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 |
Well, you seem to have found my meticulous analysis before I could nudge you to towards it! Anyhow, thanks for your further input, and definitely look to see me seeking further advice on those "gray" areas. as an editor, I must admit I may have fired off a few tags I wasn't sure about (heck, NPP is a race these days - it really shouldn't be), but as an admin, I won't be shooting from the hip. I will stand by my pledge not to delete anything that's not clearly, plain-as-day within criteria until I gain a greater understanding of them. anyhow, I appreciate the time you spent on reviewing my RFA and your comments on it (both for and against). imo, it's important in the RFA process that admins bring to light the deleted contributions that editors can't see. I've left some templated thank-spam for you below =) see you again soon! xenocidic ( talk) 03:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like to thank the community for placing their trust in me during my recent request for adminship, which passed 72 13 2 . Rest assured, I have read each comment thoroughly and will be addressing the various concerns raised as I step cautiously into my new role as janitor. In particular, I would like to thank Balloonman for putting so much time into reviewing my contributions and writing such a thoughtful nomination statement after knowing me for only a brief period of time (and for convincing me that I was ready to take up the mop now, rather than go through admin coaching).
To my fellow admins - please let me know right away if I ever take any mis-steps with my new tools. Should I make a mistake, and you reverse the action, I will not consider it to be wheel-warring (but please tell me so I can understand what I did wrong).
To everyone - please feel free to slap me around a bit if I ever lose sight of the core philosophy of Wikipedia as I understand it - the advancement of knowledge through the processes of mutual understanding and respect. As always, feel free to drop by my talk page if I can be of any assistance. =)
Sincerely,
~xenocidic, 01:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the kind words, it really means a lot to me. :) :) :) -- Jaysweet ( talk) 16:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I just created this page (my first wikipedia entry :)) and it got deleted as advertising. I wanted to add a page about Shi Fu Parks as he is an accomplished Shaolin master and there are very few in the world who both have lineage and amazing teachings. I've learnt under him for many years now, and I guess I thought it would be interesting to have him on Wikipedia, but I can understand that maybe what I posted was a bit much. Any recommendations as to how to fix the tone of my post, or is it simply inappropriate content?
Thank you, I know how much you guys work to keep Wikipedia from being too crackful, Pia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greebogreebo ( talk • contribs) 19:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks heaps for the great response. I'll go and read up on everything and then reassess. I may try to put something up again in a few days if he meets the guidelines and if so I'll be sure to write it in a neutral tone and reference everything. Thanks! Have a great day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greebogreebo ( talk • contribs) 19:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Can you look at Fubixing, please? I tagged it as blatant copyright violation, (and it got deleted as that) because he posted a transcript of a copyrighted video. Does that still count as copyright violation? Or should I have tagged it with something else, or PROD-ed it? Thanks for you help, J.delanoy gabs analyze 19:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the information regarding the removal of erroneously placed speedy deletion tags on the 1400 BC in art article today. Now I know! Ecoleetage ( talk) 02:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I just want to compliment you on the great wisdom and discernment you exhibited in handling the closing of this afd. -- MPerel 07:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
for your excellent thorough analysis and effort exerted to achieve a wise and reasonable solution at the Jews Against Zionism AfD -- MPerel 08:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC) |
I do not agree with your logic for removal and view such disrespect as an insult to the him. David has completed many hours of community based work and in my opinion should be rewarded for his efforts. He has become a cult icon in the surrounding regions and i personally view such deletion as placing a detriment on his character.
Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiyeahh ( talk • contribs) 09:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Thanks for your message. With that article when I saw it, I just knew it wasn't notable, but was sort of related to people, at least in the sense that real people operate the characters, if that makes sense. Sorry for getting it wrong, I'll know for next time just to mark it as AfD or stick a notablility tag on. Ged UK ( talk) 15:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for removing pink tag from my comments. Diamond Bar Cruch is rarity in Southern California, locate almost at West Covina. You ever been to California before, and do you work on Highway pages. NE2 just puts pink tags on article he thinks is bad. About the 710 Frwy extension, do you think is possible? Becasue I don't think so. 710 even is north 9 mi-extension can damage Aquaruim of Pacific. You you know about the 710 Frwy story?-- Freewayguy Talk Contribs 19:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Could you please take care of the following CSDs for pages I (unwisely) created?
All of this was done months ago, and I have since decided that, however mild the harm to the project might be, it is still non-zero harm and so they should be taken care of. Thanks so much! -- Jaysweet ( talk) 17:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
This image is, um, one of those images that somehow appears here on Wikipedia even though it is actually on Commons. Last night (my current time is UTC-4) I was patrolling Recent Changes with Twinkle, and I saw someone create this page with the text "i love you", but they did not upload an image. I have never tagged an image page page for speedy deletion before, so I had no idea which tag to use. I ended up tagging it with CSD I8 (an image which is a bit-for-bit copy of an image on Commons). It has not yet been deleted, but I know that that tag was not entirely correct, because no new image was uploaded. Should I have just tagged it as db-G2? Thanks for your help. J.delanoy gabs adds 14:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I feel that your deletion of User:Ziggy_Sawdust/Avril was not compliant with CSD G5, given that the page had substantial contributions from other users, as far as I can see. My personal opinion is that the page should go, but unless at attempt at rougeness is being made, CSD isn't the way to go... Mart inp23 17:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Dear friend, just please tell me how can I convience you that WIAS is my patented invention and as it's going to be manufactured I need to publish it on the net and say to the world what is WIAS and how it works. At the next days my website would be published and you can see more about WIAS. I'm ready to e-mail you my patent in order to see WIAS is mine. Please don't remvoe my article on wiki. Just tell me what i've to do in order not to speedy deletion! -- Schahinap ( talk) 06:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Dear Moonriddengirl
I am realtively new to wiki and was hoping you could provide some of your expertise. I had some photos I thought were properly annotated with fair use rationale for the sam & dave wiki site. Apparently they werent, so they were taken down
I notice you did a nice fair use for the hold on im comin sam & dave cover. Would you be willing to assist me in re-posting several images to the sam & dave wiki site? I would be happy to send you the images, I just want to make sure the bases are covered with a proper fair use disclosure. They include some pr shots that were distributed publicly, a magazine cover and a a few album covers.
I can be reached at <email blanked for privacy concerns>
thanks in advance
68.121.161.163 ( talk) 07:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC) mmstevko
So you're like me! Refactor reply - I replied on their talk page, but copied it to my page. Improper usage of the term? As far as getting the hang of things, I've so far only blocked the test accounts (naughty, naughty test accounts), but I've deleted a potentially sensitive revision. Other than that, haven't done much. Was busy yesterday, and still getting my thank-spam out. =) xenocidic ( talk) 17:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I don't know why this user keeps violating No personal attack as he left this at his summary field. In this situation, I can't work with continued offender [1] I don't think WP:AGF is effective in this situation. -- Appletrees ( talk) 11:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Besides, his reverting does not meed the standard of the naming convention for Korea or Koreans ( WP:NC-KO), surname always comes first, but he carelessly revert it to Japanese naming convention. That kind of behaviors does not look from good faith-- Appletrees ( talk) 11:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
If the expression to Appletrees' conducts was too hard words to recognize mere a criticism, I'm sorry for you all. I am not Engish native speeker, so I am not good at imaging the word's hardness. Simply to say, I only want a citation for Appletrees' edit that the work was translated from manhwa version as WP:source says. So I was astonished of Appletress writings in my notes. To tell the truth, I don't know what can we do in that situation, when I'm not all of them. Jazz81089 ( talk) 15:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
←As I noted to Appletrees above, sources in languages other than English are appropriate, when no English equivalent exists. You can read Wikipedia:V#Non-English_sources for more about that. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your note. However, this is not a copyright infringement. This information is on our website, and I have referenced that. Also, we do have permission from Fabric Architecture (IFAI). I can fax you the document if needed. Please advise. Mtc38118 ( talk) 14:31, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, MoonG. I got back from my trip. I'm still a little short of sleep, even though I turned down a late-night social activity nearly two days ago: I'm not a night owl. I still posted a bit to Wikipedia while I was away, so maybe nobody noticed I was gone! (I even had 10 minutes in a cyber cafe while everybody else was ordering food in a restaurant. My excuse was to contact another person, who actually came and joined us at the restaurant. Well, that was the excuse for the first 5 minutes of the online time; and if there hadn't been another customer waiting to use that computer I might still be there...)☺ Coppertwig ( talk) 12:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I make new section, so you don't miss it ;>
Regarding prods...what do you usually do? Just let rip the delete button if it expired? (doubt it!) xenocidic ( talk) 22:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry I haven't been signed into wikipedia often enough to notice this. You deleted the story on sacred heart church due to copyright infringement. It is not. I wrote the original article for Latino Perspectives magazine and I give permission for the article to be here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manchartes ( talk • contribs) 06:26, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
My first rationale for deleting Tactition was poor, thanks for pointing out that this word is used quite a bit even in the scientific literature. I have been teaching in the area of sensation and perception at the college level for over 20 years and recently have been writing a textbook on this topic (and in fact in the last few weeks have been working on the somatosensory chapter, which is how I stumbled onto this) so I've recently read about six review articles from Annual Review of Psychology and Annual Review of Neuroscience, and that word is unfamiliar to me. It was not in the OED. However, PubMed comes back with many hits. So people do use this word to refer to touch or tactile perception, and there are apparently many links to this term from other articles in Wikipedia. I was surprised, but it showed I had not done my homework.
My justification for deletion should have focused on the fact that this page contains little useful information in it, it includes a sentence concerning women's moral standards that seems to me quite irrelevant, and a little section on the "Aristoltelian definition" that makes little sense. So a merge into Somatosensory system would leave really nothing from this article, in my view. The Somatosensory system article is a serious, well-documented, informative discussion of the sense of touch in all its complexities and discusses the fact that the body senses are multidimensional. To me the best solution would be to redirect Tactition to Somatosensory system and the Tactile redirect page, which has many pages that link to it, should redirect to Somatosensory system rather than to Tactition. The term Touch which is a much more common term for what I think is meant by tactition, does appropriately redirect to Somatosensory system. Let me know what you think. -- Cooper24 ( talk) 09:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. I understand the issue better now. I looked at the article under discussion and have no problem with the changes you made to address the copyright matter. Frankly, the only reason for the duplication/similarity was my attempt to kill two birds with one stone and not write the same basic material twice. But I understand now that I really should do so when writing for both sites. Thanks for your courtesy and illumination. Monkeyzpop ( talk) 16:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your time on Mandatory renewable energy targets dinghy ( talk) 12:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
You may find my comment on the subject on my Talk page. Regards, -- Ritter ( talk) 17:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I do find interesting things while patrolling newpages.
