This page 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.

Please see my comments on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Release Management and consider re-casting your vote for transwiki per Harmil. Thank you for your time. - Harmil 22:33, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I have rewritten this article in order to establish notability. I would be grateful if you could have a look. Capitalistroadster 05:25, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments on the Exa Inc page. Third-party journal references will be forthcoming.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrm03063 ( talk • contribs) 17:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

M/C/C - FUELED a 20 plus year old advertising agency and it's subdivision has historical encyclopedic signifigance...

how would suggest these entries be posted, this is not spam.. and there are several fortune 500 clients we serve we will be doing the same thing for.

not spamming.. just listing our company within the index like everyone else.. otherwise.. i have a list of about 100 ad agencies we used to format the entry for.. that i guess will need to be removed as well?

For Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising_agencies

Just listing our company. M/C/C is one of the first technology advertising Agencies founded in 1986.

FUELED is the internet arm of that company, which the guru behind it happens to hold a copyright to a meta tag.. (see US Copyright #TXu-1-164-481)

MCCSteve ( talk) 18:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

• Please see your talk page for reply. -- Several Times ( talk) 18:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that there is a problem with the pranks section of this page. The owners of the Iron Pit gym have asked me to create this page as a place where the history of the gym can reside. A large part of the history of the gym are the practical jokes. The only parties mentioned in the page have given me explicit permission to do so. Is it possible to leave this section or does it need to be removed entirely?

cnikirk

Cnikirk ( talk) 23:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for tagging Epinal American Cemetery and Memorial as a copyright problem. The text of the article was taken from a U.S. federal government site, and is therefore in the public domain. I therefore removed the copyvio tag and expanded the article a bit. -- Eastmain ( talk) 00:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

		The Bearnstar of Reference Desk wit
		I wanted to award you a barnstar for making me laugh, but unfortunately it was eaten by a bear. Rockpocke t 01:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. I think it's a borderline case so would prefer it if an admin made the decision. I will however not object too loudly if you remove it. I will watch the page though. –  ukexpat ( talk) 21:02, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

A small point re this message. You did not move the user page, you copy&pasted it. You should have moved it and cleaned up after yourself by marking the redirect at Goldie dog with {{ db-r2}}. But keep up the new page patrolling! — RHaworth ( Talk | contribs) 05:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your responses to my inquiry on the Science RefDesk last week. I edited the article Flying primates theory to cite the articles you mentioned. -- Mathew5000 ( talk) 07:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Several Times. Thanks for your feedback regarding the Walter Bowes biography. As you noted, I am working with Pitney Bowes. However, we are certainly trying to contribute neutral articles that are valuable to the community. I would like to work with you on the Walter Bowes article to resolve whatever content you feel might be a conflict of interest. We thought the article was pretty generic, but I'd certainly welcome your opinion. Please reach out to me so we can work on edits to this document. I look forward to working with you! Vlbastekzeta ( talk) 18:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for your thoughts. I've suggested some edits on the Walter Bowes talk page that I hope you will comment on. Thanks! Vlbastekzeta ( talk) 21:19, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Hi Severaltimes. Just wanted to see if you had the chance to look at our Walter Bowes edits. I am hoping we can resolve our neutrality dispute and that the banner can be removed once the content is up to date. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks! Vlbastekzeta ( talk) 18:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, If could you point out which sections specifically need to be edited so that it reads less like an advertisement, it'll help me get to work quickly on those bits. Thanks! Shubhere ( talk) 05:21, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

• The problem is not with any specific section of the article as much as it is the type of language used in the article. Each section must be written from a neutral point of view rather than one promoting the company. The section WP:SUBSTANTIATE will certainly be helpful; in short, articles need to be made up of facts verified by outside sources. If a statement expresses an opinion, that statement must also be supported by its source.

Here's an example. the Statistics section contains this sentence:

Upto August 2011, Milaap has raised USD $140,000 in loans that have helped 1750[8] lives across India.

