userspace draft}} can be added to the top of the page to identify these). When a userspace page reaches a point where it can be included as an article consider moving it into mainspace or using its content appropriately in other relevant articles.
Several userspace drafts have been speedy deleted under {{ db-g10}}. The reason is provided in the deletion log: " WP:CSD#G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP" (mine emphasized). Negative unsourced BLPs drafts, such as pages that contain unsourced allegations about living people ( Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 November 8#User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Abdul Zahir charges), should be deleted.
I thank you for your good faith responses at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Betsy Haws and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/attempts to delete GWOT articles I have started. Cunard ( talk) 11:23, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, the history is something like this. For years, there have been on and off AfDs of mainly mainspace pages from Geo Swan. In or about April, IQinn started a more dedicated effort at scrutinizing his creations, with a larger number of AfD's. He (or she) also started tagging pages in the userspace as drafts. On 28 september, I mfD'ed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/review/Abdul Haq (Northern Alliance translator), but didn't check at that time the rest of his userspace.
On October 10, 2010, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/review was filed by User:TeleComNasSprVen. In that MfD User:Tikiwont stated "My suggestion would be either to look for a more private work space or to prune it yourself, singling out reusable neutral material and possible article candidates on one hand and mark other stuff for deletion yourself". I stated "Keep all, tag individual pages", which I have since started doing, to his dismay (and for which he contemplates a RfC/U against me). I also stated "All userspace pages by Geo Swan need checking (though many will remain as unproblematic), and it would indeed be best if Geo Swan started this process himself." My comment was supported by User:Gigs, User:Nsk92 and User:IQinn. Three days later, after a comment by DGG, the only unconditional suport he received, I replied "He is aware of the problems people have with such articles, he is aware that many of his articles are redirected, deleted, userfied, ..., but he doesn't seem to change anything in his behaviour. Perhaps, apart from many MfDs and AfDs, an RfCU will become necessary as well? "
So, by or about October 10, he should have been aware that a number of people believed that there was a serious problem with many pages in his userspace. During and directly after that MfD, Geo Swan asked for the deletion of a fair number of pages, with a sudden drop of this effort after 18 October. These were apparently mainly the pages he had in User:Geo Swan/gitmo/backups, so things that weren't deleted or otherwise harder to retrieve for him on Wikipedia, plus a few pages that were mentioned by name in the above MfD. At first glance, no pages that had been userfied or that never made it into the main namespace were deleted by Geo Swan, but further research may show that this assumption is incorrect of course.
On October 11 I speedy deleted User:Geo Swan/Riyadh Abd Al-Aziz Almujahid. His reply to that deletion was the first in a long list of posts about good faith and civility14 October I started 5 MfDs on pages in his userspace. He then politely requested me to stop this to give him a chance to deal with it [1]. I did. I then noticed the above pattern, where he started with a number of deletions, and then stopped his work on his userspace and continued with his regular editing.
On november 2, I tried to restart the process by giving him the link to a number of problematic pages [2]. He deleted two of the pages, but didn't agree with the deletion of the rest. Of those, another 5 have since been deleted after an MfD, and one through speedy by me. His response to some of these pages didn't give me the impression that leaving this user to clean up his own userspace would have the desired result of following our userspace policies, so I then restarted going through his userspace and MfD'ing pages myself.
Due to the massive amount of userspace pages he has, I nominated up to five articles a day, five days a week. The vast majority of these are deleted since, or are headed for deletion, with only a few which will probably be kept. The author still doesn't seem to understand that he has many, many pages that violate our policies, despite the overwhelming evidence of these MfDs (and also a large number of AfDs that end in delete as well). Geo Swan has had over 4,000 of his 60,000plus edits deleted so far, which is a very high percentage. Coupled with the number of pages (articles and user space) that still need to be checked, this shows a worrying lack of clue as to what is acceptable, both in main space and in userspace. He is a good faith contributor, not a vandal or hoax creator or whatever, who has added loads of notable articles and info to Wikipedia, but he has gone too far in the detaillistic chronicling of everything Guantanamo-related, and lost in too many cases the focus on policies like BLP, NPOV, OR, and the userspace policies. Fram ( talk) 08:15, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
An AfD in which you recently took part has spun off a discussion on the relevant policies and guidelines which may interest you. Handschuh- talk to me 21:07, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Heads up that WP:FAKEARTICLE redirect is up for RFD. I suspect WP:STALEDRAFT and/or WP:UP#COPIES are better suited to the MFDs you are doing. Good luck with those. -- Marc Kupper| talk 11:14, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
WOW, thank you so much for helping me with so much time, Cunard. I hope to contribute more articles soon, and your editing will really give me a great guideline--even with all of the great resources for editing here, your changes have really been the most instructive tutorial for me. Thanks again! Katieshy ( talk) 15:29, 23 November 2010 (UTC)Katieshy
You tagged The Warrior Heir for deletion as a copyvio of http://www.wikibin.org/articles/the-heir-chronicles-2.html. While it was a copyvio, that website wasn't the one whose copyright was infringed upon: everything on Wikibin comes from deleted Wikipedia articles (in this case, The Heir Chronicles), which in this case was CC-by-sa licensed by dint of being created here on Wikipedia, so those whose copyright was infringed are the original authors of the Wikipedia article. Whenever you find something copied from Wikibin, you can tag the article for deletion with {{ db-repost}} (with the title of the Wikibin page as the WP article that's been reposted), for that will likely make the deleting admin's job easier and quicker. As well, that way, the deleting admin won't be likely to say "Not a copyvio, just taken from a Wikipedia mirror". Nyttend ( talk) 12:46, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I'd appreciate it if you could use my current username to refer to me. Thanks. T. Canens ( talk) 05:55, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for keeping me in the loop! :-) Katieshy ( talk) 23:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)Katieshy
Thanks for relisting this one. I've done a lot of work on it. This guy might not be known outside South Africa, but he sure got a lot of press in South Africa, in English. Your input on AfD discussion would be appreciated. Yakushima ( talk) 13:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cunard, hope you're well. As an editor who has used the services of the Guild of Copy Editors, I thought you might be interested in knowing that the Guild is currently holding elections for its coordinators. To view the discussion and voice your opinion, please visit the election page. Thanks! – SMasters ( talk) 14:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Why are these sorts of MFDs still going on? I thought that the user was going to tag them all for self-speedy-deletion? Any updates on this??? -- Cirt ( talk) 20:20, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