What on earth would you have done with Stars and planets (solar system)? I have literally no clue what the correct action was. J.delanoy gabs adds 23:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
←Ah! Indeed it does. Good sleuthing. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for removing the speedy deletion tag from Prove My Hypotheses. ل داد 11:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC) Ldud talk
Can you indefinitely move-protect my talk page so that [move=sysop]? I had to get it [edit=autoconfirmed:move=sysop] a few days ago, and the protection expired this morning. Thanks. J.delanoy gabs adds 16:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I've just been going back through previous contributions, and came across the issues with relation to the Gilda Pianelli article, which you've been kindly endeavouring to resolve. As the one who flagged it for possible copyvio, I just wanted to check that, firstly, I was correct in flagging it up and secondly, that I'd followed the correct procedure - since I do a fair bit of categorising, I edit a lot of actor profiles, so it might happen in future. I'm assuming that copy/pasting someones IMDB entry is a definiate no-no, and that any I find should be flagged as before ? (or is there a more appropriate way of flagging these articles) ? Thanks for any advice you can offer :-) CultureDrone ( talk) 21:08, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello-I've lost my patience in the discussion of Swedish auction. What really pushed me over the edge was User:Max7437's statement, "As you can see on “Revision history of Auction” much of that article has been written by me, with few complaints." In fact, Max has been making low-quality edits throughout the auction articles which will take some serious work to recover from. The fact that people have been patient with some of his bad edits should not be used as evidence that other edits are good. I suppose it should instead be used as evidence that we should be less patient. In any case, I figured I'd blow my stack at you rather than on the deletion page in the effort to be civil. If you can help me say the above civilly, maybe I'll say it to Max. Thanks! Cretog8 ( talk) 19:31, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I tagged a lot of the pages this guy created for speedy deletion, then I realized how many he had created. I am not sure how to handle this. Can you look at them and see what you think? J.delanoy gabs adds 22:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
should see this and this he's making racist comments about me, and detering just because I accuse him about sockpuppet. I only go by what Rschen7754 said. Can you warn him not to do that, becasue we should treat everyone with respect o matter what happens. These changes is not acceptable.-- Freewayguy Discussions Show all changes 05:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Anony is taking the fault on me because he believes I accuse him about sockpuppet, when I just go by what Rschen7754 says. He post go to hell, and F*** me because I accuse him of sockpuppet, which was not acceptable when I don't know. Thanksfor your time.-- Freewayguy Discussions Show all changes 05:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl, I come to here with the same problem with Jazz81089 ( talk · contribs) again. I guess the editor does not listen to your previous advice and warning, and especially regarding WP:NPA policy. I can't bear his own gaming, doing nothing to develope the article of Blade of the Phantom Master, but the only thing he has done is to write personal attacks at his edit summary or accuse others at the talk page (actually the article has been edited by other neutral editors). Anyway, the guy knows very well how to make me enraged. I think a suitable action should be taken upon the user.
Please take a look at this. Thanks. By the way, I changed my screen name. -- Caspian blue ( talk) 05:08, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Can you also take a look at another bad-faith filing by Jazz at WP:ANI#User:Caspian blue and User:Jazz81089 again? I feel very absurd on this (I was the one who got his mockeries at his edit summaries) -- Caspian blue ( talk) 06:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, I've added a few 30 second sound samples to a couple of articles ( Song to the Siren, Tim Buckley, Jeff Buckley, Dr. Dre). While i'm confident the samples do fulfil the fair use criteria i've listed them under I'm increasing suspicious that i seem to be one of very few people adding this type of media to articles. Am i doing the right thing? Does the fair use rationale seem fine to you? Does this kind of thing belong in the articles at all? I'd appreciate your thoughts! Sillyfolkboy ( talk) 11:03, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
←Phew. Such a relief to me to hear that! :D It seems like they could go in either place. Infobox or article body if the article is about a song; article body if it's not. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I read the entire discussion and I removed personal info. why cant you guys give me a chance to validate any of the info???????????? I am researching her personal blog now-which is in Japanese-so it takes time for me to research it being as I am not a fluent speaker.
Can you check if this article is copyrighted?. I revert the author who said this article is copied from that link. To me the article is not copied from there except for some lines. Can you help?. -- SkyWalker ( talk) 11:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Iam aware of the rules. -- SkyWalker ( talk) 11:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Tell this guy he's been blocked. Thank you. Narutolovehinata5 t c csd new 12:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
...for this note on ANI. [6] I'm flattered! :) BrownHornet21 ( talk) 13:32, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments on the Coyote point systems talk page.
In the interest of full disclosure, I should let you know that I am associated with this company (I'm the founder). I don't think that that should immediately disqualify me from creating an article. Someone needs to "prime the pump" by creating the page, and then (hopefully) the community will fill in by updating and maintaining the page.
There was a useful pointer from Kevin to the WP:CORP page, and I'll make sure I add some more independent sources to the page.
In general, I do think that this company is notable for being a pioneer in bringing what has generally been a very high-end (i.e. expensive) technology (Application Traffic Management/Load Balancing) to the mid-market, which has resulted in better internet infrastructure for organizations with limited budgets! Additionally, as I tried to indicate in the article, Coyote is a pioneer company in this particular technology space. We're mentioned in a number of other pages, such as load balancing and f5 Networks. I'm pretty sure that nobody from Coyote added those citations.
Anyhow, I will endeavor to improve the notability aspects of this page, and hope that it remains in place.
Coyotekish ( talk) 19:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I saw you deleted the article I wrote about that book, I couldn't follow the hole discussion because I couldn't get connected to the Internet for a good while. Is that article completely deleted or would you be able to post it to me so I can improve it without starting from the beginning? Would you give some advice to avoid other deletion proposal for I must confess I could not understand why was Perfect manners considered uncontested. Thanks in advance -- Munifico ( talk) 17:37, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
You took care for Image:David Cargo1.jpg:
Would you mind doing the same to:
Thanks, ~ WikiDon ( talk) 18:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Vishnava talk 18:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I write because of your prior response to the BLPN post I submitted regarding Dicklyon's violations of BLP and 3RR at
Archives of Sexual Behavior. He is now accusing me of violating COI in part because of that, so it seemed appropriate to notify you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#MarionTheLibrarian.
—
MarionTheLibrarian (
talk) 01:45, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer to my question, MoonG, which I've read more than once and which sounds very reasonable. I've been wondering about the things I said here. Maybe some of those things are valid things for the person closing a discussion to consider, and maybe some are not. What do you think? (I can't remember if I've already asked you this question – sorry if it's a repeat.) ☺ Coppertwig ( talk) 00:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
I DID NOT copy and paste. I used the MOVE BUTTON. I was allowed to move it under WP:BOLD. Me-123567-Me ( talk) 23:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Would you be so kind to explain your deletion of the article for 'st clair surf life saving club'
Coomsey ( talk) 02:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I drafted up my article on the drawing board about a month ago, and you were kind enough to give me feedback on it. I was hoping you could take a look at it again...
EtQ, Inc., an acronym for “Excellence Through Quality” is a provider of Enterprise Quality Management Software. EtQ develops software to automate processes and procedures associated with Quality Management and ISO standards. EtQ’s software platform uses a Web Browser interface and Workflow-based technology to map ISO, Quality Management, Environmental Health and Safety, and FDA Compliance processes to allow the software to meet the needs of the businesses that employ the tool.
EtQ is a privately held firm with corporate offices in Farmingdale, NY. North American technical support and development is in Tucson, AZ. EtQ development and international technical support is in Amman, Jordan.
The company was originally founded in 1992 under the name EtQ Management Consultants. EtQ Management Consultants was founded by former Underwriter’s Laboratories employees, with the goal of providing consultation on ISO certification. As the company began to grow, many clients began to ask for consultation on software to automate processes related to ISO standards. At the time, the company was unable to find a comprehensive tool that met the needs of their client. As a result, EtQ Management Consultants began to develop software to meet their clients’ needs. EtQ called this new product ISO 9000 Maps, designed to help diagram and document ISO 9000 procedures.
As demand for more intuitive software solutions grew, EtQ Management Consultants responded in 1995 with their first workflow-enabled solution, EtQ Solutions. EtQ discontinued production of the ISO 9000 Maps product, and changed its focus from Consulting to Software, and changed their name to EtQ, Inc.
EtQ Inc. continued to sell software products, primarily for use on the Lotus Notes client environment. However, with the advent of the Internet, EtQ began developing their products for Web Browsers. In 1998 EtQ released their second product, also called EtQ Solutions which provided a web-based client interface to replace the Lotus Notes client.
During this time, EtQ began growing as a company, and added locations for their Technical Support and Development groups. As the ISO 9000 market matured, EtQ began to expand beyond general manufacturing companies, moving into the FDA regulated industry such as Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices.
EtQ most recent product, EtQ Reliance, was created in 2003 and was a Web Browser based solution that used Java programming. This allowed EtQ to expand its software offering beyond the Lotus Domino community to the rest of the market.
In 2007, EtQ’s Development center was awarded ISO 9001 certification for their Quality Management System. After conducting a full audit of the quality management system at the EtQ Development Center, the audit team led by SGS concluded that EtQ has established and maintained its quality management system in line with the requirements of the SO 9001:2000 standard. No discrepancies were found during the audit.
In 2008, EtQ was awarded Stamped Green approval in recognition of EtQ’s commitment to developing eco-friendly products that foster a paperless environment, and reduce companies’ footprint on the environment.
As of 2008, EtQ has implemented software systems in over 1000 facilities, with over 750,000 users to date. EtQ continues to develop and provide support for all three workflow products. EtQ’s customer base ranges in size, from small startup firms to Fortune 100 companies.
EtQ uses workflow technology to automate processes related to Quality Management Systems. Called “flexible workflow”, EtQ developed this technology independently to address the unique aspects required within a Quality Management System. Flexible workflow technology is designed to use robust business rules, forms and workflows to accurately route records throughout the business, but have a high-degree of flexibility to make changes to these elements, without programming. Flexible Workflow technology has allowed configurations such as forms, fields, keywords, workflows, sections, even styles and aesthetics to be configured by the customer, without making any code-level changes.
