![]() | 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. |
![]() New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Martijn Hoekstra/Archives/2011/November! 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.
Please click
HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey |
Hi Martijn. Thank you for your message. I do agree that the current page resolves some of issues raised in the AfD. Thanks again! -- Shirt58 ( talk) 11:33, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Martijn,
Please can you tell me is it possible to reinstate the Cd slot information the text used to explain the use of the mount was taken from my own patent application as a description of its use.
Regards
Gary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starbrook ( talk • contribs) 17:17, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Martijn,
Apologies I forgot to sign my text to you please can you advise if and how I can reinstate the Cd slot mount page. The information I used to describe the use of CD Slot Mounts was my own text information that I used in my patent application which I thought was the best way to describe the use of the Cd Slot Mount device.
Thanking you in anticipation.
Gary.
Starbrook ( talk) 17:33, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that. For some reason I had a brain freeze and forgot about A7 only applying to websites, not software. Appreciate you fixing my mistake. Sparthorse ( talk) 18:02, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
I went ahead and AfDed the Austenasia article, but I should have checked the deletion logs - it's a recreation of a deleted article - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Austenasia for the original discussion. MikeWazowski ( talk) 20:40, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. May end up going to AFD in the end, we'll see. Alexandria (chew out) 20:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Re. User:Martijn Hoekstra/promocsd
(I thought I would answer you here, regarding that, to save you hunting through my own user talk)
I think I understand your intent with that template, and in particular realise you're trying to keep it short/simple. So, I'll make some comments/suggestions below, but it's all just opinion;
Maybe "The problem is" is unnecessary; maybe it could be Hi {{{1}}}, I just deleted a page you created, {{{2}}}, because it was very promotional.
That is an odd turn of phrase, in particular "question of conscience". I get it; you want to say 'are you a spammer' without being rude. It is tricky, and maybe the uncommon phraseology is necessary. I think it wouldd be slightly better to avoid the "If I'm allowed". It could be, If I may ask a question of conscience -I think that sounds better, because (i) you do not need to ask permission to ask, and (ii) removing the word "you" possibly helps it sound quite so direct/personal. Also, I try to avoid contractions (such as I'm) -> "I am") - you might prefer keeping them, because they seem less formal; however, it can also be harder to read for non-native-English people in particular.
A bit harsh, but given the prefix-statement above it is probably OK. Possibly you could remove the word "really" - that would soften it.
I would remove "just". I would add a wikilink to WP:ALTOUT (but, I can see you want to 'keep it simple').
Suggested wording improvement: "I'll probably have some advice for you if you want to continue..." -> "I will probably have somefurther advice, for you if you wantwish to continue...}}
The List of cases of penis removal article was deleted and I am trying to find out why. It says for unambiguous copyright infringement and then I found a mirror of the page and could see no evidence of this. Is there a deletion discussion you can show me or can you enlighten me as to why it was deleted? Eopsid ( talk) 14:09, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
You requested speedy deletion of the new entry for Kraftwurx however; you have allowed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapeways to exist and have not deleted it. You also allowed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sculpteo to exist and not deleted it. You have also allowed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponoko to exist and have not removed any of them. Why? What differentiates the posts? Deletion appears biased.
Also three of the other posts: Shapeways, Ponoko and Sculpteo are competing entities with limited importance. It is in my opinion identical to Kraftwurx in both spirit and nature. In fact the content of the article for all four of them was virtually identical in tone, length and content. Ponoko's ad reads as blatant advertising! in both tone and content.
SHAPEWAYS READS: "Shapeways is a 3D printing service. Users upload design files and Shapeways prints the objects for them or others.[1][2] Users can have objects printed from a variety of materials, including food safe ceramics.[3]"
PONOKO READS: "Ponoko builds on the success of the information age, and applies it to digital fabrication. Customers who have digital designs can contract with Ponoko, and sell their objects either via the Ponoko site, or their own retail outlets. Ponoko takes orders, and has it cut at the time of purchase by laser cutters or shop-bots (CNC milling machines). The manufacturers exist in a distributed network that is growing around the world, and often the manufacturer closest to the customer is sourced. While Ponoko uses desktop manufacturers to produce small-scale products, many believe that such distributed, on-demand manufacturing could create a major paradigm shift in manufacturing[1]. As of 2009, the Ponoko site had 20,000 items available."
SCULPTEO READS: "Sculpteo is a French company specialized in 3D printing. Sculpteo offers an online 3D printing service [1], using rapid prototyping and a manufacturing process[2] involving laser sintering or stereo lithography [3]. The company was founded in June 2009 by Eric Carreel co-founder of Inventel [4] , acquired by Technicolor in 2005 [5] and Withings, Clement Moreau [6] and Jacques Lewiner. Sculpteo’s online 3D printing service is available particularly in Europe and North America [7]."