{{ adminhelp}}
Giorgi Latsabidze contains material based on User:Music43lover/Giorgi Latsabidze, rendering it a copy-and-paste move. Would an admin remediate this? Thanks, Cunard ( talk) 10:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Dear Cunard, Thanks for your edits on my article. I see you made some minor edits on it, I appreciate it. I also see that you have left a notice for User:Music43lover/Giorgi Latsabidze I hope he will reply your message soon. However, I would like to let you know that I left for him a message when i was recreating the article first on his workspace and than moved it on mine. I am sure he is all right with that. I also see you have put some tag on the article's discussion page. Is that something I should worry about? After various edits by different users Latsabidz'e article got better and I think notability is established now. I think it would be good if User43lover would remove Latsabidze's article from his workplace since I have worked on it fundamentally along with other wikipedia users (including your edits). I hope there is no danger for the article to be nominated for a deletion any more. If you have any suggestions please let me know. Sausa11 ( talk) 22:23, 4 December 2010 (UTC) Thanks!
I Appreciate your reply and thanks for the explanation! The progress is made on Latsabidze's article, now it's safe. Feel free to edit the article as time goes on and more information becomes available. All the best Sausa11 ( talk) 07:49, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The article Man Cave, LLC is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Man Cave, LLC until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Corvus cornix talk 19:07, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Ragrding the origin of the term Bang for the buck: while your source, Random House, is a secondary and therefor "better" source, it is clearly incorrect, and it is not hard to find the 1954 mention of the term in a reliable source: [3]. While stating that this 1954 source would be the first mention of the term would be WP:OR, repeating that 1968 is the first confirmed mention is rather silly when it is obviously in error. Note that the term was repeatedly used in reliable sources throughout the later 1950s, with e.g. these four extra sources [4]. The policy was already described as obsolete in 1956! [5] Apparently other uses of the term date back to 1944 [6] and appear regularly in the 1940s [7]. Fram ( talk) 15:02, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
On 16 December 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bang for the buck, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the phrase "more bang for the buck" was used to describe the United States' New Look policy of depending on nuclear weapons, rather than a large regular army, to keep the Soviet Union in check? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 18:06, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Good evening sir, above article Ambarish Srivastava was nominated for deletion review on 2010 February 14. The result of the discussion was moved to main space. You have participated in that discussion. It was thoroughly checked and edited by you also. I am grateful to you for your kind support at that time. At present Mr. 'SpacemanSpiff' who nominated this article for AFD previously, has deleted its major part under 'poetry' section which was cited properly. As well as he also deleted it's whole 'Architectural works' section on Yesterday 19:01, 16 December 2010 and 19:03, 16 December 2010. I contacted Mr. 'SpacemanSpiff' on his talk page where he answered to me "You can not use photographs of buildings as references for works by the person, we need reliable source references. Likewise, user submitted content sites are not valid references for poetic contributions and linking to every poem on such sites runs afoul of our external links policy. Suggest you read WP:BLP and WP:NPOV". If that content was not was as per WP:BLP and WP:NPOV then why he could not deleted it previously when this page was moved to main space, while Mr. 'Fayenatic london' has made some quarries about it on 18:46, 20 August 2010, 18:49, 20 August 2010,18:53, 20 August 2010, 18:58, 20 August 2010, 19:05, 20 August 2010 & 19:12, 20 August 2010. He was satisfied with my answers about those sections. I request you to check it. Is it justified? if not please help it. Thanks a lot. Spjayswal67 ( talk) 16:04, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Because you initiated Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Conspiracy journalism, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conspiracy journalism (2nd nomination). Cunard ( talk) 10:13, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Wishing you all the very best for the season. Thanks for all your help and support this year. Merry Christmas and may Santa be good to you! – SMasters ( talk) 03:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC) Click to play! |
Why do you add <noinclude> tags to such as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths related to Scientology in this edit? __ meco ( talk) 10:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
On 31 December 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Harry Neal Baum, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Harry Neal Baum ghostwrote the 1917 novel Mary Louise Solves a Mystery when his ailing father, L. Frank Baum, could not fulfill his obligations to his publishers? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 14:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Good evening! Respected Sir, my article was moved User:Spjayswal67/Ambarish Srivastava to Ambarish Srivastava: restored to main space as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_February_14 by your great support. I am thankful to you for that. It was nominated for deletion that time by Mr. SpacemanSpiff. You had also participated in Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_February_14 and you had also rearranged it. Now Mr. SpacemanSpiff continuously hearts this article, he had deleted a major part such as ‘professional membership’, ‘poetry’ and ‘architectural works’section of it. If these sections were not considerable why he had not deleted these immediately after its restoration. It appears that he have some irritation due to restoration of this article. To check it you can view its history. It is my humble request to you that please suggest me that what can i do to resist it. Please help again to protect this article. Spjayswal67 ( talk) 15:12, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
adminhelp}}
Would an admin revision delete this edit which added copyrighted content from http://dchs.edu.ph/index.php/about_dchs? Thanks, Cunard ( talk) 22:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Because redacting the copyright-infringing content would not remove attribution to non-infringing contributors, the revision deletion criteria are applicable. Cunard ( talk) 23:28, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 接触平面. Since you had some involvement with the 接触平面 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Would this image fall under Wikipedia:Logos#Copyright-free logos? I found the image here. I believe it is copyright-free because it only contains shapes and words but don't know if it is trademarked. How would I find out if it is trademarked? Cunard ( talk) 08:11, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
talkback Pdfpdf ( talk) 11:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
FYI - some of my advice is being used in the school tp. Kudpung ( talk) 12:05, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cunard,
I'm a total beginner at creating pages, and believe I would not be able to create a decent one. There's a local popular band I would like to create a Page for, and if I was to give you information, is there any way you can get the page created for them??