This concept has allowed business processes and workflows to be changed as needed, by administrators within the company. Flexible workflow has enabled business users of the software to drive changes to the workflows, without requiring additional development resources. The technology uses a series of drag and drop tools, business rule forms, and settings to allow changes to the overall workflow.
The Flexible workflow technology can be found in all three of EtQ’s product platforms: EtQ Solutions for Lotus Notes, EtQ Solutions for Web/Domino, and EtQ Reliance.
EtQ’s products are module-based, using integrated modules to address different elements of Quality Management Systems. The number of modules vary by product suite, with each module filling a specific need to the type of processes they automate.
thanks a lot Smhaft ( talk) 19:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm new to wikipedia and was trying to create a page for Alpha Theory which you deleted. I respect that. But, I'm trying to understand how it got deleted in comparison to other similar articles out there like this one for instance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartclient ?
Senordhuff ( talk) 21:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
yes I would like to page to restored I have specific information regarding the organisation that i was intending to post.
Coomsey ( talk) 22:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
How is the article now? Nergaal ( talk) 19:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I noticed your activity too. I'm sure you have your own interests, so on behalf of the community, a big THANKS for taking the time to whittle down the backlog. -- Robocoder ( t| c) 16:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The Invisible Barnstar | ||
Thank you for your continued work and assistance on Wikipedia:Copyright problems, reviewing copyright status and generally cleaning up articles that need attention or a referee. As well as taking the time to make improvements to Template:Copyviocore. Your good work goes unseen unless someone disagrees ;) Jeepday ( talk) 17:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Frank Kratovil. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. The Evil Spartan ( talk) 23:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you ereased my entry for "Uther Pendragon" (band) and was wondering why. is there somthing i did wrong or information I needed to add. Just courious, thank you.
StudioXman ( talk) 01:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
hi, Moonriddengirl. I would like to give the link to find out more at my invention. and if my reasons where logical enough, tell me if i can publish wias on wiki or not. take a look at links below:
http://schahinap.googlepages.com/wias
http://schahinap.googlepages.com/interviews
i'm looking forward for your answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.165.97.94 ( talk) 16:27, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I created this page quite a while ago, (think: more than a year) when I was young and foolish. :P I am not trying to appeal its deletion here, what I am doing is asking about how it was deleted. The only reason I even knew that is was deleted at all was because I received a message from BJBot informing me of an orphaned fair-use image which had been used on the article. I then looked at the deletion log of Path of Life Camp and was shocked to see that it had been speedy deleted. Are you allowed to speedy delete an article that has been around for a year when it is not an attack page or a copyvio? J.delanoy gabs adds 12:35, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your comprehensive and helpful explanation. I had no idea that copyright material from one Wikipedia article to another can constitute plagiarism and copyright violation. I shall bear this information in mind from now on. Cheers Edelmand ( talk) 14:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Can you look at my last few contributions? Someone introduced a lot of copyright violations about people who are probably not notable. They were all brought to AFD before the AFD nom noticed they were speediable. If you delete, I'll close the AFDs. My reasoning is, if any of those people really are notable, someone can create a legitimate article. J.delanoy gabs adds 17:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, Moonriddengirl, for your support !vote at my RFA. I will be doing my best to make sure that your confidence has not been misplaced. -- lifebaka ( Talk - Contribs) 18:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Article improved. --- Dan 56 8:07 July 1, 2008
Just letting you know I'm working on it... J.delanoy gabs adds 14:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
cached:URL
. To amuse myself, I looked at the cached version of en.wikipedia.org. It still has
Oxidative phosphorylation as Today's Featured Article. But that really has nothing to do with anything. The point is, searching Google for cached:
http://stagnes.nsw.edu.au/mission_n_vision.html
comes up with nothing, which means that the website has not been in existence since Google last updated their search indexes, which they typically do once a month. So that website does not exist. However, I did look at one of the other references in the aritcle, and I came up with this:
[7], which I assume is a copy of the schools website. In any case, although the Wikipedia article is organized differently, many of the phrases are identical, such as
Should I bother re-tagging articles as copyvios if they were previously tagged under some other CSD criteria? For example, when I came across RL Hudson, it was tagged with db-spam. The article is (or was, I don't know if you'll read this before the article is deleted) a copy/paste of the first part of http://www.rlhudson.com/. Should I (have) tag (tagged) it as db-copyvio? J.delanoy gabs adds 03:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, of course, I'd like the issue resolved and for it to just go away. :) But, alas, it's just a bit more complicated than that. The first thing I'm going to do is rewriting that "I've authored..." text. The problem, is that when the warning went up, I was under the impression that I had to give up copyrights on it. Honestly, it should never have been an issue in the first place. I wish I could pull it up out of my memory banks, but I remember reading an article here at Wikipedia a week or two before I wrote the Kenworth section, that was almost fully posted verbatim from a website whose author did the exact same thing (hence why I did it, even his wording "I've autored a condensed and derivative work for the <insert article name here> article on Wikipedia" text was written the exact same way - and there wasn't any issue there). I don't want to give up copyright on the work, but at the same time, I feel as though I'm almost forced to.
I was even shocked that the warning even came up, and felt a little disrespected and dismayed when WikiDon posted the copyvio notice (and his rather harsh tone in subsequent postings on my talk page). I come from a business administration background having been a restaurant assistant manager and shift supervisor, and my training tells me to properly investigate any issue before making any judgments. WikiDon improperly investigated the situation, and went on the attack both on my talk page and the KW article without giving my userpage a glance, nor that notice on the bottom of the Pacific History page on my website.
I apologize for the rant and babble, but that's part of why I got frustrated. I strive to contribute to the best of my abilities, and when another user goes on the attack without ever getting to know me first, I tend to get a little upset and go on the defensive.
Anywho, that's my rant and babble in a nutshell. Thanks for listening Srosenow 98 ( talk) 06:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I've just seen you around CSD discussions and on Commons and wanted to say hi. I know how discouraging speedy deletion work can be, when you earn the ire of all those whose articles you smight, but I think you're doing a great job and really giving articles a chance wherever you can. Keep up the good work, and let me know if there's anything I can ever do to help. :-) Dcoetzee 19:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
You undid part of my entry on the National Rural Letter Carriers' Association. The part you took out was the union constitution. The constitution is a public document, and there was no reason to remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Spasm ( talk • contribs) 03:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Point made; fair enough. I went through my previous existing article and reentered the images that I had posted within the constitution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Spasm ( talk • contribs) 19:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm new to this; I'm working on it. I appreciate the tone you take in correcting me. It's refreshing conpared to some of the other Wikipedia editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Spasm ( talk • contribs) 19:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Xenocidic recommended you as an administrator who would be a good, neutral, experienced party to consult in a contentious AfD. Currently, the subj. article is reverting versions repeatedly, although I don't believe any editor to have been in 3RR violation yet. Further, it has been observed that positions have solidified, which I believe substantially true, and the time for the AfD has expired, yet it not been closed. There are five involved editors: myself and Exucmember support a version of the article which has as much RS infomation as possible about Andrew Wilson's major work, World Scripture. Hrafn, Crusio, and DJ Clayworth favor deleting that information for various reasons, including that it is a coatrack, not neutral/spam, and fails to demonstrate sufficient notability. I believe all parties would benefit from an admin without any previous involvement in the topic to look at the issues and revisions involved, render an appropriate judgement, and close the AfD. Would you be willing to do this for us? Thanks!
-- Jclemens ( talk) 19:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello: My name is T.J. Parsell. You deleted a page that mentioned me and my book, Fish: A Memoir of a Boy in a Man's Prison. Why did you delete it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.189.124.11 ( talk) 18:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry; but I don't understand. The source you are referencing is my own website. So where is the copyright problem? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Tjparsell (
talk •
contribs) 18:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Does it appear in archive.org at all? Geni 22:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
I just saw the history of Wikipedia:Copyright problems, you really did a great job in clearing a lot of the backlog there. Therefore....
Garion96 (talk) 22:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I see you just "notability" tagged the newly re-created SafeSquid article. I was working with the creator briefly and think he found a couple of reliable sources after the previous article was speedied for being a copy-vio. The copy-vio issues are also now resolved, by the way, so I'm not sure why the creator added the GFDL tag. Anyway, I think the article does (BARELY) meet notability guidelines so I've removed your tag. I won't complain if you decide to put it up for deletion, though, since I think the article would benefit from closer inspection by a wider range of editors. Thanks! GDallimore ( Talk) 14:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
←Hi. :) The reliability of the article isn't in question; the problem is that the coverage of this specific product is light. Generally speaking, notability of products is affirmed by widespread, non-trivial coverage in reliable sources. It is the most substantial reference I see. I don't think that you need Burt's quoting that article, but I do think that the article would benefit from additional references to verify that non-trivial, widespread coverage exists. You don't necessarily need to look online for these. If this product has been reviewed in magazines or newspapers, that can also be indicated. We have a whole list of citation templates that can help you format those, here. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Other than the intro, this entire page is a copyvio of the English version of http://www.hadimirsepasi.com/biography/ Should I tag it as db-copyvio? (if yes, can you just delete it?) J.delanoy gabs adds 15:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I saw you add a comment to his page after you used User:Moonriddengirl/carticle, so I added another parameter to the template to allow you to customize the ending, similar to how you can with the messages on WP:UTM. You can look at the template doc to see my changes. I also tested it in the sandbox, and added an explanation with it. Here is the version with my test in it. If you have any questions about it, just ask. Thanks again for your help. J.delanoy gabs adds 16:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
←LOL! Well, that's always the way it goes when jargon enters. :D I've never used huggle. I use Twinkle, and I used it quite a lot in the days before my adminship, when I focused a good bit more on vandalism. I don't know how huggle differs, really, but I gather it must, because I've caught glimpses of some controversy related to it. (Not sure what or why; I haven't paid close attention.) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
It's my impression that the data in the various logs is insufficient to reconstruct what you and i did on
Hopkins (TV series), so i'm vague about my exact thrust, and am focused on my repeated impression that most eds ignore the template's directions (once before and once after my work, in this case). If you can mention anything unconstructive that i did (besides my futile attempt to inhibit another removal by leaving trash behind), and perhaps a tutorial for what an admin should do when the subsequent edits are substantial enuf for attribution to be meaningful, i'd be grateful.