The phrase "Milaap has raised USD $140,000 in loans" is fine and is supported by the referenced source. That's great! The problem here is phrases like "have helped 1750 lives". By itself, this phrase is very general and sounds like something seen in an advertisement or press release. Stating that anything "helps lives" will rarely appear neutral on its own. It should be removed unless more, verifiable information is provided regarding how this money is used, where it goes, and so on.

If you're otherwise involved with the company (for example, if you work for them) consider reading the page on conflict of interest. It may change how you proceed. Several Times ( talk) 15:23, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks, I think I get the general idea.

203.92.61.206 ( talk) 04:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

• Hey, I've toned down the general language of the Milaap article. Could you please take an look and see if its neutral enough now? Cheers.

203.92.61.206 ( talk) 05:41, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

• It does look better. There is, however, one other immediate issue I can see. References in the text should refer to independent sources- such as the Hindustan Times article cited - rather than to the official site. A few primary references are fine, certainly, but the majority should be independent or the article risks looking like publicity. You have several media links available so it doesn't look like this should be a problem. They just nee to be presented within the article rather than simply at the end.

I'll also go through the article and make some edits to make it more Wikipedia-friendly. Several Times ( talk) 16:45, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for the edits to the Milaap page to make it more neutral. If it's good to go, can the reads like an advert banner be removed?

203.92.61.206 ( talk) 06:08, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I made a few more edits just to be safe, then removed the advert tag. §everal⇒| Times 13:44, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

• Thank you.

Shubhere ( talk) 05:41, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that you have done an excellent job in scaring people away from becoming part of the Wikipedia community. The purpose of this class project was to learn about the working of Wikipedia from within, and at the same time to become part of this community by actively contributing content. While there is research that suggests that Wikipedia is a friendly, welcoming community (Bryant, Forte, & Bruckman, 2005; Vora & Komura, 2010; Thom-Santelli, Cosley, & Gay, 2009; Kittur et al., 2007; and many others), you have proven that this is not necessarily the case. Instead of scaring my students away, you could have guided them to create high-quality contributions or point them to others that could serve as mentors for this purpose. Given I am not an expert in Wikipedia editing, to say the least, I was hoping that editors like you would provide students with the needed guidance. LeshedInstructor ( talk) 23:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

And one more thing: it seems that you have forgotten the Wikipedia code: Be polite; Assume good faith; Avoid personal attacks; Be welcoming. LeshedInstructor ( talk) 01:27, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't wish to engage in some kind of discussion as to my intentions or how welcoming they may have been or should have been. I will maintain, however, that I have engaged in no personal attacks whatsoever and have assumed good faith whenever possible. If I see that a particular article needs work, I will tag it as such. This is a common event throughout Wikipedia and isn't intended as any insult to the creators of any particular material or article. It is simply intended as a notice that some part of the tagged page needs improvement. If anything, this looks like an excellent lesson for your students: always read the instructions carefully. §everal⇒| Times 01:46, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback and agree that whenever improvements are needed, they need to be pointed out. However, there are ways to do so, especially with newbies, by assuming good faith and in order to be welcoming and not scare them away. LeshedInstructor ( talk) 02:07, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the article Pragmatic_works. We have done some changes and restructured the article. Can you visit the article and re-cast your vote about "the article being like an advert". Appreciate your time. Many thanks GeekyPuppy ( talk) 17:58, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello GeekyPuppy. I tagged the article as an advert because it contained some material that sounded like it was promoting the company or some aspects of the company without actually telling readers much about it, such as the number of customers it has. The other problem with the article is its lack of multiple independent sources. I do see that it provides citations for most of the awards the company has won; that's great and I'm glad those references are there. For the article to pass the general notability guideline (see WP:GNG), however, it needs to reference that significant third-party coverage as much as possible. Minor references are still just fine but they should be about the company rather than any one member of the company. Please let me know if you have any further questions. §everal⇒| Times 20:33, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Additionally, I'm assuming that from your use of the word "we" that your account represents more than one person. You should be aware that if you are editing this company's article on their behalf it poses a conflict of interest (see WP:SELFPROMOTE). §everal⇒| Times 20:39, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your valuable feedback and comments. The top section has been completely restructured and lot of things have been removed/edited to ensure that we're not violating wiki rules and regulations. Also a new 3rd party reference has been added. Please review the article and recast your vote about "This article needs additional citations for verification". Appreciate your time. Many thanks. GeekyPuppy ( talk) 16:11, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing the article. We have added couple of new citations for "Microsoft Gold Partner". Please review the article and let us know if we need more/other citations to fix the "Citations needed" issue. Appreciate your time. Many Thanks. GeekyPuppy ( talk) 15:35, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

SaPI, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

• Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping Wikipedia!