Thanks very much —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.138.211 ( talk) 12:08, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cunard, I'm a total beginner at creating pages, and believe I would not be able to create a decent one. There's a local popular band I would like to create a Page for, and if I was to give you information, is there any way you can get the page created for them?? Thanks very much Rob HEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY 12:09, 21 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobL16 ( talk • contribs)
On 23 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article WePay, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the inspiration for WePay originated when co-founder Rich Aberman had difficulty fundraising for his brother's bachelor party? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 18:05, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
I saw you removed the nomination because no hook was approved. After your suggestion about changing the negative hook proposed I contacted the original reviewer of the nomination about it to see what he thinks but he never responded. This is most likely why nobody responded to your suggestion. Spongie555 ( talk) 23:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Its not negative and not that bland as they beat on of the best teams of Denmark of the time. Spongie555 ( talk) 02:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
You removed my speedy delete for the article HeiaHeia, with the reason "G4 does not apply – this topic has not been deleted before at AfD". While you are correct in saying that, I assumed that you could use G4 if it has been deleted before with a speedy delete, and no information has been added. (This is not about the notability claim, I see that now and I apologize.) Bluefist talk 00:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
wha? The user's comment was already moved to the correct place. This has occurred many times before and I've never seen a decline on it. (I am watching this page, so please reply here.) — Timneu22 · talk 00:51, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
On 28 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eric Doeringer, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Eric Doeringer has sometimes sold up to US$1,500 worth of "bootlegs", small copies of paintings by eminent modern artists, in one day? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I have nothing against the current name, only that it seemed a little odd in the beginning.. Student Society of Riga was an old name and had to be changed though. H2ppyme ( talk) 08:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I am working on a potential RfC/U about User:Geo Swan. The draft is located at User:Fram/Sandbox. I have used a discussion where you were involved as part of the evidence, and would like to invite you to go over the draft RfC and add or correct whatever you feel is necessary. Obviously, if you feel that an RfC/U is not appropriate or not the best step to take, feel free to let me know as well. Fram ( talk) 11:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Would you delete and salt Mike Da Poet? You participated in a DRV in July 2010, where you suggested that Mikie Da Poet be listed at WP:DEEPER (which it now is) because of the considerable disruption of the DRV process (see the DRV links at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mikie Da Poet). Deletion has now been circumvented at the title Mike Da Poet. There also appears to be sockpuppetry going on per my comments at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/6stargeneral. Cunard ( talk) 10:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
P. S. Burton ( talk) 20:30, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Listen, don't take whatever I write in Parentheses (This is an example) as truth, but everybody has a cow about it, then I'll stop. P.S. I'm not homophobic nor have I ever treated homosexuals with nothing but the respect I show everbody who has treated me the same respect I show them.- Some Dude You've Never Known ( talk) 21:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Think about what you say. If a gay or lesbian contributor comes across your statement, what would they think about you and the substance of what you are saying? You say that what you write in parentheses shouldn't be taken as "truth", but contributors who have not met you before do not know that. Gay or lesbian editors may think you are attacking them and people who are gay. I ask that you not use such language in the future. Cunard ( talk) 22:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Listen, before this becomes a real conversation, can I re-edit my statement on the "Octomom" page, mainly because it states that I read it in People, but can't find it online, so that if he who find it could upload it to Wikipedia. - Some Dude You've Never Known ( talk) 02:39, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, you may restore your comment on the Talk:Nadya Suleman as long as you do not use "gay" in the pejorative or violate WP:NOTFORUM and WP:BLP. Writing "I heard that the Octomom is planing to give birth to another child" (mine emphasized) is not appropriate for obvious reasons. Cunard ( talk) 06:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm probably going to write a policy page on this at some point, but for now my rationale is this:
If it takes 5 minutes for me to create a secret page, and 1 minute for someone else to sign it, how does that detract from many hours spent improving Wikipedia?