--
Jerzy•
t 05:38 & 05:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi and sorry for not answering before. To be quite honest, I was here yesterday already but the page is a bit confusing as I didn't find any tab for "new section".. :) Anyway, the copyright problem is solved at least temporarily, the copied part was removed a while ago. Thanks for looking into it. JdeJ ( talk) 16:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
SJP
Chat has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thank you! And back at you. :D -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
(mostly copy/pasted from when someone else asked me about Huggle, with the links to the AN discussion provided by Iridescent)
Huggle started as an anti-vandalism tool that Gurch made for his own personal use. Apparently (I wasn't vandal-fighting at the time, but I have seen some old conversations...) people asked him how on earth he was reverting and warning so fast. When he told them, they apparently asked if they could use it, and he started distributing it around via email. I believe that other people than Gurch started showing up with Huggle between last December and the middle of last January, but I am not sure of the exact details. Gurch then left on extended wikibreak, and Huggle was distributed to trusted users upon request via email from other users who already had it. Thus the hugglers were a small group. This was the case when I first got Huggle near the end of February. For a while, this status quo remained in place. Then Gurch returned (as
Gurchzilla at first, later he started using his Gurch account again) and started expanding Huggle's capabilities and, to some degree, its speed. I seem to remember a push to let Huggle go "live", that is, anyone who wanted to could use it, without having to download it, just like Twinkle.
Eventually, Huggle did go live, and many, many editors began using it. Unfortunately, it takes a steady mind and a lot of vandal-fighting experience to handle Huggle properly, and many of the new users simply were not experienced enough. It was bad. I mean, really bad. People were filing reports to AIV for trivial things like typing "hi" into a page, people reverted anything that even remotely resembled vandalism, even edits that were clearly not vandalism, like good-faith attempts to change American English spellings to British English spellings (honour instead of honor, yogurt instead of yoghurt, etc.). Eventually, it got bad enough that Gurch started a thread on the administrators' noticeboard to see if people wanted him to ban Huggle completely. It was eventually decided that the tool wasn't the problem, it was the inexperienced users who were misusing Huggle's power. Administrators were encouraged to swiftly deal with any abuse or misuse of the tool. (by blanking and protecting problem users' huggle.css) Recently, acting on the advice he got primarily from Iridescent, Gurch made it so that to be able to use Huggle, you have to have either +rollback or +sysop. That really got things under control for the most part, so Huggle is not nearly as big of a problem as it was.
If you are interested in reading the AN thread, it is here. The previous discussion referred to in the AN thread is somewhere in third talk page archive, but the section link s/he gave in the original post doesn't make sense to me. J.delanoy gabs adds 00:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
J.delanoy gabs adds 00:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
←I'm a little scared to. As you know, technology is not my thing. It sounds like it could run away with me. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
"Powerful" is definitely the right word! I'm still a but stunned, actually. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
(this is mostly to Iridescent) The reason why I told MRG to change it to search all the namespaces is because I assumed that, being an admin and a very experienced user, she would not knee-jerk revert everything that seems remotely close to vandalism. I revert quite a bit of vandalism that is not in the article space. I am much more lenient on talk pages than articles, but get into the userspace or (heaven forbid) user talk space, and more than 75% of non-whitelisted edits are vandalism, usually retaliation for warnings. If you want me to remove my posting of the fact that Huggle does not search all namespaces by default. (Per WP:BEANS, in case the Kiddy Kabal finds this page) I will, but I fail to see why an experienced user (especially an admin) would have any problem controlling themselves on talk pages or userpages. Basically, the only time I revert a talk page (of any namespace except user talk) is when someone blanks/almost blanks the page or if they post random vulgarities/obscenities with no context. On user talk pages, I remove direct personal attacks/page blankings/almost blankings, but nothing else. MRG and Keeper would be fine using Huggle on full power. J.delanoy gabs adds 02:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
←No, that would have been an issue even in the ancient days of 9 months ago when I ran. Hmmm. Well, I guess you either run on a platform (if you do run again) of "I think I'd be good for the project anyway" or you look for other ways to contribute to the mainspace. Have you considered pitching in at Category:Articles that need to be wikified or Wikipedia:WikiProject Orphanage? Also potentially beneficial, Wikipedia:Articles for creation, which calls on judgment and analysis skills but doesn't require that you be into writing. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I saw you had deleted this for licensing problems. In the deleted version, were there any useful external sources? If so, would you mind dropping the URLs/books/etc on my talk? Thanks! rootology ( T) 17:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
This page was originally tagged by Corensearchbot as a suspected copyvio of http://www.obnoxiouslisteners.com/about. I looked at the link, and other than the intro, the page was a direct copy/paste. Was there enough similarity there for me to tag it as db-copyvio rather than db-web, as it ended up being tagged? What is the "threshold" where an article becomes a copyvio rather than a notability problem? J.delanoy gabs adds 22:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
We are nearing 48 hours since posting at the template talks, with only positive feed back. I would say your are free to go play and when you are ready, make the changes live. Jeepday ( talk) 11:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
In reference to the question you posed on User talk:Xenocidic: according to Wikipedia:Commons#Categorization, we're not supposed to categorise Commons images on Wikipedia. But I don't know how up to date this how-to is. Cheers. -- Salvador Barley ( talk) 12:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Glad to be of help. -- Salvador Barley ( talk) 13:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
Thanks for the comments and the edits on the History of Calintaan. We highly appreciate it.
Allow me to explain the "we" in the previous sentence. We are a group of Occidental Mindoro history enthusiasts. We are based in different parts of the Philippines. One member of our group, Mr. Rudy Candelario, did painstaking research on the history of our province (Occidental Mindoro) and his research was published by the Hiyas Press, Inc. and copyrighted by the Occidental Mindoro Historical Society (OMHS), to which he is a member.
The OMHS has become inactive. We, however, are continuing what it has started. One of the things we are doing is to disseminate the research of Mr. Candelario via the net. The website where you found a somewhat similar article on Calintaan, belongs to our group. We, however, think that his research will get more widely read if we place it in Wikipedia. He, of course, has agreed to this.
I now understand that this (uploading Mr Candelario's work in Wikipedia) violates Wikipedia's policy on notability, as it is a product of original research. I now understand that for us to be able to upload Mr Candelario's work on the history of our province, we have to cite his work (meaning, we write another article quoting his published work).
I have read Wikipedia's policy on "reliable sources." And to my understanding, Mr Candelario's work is a reliable source, having been published by a notable group in our province. His research is also being used by scholars who are doing post-graduate courses on subjects related to our province. But I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
We would wait for your comments before proceeding with our next steps.
Thank you very much.
Sikatuna sunset ( talk) 22:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply.
1] OK we will put a note in the website that the texts there are released under the GNU free documentation license. I will discuss this with our group. I assume it is basically a one-liner placed somewhere in the page, ie "These texts are released under the GNU free documentation license." Please confirm.
2] Mr Candelario's book is of course respected in our province. It is recognized by the Catholic hierarchy there, public officials and prominent residents. Do you need the email addresses of some of these people to check that what he wrote are verifiable? But it has not been published at the national or international scale. I understand perhaps it is easier to just give a name of a reputable publishing outfit, but we do not have this. Does reliable source only apply only to national and international publishing outfits, because people in our province, of course, could be biased in favor of Mr. Candelario's work? Or does this fall under what is called "context?" I mean the facts contained in the book are correct and verifiable (wiki readers can actually still request copies of the book, there are still a few copies left), and any wiki reader could ask prominent people in our province and they will confirm the facts contained in the book. But I guess wiki readers can only contact established publishing houses with dedicated answering services, which certainly people and groups in our province do not have. Would appreciate your further thoughts on this.
3] I understand the one account, one user thingy. Three members of our group have wiki accounts and we were thinking we can share the load of writing. I thought this does not violate anything. But please let me know if you think this is vulnerable to a host of problems.
Thanks again.
Sikatuna sunset ( talk) 23:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the patience in replying.
All the materials presented were taken from the published source. The publication actually has two versions: Tagalog and English. We - or from now on, should I say I? - are of course using the English version. A colleague wants to work on the Tagalog version, with Tambayan Philippines, where I have also discussed what I am doing with some Wiki editors there.
The interviews were actually footnotes in the published material. I just copied it, and did some rewriting. It seems from what I understand now, what I should do is to write something on the subject (say History of Calintaan) and use in the notes something like: [1]
But I was looking at the History of San Jose (another municipality in Occidental Mindoro), which we did not upload, and there was not even a single note there. There were also some factual mistakes. Pandurucan became a seat of the municipal government in 1910, not 1911, and there are documents to prove this - an executive order signed on April 18, 1910 by Gov Cameroon Forbes, governor general of the Philippines at that time.
In that same page about San Jose, there was mention of Sinaoga, as the site of the first presidencia. I grew up in that island. And no one in that island of less than 30 households knows this fact (if it is a fact). It might be true as the island is strategically located in the middle of Mangarin Bay, which was an important port at that time. But what was the reference used? And why was the article not marked "hey dude, where's your ref?" Or it was there and I just did not see it? Sorry it just confused me.
OK all for now. I will wait for further thoughts from you before proceeding with writing and editing articles on the history of the towns of our province. Again, maraming salamat (thanks a million in Tagalog).
Cheers
Sikatuna sunset ( talk) 02:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I will probably take the rewriting route, to avoid a complicated process.
I've tagged one unreferenced point in the History of San Jose article with {{ fact}} as you suggested, and another point with {{ dubious}} and will just wait for responses. It seems that article also falls within the Tambayan Philippines project, within Wikipedia.
People in San Jose of course will not rely on Wikipedia to determine what year they will celebrate their 100th foundation anniversary. If they follow that wiki article, they would be celebrating in 1911, not 1910. They would ask the members of the Occidental Mindoro Historical Society. So I guess, Wikipeda is some kind of a big discussion board on facts only, and articles do not really get finalized. Or the rating tells you the level of finality and accurateness of the article? Sorry, the slip of my confusion is showing.
If ever your happy feet get itchy and you suddenly end up in the Pearl of the Orient, we would be happy to be your and family's tour guides. Cheers.....