Mangoe ( talk) 05:02, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Several Times! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Regarding this presumably good-faithed edit at ClickSoftware Technologies, the Confusing template is unhelpful without further details. Please elaborate on the article's Discussion page what you found confusing about the article.— Biosketch ( talk) 14:21, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Don't merge it because MANY of the currency's have there own articles Philpm930 ( talk) 19:18, 11 November 2011 (UTC)Philpm930

I tagged this article for merge because I saw it as a content fork of material already covered at Russian ruble. Other currencies may also have content forks, though for most currencies each individual denomination does not need its own page unless there is something especially notable about it independent of other denominations. You may also want to see the page on the Numismatics WikiProject. §everal⇒| Times 20:38, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Well the Russian Ruble Doesn't show the security features, the history, has no info so people won't get educated with it, where do you go if you think you have a counterfeit note?wiki. i will create the whole series and that's that. Philpm930 ( talk) 21:29, 11 November 2011 (UTC)Philpm930

Please don't take my concern to mean that I don't appreciate your efforts. They may simply have more lasting impact as part of a larger page (that is, you can edit other pages). Smaller pages with fewer references risk being nominated for deletion. Whatever you decide to do, good luck! §everal⇒| Times 22:21, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I added some references on this pages. May I ask you if you could have a look and telle me if this would be enough.

Two major sources refer to Fulconis, occitan critic Robert Lafont, especially in his history of occitan litterature, a dissertatio thesis about Fulconis and a critical edition (a study and analysis folowed by a modern edition).

Thanks, Sincerely, -- Lembeye ( talk) 13:51, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello Lembeye. The references you added look sufficient for now. The only improvement I could ask for is page numbers to reference passages in those references specifically about Fulcònis. More references will be needed if the article is to be expanded, as well, but it looks good for now! §everal⇒| Times 17:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Enter your The Beauty Shop Memphis article name here. Since you had some involvement with the Enter your The Beauty Shop Memphis article name here redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). silly billypiggy ^{¡SIGN NOW OR ELSE!} 18:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Maybe--and there's also the musical bass. I went to the fishies because Google suggested it, and because I wasn't interested in what the editor desired: they're on a fast track toward a VOA block. But I'm not going to dispute--your redirect is just as good as mine. Drmies ( talk) 21:00, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

No worries - my Google search turned up both fish and vehicles. The latter seemed like a more literal redirect. §everal⇒| Times 21:30, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

JHCaufield/Archives/2012 ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))

208.22.79.249 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

---

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Garfieldpooky". The reason given for Garfieldpooky's block is: "Violations of the Biographies of living persons policy".

• Blocking administrator: Ponyo ( talk • blocks)

---

Decline reason: Interesting coincidence that User:Garfieldpooky is also looking for an unblock right now ... care to elaborate on the relationship between accounts? ( talk→  BWilkins  ←track) 20:24, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

• In regards to the above autoblock request, I have no relationship whatsoever with Garfieldpooky. I'm on a university network and suspect that the directly blocked user is elsewhere on campus or in the same building. I'm not so prolific an editor to need an unblock immediately, but a cursory check of my editing history should have been enough to establish my existence as a live person rather than a Garfieldpooky sockpuppet account. §everal⇒| Times 22:50, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Several Times,