Cheers, Access Denied [FATAL ERROR] 04:09, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Where's the RfC we were promised? Is it going to be a piecemeal chipping away at them, without linking to the previous, failed, mass MfD now? DuncanHill ( talk) 10:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
You charge that I lie about what you have said. No, I have not. The diff shows that I have not misquoted you. Point out a lie, and I will retract it. Cunard ( talk) 00:32, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cunard, could you please point me to where it is suggested that primary schools are not de facto notable. I know it's there somewhere but I just can't locate it. Thanks. -- Kudpung ( talk) 23:49, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
...to notify users of pages in their userspace that you nominate for deletion, using the {{subst:MFDWarning|PageName}} ~~~~
template. Thanks,
Acps110 (
talk •
contribs) 13:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
When you tag articles for speedy deletion because of a closed MfD, please don't use the db template with a custom reason, because it puts the page in the unspecified reason category. {{ db-xfd|votepage=name of MfD subpage without slash}} was designed for this purpose, and it puts the page in the G6 category. — Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 00:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I understand your viewpoint but you can't retrodate rules, it just isn't done, since the dates on the pages in question is clearly before the guideline date then the pages stand, also 5 minutes to create a page vs. many hours spent improving wikipedia. Delete them if you MUST but be warned you WILL lose me and many others in the process. Thanks Djminisite - Talk | Sign 16:03, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the very helpful suggestions in your review of this article. Back from a trip now, and with a better understanding of Wikipedia referencing requirements, I intend to work on modifying the article in my workspace as necessary to appropriately rely on secondary sources, and believe that this can be done for at least some of the subject's notable accomplishments. I will gratefully accept your offer to look at it again after some of this work is done. Music43lover ( talk) 02:54, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I have started to gather the material to implement the changes that you have suggested. A question: many of the reliable secondary source references that can be cited are in foreign languages, including German, Russian, and Georgian, the last of which is a very little-used language. Latsabidze spent most of the first 19 years of his life in Georgia, and the rest mostly in Germany and France until about 4 years ago when he came here to attend USC and study with Gordon Stewart. (When he came here, he spoke fluent Georgian, Russian, German and French, but very little English.) Is it acceptable to cite such foreign references that are relatively inaccessable to American readers? That concern largely guided my non-use of these sources before, forcing me to rely more on the primary sources cited and on other supporting "notes". I have original (paper) copies of numerous newpaper articles about Latsabidze in these languages that can be cited, none of which are available online. There are other reliable sources in these languages, such as the German news documentary on Latsabidze in Salzberg and news interviews of Latsabidze on Georgian TV. There are relatively few secondary sources on Latsabidze in English, and I will try to maximize my use of those where they can be considered "reliable", but what about the others? Music43lover ( talk) 21:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, It was taken care of because of a request on WP:VPT, I was sure I removed this request, or noted on it. Sorry for the inconvience. -- Wolfnix • Talk • 13:36, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Could you keep an eye on the civility issues at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/What Men Know that Women Don't, or ask another disinterested admin to. It's a book by Rich Zubaty. Zubaty's interventions are escalating both in length and in the degree of personal attacks on those participating in the discussion. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 18:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
I am speechless. Such arrogant rubbish need not be dignified by a reply. I recommend that you pay 72.234.207.192 ( talk · contribs) / Lew Loot ( talk · contribs) no heed. The user seems to be afflicted with a case of WP:IDIDNTHERETHAT and a lack of common sense. Because all uninvolved editors have concluded that the subject is non-notable, and because the debate is a clear delete, I recommend that you avoid further commenting at the AfD, as it will only be a waste of your time. I am impressed by the patience and grace you exhibited in responses during the onslaught of personal attacks and ludicrousness.
I've contacted Bongwarrior ( talk · contribs) to keep an eye on the AfD if the personal attacks resume. Best, Cunard ( talk) 09:18, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
According to CSD, criteria that is listed on WP:NOT is not enough criteria to delete a page... A p3rson ‽ 01:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but even if it is in my usersapce, the criteria provided shouldn't apply, per WP:NOT, because what is on WP:NOT is not enough to request deletion of a page. A p3rson ‽ 00:40, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Could you please explain as to why you think you are in any position to demand editors delete their own user pages? The link you have provided to the discussion is worthless as it does not indicate any change in policy it merely affirms what is already stated. Whilst secret pages are sometimes frowned upon if there is excess usage of it or it detracts from the project, they are not in essence banned or written into policy as outright disallowed. I would request you stop demanding editors to CSD tag their user pages or you may find yourself being warned for such actions. Regards Zoo Pro 04:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi SandyGeorgia. Would you take a look at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#About.com sources from Hyde Flippo? I want to know if two articles by Hyde Flippo at About.com pass FA 1(c). (I plan to use those sources in Have a nice day.) No one has commented at RSN after one day. Because you provided valuable insight at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 16#Huffington Post, Gawker and About.com, I hope you can provide advice for these sources as well. Thank you! Cunard ( talk) 06:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acer Clear.fi. Could you put those citations properly in the Acer Clear.fi article and improve the article including a specific assertion of why it is notable? Otherwise it will be subject to Afd nomination again. -- Bejnar ( talk) 18:29, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Advanced search for: "Search" | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||
|
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL ·
page history ·
Books Ngram Viewer
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL ·
toolserver ·
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL
On 18 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Michel Maxwell Philip, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 18:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Cunard - I am not sure why you reverted back all the updates for Empower Orphans. I had updated the 'Projects' area and summarized the information and made it up to date. The info currently on wiki is a year old.