Sikatuna sunset ( talk) 23:25, 12 July 2008 (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 |
Well, you seem to have found my meticulous analysis before I could nudge you to towards it! Anyhow, thanks for your further input, and definitely look to see me seeking further advice on those "gray" areas. as an editor, I must admit I may have fired off a few tags I wasn't sure about (heck, NPP is a race these days - it really shouldn't be), but as an admin, I won't be shooting from the hip. I will stand by my pledge not to delete anything that's not clearly, plain-as-day within criteria until I gain a greater understanding of them. anyhow, I appreciate the time you spent on reviewing my RFA and your comments on it (both for and against). imo, it's important in the RFA process that admins bring to light the deleted contributions that editors can't see. I've left some templated thank-spam for you below =) see you again soon! xenocidic ( talk) 03:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like to thank the community for placing their trust in me during my recent request for adminship, which passed 72 13 2 . Rest assured, I have read each comment thoroughly and will be addressing the various concerns raised as I step cautiously into my new role as janitor. In particular, I would like to thank Balloonman for putting so much time into reviewing my contributions and writing such a thoughtful nomination statement after knowing me for only a brief period of time (and for convincing me that I was ready to take up the mop now, rather than go through admin coaching).
To my fellow admins - please let me know right away if I ever take any mis-steps with my new tools. Should I make a mistake, and you reverse the action, I will not consider it to be wheel-warring (but please tell me so I can understand what I did wrong).
To everyone - please feel free to slap me around a bit if I ever lose sight of the core philosophy of Wikipedia as I understand it - the advancement of knowledge through the processes of mutual understanding and respect. As always, feel free to drop by my talk page if I can be of any assistance. =)
Sincerely,
~xenocidic, 01:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the kind words, it really means a lot to me. :) :) :) -- Jaysweet ( talk) 16:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I just created this page (my first wikipedia entry :)) and it got deleted as advertising. I wanted to add a page about Shi Fu Parks as he is an accomplished Shaolin master and there are very few in the world who both have lineage and amazing teachings. I've learnt under him for many years now, and I guess I thought it would be interesting to have him on Wikipedia, but I can understand that maybe what I posted was a bit much. Any recommendations as to how to fix the tone of my post, or is it simply inappropriate content?
Thank you, I know how much you guys work to keep Wikipedia from being too crackful, Pia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greebogreebo ( talk • contribs) 19:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks heaps for the great response. I'll go and read up on everything and then reassess. I may try to put something up again in a few days if he meets the guidelines and if so I'll be sure to write it in a neutral tone and reference everything. Thanks! Have a great day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greebogreebo ( talk • contribs) 19:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Can you look at Fubixing, please? I tagged it as blatant copyright violation, (and it got deleted as that) because he posted a transcript of a copyrighted video. Does that still count as copyright violation? Or should I have tagged it with something else, or PROD-ed it? Thanks for you help, J.delanoy gabs analyze 19:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the information regarding the removal of erroneously placed speedy deletion tags on the 1400 BC in art article today. Now I know! Ecoleetage ( talk) 02:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I just want to compliment you on the great wisdom and discernment you exhibited in handling the closing of this afd. -- MPerel 07:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
for your excellent thorough analysis and effort exerted to achieve a wise and reasonable solution at the Jews Against Zionism AfD -- MPerel 08:27, 5 June 2008 (UTC) |
I do not agree with your logic for removal and view such disrespect as an insult to the him. David has completed many hours of community based work and in my opinion should be rewarded for his efforts. He has become a cult icon in the surrounding regions and i personally view such deletion as placing a detriment on his character.
Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiyeahh ( talk • contribs) 09:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Thanks for your message. With that article when I saw it, I just knew it wasn't notable, but was sort of related to people, at least in the sense that real people operate the characters, if that makes sense. Sorry for getting it wrong, I'll know for next time just to mark it as AfD or stick a notablility tag on. Ged UK ( talk) 15:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for removing pink tag from my comments. Diamond Bar Cruch is rarity in Southern California, locate almost at West Covina. You ever been to California before, and do you work on Highway pages. NE2 just puts pink tags on article he thinks is bad. About the 710 Frwy extension, do you think is possible? Becasue I don't think so. 710 even is north 9 mi-extension can damage Aquaruim of Pacific. You you know about the 710 Frwy story?-- Freewayguy Talk Contribs 19:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Could you please take care of the following CSDs for pages I (unwisely) created?
All of this was done months ago, and I have since decided that, however mild the harm to the project might be, it is still non-zero harm and so they should be taken care of. Thanks so much! -- Jaysweet ( talk) 17:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
This image is, um, one of those images that somehow appears here on Wikipedia even though it is actually on Commons. Last night (my current time is UTC-4) I was patrolling Recent Changes with Twinkle, and I saw someone create this page with the text "i love you", but they did not upload an image. I have never tagged an image page page for speedy deletion before, so I had no idea which tag to use. I ended up tagging it with CSD I8 (an image which is a bit-for-bit copy of an image on Commons). It has not yet been deleted, but I know that that tag was not entirely correct, because no new image was uploaded. Should I have just tagged it as db-G2? Thanks for your help. J.delanoy gabs adds 14:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I feel that your deletion of User:Ziggy_Sawdust/Avril was not compliant with CSD G5, given that the page had substantial contributions from other users, as far as I can see. My personal opinion is that the page should go, but unless at attempt at rougeness is being made, CSD isn't the way to go... Mart inp23 17:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Dear friend, just please tell me how can I convience you that WIAS is my patented invention and as it's going to be manufactured I need to publish it on the net and say to the world what is WIAS and how it works. At the next days my website would be published and you can see more about WIAS. I'm ready to e-mail you my patent in order to see WIAS is mine. Please don't remvoe my article on wiki. Just tell me what i've to do in order not to speedy deletion! -- Schahinap ( talk) 06:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Dear Moonriddengirl
I am realtively new to wiki and was hoping you could provide some of your expertise. I had some photos I thought were properly annotated with fair use rationale for the sam & dave wiki site. Apparently they werent, so they were taken down
I notice you did a nice fair use for the hold on im comin sam & dave cover. Would you be willing to assist me in re-posting several images to the sam & dave wiki site? I would be happy to send you the images, I just want to make sure the bases are covered with a proper fair use disclosure. They include some pr shots that were distributed publicly, a magazine cover and a a few album covers.
I can be reached at <email blanked for privacy concerns>
thanks in advance
68.121.161.163 ( talk) 07:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC) mmstevko
So you're like me! Refactor reply - I replied on their talk page, but copied it to my page. Improper usage of the term? As far as getting the hang of things, I've so far only blocked the test accounts (naughty, naughty test accounts), but I've deleted a potentially sensitive revision. Other than that, haven't done much. Was busy yesterday, and still getting my thank-spam out. =) xenocidic ( talk) 17:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I don't know why this user keeps violating No personal attack as he left this at his summary field. In this situation, I can't work with continued offender [1] I don't think WP:AGF is effective in this situation. -- Appletrees ( talk) 11:15, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Besides, his reverting does not meed the standard of the naming convention for Korea or Koreans ( WP:NC-KO), surname always comes first, but he carelessly revert it to Japanese naming convention. That kind of behaviors does not look from good faith-- Appletrees ( talk) 11:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
If the expression to Appletrees' conducts was too hard words to recognize mere a criticism, I'm sorry for you all. I am not Engish native speeker, so I am not good at imaging the word's hardness. Simply to say, I only want a citation for Appletrees' edit that the work was translated from manhwa version as WP:source says. So I was astonished of Appletress writings in my notes. To tell the truth, I don't know what can we do in that situation, when I'm not all of them. Jazz81089 ( talk) 15:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
←As I noted to Appletrees above, sources in languages other than English are appropriate, when no English equivalent exists. You can read Wikipedia:V#Non-English_sources for more about that. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:10, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your note. However, this is not a copyright infringement. This information is on our website, and I have referenced that. Also, we do have permission from Fabric Architecture (IFAI). I can fax you the document if needed. Please advise. Mtc38118 ( talk) 14:31, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, MoonG. I got back from my trip. I'm still a little short of sleep, even though I turned down a late-night social activity nearly two days ago: I'm not a night owl. I still posted a bit to Wikipedia while I was away, so maybe nobody noticed I was gone! (I even had 10 minutes in a cyber cafe while everybody else was ordering food in a restaurant. My excuse was to contact another person, who actually came and joined us at the restaurant. Well, that was the excuse for the first 5 minutes of the online time; and if there hadn't been another customer waiting to use that computer I might still be there...)☺ Coppertwig ( talk) 12:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I make new section, so you don't miss it ;>
Regarding prods...what do you usually do? Just let rip the delete button if it expired? (doubt it!) xenocidic ( talk) 22:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry I haven't been signed into wikipedia often enough to notice this. You deleted the story on sacred heart church due to copyright infringement. It is not. I wrote the original article for Latino Perspectives magazine and I give permission for the article to be here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manchartes ( talk • contribs) 06:26, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
My first rationale for deleting Tactition was poor, thanks for pointing out that this word is used quite a bit even in the scientific literature. I have been teaching in the area of sensation and perception at the college level for over 20 years and recently have been writing a textbook on this topic (and in fact in the last few weeks have been working on the somatosensory chapter, which is how I stumbled onto this) so I've recently read about six review articles from Annual Review of Psychology and Annual Review of Neuroscience, and that word is unfamiliar to me. It was not in the OED. However, PubMed comes back with many hits. So people do use this word to refer to touch or tactile perception, and there are apparently many links to this term from other articles in Wikipedia. I was surprised, but it showed I had not done my homework.
My justification for deletion should have focused on the fact that this page contains little useful information in it, it includes a sentence concerning women's moral standards that seems to me quite irrelevant, and a little section on the "Aristoltelian definition" that makes little sense. So a merge into Somatosensory system would leave really nothing from this article, in my view. The Somatosensory system article is a serious, well-documented, informative discussion of the sense of touch in all its complexities and discusses the fact that the body senses are multidimensional. To me the best solution would be to redirect Tactition to Somatosensory system and the Tactile redirect page, which has many pages that link to it, should redirect to Somatosensory system rather than to Tactition. The term Touch which is a much more common term for what I think is meant by tactition, does appropriately redirect to Somatosensory system. Let me know what you think. -- Cooper24 ( talk) 09:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. I understand the issue better now. I looked at the article under discussion and have no problem with the changes you made to address the copyright matter. Frankly, the only reason for the duplication/similarity was my attempt to kill two birds with one stone and not write the same basic material twice. But I understand now that I really should do so when writing for both sites. Thanks for your courtesy and illumination. Monkeyzpop ( talk) 16:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your time on Mandatory renewable energy targets dinghy ( talk) 12:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
You may find my comment on the subject on my Talk page. Regards, -- Ritter ( talk) 17:55, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I do find interesting things while patrolling newpages.