Kraftwurx read (before you deleted it): Kraftwurx is a 3D printing service... offering three services.
Please be specific and thorough in your justification when you reply. You must articulate you complete reasoning for deleting one and allowing the others to remain. Additionally, you should reply with recommendations to reinstate Kraftwurx that would comply with your justifications for allowing it to be published instead of unilaterally deleting one and not others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.200.42.204 ( talk) 05:23, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
The article about Kraftwurx is/was supported by independent editorial as well. You failed to review them, to ask for editorial support or anything. Instead you speedily deleted it, again showing BIAS. Please restore the article and request editorial content to support the article and I or someone else will be happy to add them. (I did list two sources) which you obviously deleted too. If you feel that the article is not warranted to exist, then I will appeal it and you will have to answer everyone as to why you deleted one without deleting the others when they all are the same in content, coverage and nature.
Restoration is the only viable choice. Once re-instated, I will gladly place three supporting articles from three independent sources. If after that, you still feel compelled that it should not exist, ask for more editorial and allow editorial time to be added. It was less than 12 hours from the time the article was posted until it was removed by you. Nobody, not even myself had time to respond. I need a response that is not mired in ambiguity but is factual and unbiased. Without editorial or scholarly articles to support the other posts, you put yourself in a precarious position as an editor. Yoou failed to allow time...not even 24 hours to allow edits. You failed to ask for supporting articles. You also cited improper justification for removal.
A7 States: The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines according to footnote 6. which states: "It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied."
G11 states unequivocally: "Note: An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion."
Your justification for removal is unsubstantiated. I posted 3 sources that are both independent and verifiable from credible organizations. I can supply several more too.
thank you for your consideration on this matter and I hope that you will act appropriately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bcn0209 ( talk • contribs) 20:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Your page happens to say that you live less than 150 km from Shapeways Headquarters in Alkmaar the Netherlands. Are you affiliated with Shapeways a shapeways user, a member, an employee or relative of anyone at Shapeways or Philips? Perhaps Wikipeda can find out?
Please promote the community discussion. Please ensure that you divulge all related links for the content of Ponoko, Sculpteo and Shapeways in your discussion as well as the fact that you deleted the article without asking for references or improvement. User amymittx5273!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amymittx ( talk • contribs) 00:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Martijn, I have documented permission from the publisher of an article to create a wikipedia page using the published information. What are the next steps to create this page with out it getting deleted? Thanks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkenn25 ( talk • contribs) 22:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
![]() | 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. |
![]() New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Martijn Hoekstra/Archives/2011/November! 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.
Please click
HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey |
Hi Martijn. Thank you for your message. I do agree that the current page resolves some of issues raised in the AfD. Thanks again! -- Shirt58 ( talk) 11:33, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Martijn,
Please can you tell me is it possible to reinstate the Cd slot information the text used to explain the use of the mount was taken from my own patent application as a description of its use.
Regards
Gary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starbrook ( talk • contribs) 17:17, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Martijn,
Apologies I forgot to sign my text to you please can you advise if and how I can reinstate the Cd slot mount page. The information I used to describe the use of CD Slot Mounts was my own text information that I used in my patent application which I thought was the best way to describe the use of the Cd Slot Mount device.
Thanking you in anticipation.
Gary.
Starbrook ( talk) 17:33, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that. For some reason I had a brain freeze and forgot about A7 only applying to websites, not software. Appreciate you fixing my mistake. Sparthorse ( talk) 18:02, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
I went ahead and AfDed the Austenasia article, but I should have checked the deletion logs - it's a recreation of a deleted article - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Austenasia for the original discussion. MikeWazowski ( talk) 20:40, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. May end up going to AFD in the end, we'll see. Alexandria (chew out) 20:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Re. User:Martijn Hoekstra/promocsd
(I thought I would answer you here, regarding that, to save you hunting through my own user talk)
I think I understand your intent with that template, and in particular realise you're trying to keep it short/simple. So, I'll make some comments/suggestions below, but it's all just opinion;
Maybe "The problem is" is unnecessary; maybe it could be Hi {{{1}}}, I just deleted a page you created, {{{2}}}, because it was very promotional.
That is an odd turn of phrase, in particular "question of conscience". I get it; you want to say 'are you a spammer' without being rude. It is tricky, and maybe the uncommon phraseology is necessary. I think it wouldd be slightly better to avoid the "If I'm allowed". It could be, If I may ask a question of conscience -I think that sounds better, because (i) you do not need to ask permission to ask, and (ii) removing the word "you" possibly helps it sound quite so direct/personal. Also, I try to avoid contractions (such as I'm) -> "I am") - you might prefer keeping them, because they seem less formal; however, it can also be harder to read for non-native-English people in particular.
A bit harsh, but given the prefix-statement above it is probably OK. Possibly you could remove the word "really" - that would soften it.