Anvcomp ( talk) 16:03, 19 October 2010 (UTC)anvcomp
Cunard - The details in http://www.empowerorphans.org/civicrm/contribute/pcp/info?reset=1&id=31 have been changed. Hopefully now it is acceptable. Thanks Anvcomp ( talk) 20:49, 22 October 2010 (UTC)anvcomp
Hello Cunard
The following email has been sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org
We own the copyright to the text mentioned in Wikipedia for "Empower Orphans" and permit its use under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).
Can you please remove the Possible Copyright Infringement note on our article.
Details requested by Wikimedia: Original Publication (website) - http://www.empowerorphans.org/civicrm/contribute/pcp/info?reset=1&id=31 Owner of copyrighted material - Empower Orphans (Neha Gupta) Copyright being released - Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts) Link to uploaded material - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empower_Orphans
Anvcomp ( talk) 13:46, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Would you please create your user page? If you can't think of anything to put on it, could you at least redirect it to your talk page (this page)? That way, the link to your user page is no longer red, and you won't be mistaken for a newbie. ~ Nerdy Science Dude 01:04, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Response to NerdyScienceDude. Uncle G ( talk · contribs)'s statement at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Uncle G sums up why I have chosen not to have a userpage:
|
Cunard ( talk) 05:45, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
The Article Rescue Barnstar | ||
For rewriting Yahoo! Kids with reliable sources to save it from deletion. Narthring ( talk • contribs) 13:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC) |
Please see Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_October_25#Wikipedia:Sandbox.2FWord_Association.2FUltra_Game. -- Cirt ( talk) 13:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey Cunard, thanks for looking over it before. I think I've done all I can... but I've tried to be thorough. I am here to take you up on your offer, please copyedit/review when you get a chance. - Theornamentalist ( talk) 22:11, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Cunard ( talk) 07:50, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
<-- new one :)
Hi,
This page was created by the marketing department of BlueMorpho. I know the guy who created this page; his name is Malcolm. I have exchanged emails with him and Hamilton (the owner) and asked them to edit this page. This is purely an ad for their center created by them posted by them. I have been to this Center three times and I am friendly with the people at the center. I love Wikipedia and would like to see its integraty stay intact. Thank you, Daemon777
Here is one email that was sent to them:
Hi Malcolm,
Erm, yeah, [sic] drew my attention to this, so I've had a read and I bounced it off some other Blue Morpho Alumni and the reaction was universally negative, ok thats only 4 people but it's also 100%. I was a little surprised to read you have been talking to representatives of wikipedia as wikipedia has no editorial board and does not review pages, they are particularly proud of that fact. Could you let me know the user ids of whoever claimed to represent wikipedia please so I can discuss this with them
To quote the contact us page (their emphasis, not mine)
"Wikipedia has no editorial board. Revisions are not reviewed before they appear on the site. Content is not the result of an editorial decision by the Wikimedia Foundation or its staff."
I've listed the objections I have below, I don't really want to get into an email discussion though, I'd prefer it carried on on the wikipedia discussion page.
Notability Subjects on wikipedia should be 'notable' a really good rule of thumb about notability is that if you had to write it yourself it probably wasn't notable otherwise it gives rise to a conflict of interest, there are plenty of guidelines on wikipedia about conflicts of interest, I include below a quote from the guidelines that an article should be..
"Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.[4] Significant media coverage can be an indicator of notability; I understand that being so close to Blue Morpho you may think it is really famous, but outside of the 'community' it's actually not, even inside the community; it's not like it's world famous.
Verifiable. That Blue Morpho page falls very far short, comments like "Blue Morpho Ayahuasca center is the largest Ayahuasca shamanism and Universal shamanism center in the Amazon jungle." largest in what respect? land mass? turnover? staff numbers? visitors? where are the references to support that claim? this is why people are discouraged from writing about themselves, people close to the subject will find it extremely difficult to maintain neutrality. The rest of the page is just advertising blurb again with no supporting information and some more promotion of related items at the end. I can't point at a section of the page and say 'this is wrong, this should be changed' because the whole page just looks like marketing and bears little resemblance to an encyclopaedia article.
Independant I think it's obvious that an article written to promote an organisation by staff of that organisation is not independant.
I actually agree with [sic] it's my opinion the page is not notable and does not contain any significant information, maybe one day it will become so famous as to justify a page but wikipedia is not the tool to get there. It has no merit on it's own and should be deleted, I see it's already been recommended for deletion a couple of times. In fact, it is clear that the page exists only because it is linked to from the ayahuasca page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daemon777 ( talk • contribs) 16:48, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
On 2 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Yahoo! Kids, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
-- Cirt ( talk) 06:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Umm... In fact I participated in the 3rd discussion. (And might still say a few words there.) I was notified through WikiProject Deletion sorting, like all others who monitor the Croatian or other WPDS subpages. Thanks for letting me know anyway. GregorB ( talk) 08:10, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the thumbs up !