What on earth would you have done with Stars and planets (solar system)? I have literally no clue what the correct action was. J.delanoy gabs adds 23:52, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
←Ah! Indeed it does. Good sleuthing. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for removing the speedy deletion tag from Prove My Hypotheses. ل داد 11:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC) Ldud talk
Can you indefinitely move-protect my talk page so that [move=sysop]? I had to get it [edit=autoconfirmed:move=sysop] a few days ago, and the protection expired this morning. Thanks. J.delanoy gabs adds 16:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I've just been going back through previous contributions, and came across the issues with relation to the Gilda Pianelli article, which you've been kindly endeavouring to resolve. As the one who flagged it for possible copyvio, I just wanted to check that, firstly, I was correct in flagging it up and secondly, that I'd followed the correct procedure - since I do a fair bit of categorising, I edit a lot of actor profiles, so it might happen in future. I'm assuming that copy/pasting someones IMDB entry is a definiate no-no, and that any I find should be flagged as before ? (or is there a more appropriate way of flagging these articles) ? Thanks for any advice you can offer :-) CultureDrone ( talk) 21:08, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello-I've lost my patience in the discussion of Swedish auction. What really pushed me over the edge was User:Max7437's statement, "As you can see on “Revision history of Auction” much of that article has been written by me, with few complaints." In fact, Max has been making low-quality edits throughout the auction articles which will take some serious work to recover from. The fact that people have been patient with some of his bad edits should not be used as evidence that other edits are good. I suppose it should instead be used as evidence that we should be less patient. In any case, I figured I'd blow my stack at you rather than on the deletion page in the effort to be civil. If you can help me say the above civilly, maybe I'll say it to Max. Thanks! Cretog8 ( talk) 19:31, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I tagged a lot of the pages this guy created for speedy deletion, then I realized how many he had created. I am not sure how to handle this. Can you look at them and see what you think? J.delanoy gabs adds 22:40, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
should see this and this he's making racist comments about me, and detering just because I accuse him about sockpuppet. I only go by what Rschen7754 said. Can you warn him not to do that, becasue we should treat everyone with respect o matter what happens. These changes is not acceptable.-- Freewayguy Discussions Show all changes 05:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Anony is taking the fault on me because he believes I accuse him about sockpuppet, when I just go by what Rschen7754 says. He post go to hell, and F*** me because I accuse him of sockpuppet, which was not acceptable when I don't know. Thanksfor your time.-- Freewayguy Discussions Show all changes 05:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl, I come to here with the same problem with Jazz81089 ( talk · contribs) again. I guess the editor does not listen to your previous advice and warning, and especially regarding WP:NPA policy. I can't bear his own gaming, doing nothing to develope the article of Blade of the Phantom Master, but the only thing he has done is to write personal attacks at his edit summary or accuse others at the talk page (actually the article has been edited by other neutral editors). Anyway, the guy knows very well how to make me enraged. I think a suitable action should be taken upon the user.
Please take a look at this. Thanks. By the way, I changed my screen name. -- Caspian blue ( talk) 05:08, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Can you also take a look at another bad-faith filing by Jazz at WP:ANI#User:Caspian blue and User:Jazz81089 again? I feel very absurd on this (I was the one who got his mockeries at his edit summaries) -- Caspian blue ( talk) 06:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, I've added a few 30 second sound samples to a couple of articles ( Song to the Siren, Tim Buckley, Jeff Buckley, Dr. Dre). While i'm confident the samples do fulfil the fair use criteria i've listed them under I'm increasing suspicious that i seem to be one of very few people adding this type of media to articles. Am i doing the right thing? Does the fair use rationale seem fine to you? Does this kind of thing belong in the articles at all? I'd appreciate your thoughts! Sillyfolkboy ( talk) 11:03, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
←Phew. Such a relief to me to hear that! :D It seems like they could go in either place. Infobox or article body if the article is about a song; article body if it's not. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I read the entire discussion and I removed personal info. why cant you guys give me a chance to validate any of the info???????????? I am researching her personal blog now-which is in Japanese-so it takes time for me to research it being as I am not a fluent speaker.
Can you check if this article is copyrighted?. I revert the author who said this article is copied from that link. To me the article is not copied from there except for some lines. Can you help?. -- SkyWalker ( talk) 11:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Iam aware of the rules. -- SkyWalker ( talk) 11:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Tell this guy he's been blocked. Thank you. Narutolovehinata5 t c csd new 12:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
...for this note on ANI. [6] I'm flattered! :) BrownHornet21 ( talk) 13:32, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments on the Coyote point systems talk page.
In the interest of full disclosure, I should let you know that I am associated with this company (I'm the founder). I don't think that that should immediately disqualify me from creating an article. Someone needs to "prime the pump" by creating the page, and then (hopefully) the community will fill in by updating and maintaining the page.
There was a useful pointer from Kevin to the WP:CORP page, and I'll make sure I add some more independent sources to the page.
In general, I do think that this company is notable for being a pioneer in bringing what has generally been a very high-end (i.e. expensive) technology (Application Traffic Management/Load Balancing) to the mid-market, which has resulted in better internet infrastructure for organizations with limited budgets! Additionally, as I tried to indicate in the article, Coyote is a pioneer company in this particular technology space. We're mentioned in a number of other pages, such as load balancing and f5 Networks. I'm pretty sure that nobody from Coyote added those citations.
Anyhow, I will endeavor to improve the notability aspects of this page, and hope that it remains in place.
Coyotekish ( talk) 19:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I saw you deleted the article I wrote about that book, I couldn't follow the hole discussion because I couldn't get connected to the Internet for a good while. Is that article completely deleted or would you be able to post it to me so I can improve it without starting from the beginning? Would you give some advice to avoid other deletion proposal for I must confess I could not understand why was Perfect manners considered uncontested. Thanks in advance -- Munifico ( talk) 17:37, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
You took care for Image:David Cargo1.jpg:
Would you mind doing the same to:
Thanks, ~ WikiDon ( talk) 18:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Vishnava talk 18:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I write because of your prior response to the BLPN post I submitted regarding Dicklyon's violations of BLP and 3RR at
Archives of Sexual Behavior. He is now accusing me of violating COI in part because of that, so it seemed appropriate to notify you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#MarionTheLibrarian.
—
MarionTheLibrarian (
talk) 01:45, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer to my question, MoonG, which I've read more than once and which sounds very reasonable. I've been wondering about the things I said here. Maybe some of those things are valid things for the person closing a discussion to consider, and maybe some are not. What do you think? (I can't remember if I've already asked you this question – sorry if it's a repeat.) ☺ Coppertwig ( talk) 00:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
I DID NOT copy and paste. I used the MOVE BUTTON. I was allowed to move it under WP:BOLD. Me-123567-Me ( talk) 23:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Would you be so kind to explain your deletion of the article for 'st clair surf life saving club'
Coomsey ( talk) 02:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I drafted up my article on the drawing board about a month ago, and you were kind enough to give me feedback on it. I was hoping you could take a look at it again...
EtQ, Inc., an acronym for “Excellence Through Quality” is a provider of Enterprise Quality Management Software. EtQ develops software to automate processes and procedures associated with Quality Management and ISO standards. EtQ’s software platform uses a Web Browser interface and Workflow-based technology to map ISO, Quality Management, Environmental Health and Safety, and FDA Compliance processes to allow the software to meet the needs of the businesses that employ the tool.
EtQ is a privately held firm with corporate offices in Farmingdale, NY. North American technical support and development is in Tucson, AZ. EtQ development and international technical support is in Amman, Jordan.
The company was originally founded in 1992 under the name EtQ Management Consultants. EtQ Management Consultants was founded by former Underwriter’s Laboratories employees, with the goal of providing consultation on ISO certification. As the company began to grow, many clients began to ask for consultation on software to automate processes related to ISO standards. At the time, the company was unable to find a comprehensive tool that met the needs of their client. As a result, EtQ Management Consultants began to develop software to meet their clients’ needs. EtQ called this new product ISO 9000 Maps, designed to help diagram and document ISO 9000 procedures.
As demand for more intuitive software solutions grew, EtQ Management Consultants responded in 1995 with their first workflow-enabled solution, EtQ Solutions. EtQ discontinued production of the ISO 9000 Maps product, and changed its focus from Consulting to Software, and changed their name to EtQ, Inc.
EtQ Inc. continued to sell software products, primarily for use on the Lotus Notes client environment. However, with the advent of the Internet, EtQ began developing their products for Web Browsers. In 1998 EtQ released their second product, also called EtQ Solutions which provided a web-based client interface to replace the Lotus Notes client.
During this time, EtQ began growing as a company, and added locations for their Technical Support and Development groups. As the ISO 9000 market matured, EtQ began to expand beyond general manufacturing companies, moving into the FDA regulated industry such as Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices.
EtQ most recent product, EtQ Reliance, was created in 2003 and was a Web Browser based solution that used Java programming. This allowed EtQ to expand its software offering beyond the Lotus Domino community to the rest of the market.
In 2007, EtQ’s Development center was awarded ISO 9001 certification for their Quality Management System. After conducting a full audit of the quality management system at the EtQ Development Center, the audit team led by SGS concluded that EtQ has established and maintained its quality management system in line with the requirements of the SO 9001:2000 standard. No discrepancies were found during the audit.
In 2008, EtQ was awarded Stamped Green approval in recognition of EtQ’s commitment to developing eco-friendly products that foster a paperless environment, and reduce companies’ footprint on the environment.
As of 2008, EtQ has implemented software systems in over 1000 facilities, with over 750,000 users to date. EtQ continues to develop and provide support for all three workflow products. EtQ’s customer base ranges in size, from small startup firms to Fortune 100 companies.
EtQ uses workflow technology to automate processes related to Quality Management Systems. Called “flexible workflow”, EtQ developed this technology independently to address the unique aspects required within a Quality Management System. Flexible workflow technology is designed to use robust business rules, forms and workflows to accurately route records throughout the business, but have a high-degree of flexibility to make changes to these elements, without programming. Flexible Workflow technology has allowed configurations such as forms, fields, keywords, workflows, sections, even styles and aesthetics to be configured by the customer, without making any code-level changes.