My student lonnie5200 has added a photograph of a musician that lonnie5200 took, so please do not delete the image. If lonnie5200 needs to do something to satisfy copyright criteria, please give lonnie5200 time to do that. My class on Wikipedia is intended to support gender-balance and greater diversity among contributors to Wikipedia. Please be patient. Thank you kindly, KSRolph ( talk) 23:27, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello KSRolph. I must admit that I am not entirely sure which image you are referring to, but deletion is not up to me. Rather, images of uncertain copyright status are often deleted automatically. Luckily, if the photograph you are concerned with is an original work, lonnie5200 should certainly be able to release the image under a license compatible with Wikipedia or even into the public domain. You may find this page helpful regarding images. Please let me know if you have any more questions, but I will reiterate that image deletion is not an area I have influence in. §everal⇒| Times 16:17, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Looks like you hit the prod button about the same time I hit the speedy button ... HangingCurve ^{Swing for the fence} 21:16, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

• That's alright - I wouldn't dispute a speedy as it doesn't appear to cite anything specific. §everal⇒| Times 21:35, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello. Can you or someone at Wikipedia help me upload an image for the Good Morning Memphis Wikipedia article page. Its seems I can't upload anything right now. Thank you. Billim123 ( talk) 16:40, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello Billim123. The best tip I can give you is to follow this guide on uploading images. You probably cannot upload anything because your account is new. After a few days, it will be 'autoconfirmed' and you'll be able to upload files. In the meantime, you could make a request at the Files for upload page. Good luck! §everal⇒| Times 19:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Ah, looks like you figured most of that out already. §everal⇒| Times 19:39, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Several Times. I noticed that you edited a page that I have been working on for BranchOut. A user keeps inserting a phrase into the page which I believe is unnecessary as it's already supported by the sources (I added the relevant quotes from the sources into the ref tags as well): http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=BranchOut&diff=469400863&oldid=469381349. Since I've reverted him a few times already, I thought it would be best to look for a second opinion before going to the administrators. Can you give it a look? Thanks. MountainMan11 ( talk) 01:16, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

• Hello MountainMan11. I would agree with your reversion of the edit, as it really just appears to be redundant citation. It's a good faith edit, though, and may not be worth getting an admin involved with. If the other user is so intent on making that edit, perhaps a note on the article's talk page or on the other user's talk page would help resolve the conflict. It's clearly not vandalism.

Along the lines of assuming good faith, I assume that by "working on for BranchOut" you don't mean that you're associated with the company in any way. The article does look nice and neutral to me right now but I'm always on the lookout for potential conflicts of interest. If there's a conflict, please consider that in your editing. If not, keep up the great work! §everal⇒| Times 17:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll engage the user on the talk page. Sorry that phrase was unclear - I meant that I was the one that created the Wikipedia page and I've been working on it to make it better. I have used their app before, but I'm pretty sure that's not a COI. Let me know if otherwise. MountainMan11 ( talk) 22:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello Several Times,

17 sources are not enough for a brief article? In Talk:Dmitry Borshch I wrote the following:

"Getty Union List of Artist Names (ULAN), ARTstor, AskART, Arcadja, Artprice, and Who's Who in American Art are not reliable secondary sources?

Artcyclopedia describes ULAN as "an authoritative reference whose editorial guidelines are plainly laid out and whose original sources are clearly cited ... for professional or academic work, it's a better source for key information than Artcyclopedia..." ARTstor, AskART, Arcadja, Artprice, and Who's Who in American Art are accepted by ULAN as reliable secondary sources. ARTstor, for example, is reliable enough to be used by educators, scholars, curators, librarians, and students at more than 1350 universities, community colleges, museums, libraries, and K-12 schools in 46 countries." [1]

Since December 17 this article has been examined by many editors who have agreed with me that it is sufficiently sourced. Your contribution has been undone.

-- Khidekel ( talk) 19:45, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Hello Khidekel. I apologize for not providing more detail - I tagged Dmitry Borshch as such because a number of the citations were actually to blogs rather than to reliable sources such as ARTstor. Biographies of living persons such as this article generally require at least a few secondary sources for verification. Examples of the subject's work are certainly helpful, but they don't constitute independent, secondary sources.

It may also help you to read the guide to citing sources. §everal⇒| Times 20:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Only 2 are blogs: Kulturologia and Asphalt Eden.

All 17 are notable and edited sources, meaning there is an editorial layer between the contributor, Borshch, and the source.