( Whohe! ( talk) 14:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC))
{{adminhelp}}
Would an admin revert the move of
User talk:Lehla to
User talk:Laura Fletcher/user? Thanks,
Cunard (
talk) 20:18, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
You may be interested in the comments that I have posted at User talk:SmokeyJoe#About my MFDs of old userspace drafts. -- RL0919 ( talk) 16:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cunard. Not meaning to be personal, but I am wondering.... Did you previously edit under a different account and did we interact back then? Did you have any involvement in Esperanza? I observed, but did not get involved. Why is your talk page move-protected? Not that it is a problem, but it's unusual. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 10:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
My talk page is move-protected to prevent page-move vandalism. I've dealt with this user before and my talk page undoubtedly would have been targeted had it not been protected at the time. Cunard ( talk) 23:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Most of the recent {{ mfd}} from Iqinn are similar situations.
Cheers! Geo Swan ( talk) 18:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Cunard, instead of one-by-one dealing with things at MFD per WP:NOTWEBHOST and WP:BLP issues, for example, specifically with regard to numerous discussions lately involving userspace-drafts by Geo Swan ( talk · contribs), might it be more logical to have one centralized discussion, perhaps in the form of WP:RFC/U? Cheers, -- Cirt ( talk) 00:37, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Userspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles, old revisions, or deleted content, or your preferred version of disputed content. Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion. Short term hosting of potentially valid articles and other reasonable content under development or in active use is usually acceptable (the template {{ userspace draft}} can be added to the top of the page to identify these). When a userspace page reaches a point where it can be included as an article consider moving it into mainspace or using its content appropriately in other relevant articles.
Several userspace drafts have been speedy deleted under {{ db-g10}}. The reason is provided in the deletion log: " WP:CSD#G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP" (mine emphasized). Negative unsourced BLPs drafts, such as pages that contain unsourced allegations about living people ( Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 November 8#User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Abdul Zahir charges), should be deleted.
I thank you for your good faith responses at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Betsy Haws and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/attempts to delete GWOT articles I have started. Cunard ( talk) 11:23, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, the history is something like this. For years, there have been on and off AfDs of mainly mainspace pages from Geo Swan. In or about April, IQinn started a more dedicated effort at scrutinizing his creations, with a larger number of AfD's. He (or she) also started tagging pages in the userspace as drafts. On 28 september, I mfD'ed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/review/Abdul Haq (Northern Alliance translator), but didn't check at that time the rest of his userspace.
On October 10, 2010, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geo Swan/review was filed by User:TeleComNasSprVen. In that MfD User:Tikiwont stated "My suggestion would be either to look for a more private work space or to prune it yourself, singling out reusable neutral material and possible article candidates on one hand and mark other stuff for deletion yourself". I stated "Keep all, tag individual pages", which I have since started doing, to his dismay (and for which he contemplates a RfC/U against me). I also stated "All userspace pages by Geo Swan need checking (though many will remain as unproblematic), and it would indeed be best if Geo Swan started this process himself." My comment was supported by User:Gigs, User:Nsk92 and User:IQinn. Three days later, after a comment by DGG, the only unconditional suport he received, I replied "He is aware of the problems people have with such articles, he is aware that many of his articles are redirected, deleted, userfied, ..., but he doesn't seem to change anything in his behaviour. Perhaps, apart from many MfDs and AfDs, an RfCU will become necessary as well? "
So, by or about October 10, he should have been aware that a number of people believed that there was a serious problem with many pages in his userspace. During and directly after that MfD, Geo Swan asked for the deletion of a fair number of pages, with a sudden drop of this effort after 18 October. These were apparently mainly the pages he had in User:Geo Swan/gitmo/backups, so things that weren't deleted or otherwise harder to retrieve for him on Wikipedia, plus a few pages that were mentioned by name in the above MfD. At first glance, no pages that had been userfied or that never made it into the main namespace were deleted by Geo Swan, but further research may show that this assumption is incorrect of course.
On October 11 I speedy deleted User:Geo Swan/Riyadh Abd Al-Aziz Almujahid. His reply to that deletion was the first in a long list of posts about good faith and civility14 October I started 5 MfDs on pages in his userspace. He then politely requested me to stop this to give him a chance to deal with it [1]. I did. I then noticed the above pattern, where he started with a number of deletions, and then stopped his work on his userspace and continued with his regular editing.
On november 2, I tried to restart the process by giving him the link to a number of problematic pages [2]. He deleted two of the pages, but didn't agree with the deletion of the rest. Of those, another 5 have since been deleted after an MfD, and one through speedy by me. His response to some of these pages didn't give me the impression that leaving this user to clean up his own userspace would have the desired result of following our userspace policies, so I then restarted going through his userspace and MfD'ing pages myself.