I would remove "just". I would add a wikilink to WP:ALTOUT (but, I can see you want to 'keep it simple').
Suggested wording improvement: "I'll probably have some advice for you if you want to continue..." -> "I will probably have somefurther advice, for you if you wantwish to continue...}}
The List of cases of penis removal article was deleted and I am trying to find out why. It says for unambiguous copyright infringement and then I found a mirror of the page and could see no evidence of this. Is there a deletion discussion you can show me or can you enlighten me as to why it was deleted? Eopsid ( talk) 14:09, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
You requested speedy deletion of the new entry for Kraftwurx however; you have allowed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapeways to exist and have not deleted it. You also allowed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sculpteo to exist and not deleted it. You have also allowed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponoko to exist and have not removed any of them. Why? What differentiates the posts? Deletion appears biased.
Also three of the other posts: Shapeways, Ponoko and Sculpteo are competing entities with limited importance. It is in my opinion identical to Kraftwurx in both spirit and nature. In fact the content of the article for all four of them was virtually identical in tone, length and content. Ponoko's ad reads as blatant advertising! in both tone and content.
SHAPEWAYS READS: "Shapeways is a 3D printing service. Users upload design files and Shapeways prints the objects for them or others.[1][2] Users can have objects printed from a variety of materials, including food safe ceramics.[3]"
PONOKO READS: "Ponoko builds on the success of the information age, and applies it to digital fabrication. Customers who have digital designs can contract with Ponoko, and sell their objects either via the Ponoko site, or their own retail outlets. Ponoko takes orders, and has it cut at the time of purchase by laser cutters or shop-bots (CNC milling machines). The manufacturers exist in a distributed network that is growing around the world, and often the manufacturer closest to the customer is sourced. While Ponoko uses desktop manufacturers to produce small-scale products, many believe that such distributed, on-demand manufacturing could create a major paradigm shift in manufacturing[1]. As of 2009, the Ponoko site had 20,000 items available."
SCULPTEO READS: "Sculpteo is a French company specialized in 3D printing. Sculpteo offers an online 3D printing service [1], using rapid prototyping and a manufacturing process[2] involving laser sintering or stereo lithography [3]. The company was founded in June 2009 by Eric Carreel co-founder of Inventel [4] , acquired by Technicolor in 2005 [5] and Withings, Clement Moreau [6] and Jacques Lewiner. Sculpteo’s online 3D printing service is available particularly in Europe and North America [7]."
Kraftwurx read (before you deleted it): Kraftwurx is a 3D printing service... offering three services.
Please be specific and thorough in your justification when you reply. You must articulate you complete reasoning for deleting one and allowing the others to remain. Additionally, you should reply with recommendations to reinstate Kraftwurx that would comply with your justifications for allowing it to be published instead of unilaterally deleting one and not others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.200.42.204 ( talk) 05:23, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
The article about Kraftwurx is/was supported by independent editorial as well. You failed to review them, to ask for editorial support or anything. Instead you speedily deleted it, again showing BIAS. Please restore the article and request editorial content to support the article and I or someone else will be happy to add them. (I did list two sources) which you obviously deleted too. If you feel that the article is not warranted to exist, then I will appeal it and you will have to answer everyone as to why you deleted one without deleting the others when they all are the same in content, coverage and nature.
Restoration is the only viable choice. Once re-instated, I will gladly place three supporting articles from three independent sources. If after that, you still feel compelled that it should not exist, ask for more editorial and allow editorial time to be added. It was less than 12 hours from the time the article was posted until it was removed by you. Nobody, not even myself had time to respond. I need a response that is not mired in ambiguity but is factual and unbiased. Without editorial or scholarly articles to support the other posts, you put yourself in a precarious position as an editor. Yoou failed to allow time...not even 24 hours to allow edits. You failed to ask for supporting articles. You also cited improper justification for removal.
A7 States: The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines according to footnote 6. which states: "It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied."
G11 states unequivocally: "Note: An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion."
Your justification for removal is unsubstantiated. I posted 3 sources that are both independent and verifiable from credible organizations. I can supply several more too.
thank you for your consideration on this matter and I hope that you will act appropriately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bcn0209 ( talk • contribs) 20:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Your page happens to say that you live less than 150 km from Shapeways Headquarters in Alkmaar the Netherlands. Are you affiliated with Shapeways a shapeways user, a member, an employee or relative of anyone at Shapeways or Philips? Perhaps Wikipeda can find out?
Please promote the community discussion. Please ensure that you divulge all related links for the content of Ponoko, Sculpteo and Shapeways in your discussion as well as the fact that you deleted the article without asking for references or improvement. User amymittx5273!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amymittx ( talk • contribs) 00:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Martijn, I have documented permission from the publisher of an article to create a wikipedia page using the published information. What are the next steps to create this page with out it getting deleted? Thanks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkenn25 ( talk • contribs) 22:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)