This concept has allowed business processes and workflows to be changed as needed, by administrators within the company. Flexible workflow has enabled business users of the software to drive changes to the workflows, without requiring additional development resources. The technology uses a series of drag and drop tools, business rule forms, and settings to allow changes to the overall workflow.
The Flexible workflow technology can be found in all three of EtQ’s product platforms: EtQ Solutions for Lotus Notes, EtQ Solutions for Web/Domino, and EtQ Reliance.
EtQ’s products are module-based, using integrated modules to address different elements of Quality Management Systems. The number of modules vary by product suite, with each module filling a specific need to the type of processes they automate.
thanks a lot Smhaft ( talk) 19:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm new to wikipedia and was trying to create a page for Alpha Theory which you deleted. I respect that. But, I'm trying to understand how it got deleted in comparison to other similar articles out there like this one for instance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smartclient ?
Senordhuff ( talk) 21:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
yes I would like to page to restored I have specific information regarding the organisation that i was intending to post.
Coomsey ( talk) 22:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
How is the article now? Nergaal ( talk) 19:03, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I noticed your activity too. I'm sure you have your own interests, so on behalf of the community, a big THANKS for taking the time to whittle down the backlog. -- Robocoder ( t| c) 16:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The Invisible Barnstar | ||
Thank you for your continued work and assistance on Wikipedia:Copyright problems, reviewing copyright status and generally cleaning up articles that need attention or a referee. As well as taking the time to make improvements to Template:Copyviocore. Your good work goes unseen unless someone disagrees ;) Jeepday ( talk) 17:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Frank Kratovil. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. The Evil Spartan ( talk) 23:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I noticed you ereased my entry for "Uther Pendragon" (band) and was wondering why. is there somthing i did wrong or information I needed to add. Just courious, thank you.
StudioXman ( talk) 01:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
hi, Moonriddengirl. I would like to give the link to find out more at my invention. and if my reasons where logical enough, tell me if i can publish wias on wiki or not. take a look at links below:
http://schahinap.googlepages.com/wias
http://schahinap.googlepages.com/interviews
i'm looking forward for your answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.165.97.94 ( talk) 16:27, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I created this page quite a while ago, (think: more than a year) when I was young and foolish. :P I am not trying to appeal its deletion here, what I am doing is asking about how it was deleted. The only reason I even knew that is was deleted at all was because I received a message from BJBot informing me of an orphaned fair-use image which had been used on the article. I then looked at the deletion log of Path of Life Camp and was shocked to see that it had been speedy deleted. Are you allowed to speedy delete an article that has been around for a year when it is not an attack page or a copyvio? J.delanoy gabs adds 12:35, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your comprehensive and helpful explanation. I had no idea that copyright material from one Wikipedia article to another can constitute plagiarism and copyright violation. I shall bear this information in mind from now on. Cheers Edelmand ( talk) 14:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Can you look at my last few contributions? Someone introduced a lot of copyright violations about people who are probably not notable. They were all brought to AFD before the AFD nom noticed they were speediable. If you delete, I'll close the AFDs. My reasoning is, if any of those people really are notable, someone can create a legitimate article. J.delanoy gabs adds 17:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, Moonriddengirl, for your support !vote at my RFA. I will be doing my best to make sure that your confidence has not been misplaced. -- lifebaka ( Talk - Contribs) 18:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Article improved. --- Dan 56 8:07 July 1, 2008
Just letting you know I'm working on it... J.delanoy gabs adds 14:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
cached:URL
. To amuse myself, I looked at the cached version of en.wikipedia.org. It still has
Oxidative phosphorylation as Today's Featured Article. But that really has nothing to do with anything. The point is, searching Google for cached:
http://stagnes.nsw.edu.au/mission_n_vision.html
comes up with nothing, which means that the website has not been in existence since Google last updated their search indexes, which they typically do once a month. So that website does not exist. However, I did look at one of the other references in the aritcle, and I came up with this:
[7], which I assume is a copy of the schools website. In any case, although the Wikipedia article is organized differently, many of the phrases are identical, such as
Should I bother re-tagging articles as copyvios if they were previously tagged under some other CSD criteria? For example, when I came across RL Hudson, it was tagged with db-spam. The article is (or was, I don't know if you'll read this before the article is deleted) a copy/paste of the first part of http://www.rlhudson.com/. Should I (have) tag (tagged) it as db-copyvio? J.delanoy gabs adds 03:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, of course, I'd like the issue resolved and for it to just go away. :) But, alas, it's just a bit more complicated than that. The first thing I'm going to do is rewriting that "I've authored..." text. The problem, is that when the warning went up, I was under the impression that I had to give up copyrights on it. Honestly, it should never have been an issue in the first place. I wish I could pull it up out of my memory banks, but I remember reading an article here at Wikipedia a week or two before I wrote the Kenworth section, that was almost fully posted verbatim from a website whose author did the exact same thing (hence why I did it, even his wording "I've autored a condensed and derivative work for the <insert article name here> article on Wikipedia" text was written the exact same way - and there wasn't any issue there). I don't want to give up copyright on the work, but at the same time, I feel as though I'm almost forced to.
I was even shocked that the warning even came up, and felt a little disrespected and dismayed when WikiDon posted the copyvio notice (and his rather harsh tone in subsequent postings on my talk page). I come from a business administration background having been a restaurant assistant manager and shift supervisor, and my training tells me to properly investigate any issue before making any judgments. WikiDon improperly investigated the situation, and went on the attack both on my talk page and the KW article without giving my userpage a glance, nor that notice on the bottom of the Pacific History page on my website.
I apologize for the rant and babble, but that's part of why I got frustrated. I strive to contribute to the best of my abilities, and when another user goes on the attack without ever getting to know me first, I tend to get a little upset and go on the defensive.
Anywho, that's my rant and babble in a nutshell. Thanks for listening Srosenow 98 ( talk) 06:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I've just seen you around CSD discussions and on Commons and wanted to say hi. I know how discouraging speedy deletion work can be, when you earn the ire of all those whose articles you smight, but I think you're doing a great job and really giving articles a chance wherever you can. Keep up the good work, and let me know if there's anything I can ever do to help. :-) Dcoetzee 19:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
You undid part of my entry on the National Rural Letter Carriers' Association. The part you took out was the union constitution. The constitution is a public document, and there was no reason to remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Spasm ( talk • contribs) 03:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Point made; fair enough. I went through my previous existing article and reentered the images that I had posted within the constitution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Spasm ( talk • contribs) 19:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm new to this; I'm working on it. I appreciate the tone you take in correcting me. It's refreshing conpared to some of the other Wikipedia editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnny Spasm ( talk • contribs) 19:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Xenocidic recommended you as an administrator who would be a good, neutral, experienced party to consult in a contentious AfD. Currently, the subj. article is reverting versions repeatedly, although I don't believe any editor to have been in 3RR violation yet. Further, it has been observed that positions have solidified, which I believe substantially true, and the time for the AfD has expired, yet it not been closed. There are five involved editors: myself and Exucmember support a version of the article which has as much RS infomation as possible about Andrew Wilson's major work, World Scripture. Hrafn, Crusio, and DJ Clayworth favor deleting that information for various reasons, including that it is a coatrack, not neutral/spam, and fails to demonstrate sufficient notability. I believe all parties would benefit from an admin without any previous involvement in the topic to look at the issues and revisions involved, render an appropriate judgement, and close the AfD. Would you be willing to do this for us? Thanks!
-- Jclemens ( talk) 19:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello: My name is T.J. Parsell. You deleted a page that mentioned me and my book, Fish: A Memoir of a Boy in a Man's Prison. Why did you delete it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.189.124.11 ( talk) 18:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry; but I don't understand. The source you are referencing is my own website. So where is the copyright problem? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Tjparsell (
talk •
contribs) 18:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Does it appear in archive.org at all? Geni 22:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
I just saw the history of Wikipedia:Copyright problems, you really did a great job in clearing a lot of the backlog there. Therefore....
Garion96 (talk) 22:55, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I see you just "notability" tagged the newly re-created SafeSquid article. I was working with the creator briefly and think he found a couple of reliable sources after the previous article was speedied for being a copy-vio. The copy-vio issues are also now resolved, by the way, so I'm not sure why the creator added the GFDL tag. Anyway, I think the article does (BARELY) meet notability guidelines so I've removed your tag. I won't complain if you decide to put it up for deletion, though, since I think the article would benefit from closer inspection by a wider range of editors. Thanks! GDallimore ( Talk) 14:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
←Hi. :) The reliability of the article isn't in question; the problem is that the coverage of this specific product is light. Generally speaking, notability of products is affirmed by widespread, non-trivial coverage in reliable sources. It is the most substantial reference I see. I don't think that you need Burt's quoting that article, but I do think that the article would benefit from additional references to verify that non-trivial, widespread coverage exists. You don't necessarily need to look online for these. If this product has been reviewed in magazines or newspapers, that can also be indicated. We have a whole list of citation templates that can help you format those, here. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Other than the intro, this entire page is a copyvio of the English version of http://www.hadimirsepasi.com/biography/ Should I tag it as db-copyvio? (if yes, can you just delete it?) J.delanoy gabs adds 15:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I saw you add a comment to his page after you used User:Moonriddengirl/carticle, so I added another parameter to the template to allow you to customize the ending, similar to how you can with the messages on WP:UTM. You can look at the template doc to see my changes. I also tested it in the sandbox, and added an explanation with it. Here is the version with my test in it. If you have any questions about it, just ask. Thanks again for your help. J.delanoy gabs adds 16:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
←LOL! Well, that's always the way it goes when jargon enters. :D I've never used huggle. I use Twinkle, and I used it quite a lot in the days before my adminship, when I focused a good bit more on vandalism. I don't know how huggle differs, really, but I gather it must, because I've caught glimpses of some controversy related to it. (Not sure what or why; I haven't paid close attention.) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
It's my impression that the data in the various logs is insufficient to reconstruct what you and i did on
Hopkins (TV series), so i'm vague about my exact thrust, and am focused on my repeated impression that most eds ignore the template's directions (once before and once after my work, in this case). If you can mention anything unconstructive that i did (besides my futile attempt to inhibit another removal by leaving trash behind), and perhaps a tutorial for what an admin should do when the subsequent edits are substantial enuf for attribution to be meaningful, i'd be grateful.
--
Jerzy•
t 05:38 & 05:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi and sorry for not answering before. To be quite honest, I was here yesterday already but the page is a bit confusing as I didn't find any tab for "new section".. :) Anyway, the copyright problem is solved at least temporarily, the copied part was removed a while ago. Thanks for looking into it. JdeJ ( talk) 16:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
SJP
Chat has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Thank you! And back at you. :D -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
(mostly copy/pasted from when someone else asked me about Huggle, with the links to the AN discussion provided by Iridescent)
Huggle started as an anti-vandalism tool that Gurch made for his own personal use. Apparently (I wasn't vandal-fighting at the time, but I have seen some old conversations...) people asked him how on earth he was reverting and warning so fast. When he told them, they apparently asked if they could use it, and he started distributing it around via email. I believe that other people than Gurch started showing up with Huggle between last December and the middle of last January, but I am not sure of the exact details. Gurch then left on extended wikibreak, and Huggle was distributed to trusted users upon request via email from other users who already had it. Thus the hugglers were a small group. This was the case when I first got Huggle near the end of February. For a while, this status quo remained in place. Then Gurch returned (as
Gurchzilla at first, later he started using his Gurch account again) and started expanding Huggle's capabilities and, to some degree, its speed. I seem to remember a push to let Huggle go "live", that is, anyone who wanted to could use it, without having to download it, just like Twinkle.
Eventually, Huggle did go live, and many, many editors began using it. Unfortunately, it takes a steady mind and a lot of vandal-fighting experience to handle Huggle properly, and many of the new users simply were not experienced enough. It was bad. I mean, really bad. People were filing reports to AIV for trivial things like typing "hi" into a page, people reverted anything that even remotely resembled vandalism, even edits that were clearly not vandalism, like good-faith attempts to change American English spellings to British English spellings (honour instead of honor, yogurt instead of yoghurt, etc.). Eventually, it got bad enough that Gurch started a thread on the administrators' noticeboard to see if people wanted him to ban Huggle completely. It was eventually decided that the tool wasn't the problem, it was the inexperienced users who were misusing Huggle's power. Administrators were encouraged to swiftly deal with any abuse or misuse of the tool. (by blanking and protecting problem users' huggle.css) Recently, acting on the advice he got primarily from Iridescent, Gurch made it so that to be able to use Huggle, you have to have either +rollback or +sysop. That really got things under control for the most part, so Huggle is not nearly as big of a problem as it was.
If you are interested in reading the AN thread, it is here. The previous discussion referred to in the AN thread is somewhere in third talk page archive, but the section link s/he gave in the original post doesn't make sense to me. J.delanoy gabs adds 00:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
J.delanoy gabs adds 00:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
←I'm a little scared to. As you know, technology is not my thing. It sounds like it could run away with me. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
"Powerful" is definitely the right word! I'm still a but stunned, actually. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
(this is mostly to Iridescent) The reason why I told MRG to change it to search all the namespaces is because I assumed that, being an admin and a very experienced user, she would not knee-jerk revert everything that seems remotely close to vandalism. I revert quite a bit of vandalism that is not in the article space. I am much more lenient on talk pages than articles, but get into the userspace or (heaven forbid) user talk space, and more than 75% of non-whitelisted edits are vandalism, usually retaliation for warnings. If you want me to remove my posting of the fact that Huggle does not search all namespaces by default. (Per WP:BEANS, in case the Kiddy Kabal finds this page) I will, but I fail to see why an experienced user (especially an admin) would have any problem controlling themselves on talk pages or userpages. Basically, the only time I revert a talk page (of any namespace except user talk) is when someone blanks/almost blanks the page or if they post random vulgarities/obscenities with no context. On user talk pages, I remove direct personal attacks/page blankings/almost blankings, but nothing else. MRG and Keeper would be fine using Huggle on full power. J.delanoy gabs adds 02:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
←No, that would have been an issue even in the ancient days of 9 months ago when I ran. Hmmm. Well, I guess you either run on a platform (if you do run again) of "I think I'd be good for the project anyway" or you look for other ways to contribute to the mainspace. Have you considered pitching in at Category:Articles that need to be wikified or Wikipedia:WikiProject Orphanage? Also potentially beneficial, Wikipedia:Articles for creation, which calls on judgment and analysis skills but doesn't require that you be into writing. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I saw you had deleted this for licensing problems. In the deleted version, were there any useful external sources? If so, would you mind dropping the URLs/books/etc on my talk? Thanks! rootology ( T) 17:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
This page was originally tagged by Corensearchbot as a suspected copyvio of http://www.obnoxiouslisteners.com/about. I looked at the link, and other than the intro, the page was a direct copy/paste. Was there enough similarity there for me to tag it as db-copyvio rather than db-web, as it ended up being tagged? What is the "threshold" where an article becomes a copyvio rather than a notability problem? J.delanoy gabs adds 22:01, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
We are nearing 48 hours since posting at the template talks, with only positive feed back. I would say your are free to go play and when you are ready, make the changes live. Jeepday ( talk) 11:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
In reference to the question you posed on User talk:Xenocidic: according to Wikipedia:Commons#Categorization, we're not supposed to categorise Commons images on Wikipedia. But I don't know how up to date this how-to is. Cheers. -- Salvador Barley ( talk) 12:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Glad to be of help. -- Salvador Barley ( talk) 13:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
Thanks for the comments and the edits on the History of Calintaan. We highly appreciate it.
Allow me to explain the "we" in the previous sentence. We are a group of Occidental Mindoro history enthusiasts. We are based in different parts of the Philippines. One member of our group, Mr. Rudy Candelario, did painstaking research on the history of our province (Occidental Mindoro) and his research was published by the Hiyas Press, Inc. and copyrighted by the Occidental Mindoro Historical Society (OMHS), to which he is a member.
The OMHS has become inactive. We, however, are continuing what it has started. One of the things we are doing is to disseminate the research of Mr. Candelario via the net. The website where you found a somewhat similar article on Calintaan, belongs to our group. We, however, think that his research will get more widely read if we place it in Wikipedia. He, of course, has agreed to this.
I now understand that this (uploading Mr Candelario's work in Wikipedia) violates Wikipedia's policy on notability, as it is a product of original research. I now understand that for us to be able to upload Mr Candelario's work on the history of our province, we have to cite his work (meaning, we write another article quoting his published work).
I have read Wikipedia's policy on "reliable sources." And to my understanding, Mr Candelario's work is a reliable source, having been published by a notable group in our province. His research is also being used by scholars who are doing post-graduate courses on subjects related to our province. But I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
We would wait for your comments before proceeding with our next steps.
Thank you very much.
Sikatuna sunset ( talk) 22:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply.
1] OK we will put a note in the website that the texts there are released under the GNU free documentation license. I will discuss this with our group. I assume it is basically a one-liner placed somewhere in the page, ie "These texts are released under the GNU free documentation license." Please confirm.
2] Mr Candelario's book is of course respected in our province. It is recognized by the Catholic hierarchy there, public officials and prominent residents. Do you need the email addresses of some of these people to check that what he wrote are verifiable? But it has not been published at the national or international scale. I understand perhaps it is easier to just give a name of a reputable publishing outfit, but we do not have this. Does reliable source only apply only to national and international publishing outfits, because people in our province, of course, could be biased in favor of Mr. Candelario's work? Or does this fall under what is called "context?" I mean the facts contained in the book are correct and verifiable (wiki readers can actually still request copies of the book, there are still a few copies left), and any wiki reader could ask prominent people in our province and they will confirm the facts contained in the book. But I guess wiki readers can only contact established publishing houses with dedicated answering services, which certainly people and groups in our province do not have. Would appreciate your further thoughts on this.
3] I understand the one account, one user thingy. Three members of our group have wiki accounts and we were thinking we can share the load of writing. I thought this does not violate anything. But please let me know if you think this is vulnerable to a host of problems.
Thanks again.
Sikatuna sunset ( talk) 23:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the patience in replying.
All the materials presented were taken from the published source. The publication actually has two versions: Tagalog and English. We - or from now on, should I say I? - are of course using the English version. A colleague wants to work on the Tagalog version, with Tambayan Philippines, where I have also discussed what I am doing with some Wiki editors there.
The interviews were actually footnotes in the published material. I just copied it, and did some rewriting. It seems from what I understand now, what I should do is to write something on the subject (say History of Calintaan) and use in the notes something like: [1]
But I was looking at the History of San Jose (another municipality in Occidental Mindoro), which we did not upload, and there was not even a single note there. There were also some factual mistakes. Pandurucan became a seat of the municipal government in 1910, not 1911, and there are documents to prove this - an executive order signed on April 18, 1910 by Gov Cameroon Forbes, governor general of the Philippines at that time.
In that same page about San Jose, there was mention of Sinaoga, as the site of the first presidencia. I grew up in that island. And no one in that island of less than 30 households knows this fact (if it is a fact). It might be true as the island is strategically located in the middle of Mangarin Bay, which was an important port at that time. But what was the reference used? And why was the article not marked "hey dude, where's your ref?" Or it was there and I just did not see it? Sorry it just confused me.
OK all for now. I will wait for further thoughts from you before proceeding with writing and editing articles on the history of the towns of our province. Again, maraming salamat (thanks a million in Tagalog).
Cheers
Sikatuna sunset ( talk) 02:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I will probably take the rewriting route, to avoid a complicated process.
I've tagged one unreferenced point in the History of San Jose article with {{ fact}} as you suggested, and another point with {{ dubious}} and will just wait for responses. It seems that article also falls within the Tambayan Philippines project, within Wikipedia.
People in San Jose of course will not rely on Wikipedia to determine what year they will celebrate their 100th foundation anniversary. If they follow that wiki article, they would be celebrating in 1911, not 1910. They would ask the members of the Occidental Mindoro Historical Society. So I guess, Wikipeda is some kind of a big discussion board on facts only, and articles do not really get finalized. Or the rating tells you the level of finality and accurateness of the article? Sorry, the slip of my confusion is showing.
If ever your happy feet get itchy and you suddenly end up in the Pearl of the Orient, we would be happy to be your and family's tour guides. Cheers.....
Sikatuna sunset ( talk) 23:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)