Due to the massive amount of userspace pages he has, I nominated up to five articles a day, five days a week. The vast majority of these are deleted since, or are headed for deletion, with only a few which will probably be kept. The author still doesn't seem to understand that he has many, many pages that violate our policies, despite the overwhelming evidence of these MfDs (and also a large number of AfDs that end in delete as well). Geo Swan has had over 4,000 of his 60,000plus edits deleted so far, which is a very high percentage. Coupled with the number of pages (articles and user space) that still need to be checked, this shows a worrying lack of clue as to what is acceptable, both in main space and in userspace. He is a good faith contributor, not a vandal or hoax creator or whatever, who has added loads of notable articles and info to Wikipedia, but he has gone too far in the detaillistic chronicling of everything Guantanamo-related, and lost in too many cases the focus on policies like BLP, NPOV, OR, and the userspace policies. Fram ( talk) 08:15, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
An AfD in which you recently took part has spun off a discussion on the relevant policies and guidelines which may interest you. Handschuh- talk to me 21:07, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Heads up that WP:FAKEARTICLE redirect is up for RFD. I suspect WP:STALEDRAFT and/or WP:UP#COPIES are better suited to the MFDs you are doing. Good luck with those. -- Marc Kupper| talk 11:14, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
WOW, thank you so much for helping me with so much time, Cunard. I hope to contribute more articles soon, and your editing will really give me a great guideline--even with all of the great resources for editing here, your changes have really been the most instructive tutorial for me. Thanks again! Katieshy ( talk) 15:29, 23 November 2010 (UTC)Katieshy
You tagged The Warrior Heir for deletion as a copyvio of http://www.wikibin.org/articles/the-heir-chronicles-2.html. While it was a copyvio, that website wasn't the one whose copyright was infringed upon: everything on Wikibin comes from deleted Wikipedia articles (in this case, The Heir Chronicles), which in this case was CC-by-sa licensed by dint of being created here on Wikipedia, so those whose copyright was infringed are the original authors of the Wikipedia article. Whenever you find something copied from Wikibin, you can tag the article for deletion with {{ db-repost}} (with the title of the Wikibin page as the WP article that's been reposted), for that will likely make the deleting admin's job easier and quicker. As well, that way, the deleting admin won't be likely to say "Not a copyvio, just taken from a Wikipedia mirror". Nyttend ( talk) 12:46, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I'd appreciate it if you could use my current username to refer to me. Thanks. T. Canens ( talk) 05:55, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for keeping me in the loop! :-) Katieshy ( talk) 23:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)Katieshy
Thanks for relisting this one. I've done a lot of work on it. This guy might not be known outside South Africa, but he sure got a lot of press in South Africa, in English. Your input on AfD discussion would be appreciated. Yakushima ( talk) 13:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cunard, hope you're well. As an editor who has used the services of the Guild of Copy Editors, I thought you might be interested in knowing that the Guild is currently holding elections for its coordinators. To view the discussion and voice your opinion, please visit the election page. Thanks! – SMasters ( talk) 14:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Why are these sorts of MFDs still going on? I thought that the user was going to tag them all for self-speedy-deletion? Any updates on this??? -- Cirt ( talk) 20:20, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
{{ adminhelp}}
Giorgi Latsabidze contains material based on User:Music43lover/Giorgi Latsabidze, rendering it a copy-and-paste move. Would an admin remediate this? Thanks, Cunard ( talk) 10:33, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Dear Cunard, Thanks for your edits on my article. I see you made some minor edits on it, I appreciate it. I also see that you have left a notice for User:Music43lover/Giorgi Latsabidze I hope he will reply your message soon. However, I would like to let you know that I left for him a message when i was recreating the article first on his workspace and than moved it on mine. I am sure he is all right with that. I also see you have put some tag on the article's discussion page. Is that something I should worry about? After various edits by different users Latsabidz'e article got better and I think notability is established now. I think it would be good if User43lover would remove Latsabidze's article from his workplace since I have worked on it fundamentally along with other wikipedia users (including your edits). I hope there is no danger for the article to be nominated for a deletion any more. If you have any suggestions please let me know. Sausa11 ( talk) 22:23, 4 December 2010 (UTC) Thanks!
I Appreciate your reply and thanks for the explanation! The progress is made on Latsabidze's article, now it's safe. Feel free to edit the article as time goes on and more information becomes available. All the best Sausa11 ( talk) 07:49, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The article Man Cave, LLC is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Man Cave, LLC until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. Corvus cornix talk 19:07, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Ragrding the origin of the term Bang for the buck: while your source, Random House, is a secondary and therefor "better" source, it is clearly incorrect, and it is not hard to find the 1954 mention of the term in a reliable source: [3]. While stating that this 1954 source would be the first mention of the term would be WP:OR, repeating that 1968 is the first confirmed mention is rather silly when it is obviously in error. Note that the term was repeatedly used in reliable sources throughout the later 1950s, with e.g. these four extra sources [4]. The policy was already described as obsolete in 1956! [5] Apparently other uses of the term date back to 1944 [6] and appear regularly in the 1940s [7]. Fram ( talk) 15:02, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
On 16 December 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bang for the buck, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the phrase "more bang for the buck" was used to describe the United States' New Look policy of depending on nuclear weapons, rather than a large regular army, to keep the Soviet Union in check? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 18:06, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Good evening sir, above article Ambarish Srivastava was nominated for deletion review on 2010 February 14. The result of the discussion was moved to main space. You have participated in that discussion. It was thoroughly checked and edited by you also. I am grateful to you for your kind support at that time. At present Mr. 'SpacemanSpiff' who nominated this article for AFD previously, has deleted its major part under 'poetry' section which was cited properly. As well as he also deleted it's whole 'Architectural works' section on Yesterday 19:01, 16 December 2010 and 19:03, 16 December 2010. I contacted Mr. 'SpacemanSpiff' on his talk page where he answered to me "You can not use photographs of buildings as references for works by the person, we need reliable source references. Likewise, user submitted content sites are not valid references for poetic contributions and linking to every poem on such sites runs afoul of our external links policy. Suggest you read WP:BLP and WP:NPOV". If that content was not was as per WP:BLP and WP:NPOV then why he could not deleted it previously when this page was moved to main space, while Mr. 'Fayenatic london' has made some quarries about it on 18:46, 20 August 2010, 18:49, 20 August 2010,18:53, 20 August 2010, 18:58, 20 August 2010, 19:05, 20 August 2010 & 19:12, 20 August 2010. He was satisfied with my answers about those sections. I request you to check it. Is it justified? if not please help it. Thanks a lot. Spjayswal67 ( talk) 16:04, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Because you initiated Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Conspiracy journalism, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conspiracy journalism (2nd nomination). Cunard ( talk) 10:13, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Wishing you all the very best for the season. Thanks for all your help and support this year. Merry Christmas and may Santa be good to you! – SMasters ( talk) 03:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC) Click to play! |