-- Khidekel ( talk) 20:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not implying that Borsch is writing the blogs himself, just that they really don't go beyond basic biographical notes and examples of his work. Looking at the External Links section of the article, which I will assume is what you are referring to:

Getty Union List of Artist Names, Dmitry Borshch Looks alright to me.

ARTstor, Dmitry Borshch Also looks good and reliable.

ARTstor, Now available: Drawings by contemporary artist Dmitry Borshch This is a blog run by ARTstor. It's on their site, yes, but it's still a blog, which means we really don't know who is responsible for writing or providing the content. The biographical information duplicates that of the above link as far as I can tell, so it's really not a big deal, but it's still not an ideal source.

ARTstor, Happy birthday to Mayor Ed Koch! Same as the above link.

AskART, Dmitry Borshch It's an online database but I can't vouch for its reliability.

Arcadja, Dmitry Borshch An auction of his work. Not a published secondary source.

Artprice, Dmitry Borshch Similar to the above link.

MoMA PS1 Studio Visit, Dmitry Borshch A little better, though this one actually is written by the artist.

The Russian American Cultural Center (RACC), Dmitry Borshch Examples of the art, again, though not a published source.

Fine Art Adoption Network, Dmitry Borshch Not a published source.

http://www.kulturologia.ru, Синим по белому. Оригинальные рисунки советского американца Дмитрия Борща (Dmitry Borshch) A blog entry, as you noted.

Anti-, Cover art by Dmitry Borshch An example of his work but doesn't provide any biographical information.

Asphalt Eden, 7 Minutes in Heaven with Dmitry Borshch A blog entry, but perhaps the best reference here! It actually provides us with information about Borshch beyond the basics, even if it is just an interview. Still, not exactly a reliable source.

http://local-artists.org/, Dmitry Borshch This actually looks like the artist's profile on the site.

Artist A Day, Dmitry Borshch This is a blog entry as well.

I understand that contemporary artists may not always be the subject of extensive news coverage, but including more links is not always better on Wikipedia articles. §everal⇒| Times 23:19, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

If you google “Dmitry Borshch”, many links will appear than are not included in this article: exhibition announcements, blog entries, and so on.

I selected 17 notable sources, including 7 “reliable” ones: Who’s Who, ULAN, ARTstor, AskART, Arcadja, Artprice, RACC (edited by Regina Khidekel, PhD, RACC’s director). In order to be included in Who’s Who, Artprice, AskART, an artist must have a strong exhibition record, which is true of Borshch.

ARTstor blog is edited by the same qualified staff that edits ARTstor.

Fine Art Adoption Network is also a published source:

Simon, A. Fine Art Adoption Network: Art in General New Commissions Program Book Series, Vol. VII.

ISBN-10: 1934890073 ISBN-13: 978-1934890073

Artist a Day is not a blog and claims to have been visited by 25 million unique visitors. Is that notable enough of a link to be included in the article? My answer is yes.

-- Khidekel ( talk) 02:15, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

If you feel that Asphalt Eden is the best reference, another interesting interview with Borshch was published in The Associative Press, also cited in the article.

-- Khidekel ( talk) 02:43, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

This article easily passes any attempt for Speedy. JunoBeach ( talk) 21:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I marked the page for speedy deletion because it didn't make any assertions of notability. Notability needs to be backed up by reliable, independent sources. More detail is at WP:WEB - most importantly, "primary sources alone are not sufficient to establish notability". §everal⇒| Times 21:29, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

There is a citation and more will follow. The article is only twenty-minutes old and has plenty of room for expansion, that is all that is required for an article at Wikipedia. JunoBeach ( talk) 21:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Selenomonadales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 16S rRNA ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:31, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

You put two text snippets on this page. I wrote something about it at the talk page. Please have a look. -- mmsLab ( talk) 12:37, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

• Hello mmsLab. I placed those tags there because I found the sources provided insufficient to establish notability. Specifically, pages like this one need coverage in independent, published sources. If it's still too early for those sources to exist, it may be too early to have a full page on Wikipedia. It may be more appropriate to mention LEPTON CMS in the context of another page here. §everal⇒| Times 16:18, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Ethyl decanoate, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fermentation ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:06, 16 February 2012 (UTC)