Why do you add <noinclude> tags to such as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths related to Scientology in this edit? __ meco ( talk) 10:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
On 31 December 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Harry Neal Baum, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Harry Neal Baum ghostwrote the 1917 novel Mary Louise Solves a Mystery when his ailing father, L. Frank Baum, could not fulfill his obligations to his publishers? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 14:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Good evening! Respected Sir, my article was moved User:Spjayswal67/Ambarish Srivastava to Ambarish Srivastava: restored to main space as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_February_14 by your great support. I am thankful to you for that. It was nominated for deletion that time by Mr. SpacemanSpiff. You had also participated in Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_February_14 and you had also rearranged it. Now Mr. SpacemanSpiff continuously hearts this article, he had deleted a major part such as ‘professional membership’, ‘poetry’ and ‘architectural works’section of it. If these sections were not considerable why he had not deleted these immediately after its restoration. It appears that he have some irritation due to restoration of this article. To check it you can view its history. It is my humble request to you that please suggest me that what can i do to resist it. Please help again to protect this article. Spjayswal67 ( talk) 15:12, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
adminhelp}}
Would an admin revision delete this edit which added copyrighted content from http://dchs.edu.ph/index.php/about_dchs? Thanks, Cunard ( talk) 22:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Because redacting the copyright-infringing content would not remove attribution to non-infringing contributors, the revision deletion criteria are applicable. Cunard ( talk) 23:28, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 接触平面. Since you had some involvement with the 接触平面 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Would this image fall under Wikipedia:Logos#Copyright-free logos? I found the image here. I believe it is copyright-free because it only contains shapes and words but don't know if it is trademarked. How would I find out if it is trademarked? Cunard ( talk) 08:11, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
talkback Pdfpdf ( talk) 11:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
FYI - some of my advice is being used in the school tp. Kudpung ( talk) 12:05, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cunard,
I'm a total beginner at creating pages, and believe I would not be able to create a decent one. There's a local popular band I would like to create a Page for, and if I was to give you information, is there any way you can get the page created for them??
Thanks very much —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.138.211 ( talk) 12:08, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cunard, I'm a total beginner at creating pages, and believe I would not be able to create a decent one. There's a local popular band I would like to create a Page for, and if I was to give you information, is there any way you can get the page created for them?? Thanks very much Rob HEYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY 12:09, 21 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobL16 ( talk • contribs)
On 23 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article WePay, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the inspiration for WePay originated when co-founder Rich Aberman had difficulty fundraising for his brother's bachelor party? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 18:05, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
I saw you removed the nomination because no hook was approved. After your suggestion about changing the negative hook proposed I contacted the original reviewer of the nomination about it to see what he thinks but he never responded. This is most likely why nobody responded to your suggestion. Spongie555 ( talk) 23:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Its not negative and not that bland as they beat on of the best teams of Denmark of the time. Spongie555 ( talk) 02:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
You removed my speedy delete for the article HeiaHeia, with the reason "G4 does not apply – this topic has not been deleted before at AfD". While you are correct in saying that, I assumed that you could use G4 if it has been deleted before with a speedy delete, and no information has been added. (This is not about the notability claim, I see that now and I apologize.) Bluefist talk 00:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
wha? The user's comment was already moved to the correct place. This has occurred many times before and I've never seen a decline on it. (I am watching this page, so please reply here.) — Timneu22 · talk 00:51, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
On 28 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eric Doeringer, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Eric Doeringer has sometimes sold up to US$1,500 worth of "bootlegs", small copies of paintings by eminent modern artists, in one day? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I have nothing against the current name, only that it seemed a little odd in the beginning.. Student Society of Riga was an old name and had to be changed though. H2ppyme ( talk) 08:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
I am working on a potential RfC/U about User:Geo Swan. The draft is located at User:Fram/Sandbox. I have used a discussion where you were involved as part of the evidence, and would like to invite you to go over the draft RfC and add or correct whatever you feel is necessary. Obviously, if you feel that an RfC/U is not appropriate or not the best step to take, feel free to let me know as well. Fram ( talk) 11:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Would you delete and salt Mike Da Poet? You participated in a DRV in July 2010, where you suggested that Mikie Da Poet be listed at WP:DEEPER (which it now is) because of the considerable disruption of the DRV process (see the DRV links at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mikie Da Poet). Deletion has now been circumvented at the title Mike Da Poet. There also appears to be sockpuppetry going on per my comments at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/6stargeneral. Cunard ( talk) 10:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
P. S. Burton ( talk) 20:30, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |