![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Looks like someone is vandalizing your page and mine from random IPs. I'm going to bed, so I'm taking the liberty of s-protecting your pages till tomorrow. AKRadecki Speaketh 06:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh ya let all keep powell ohio's page amazing and vadalism free yay! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshgibson01 ( talk • contribs) 04:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia. I read the plea on your user page for advice to help you understand the ins and outs of contributing. There is a lot of guidance, in fact a confusing amount: good places to start are the Introduction, the Five Pillars, and the guide to writing Your First Article. A lot of new articles fall foul of the requirements for Notability and for Verifiability from Independent, Reliable Sources. The other two key content policies are No Original Research and Neutral Point of View. Finally (I feel as though I'm setting you a term's reading list) the List of Bad Article Ideas and the rather long list of What Wikipedia is not are worth a look. I hope that helps! JohnCD ( talk) 17:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
If you edit scientific articles, use only peer-reviewed sources. It's really easy to do this <ref>{{cite doi|????????}}</ref> Andrewjlockley ( talk) 10:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello and welcome. This is just a quick reply to your notes on my talk page (thanks). Don't be too mislead by all the conflict you see there: there are many areas of wiki that aren't battle grounds! William M. Connolley ( talk) 08:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
You handled it well. Just note that you don't have to add the Wiki link brackets ("[[ ]]") inside of the vandalism template. Thanks for your efforts! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I do not think there was any "vandilism to Powell, Ohio you guys take this shit way to seriously, Its a small town in the middle of no where I really dont think people are going to care, they probably are going to get some laughs.
This discussion has been collapsed. |
---|
Replied at Talk:Bob Cranmer and at User talk:Cunard#Removal of Speedy Deletion tag on Bob Cranmer. Cunard ( talk) 10:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
|
This discussion has been collapsed. |
---|
Dear OIYeller21, I am a representitive of Unskooled and I am here to tell you that Unskooled IS a real band. If you would like more info please search Unskooled in Google, go to the [ http://www.unskooled.synthasite.com/ band's website or email us at unskooledlakes@hotmail.com Thanks,
|
-- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 01:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from
Template:Adw. When removing text, please specify a reason in the
edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's
talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the
page history. Thank you. --
Orlady (
talk)
05:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Welcome...Be bold! -- Buster7 ( talk) 22:41, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for changing the speedy delete on that artist page for me. I originally nominated it for speedy delete because the page was specifically about the band, and not about the artist. However, you are correct, this artist is not notable enough to warrant a page on WP. I support your deletion proposal!
Streetsabre ( talk) 18:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Heh, I can't say I'm that into basketball so I don't have a clue how notable 200-0 is, I will however try and be more cautious in the future. And thanks for letting me know about my error :) - Kingpin13 ( talk) 20:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't know whether you are watching Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kuessner effect, but new sources are available. Cheers. -- Edcolins ( talk) 22:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
This discussion has been collapsed. |
---|
Hi, you asked for comment on the WikiProject music talk page about the Josh Rosenthal article. I don't see a big problem; you already had some discussion with the other editor on the article's talk page, and resolved some issues so that there is no longer a threat of the page being deleted. Regarding the photo credits, I don't see a problem. The photographer has been identified on the JPG page, and it matches the name in the article. The name should be removed from the article, as this is against standards, but the JPG itself appears to be okay, and the licensing info appears to be correct. You say you are frustrated with the other editor, but I'm betting he is frustrated too, as you have previously nominated the article for deletion, removed his JPG, threatened him with 3RR (which has to do with 3 revisions in 24 hours, not 3 revisions over any period of time), accused him of vandalism in your edit summaries (which is inappropriate), and keep reminding him to let you know if he has any questions, implying he has never asked for feedback from you before, which is not true, so this reminder is unnecessary, and comes across as condescending. You have also been identifying the other editor by name when making accusations, in places where this is not necessary. As for his reverts of the tags, the rules are vague, because they say that tags can be removed if someone disagrees that there are outstanding issues, so your insistance that they cannot be removed is not really true. Getting into a revert war over tags is rather frivolous. But there should be discussion about outstanding issues on the talk page; you should be stating what you think needs to be done, and the other editor should be stating his reasons for removing the tags. Since work on this article is ongoing, you can have this discussion without using tags at all. You may not see it this way, but you are coming on too strong for someone who is just trying to help; your actions probably appear to be hostile. I recommend you apologize to the editor, and try to continue discussion on the article's talk page about what issues are still outstanding. The other editor already asked you what more needs to be done, so he appears to be willing to work with you. -- A Knight Who Says Ni ( talk) 00:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
|
No offense intended, just wanted to get your attention... ;-) It may look alarming if you're unfamiliar, but William and I do these sorts of things occasionally so please let my adornment of his user page stand for a while. Short Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 01:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
This discussion has been collapsed. | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Good nom. Now go and rescue an article. :-) Bearian ( talk) 20:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey there! I wanted to thank you for the work you have done on this article. I am not that wiki-savvy but if you have any questions for me then feel free to shoot me an email and I'll try my best. Thanks again, JayDeeTulsa ( talk) 13:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
JD —Preceding unsigned comment added by JayDeeTulsa ( talk • contribs) 13:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
You put the page Scatter Brothers Productions up for deletion, and I understand your concerns. The company is still up and coming, but is growing fast. It may not have A LOT of notoriety through press, but are very well known in the Tampa Bay/Central Florida film industry. Is there any way to save the page from deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougietuff ( talk • contribs) 16:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I moved your posting about chefs from the F&D Article guidelines talk page to the main F&D talk page. The place you placed the discussion will not receive any responses. -- Jeremy ( blah blah) 19:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello there, I'm not as active on Wikipedia as I used to be, but I completely agree that the CMC's should be recognized on Wikipedia. References could come from the ACF website, newspaper articles, or anything not directly connected to the chef. For instance, Chef Hartmut's webpage for his restaurant would not be appropriate to source from as per wikipedia guidelines. Let me know if I can be of some assistance.-- Chef Tanner ( talk) 17:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Here's a nice one for you, and even acts to confirm his college: Lubbock Online. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Re your message here: Hey, that was a joke. You're not a talk page stalker; you're a talk page watcher. Please keep my page watchlisted, so that I can have someone to rely on if I'm not on Wikipedia when a new user needs help. I have your talk page watchlisted, and I'll do the same for you (if you consent, of course). In this case, I didn't log on to Wikipedia until five hours after their request for help. Your help saved a new user from waiting five hours for a response. Cunard ( talk) 22:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
the link about him being on Urban Tulsa Weekly's "Hot 100" list of 2009, although it is short does definitely provide a lot of notability as that is a big public honor in Tulsa and the surrounding area. I think that should qualify. Also there is a news article on fox23 that I can dig up that writes about him but not specifically his comedy. Will that help? Bruce Jennings ( talk) 21:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Also RooftopComedy.com is an neutral site that verifies ALL comedians. Bruce Jennings ( talk) 21:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
You locked the page. I'm wondering why.There is no definite rule that says marriage dates & DOBs cant be included. 4 some personal reason plastikspork & redpen dont want it in. Y I dont know. In wiki terms there isnt any reason that it shouldnt be included. It is just facts. The dates arent private bc EH publicised it & publicises it every year. Also ABC Disney NFL all sent out press releases. Throughout wikipedia are marriage dates & DOBs dates, so y shouldnt they be deleted from EH's page? y rnt plastik/redpen going on every wiki bio & removing marriage dates & birthdates? plastik claims it put them ask risk for identity theft which I think is ridiculous. It is their DOB not their birthweight, length @ birth; favourite colur,etc. Thanks. 70.108.102.252 ( talk) 15:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
OlYeller: On the disc page redpen/plastikspork oppose, while tom/speil/ & myself support. I conceded & let them rename the 1st section 'early life' instead of 'bio'. Where is their concession. On WP:BLP there is no clear rule about marriage dates & DOBs. plastik/redpen cite 'extraneous unncess info' as the reason. It is simply marriage date & DOBs, not time of marriage,location,birthweight, nor birthlength. Thanks. 70.108.102.252 ( talk) 17:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Why didn't you check WP:TFD? It's where Template deletions show up. 76.66.193.69 ( talk) 04:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed that the article was deleted because of a blatant copyvio. Can you help me get the code from before it was deleted so that I can remove the copyvios and repost the article? For the record, I wasn't the author and didn't put into the copyvio lines. OlYeller Talktome 02:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand why you have reverted back to the old page for the third time? The page is a work in progress stating three different sources to prove the song is being released as a single. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.108.42.66 ( talk) 20:56, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
FYI, I have submitted TOMS Shoes for deletion via AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TOMS SHOES (2nd nomination) — Danorton ( talk) 07:43, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm confused about why The Trance from the New Twilight Zone is up for deletion. I tried to make the page as close to the 200 other Twilight Zone pages. I only wanted to flesh out something that interested me. If The Trance is to be deleted, shouldn't the entire Twilight Zone episode list be deleted as well? From the original episodes all the way through the last series from 2003? What is that's wrong? Tmkeffer71 ( talk) 02:39, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I only came across the entire set of Twilight Zone episodes because my cable system just got the Chiller network and I remembered them from when I was younger, but the list had hardly any of the Twilight Zone first revival series episodes, like just a listing and nothing fleshing out the episodes. Plus, most of the ones I worked on, had a note on it asking for them to be fleshed out, saying it was only a stub or some didn't have a page and when I clicked on it, it asked if I wanted to create a page for it. I really did nothing I wasn't invited to do. Anyway, I guess it doesn't matter. I just found something interesting that I could do something to help look better. Tmkeffer71 ( talk) 02:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Anyway, thanks for talking with me about it. Take care. Tmkeffer71 ( talk) 03:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you and thanks again for discussing it. Tmkeffer71 ( talk) 21:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
With you and CactusWriter leading the way, I went through the TOMS Shoes and did some major copyedit, removed extraneous fluff, advert, and POV. I think it is far better than when it started. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Article Rescue Barnstar | |
For your good work on bringing life to an article which might otherwise have been deleted, I am honored to award you this Barnstar for your efforts at TOMS Shoes. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC) |
Thanks for uploading Image:TNK Emblem.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 00:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually what had happened was that he had added the box to Talk:TOMS SHOES, which is the title the article was originally created under and subsequently deleted a long time ago. I created the redirect for TOMS SHOES but forgot to create a redirect for the talk page. Not a problem fixing that! scootey talk 03:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your support. I thought the nominator had a pretty weak 1 sentence proposal. 02:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
TomCat4680 (
talk) has given you a
kitten! Kittens promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{ subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
![]() | Are you from the Ohio area? A Wikipedian meetup is taking place on July 18, 2009 in Columbus. If you are interested in coming or would like more information, see the first Ohio meetup page. |
Thanks! -- Rkitko ( talk) 22:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
~ mazca t| c 21:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't think you meant WP:NOTNOW in AfD... maybe you meant WP:CRYSTAL? Gigs ( talk)
I was personally attacked yesterday at Signs (Bloc Party song) by a user who I won't name. It sort of hurt my feelings so I'm going to take a short break. I'm not crying about it or anything but I realized that if Wikipedia editing effects my life outside of Wikipedia, it's probably time for a break. Just an FYI for anyone who may be looking for me. OlYeller Talktome 14:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
How can a band be notable without the members themselves being notable? A band is it's members.-- DunkinDonutBoy ( talk) 05:45, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering why the heck you would put this article up for deletion? Why would you do such a thing? Seriously? It has credible sources. Everything's legit. Care to explain? ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC).
Shadowjams ( talk) 07:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
[3] - you're replying to a year-old thread. Maybe you knew, but I reckon a new section might be appropriate. Fritzpoll ( talk) 15:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Dank ( push to talk) 15:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I meant that your findings that the six you checked were notable regardless of the star indicated that the star was generally being given to notable people and not just willy-nilly. Like in the British honors system, some of the recipients may not be well known outside of their field. Drawn Some ( talk) 11:25, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Can we bring this article back to life now? There is now another news source. Before you just needed one more news source and here it is: http://www.tulsapeople-digital.com/tulsapeople/200906/?u1=texterity 208.191.26.53 ( talk) 18:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Forgot to log in and wasn't sure if you knew how to get back with me on this. Thanks. Bruce Jennings ( talk) 18:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts. The second reference that you removed from mtishows (the one that was not a duplicate) was the one where I learned about his family life. That did not come from the playbill reference (that you kept); all the rest of the material did. Should you restore the second ref? -- DAW0001 ( talk) 00:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Otterathome is a quirky sort. I boldly removed the sockpuppet list from his userpage lest he get in trouble. Think we should take it to AN anyway? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Content |
I noticed that you commented in a past AfD discussion of the article Nicholas Beale. After being deleted then, it has been reposted and is now back at AfD again, so you might be interested in commenting again (but you are under no obligation to). Thank you, rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 22:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
An AFD discussion that you have previously participated in has been reignited. See here for more the new discussion. Dale 10:58, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The information in the MMRF article is completely outdated and in many cases has errors and wrong information. How else can we go about fixing this? - Michelle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.79.121.187 ( talk) 17:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Made a few quick error fixes, will come back to this later... 160.79.121.187 ( talk) 17:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Michelle
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.212.196 ( talk) 18:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Um...on Machine to Machine, I finished rewriting it myself. It doesn't copyright violate now, though I think I have to go fix the history first. Silver seren C 23:45, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm not the same person I was a year ago, not even close. I am not going to start yelling or get out of hand. I am, and will continue to, calmly press my point with logic and facts.
Thank you for worrying about me, but you also don't need to worry about me. I'm fine. I'm the one that's replied to so many comments because, at this point, it's my article, and I don't want to get it deleted. Silver seren C 20:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi there,
Sorry I removed the tag and warning, I don't know what the process is, however I've re-written the copy as suggested for the article and waiting for someone to get back to me if it's ok as I do not wish to see this page gets deleted. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Echiu888 ( talk • contribs) 22:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Michael Lamb (professor), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 05:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
When I see an article that I am unsure about, I will sometimes ask the relevant WikiProject for help. For example, I recently saw an article about a U.S. army officer who didn't appear to be notable, but rather than tag the article for deletion myself, I asked for advice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history, and someone there with more familiarity with military biographies initiated the AfD. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 05:53, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry but you are misinterpreting Wikipedia guidelines. The guideline of notability is only for creating an article ABOUT the artist [i.e. Greenie must be notable to have his OWN article on Wikipedia]. If you review Wikipedia's own guidelines at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiProject_Albums and pay SPECIAL attention to the section on DISCOGRAPHY [and albums]...you'll see there ARE NO EXPLICIT CRITERIA for discographies.
You have a WikiPedia page on the career of KRS-ONE, correct? As part of KRS-ONE's career he is presently working/involved in a collaboration with an artist named Greenie. He is releasing a 14 track album. I have posted links to production videos, audio, and more featuring CLEARLY-- KRS-ONE himself discussing the project [and performing on it].
KRS-ONE is a legend and major figure in hip-hop's history with a reputation for only putting his name on projects in which he strongly believes.
Greenie need not yet be notable--because it's not ABOUT Greenie-- It's about the CAREER of KRS-ONE.. the work/music HE* does --and presently, in 2010-- KRS-ONE is working on a project with Greenie-- KRS does 1-3 albums per year, correct? As you've repeatedly been shown, this year he's doing a collaboration with Greenie and that is PART OF KRS-ONE's biography now...regardless of Greenie's own current fame level.. If you need, the article can read "KRS-ONE is choosing to create an album project with an unknown named Greenie"-- but even the PROJECT is notable [not that it needs to be]--because it's the first time in history -- KRS and MC SHAN will be together on a CD [on the track named "WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE"..and because it features MANY old school artists--i.e. Busy Bee Starski...
Either way, there is NO wikipedia guideline that would exclude a KRS project from KRS' biography because it's not notable-- KRS is a MAJOR recording artist and legend..any time he sets foot in the studio to do THE WORK THAT HE DOES-- his production is PART of HIS*** biography/discography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.21 ( talk) 05:35, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
What this comes down to is that you have provided two sources. One that is an unreliable fansite of some sort and a Youtube video (which is not a reliable source). Perhaps you should wait until the record is closer to release and more information is written about it by reliable sources. I understand that you may be personally involved with this subject which may be the reason you're so adamant to include the information. I suggest stepping back for a few days, looking for some information about the artist and the album from a reliable source, and come back when you do. Until then, the information cannot be included. I'm sorry this has been so tough. I know what it's like to be new and not understand all the policies and guidelines. Again, this is the last time I'm responding to you as I've explained every point here to you before. OlYeller Talktome 05:55, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
You recently marked " Susegad" for speedy deletion as nonsense - as the Times of London used and defined the term in an article, I have removed the tag. I have, however, requested that it be transwikied to wiktionary:susegad. -- Philosopher Let us reason together. 02:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Please respond on my talk page as I will respond back here.
I noticed you have voted twice. You do understand that nominating an article for deletion is your vote deletion? Mr. C.C. Hey yo! I didn't do it! 11:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I originally {{ db-attack}} for Cathophilia, then reverted as I was not sure if that template applied to institutions as well as people. When I notified the editor with the automatic message, I saw the message had to do with personal attacks. So it is for general attacks also? Thanks, Xtzou ( Talk) 15:30, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for dealing with Jon Nelson. The editor has removed my tags several times, as well as those of JohnCD. Xtzou ( Talk) 16:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
He's at it again! He has recreated the Jon Nelson page from the redirect. Xtzou ( Talk) 17:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
What do you think of Snoners? I labelled it a {{ db-hoax}} because it is a combination of parts of snoring and penile erection articles. Must be a convincing read. Xtzou ( Talk) 16:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
What do you think of Anabela Basalo? It turns out, if you translate one of the refs with Google, that the "she" is actually a "he" porno queen. Xtzou ( Talk) 18:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Field Studies EP, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is an article for the band who released the recording. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. The leftorium 20:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, OlYeller21. The File:Moonsalbumcover.png should have been tagged for WP:F9 (which is for images) rather than the WP:G12 (which is for text). In the long run it didn't matter because it was a copyright violation of this flickr image. The Creative Commons non-commercial license on it isn't compatible with Wikipedia. We can sometimes use album cover and book cover artwork in low resolution, if we can claim fair use. However, in this case, the claim that uploader had created the image was clearly false and I think it is better to simply delete the image and start from scratch. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 19:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Wait, what? -- Tgwti ( talk) 17:40, 10 April 2010 (UTC)Tgwti
Hi - I deleted two of your subpages that you had tagged with csd-u1, without reading the actual message in the tag. I've brought it up on WP:ANI, and another admin should be along shortly to fix the problem. Sorry about this. Alexius Horatius 20:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
You placed a notice about speedy deleting this article (well disambig), but I don't see anything on the page itself or the history. What am I missing? Wizard191 ( talk) 19:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
I believe the IP and the article creator of Madison Eagles to be the same person. I will be restoring the tag for this reason. I will remove it if I am proven to be wrong by a check user. !! Justa Punk !! 03:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
As I see it , his is an entirely different article from Demographics of India. Whether it might be overgeneralized and under-documented is another matter; whether this is the best title seem more than a little dubious. I don;t know the history of the article or the people involved, but whatever the problem is, I don;t really think its the best way to try to solve it at Speedy. DGG ( talk ) 00:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
I've done some work there and ask that you revisit Chris M. Allport. As the man does not always use his middle initial, it seems like many (not all) of THESE are our guy. More important though, and through further research, it seems the fellow received multiple awards and nomination back in the 90s that allow notability per WP:ANYBIO. I've begun sourcing these in Chris M. Allport#Awards & nominations. Now that it belongs to Wikipedia, and since even 1990s notability is not temporary, why not warn the author strongly about COI and we allow it to be improved through regular editing? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 04:41, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your efforts to prevent the possible deletion of the article I wrote about Donna J. Stone, and particularly for removing the request for speedy deletion. I did, in fact, write the article myself, and obtained written permission from Dr. Christopher Stone, Ms. Stone's son and the copyright holder of the photo I used in the article, to use the image in the Wikipedia article. (I know you didn't mention any copyright concerns about the image, so you probably saw that I got permission for the image.)
I know about the Wielder of Words website, of course, since I linked to it in the article and included it in the references. Dr. Stone also holds the copyright to the site. What I'd like to clarify is that I wrote the Wikipedia article before Dr. Stone made his website. This is verifiable by the recorded creation dates of both web pages. The history section of my Wikipedia artice, which can be viewed here, shows that I created it and wrote the bulk of it on December 29, 2009. The Who Is website shows that the Wielder of Words site was created on April 5, 2010, which can be seen here. (You'll have to enter the domain name to see the date; I can't link to it directly.)
Although I don't think it was necessary given the free nature of Wiki information, Dr. Stone did get my permission to incorporate the text from my Wikipedia article into his website about his mother. (I'm certainly not implying that he violated any copyright, either.) I believe the dates of creation should allay any concerns about copyright infringement.
As for the numerous references, I was trying to list everything even alluded to in either the article or its links. Admittedly, my compulsive nature probably led to overkill, with some references having only a tenuous connection to the text of the article. I'm a literary historian (with a special interest in modern poetry), and am prone to being overly inclusive. I'm happy to clean up the references section.
Since it seems unlikely that most readers of both web pages would check the dates the pages were created, your concern that the page I wrote might be deleted due to copyright concerns is a very good point. I can think of a couple of ways to prevent this. The easiest thing would be for me to ask Dr. Stone for permission to use text from his website in my Wikipedia article. Another option would be for me to rewrite the article from scratch, although I must admit that the time and effort involved make this a less desirable option for me. But I don't want the article to be deleted. What would you recommend?
Thanks you for reading this long entry.
Mary Ann
-- Mah Jong ( talk) 08:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi Mary. Thanks for the detailed message. It made it very easy to understand what's going on. I thought that there was a chance that wielderofwords.com borrowed the text from Wikipedia but I didn't think to check the whois on the website. This is a little over my head as far as Wikipedia's copyright policies go so I'm going to call in an expert to help out. I'll message her now and invite her to discuss the situation here or on the article's page. I'll make sure that you're notified of the location of the discussion so that you can participate. OlYeller Talktome 14:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
In response to your question at WP:AIV, edit summary warnings do not count towards the required notices. Please see WP:WARN for more details. caknuck ° needs to be running more often 02:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC) Will do. Thanks for the info. OlYeller Talktome 03:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey, guess I've mistakenly edited your signed comment, sorry pal =D Betelguese000 ( talk) 22:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I posted a reply on my talk about your signature. CTJF83 chat 18:32, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Please review the AFD and the article at The Tenderloins. The darn thing still needs work, but now that I have found the independent reliable sources to meet the nominator's concerns, perhaps your "weak" might now become a little stronger? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 09:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Your point was well taken. I was about to send a curt note to the editor who removed that person from the list, but then I saw that it was a blocked editor and that the editor who did the removing was an administrator. The administrator should have stated his reason for taking the editor off the list. ScottyBerg ( talk) 15:09, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm just browsing anonymously , i didn't edit from this ip . I guess someone else was on it from my ISP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.180.40.212 ( talk) 03:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jagdverbande Mitte, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Olaf Davis ( talk) 21:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Lil Crazed requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
OlYeller
Talktome
03:22, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
Civility Award | |
To OlYeller21 in recognition of notable patience in explaining to an article creator why the speedy deletion was going to have to be completed. Your calm demeanor and clear reasoning are beyond reproach, and inspire me to do as well in the future! With best wishes always, Jusdafax 23:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC) |
Wow, thanks! I think this is my second barnstar ever! OlYeller Talktome 23:58, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi OlYeller21, if you want to leave similar messages in the future you'd be much better off leaving them on the talk page of the deleting admin, as you created the Talk:Pickle Drink page after the Pickle Drink page had been deleted you've essentially just created a G8. Just thought I'd let you know. Cheers, Jeffrey Mall ( talk • contribs) - 00:49, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
It appears an autobot has rejected the article for possible copyright infringement. I hope you are a human being. This is not an infringement. The Website the autobot tagged is an ecommerce site that posts news stories to generate traffic from searches to generate marketing revenue. They even cite Wikipedia as their source. Please see for yourself at http://www.the-home-business-place.com/ponzi-schemes.html. There you will find many posts that use the word ponzi, fraud, and scheme with dates and names of many people. They have no claim to the intellectual content in any of their posts.
It would be impossible to write a biography on this important figure, Micheal Owen Traynor, and exclude the words ponzi, fraud, church, scheme and the dates of his activities. Please insert human intelligence to distinguish what the autobot cannot.
More importantly, the Traynor article I posted cited the sources and included links to other unimpeachable sources, ie. the official Florida Department of Law Enforcement Website and the Florida Department of Corrections Official Website. The article I posted was based on an original news story by Tod Ruger as cited, an original piece to which I was a source, not cited.
Furthermore, it is important that Wiki remain a provider of all information. Please do not be hindered by false claims to intellectual property by marketers. Not that marketing is bad, they just do not own this. Also note the Traynor news story has been hijacked by plaintiff attorneys not related to the case and not located in proximity to any victims ie johnschapman.com. Please note that John Chapman Law is in Cleveland, OH. Has not investigated nor had any involvement with Traynor or his victims. I am in a position to know ALL aspects of this case and investigation.
Most importantly, it is very important that Wiki continues to be a conduit of candid information. The revelation of the facts surrounding Micheal Owen Traynor are important in many ways. One, it is a report of a historical figure that used his position to influence and ultimately harm those that trusted him. Two, his deception was discovered. Three, his victims were never compensated. Four, he is "paying" a price for his deception in his custody of the authorities. Important information worthy of Wiki.
Regards,
Newomatt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newomatt ( talk • contribs) 03:33, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Why did you remove the warning on User talk:Ilovealexcrimmins3 about Alex crimmins? The warning was still applicable. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
You said it was locked, but indeed it wasn't even deleted! Which is it? — Timneu22 · talk 18:08, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, DJ Surge-N, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DJ Surge-N. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Accounting4Taste: talk 19:39, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Tamadis Young requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
OlYeller
Talktome
04:24, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Just a heads up. Usernames are generally only blockable as promotional when the directly or susbstantially match that of a business. People are allowed to have their own, real, personal names as their username or a part of it. Even if they write their own autobiography, that doesn't instantly make their username a violation of policy. The autobiography writing is an issue that needs to be discussed with the user in light of WP:COI, but there is no username violation. Take care when nominating at WP:UAA that the username itself is a blatant and instantly blockable violation of the username policy. -- Jayron 32 05:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
hi i wrote an article called "The Big Green Bus" and I believe that it is meritable enough to be kept on Wikipedia. When will I know if you are satisfied with the notability and its sources? thanks
Pose716 ( talk) 05:40, 26 May 2010 (UTC)pose716
I think the above user is a sockpuppet of User:Sngbengal. I would put up a Sockpuppet investigations, but I need to ascertain if there are others. Can you help?-- Nilotpal 42 16:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I initiated the SPI Not sure that I did it correctly (used Twinkle). OlYeller Talktome 16:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I've declined the speedy because I can't find the text on the page. Could you recheck it? The page definitely isn't in a good state, and it really would be better if it were deleted, so if you could show me bits that have been copied that I overlooked, I'll be quite happy to delete it. Nyttend ( talk) 17:20, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I was considering removing the hangon from The Smolen when you removed it first. My reason would have been that it was added by an IP editor, not by the page creator, and the CSD tag and policy only make reference to hangons being added by the creator. I decided that was too wikilawyerish and perhaps an AGF violation, so didn't, only to see that you'd removed it due to no justification in 2 hours. Is there some policy or consensus that says that's okay? In one sense, I suppose that you can argue that since the hangon tag says that it will be ignored if not justified that removing it after a decent interval such as you did is acceptable since it will be ignored anyway and, by removing it, you may jog the creator into re–adding it with a justification. This isn't a criticism, I like the idea, but hoping you had some specific authority justifying it. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 17:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi again. I hope you don't mind, but I undid your revisions to the Donna J. Stone article. I'm in the process of cleaning up some of my articles, and have been working a lot on this one. I've used the CompactTOC8 in this and other articles, customized a bit for size, to save space and eliminate blank areas. It's actually a lot of work, but I think it makes some of the articles look cleaner. Since it is an option made available to us, I don't see a problem using it. As for the spacing issue, I added the extra spaces to accommodate inline citations, which sometimes obscure divisions between paragraphs (and did in this case).
On another note, I noticed the Columbus, Ohio meet-up tag on your page. Are you from that area? I'm not, but one of my colleagues is. Coincidentally, Ms. Stone was also from there. Just curious.
Thanks again for your interest in the article. I hope you understand my reasons for reverting to the previous style.
Mary Ann -- Mah Jong ( talk) 19:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Just a friendly reminder to check the page history before tagging for a no content speedy. An editor had come along and blanked the page, so I reverted back to the pre-blanked version. Cheers! -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I added points #9 and #10 to Talk:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day/Requirements for gallery of depictions of Mohammed. Do you support the 12-point list as revised? Greg L ( talk) 00:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I meant the hangon for any Npp-ers who might come along and tag it. I think he's notable, but I just don't have enough experience with BLP's to properly write the article. See Google News archives, Google scholar, and Gooogle Books. There's info, probably even enough for notability, I just don't know how to get it into the article. You like to rescue articles - will you help me rescue this one? PrincessofLlyr royal court 20:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
You can find Kenny Winfree's music by going to Smithsonian Folkways Recordings and search for his stuff. But, you must type in Kenny Winfree. Also, how do you add external links to his article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unioncard1 ( talk • contribs) 22:16, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Dear OlYeller21,
Thanks for your explanantion that my latest page violated guideline A7. I'm new at this so I'm requesting your help, assistance and/or guidance as to my next steps.
I'm confused/uncertain as to why an A7 tag was placed on my page. There are numerous other summer college baseball leagues with their own page. In reviewing them I don't see anything particularly special about any of them that would necessarily warrant a page, other than to provide reference and information. In fact, one page, the "Hawaii Collegiate Baseball League" contains far less information that I was attempting to provide.
So, please, can you guide me and/or advise me on what it is that my proposed page is missing? I would be very, grateful (from one Buckeye to another).
Thanks.
Roy Snyder Deputy Commissioner Maryland Collegiate Baseball League —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starflight7 ( talk • contribs) 00:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
OlYeller, have you seen this RfC on Talk:Draw Mohammed? Greg L ( talk) 02:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi can you help me improve "Amén"? I put a lot of new thinks the last days!! Really need your help please! -- 89.217.203.15 ( talk) 17:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Jeez, that’s what I’m talking about. Thanks for reverting that ( ∆). That editor clearly either disagreed with the gallery criteria, or didn’t read it. That sort of drawing is just the sort of “pushing things“ that can cause a pendulum to swing too far the other way. Speaking of “galleries,” as I recall, some Black Panthers back in the 60s arrived at the California state assembly house, during live debate by state legislators, and sat in the gallery while openly armed with guns to make a point that it was their right to do so. The lawmakers in turn demonstrated their right to pass new laws faced with needless provocation that fell far short of any common sense. I think the current 12-point metric—if properly adhered to—should keep Wikipedia properly encyclopedic without outrageous POV-pushing and avoid a huge and utterly needless scandal. Greg L ( talk) 19:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
HI There,
I just wanted to address the edits made to the Big Green Bus page yesterday. I realize it's not a huge page, and I'm hoping that it grows some, but I think the issues with the maintenance templates were fairly well addressed with the additions I put on yesterday.
Orphan: I put links to the page on the Dartmouth Outing Club page as well as the Dartmouth College page. I suppose I could look for a few more places, but that seemed sufficient to make it not an orphan at least.
Citations: I put inline citations in almost every sentence.
Notability: I think the national media attention that this program has received, detailed extensively in the article ought to be sufficient to establish notability.
Please let me know what more you think ought to be done to correct these problems and what the proper protocol is for removing those maintenance tags.
Bigroryg ( talk) 12:53, 6 June 2010 (UTC)Bigroryg
"The article is still an orphan because it has less than three article linking to it. You didn't actually add citations to the article, you added external links. When I tagged the article, notability was very questionable. If the external links were in reference format, it would probably be easy to tell if the subject is notable but as external links, every link has to be checked and read to determine notability. I didn't feel like reading them over last night and was/am coming back today to change the links to citations and attempt to address the maintenance templates as it seems like you've almost addressed them completely. OlYeller Talktome 14:46, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey, just wanted to thank you for your help formatting those in-line citations and with the categories and whatnot. I had just figured out what you meant by external links are not citations and I was a little intimidated about doing that. Anyway, I just thought I would reach out and say thanks!
Bigroryg ( talk) 21:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)Bigroryg
Hi There,
Just checking back in on this article - It has now the coi and tone boxes and I'd love to work to get those off. Any specific suggestions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigroryg ( talk • contribs) 23:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
OlYeller21 - Hey, thanks for looking out for us newbies. I have had my article nominated for deletion, but there's really no info on WHY. I'm glad to re-edit, but I'm not sure just what that will take. I know how to make apostrophes but they aren't forming a bold topic for my article. ??
I have references that come from now-defunct magazines, etc. so I don't know how to document sources when there is not a current morgue of past article. (I have the tattered originals.) What else do I need to do to legitimize? Thanks. Ks15ko ( talk) 03:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)ks15ko
Hi again. Supporting "best seller" notation, how about the badge used by the publisher on the cover of the paperback edition "The National Bestseller." < http://www.amazon.com/Michael-Marons-Instant-Makeover-Magic/dp/044638187X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276870327&sr=1-1>
I trust the publishing house would not have been allowed to make such a claim.?
Beyond that there are several references I found by following the link you gave to Google news archive that list him as a beauty expert, noted beauty expert, etc., especially in a panel of beauty judges one for Most Beautiful Woman on TV with and another for Miss Teen America. [1] (TV Guide picks 10 most beautiful women. The voters were Way Bandy, Nina Blanchard, Eileen Ford, Aida Gray, George Hurrell, Elsa Klensch, Shirley Lord, and Michael Maron. They ought to know beauty when they see it. Byline: Liz Smith) I think politically they were listed alphabetically, which put Mr. Maron last.
[2] (‘TV’s Most Beautiful is Collins’ . . . according to a panel of 10 experts. . . panel of makeup artists, modeling authorities, fashion photographers and beauty editors selected by TV Guide. “ You can tell she absolutely loves to be beautiful . . . and consequently is, “ said panelist Michael Maron, celebrity makeup artist and photographer.) Ocala Star-Banner, Dec. 10, 1984)
[3] TV guide – 10AM channel 13 – Wil Shriner Show – guests Steve Allen, Jayne Meadows, Teri Austin, Tony Hendra, Michael Maron St. Petersburg Times - Google News Archive - Jan 21, 1988 (Not a bad lineup to be invited on the same show with Steve Allen and Jayne Meadows.) So, if the "best seller" is still questionable, certainly he garnered some notability from these books as well as his corrective and charitable work. What do you think? ( Ks15ko ( talk) 14:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)ks15ko Ks15ko ( talk) 14:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC))
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. MBisanz talk 02:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
True, I forgot that offline sources counted as citations, but seeing as though said source is available on the internet at ERO website I thought it was better if someone could dig it up. I'll link this to the page now. <- Gadfium has already done it. Techhead7890 ( talk) 02:14, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Re this, I tagged it as an A7. That is not spam, it's notability. Your reason for removal was therefore invalid as it was not tagged for the reason you removed it. Have anything to show why this person is notable after it has been deleted so many times?-- Terrillja talk 17:22, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Lol, I think we're done here. Try using Twinkle sometime. OlYeller Talktome 14:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I've been following article guidelines, got lots of references both to notability and best selling author. I've got them set up in References and Notes and hyperlinked. Other than that, what else do I need to do. Was I wrong in practicing this page in my personal sandbox? Can I use that and just have whatever editor is available check it over? Should I try to get the original speedy deleting editor to pass on it? Is that necessary? Could you look it over and see if there's anything critically wrong with it, still? Thanks, Ks15ko ( talk) 04:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey, why don't you better help me improving my own sentence? I'd be glad to listen what's wrong now. If you want to dispute whether or not it should be in that section - tell me, if not, then don't revert it to "criticism" section but change only sentences. Userpd ( talk) 22:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, OlYeller21. I have read you message at Talk:The Firehouse Restaurant, where you said "To the patrolling admin, if you are going to delete this article, please userfy it first for the author. I have a hunch that some news articles can be found and we can easily remove the copyvio if that's the case. I also think that, from their intense editing, the author would do most of the work with the right direction." I have decided to comply with your request and userfy the article, although my own instinct was to delete it as spam. We will see whether you are right in thinking that the author will make a good job of it: I hope you are right. JamesBWatson ( talk) 08:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi there,
I got your name from the Wikimedia:Meetup/Ohio 1 page. I will be in Columbus Aug 8-11 and was wondering if any Wikimedians would be interested in meeting up then. If so, I started Wikipedia:Meetup/Ohio 2 for quick planning :) best, -- phoebe / ( talk to me) 17:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
About a month ago, I was patrolling new pages and ran into a page for a restaurant that was very likely notable but had to tag the article for deletion because it was a copyvio and blatant advertisement. I then asked an admin to userfy the article so that I could help guide the user in cleaning up the article. After a few attempts, the user disappeared so I ended up writing the article myself and posting it to mainspace. Afterwards, the user came back and tried to add copyright material that read like an advertisement. I removed it and through a short conversations, found that the user was from the company. After explaining the issues and asking them to work through me to circumvent a conflict of interest, they got upset. They said that my customer service skills were poor and that they wanted to speak to management! I thought it was funny enough that I wanted to save it here so that I can get a laugh if I need it. OlYeller Talktome 20:33, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
I didn't realise at first there was also GoCar Tours hence the previous revert. I agree it has to be disambiguated, however I think maybe "GoCar Club" may be better than "GoCar of Ireland"? Since it is a club... would you be ok with that?-- NorthernCounties ( talk) 17:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I assume your edits have been in good faith, however, it is not acceptable on Wikipedia, that if a song needs to be disambiguated, that you call it, for example, "Drummer Boy" (single). The correct title should be, as it was, "Drummer Boy" (song).
Please take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs for information regardinging the style and formatting of naming articles. Thank you -- Patyo1994 ( talk) 15:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate your impatience, however, as I have stated, I am now awaiting more people to give their inputs on the issue. __ meco ( talk) 21:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I was going to userfy it for you but it turns out that what was deleted was a single sentence and I believe you've already included everything that was in it in your current draft. You've written an acceptable stub, the deleted sentence didn't even contain the claim of notability which you include. Guy ( Help!) 19:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
There's really basically nothing there that you don't already have. The only new info is that he used to write about "Notre Dame and Northwestern football and Northwestern and DePaul basketball" at the paper he worked for, and that he used to live in Berkley. JesseW, the juggling janitor 04:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
If you'll reread what I wrote, my entire point is that I think there may be a misunderstanding. Your comment struck me as quite harsh, and based upon WP:AGF, I'm assuming you didn't meant it the way I summarized it. The point of talk pages is to talk, and reach agreement, so I explained how I read your comment. I was hoping your response would be something along the line of "no that isn't what I meant, so I'm rewriting to explain what I really mean". However, you've reiterated that you don't care who's at fault, so I assume you really mean it. I'm not sure what action we should take. Is it your position that a block, supported by a [[Wikipedia:Ani#Block_of_User:William_M._Connolley_by_User:The_Wordsmith|solid consensus[[, should be revoked because Ol'Yeller doesn't care who's at fault? I'm genuinely puzzled what you think should happen, and why it should happen. (I don't want to drag out an off-topic discussion at WMC's talk page, so I'm responding here. If you'd rather not pursue this, that's fine as well, but I'm truly interested in what uninvolved editors think about this situation, and how they reach such conclusions)-- SPhilbrick T 14:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
<-Jehochman declared that the sanction was "arguably improper". As an experiment, I decided to start from the assumption that it was imporper, and decided to see if I could make such a case. My efforts started positively, and I was close to posting my defense of WMC on his talk page. If you are willing to read it, you will see why I did not.
In partial defense of WMC
|
---|
In partial defense of WMC The probation page contains both a scope and a remit:
Neither phrase was carefully defined. "Broadly construed" obviously allows a fair amount of leeway. Presumably, this was deliberate, as the borderline in article space could be fuzzy. Everyone assumes that articles about climate are included, along with bios of people significantly involved in the field. I trust everyone accpets that the associated talk pages are covered. We got some measure of the limit when it went unchallenged that dog was outside the boundary. But what about user talk pages? I suggest it isn't immediately obvious that a user talk page is a page about climate change, and reasonable people might disagree. Accordingly, it would have been helpful had it been clarified. (I haven't read everything, maybe it was clarified, and I missed it.) I did a quick perusal of the log, and in quick review, noticed that the sanctions covered article and article talk pages, but not explicitly user talk pages. WMC has asserted that the CC-sanction does not extend to user talk pages. Based upon experience, that position seems valid. The remit is unreasonably broad. Understandably, when one is crafting a one-time policy, rather than a WP wide policy, one might not want to spend days agonizing over specific wording. I trust that if the sysop instructed WMC to send a check for $100 to everyone who asked, that would be considered out of bounds, so clearly we don't literally mean "any other measures". So what are the bounds of what can be imposed? One way to think about it is to consider the types of things that are generally allowed, or sometimes disallowed. Editors are generally able to edit any article at any time, but often, restrictions are placed. So limitations on edits to article space are permitted. Similarly, edits to article talk pages are generally permitted, but occasionally restricted. It is not uncommon to restrict the article, while allowing edits to the associated talk page, so restricting edits to talk pages is generally a "bigger deal". However, we give wide latitude to users to manage their user space as they see fit. We have policies covering the editing of comments of others WP:TPOC. A relevant admonition is "Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning". WMC's act to insert a bracketed comment into someone else's comment did not violate this. We very rarely restrict the right to edit your own talk page. It seems reasonable to conclude that the phrase "any other measure" includes the usual measures, and does not include unreasonable limits on edits to one's own talk page. In summary, WMC has a good case that the probation was never intended for user talk pages, and the remit is unreasonably broad, so that declaring that a sysop can take "any other measure" is not intended to be literally true. He is right to assert that the specific sanction is malformed, and not enforceable. Except: While double-checking sanction log, I noticed two exceptions. The first is quite minor (at least for this discussion). A sanction applied to Jettaman was quite broad and included a prohibition from a user page, but notably, this was someone else's user page. However, there is one other exception, and one sanction specifically did address editing one's own talk page. So we do have precedent for a limitation on editing one's own talk page, and as far as I can see, there was no conclusion or even serious discussion that the sanction was out of bounds. That sanction applied to WMC, so this makes it quite difficult to argue that the probation scope excluded user talk pages, or that WMC might have reason to think it doesn't extend that far. I also felt that inserting a clearly identified (using brackets) phrase into someone else's comment was a close call whether it should be considered editing someone else's comment, and one could reasonably conclude it was not. Except - WMC affirmatively stated it should be construed that way. To make an analogy, suppose we know the proper way to challenge someone to a duel is to slap them on the face with a glove. What do we conclude if someone slaps another person with a mitten? We could debate it, unless the slapper simultaneously declares, "please consider this mitten a glove". That removes all doubt, and even if the anal convicting argue it wasn't a proper challenge, it is tough to argue that the intent to duel wasn't there. |
In summary, I tried to find a way to support WMC and I failed. Perhaps I didn't try hard enough, so I'll leave it to others to explain why his actions should be ignored.
Please be more careful when resetting an article to an older version. Or did you have a particular reason for reinserting the dead weblink [6]? Regards, HaeB ( talk) 20:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank for your comment, but I am not Christina Thi. We might come from the same IP range or location; but surely I am not Christina Thi.
About the LogiGear page; I am not quite sure about the reason why Book section has been removed. I thought VISTACON information might be interesting audiences; If you think it likes an advertising, just remove VISTACON section, I am OK with that, but not deleting whole LogiGear article. All the information provided has the good references. I am trying to build Outsourcing company in Vietnam | Software testing company in Vietnam NewbieIT ( talk) 16:06, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
OlYeller21, Thank you again for your support. It inspired me to complete much more research and produce a first page I am proud of. However, User/Ks15ko/Personal Sandbox, continues to appear online, though it was in error, has no references and was the article nominated for speedy deletion. I created it in error, never intending it to go public in that state. I would like, as its author, for it to be completely retracted and the history made inaccessible except to high level administrators. Can I make that appeal through you, or can you guide me to the correct level of administrator? Thanks, Ks15ko ( talk) 17:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21. I am just letting you know that I deleted Fabio Agostini, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Courcelles 14:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I've just deleted Marcel Louzado which you tagged as a hoax. It took me twenty minutes or so of searching before I was sure enough - it seems there is such a Jiujitsuer, but I found specific claims of championships won which could be checked and were false. My point is that you probably did similar checks, or maybe have special knowledge of that scene: in a case like this it would be helpful to the reviewing admin if you noted on the article talk page your reasons for tagging it as a hoax. See, for example (if it's still there) Talk:Leandro Santinho Morales, which I have just written up and left for another admin to consider. Hoaxes that take a lot of checking before one is sure should normally go to AfD, but if the checking assembles damning enough evidence which once assembled can be checked quickly, a G3 speedy will usually be accepted. Well done for spotting it anyway, it's depressing how many get through. Regards, JohnCD ( talk) 21:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
you seriously can not be that dumb republican to belive that lies are not fiction! 71.99.92.124 ( talk) 14:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate, I am trying to start a page on my professional organisation, the Australian Veterinary Association, but it keeps getting deleted. Where am I going wrong ? I'm not really writing anything controversial, its a fairly dry history, and I have been basing my efforts on the entry for the American Veterinary Medical Association. Any tips ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by XPR250 ( talk • contribs) 02:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
thanks for the heads up, someone else already nailed it Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:09, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
I created a page yesterday for private transfer fees (admittedly, this was my first time creating a Wikipedia page, so there are certainly some formatting issues), and came back to find that another user (who has since deleted his accounts) made some pretty drastic changes that seemed to discredit more than add to the entry. The user deleted some of the headers, deleted the category listing, and removed all sources/citations. I was wondering what the best way to deal with this issue is. The topic of Private transfer fees is fairly controversial, with some large developers as their biggest proponents, but I don't want to get into a back and forth editing "war." Any suggestions? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolob ( talk • contribs) 15:32, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointer; I've deleted the page. Nyttend ( talk) 16:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, you can always stick on one of the CSD templates which will always be picked up sooner or later Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Brook Waimarama Sanctuary, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to nature sanctuaries. Thank you. Kimchi.sg ( talk) 11:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I deleted Jacob Langvad as a copyvio even though you changed the speedy tag from G12 to A7. The actual source page uses CC-BY-NC-ND which is incompatible with Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA) so it was a copyvio after all. Kimchi.sg ( talk) 11:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Looks like someone is vandalizing your page and mine from random IPs. I'm going to bed, so I'm taking the liberty of s-protecting your pages till tomorrow. AKRadecki Speaketh 06:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh ya let all keep powell ohio's page amazing and vadalism free yay! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshgibson01 ( talk • contribs) 04:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia. I read the plea on your user page for advice to help you understand the ins and outs of contributing. There is a lot of guidance, in fact a confusing amount: good places to start are the Introduction, the Five Pillars, and the guide to writing Your First Article. A lot of new articles fall foul of the requirements for Notability and for Verifiability from Independent, Reliable Sources. The other two key content policies are No Original Research and Neutral Point of View. Finally (I feel as though I'm setting you a term's reading list) the List of Bad Article Ideas and the rather long list of What Wikipedia is not are worth a look. I hope that helps! JohnCD ( talk) 17:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
If you edit scientific articles, use only peer-reviewed sources. It's really easy to do this <ref>{{cite doi|????????}}</ref> Andrewjlockley ( talk) 10:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello and welcome. This is just a quick reply to your notes on my talk page (thanks). Don't be too mislead by all the conflict you see there: there are many areas of wiki that aren't battle grounds! William M. Connolley ( talk) 08:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
You handled it well. Just note that you don't have to add the Wiki link brackets ("[[ ]]") inside of the vandalism template. Thanks for your efforts! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I do not think there was any "vandilism to Powell, Ohio you guys take this shit way to seriously, Its a small town in the middle of no where I really dont think people are going to care, they probably are going to get some laughs.
This discussion has been collapsed. |
---|
Replied at Talk:Bob Cranmer and at User talk:Cunard#Removal of Speedy Deletion tag on Bob Cranmer. Cunard ( talk) 10:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
|
This discussion has been collapsed. |
---|
Dear OIYeller21, I am a representitive of Unskooled and I am here to tell you that Unskooled IS a real band. If you would like more info please search Unskooled in Google, go to the [ http://www.unskooled.synthasite.com/ band's website or email us at unskooledlakes@hotmail.com Thanks,
|
-- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 01:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from
Template:Adw. When removing text, please specify a reason in the
edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's
talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the
page history. Thank you. --
Orlady (
talk)
05:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Welcome...Be bold! -- Buster7 ( talk) 22:41, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for changing the speedy delete on that artist page for me. I originally nominated it for speedy delete because the page was specifically about the band, and not about the artist. However, you are correct, this artist is not notable enough to warrant a page on WP. I support your deletion proposal!
Streetsabre ( talk) 18:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Heh, I can't say I'm that into basketball so I don't have a clue how notable 200-0 is, I will however try and be more cautious in the future. And thanks for letting me know about my error :) - Kingpin13 ( talk) 20:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't know whether you are watching Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kuessner effect, but new sources are available. Cheers. -- Edcolins ( talk) 22:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
This discussion has been collapsed. |
---|
Hi, you asked for comment on the WikiProject music talk page about the Josh Rosenthal article. I don't see a big problem; you already had some discussion with the other editor on the article's talk page, and resolved some issues so that there is no longer a threat of the page being deleted. Regarding the photo credits, I don't see a problem. The photographer has been identified on the JPG page, and it matches the name in the article. The name should be removed from the article, as this is against standards, but the JPG itself appears to be okay, and the licensing info appears to be correct. You say you are frustrated with the other editor, but I'm betting he is frustrated too, as you have previously nominated the article for deletion, removed his JPG, threatened him with 3RR (which has to do with 3 revisions in 24 hours, not 3 revisions over any period of time), accused him of vandalism in your edit summaries (which is inappropriate), and keep reminding him to let you know if he has any questions, implying he has never asked for feedback from you before, which is not true, so this reminder is unnecessary, and comes across as condescending. You have also been identifying the other editor by name when making accusations, in places where this is not necessary. As for his reverts of the tags, the rules are vague, because they say that tags can be removed if someone disagrees that there are outstanding issues, so your insistance that they cannot be removed is not really true. Getting into a revert war over tags is rather frivolous. But there should be discussion about outstanding issues on the talk page; you should be stating what you think needs to be done, and the other editor should be stating his reasons for removing the tags. Since work on this article is ongoing, you can have this discussion without using tags at all. You may not see it this way, but you are coming on too strong for someone who is just trying to help; your actions probably appear to be hostile. I recommend you apologize to the editor, and try to continue discussion on the article's talk page about what issues are still outstanding. The other editor already asked you what more needs to be done, so he appears to be willing to work with you. -- A Knight Who Says Ni ( talk) 00:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
|
No offense intended, just wanted to get your attention... ;-) It may look alarming if you're unfamiliar, but William and I do these sorts of things occasionally so please let my adornment of his user page stand for a while. Short Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 01:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
This discussion has been collapsed. | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Good nom. Now go and rescue an article. :-) Bearian ( talk) 20:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Hey there! I wanted to thank you for the work you have done on this article. I am not that wiki-savvy but if you have any questions for me then feel free to shoot me an email and I'll try my best. Thanks again, JayDeeTulsa ( talk) 13:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
JD —Preceding unsigned comment added by JayDeeTulsa ( talk • contribs) 13:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
You put the page Scatter Brothers Productions up for deletion, and I understand your concerns. The company is still up and coming, but is growing fast. It may not have A LOT of notoriety through press, but are very well known in the Tampa Bay/Central Florida film industry. Is there any way to save the page from deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougietuff ( talk • contribs) 16:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I moved your posting about chefs from the F&D Article guidelines talk page to the main F&D talk page. The place you placed the discussion will not receive any responses. -- Jeremy ( blah blah) 19:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello there, I'm not as active on Wikipedia as I used to be, but I completely agree that the CMC's should be recognized on Wikipedia. References could come from the ACF website, newspaper articles, or anything not directly connected to the chef. For instance, Chef Hartmut's webpage for his restaurant would not be appropriate to source from as per wikipedia guidelines. Let me know if I can be of some assistance.-- Chef Tanner ( talk) 17:47, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Here's a nice one for you, and even acts to confirm his college: Lubbock Online. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Re your message here: Hey, that was a joke. You're not a talk page stalker; you're a talk page watcher. Please keep my page watchlisted, so that I can have someone to rely on if I'm not on Wikipedia when a new user needs help. I have your talk page watchlisted, and I'll do the same for you (if you consent, of course). In this case, I didn't log on to Wikipedia until five hours after their request for help. Your help saved a new user from waiting five hours for a response. Cunard ( talk) 22:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
the link about him being on Urban Tulsa Weekly's "Hot 100" list of 2009, although it is short does definitely provide a lot of notability as that is a big public honor in Tulsa and the surrounding area. I think that should qualify. Also there is a news article on fox23 that I can dig up that writes about him but not specifically his comedy. Will that help? Bruce Jennings ( talk) 21:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Also RooftopComedy.com is an neutral site that verifies ALL comedians. Bruce Jennings ( talk) 21:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
You locked the page. I'm wondering why.There is no definite rule that says marriage dates & DOBs cant be included. 4 some personal reason plastikspork & redpen dont want it in. Y I dont know. In wiki terms there isnt any reason that it shouldnt be included. It is just facts. The dates arent private bc EH publicised it & publicises it every year. Also ABC Disney NFL all sent out press releases. Throughout wikipedia are marriage dates & DOBs dates, so y shouldnt they be deleted from EH's page? y rnt plastik/redpen going on every wiki bio & removing marriage dates & birthdates? plastik claims it put them ask risk for identity theft which I think is ridiculous. It is their DOB not their birthweight, length @ birth; favourite colur,etc. Thanks. 70.108.102.252 ( talk) 15:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
OlYeller: On the disc page redpen/plastikspork oppose, while tom/speil/ & myself support. I conceded & let them rename the 1st section 'early life' instead of 'bio'. Where is their concession. On WP:BLP there is no clear rule about marriage dates & DOBs. plastik/redpen cite 'extraneous unncess info' as the reason. It is simply marriage date & DOBs, not time of marriage,location,birthweight, nor birthlength. Thanks. 70.108.102.252 ( talk) 17:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Why didn't you check WP:TFD? It's where Template deletions show up. 76.66.193.69 ( talk) 04:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed that the article was deleted because of a blatant copyvio. Can you help me get the code from before it was deleted so that I can remove the copyvios and repost the article? For the record, I wasn't the author and didn't put into the copyvio lines. OlYeller Talktome 02:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand why you have reverted back to the old page for the third time? The page is a work in progress stating three different sources to prove the song is being released as a single. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.108.42.66 ( talk) 20:56, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
FYI, I have submitted TOMS Shoes for deletion via AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TOMS SHOES (2nd nomination) — Danorton ( talk) 07:43, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm confused about why The Trance from the New Twilight Zone is up for deletion. I tried to make the page as close to the 200 other Twilight Zone pages. I only wanted to flesh out something that interested me. If The Trance is to be deleted, shouldn't the entire Twilight Zone episode list be deleted as well? From the original episodes all the way through the last series from 2003? What is that's wrong? Tmkeffer71 ( talk) 02:39, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I only came across the entire set of Twilight Zone episodes because my cable system just got the Chiller network and I remembered them from when I was younger, but the list had hardly any of the Twilight Zone first revival series episodes, like just a listing and nothing fleshing out the episodes. Plus, most of the ones I worked on, had a note on it asking for them to be fleshed out, saying it was only a stub or some didn't have a page and when I clicked on it, it asked if I wanted to create a page for it. I really did nothing I wasn't invited to do. Anyway, I guess it doesn't matter. I just found something interesting that I could do something to help look better. Tmkeffer71 ( talk) 02:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Anyway, thanks for talking with me about it. Take care. Tmkeffer71 ( talk) 03:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you and thanks again for discussing it. Tmkeffer71 ( talk) 21:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
With you and CactusWriter leading the way, I went through the TOMS Shoes and did some major copyedit, removed extraneous fluff, advert, and POV. I think it is far better than when it started. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Article Rescue Barnstar | |
For your good work on bringing life to an article which might otherwise have been deleted, I am honored to award you this Barnstar for your efforts at TOMS Shoes. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC) |
Thanks for uploading Image:TNK Emblem.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 00:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually what had happened was that he had added the box to Talk:TOMS SHOES, which is the title the article was originally created under and subsequently deleted a long time ago. I created the redirect for TOMS SHOES but forgot to create a redirect for the talk page. Not a problem fixing that! scootey talk 03:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your support. I thought the nominator had a pretty weak 1 sentence proposal. 02:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
TomCat4680 (
talk) has given you a
kitten! Kittens promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{ subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
![]() | Are you from the Ohio area? A Wikipedian meetup is taking place on July 18, 2009 in Columbus. If you are interested in coming or would like more information, see the first Ohio meetup page. |
Thanks! -- Rkitko ( talk) 22:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
~ mazca t| c 21:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't think you meant WP:NOTNOW in AfD... maybe you meant WP:CRYSTAL? Gigs ( talk)
I was personally attacked yesterday at Signs (Bloc Party song) by a user who I won't name. It sort of hurt my feelings so I'm going to take a short break. I'm not crying about it or anything but I realized that if Wikipedia editing effects my life outside of Wikipedia, it's probably time for a break. Just an FYI for anyone who may be looking for me. OlYeller Talktome 14:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
How can a band be notable without the members themselves being notable? A band is it's members.-- DunkinDonutBoy ( talk) 05:45, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering why the heck you would put this article up for deletion? Why would you do such a thing? Seriously? It has credible sources. Everything's legit. Care to explain? ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC).
Shadowjams ( talk) 07:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
[3] - you're replying to a year-old thread. Maybe you knew, but I reckon a new section might be appropriate. Fritzpoll ( talk) 15:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Dank ( push to talk) 15:56, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I meant that your findings that the six you checked were notable regardless of the star indicated that the star was generally being given to notable people and not just willy-nilly. Like in the British honors system, some of the recipients may not be well known outside of their field. Drawn Some ( talk) 11:25, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Can we bring this article back to life now? There is now another news source. Before you just needed one more news source and here it is: http://www.tulsapeople-digital.com/tulsapeople/200906/?u1=texterity 208.191.26.53 ( talk) 18:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Forgot to log in and wasn't sure if you knew how to get back with me on this. Thanks. Bruce Jennings ( talk) 18:08, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your efforts. The second reference that you removed from mtishows (the one that was not a duplicate) was the one where I learned about his family life. That did not come from the playbill reference (that you kept); all the rest of the material did. Should you restore the second ref? -- DAW0001 ( talk) 00:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Otterathome is a quirky sort. I boldly removed the sockpuppet list from his userpage lest he get in trouble. Think we should take it to AN anyway? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Content |
I noticed that you commented in a past AfD discussion of the article Nicholas Beale. After being deleted then, it has been reposted and is now back at AfD again, so you might be interested in commenting again (but you are under no obligation to). Thank you, rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 22:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
An AFD discussion that you have previously participated in has been reignited. See here for more the new discussion. Dale 10:58, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The information in the MMRF article is completely outdated and in many cases has errors and wrong information. How else can we go about fixing this? - Michelle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.79.121.187 ( talk) 17:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Made a few quick error fixes, will come back to this later... 160.79.121.187 ( talk) 17:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Michelle
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.212.196 ( talk) 18:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Um...on Machine to Machine, I finished rewriting it myself. It doesn't copyright violate now, though I think I have to go fix the history first. Silver seren C 23:45, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm not the same person I was a year ago, not even close. I am not going to start yelling or get out of hand. I am, and will continue to, calmly press my point with logic and facts.
Thank you for worrying about me, but you also don't need to worry about me. I'm fine. I'm the one that's replied to so many comments because, at this point, it's my article, and I don't want to get it deleted. Silver seren C 20:16, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi there,
Sorry I removed the tag and warning, I don't know what the process is, however I've re-written the copy as suggested for the article and waiting for someone to get back to me if it's ok as I do not wish to see this page gets deleted. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Echiu888 ( talk • contribs) 22:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Michael Lamb (professor), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 05:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
When I see an article that I am unsure about, I will sometimes ask the relevant WikiProject for help. For example, I recently saw an article about a U.S. army officer who didn't appear to be notable, but rather than tag the article for deletion myself, I asked for advice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history, and someone there with more familiarity with military biographies initiated the AfD. Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 05:53, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry but you are misinterpreting Wikipedia guidelines. The guideline of notability is only for creating an article ABOUT the artist [i.e. Greenie must be notable to have his OWN article on Wikipedia]. If you review Wikipedia's own guidelines at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiProject_Albums and pay SPECIAL attention to the section on DISCOGRAPHY [and albums]...you'll see there ARE NO EXPLICIT CRITERIA for discographies.
You have a WikiPedia page on the career of KRS-ONE, correct? As part of KRS-ONE's career he is presently working/involved in a collaboration with an artist named Greenie. He is releasing a 14 track album. I have posted links to production videos, audio, and more featuring CLEARLY-- KRS-ONE himself discussing the project [and performing on it].
KRS-ONE is a legend and major figure in hip-hop's history with a reputation for only putting his name on projects in which he strongly believes.
Greenie need not yet be notable--because it's not ABOUT Greenie-- It's about the CAREER of KRS-ONE.. the work/music HE* does --and presently, in 2010-- KRS-ONE is working on a project with Greenie-- KRS does 1-3 albums per year, correct? As you've repeatedly been shown, this year he's doing a collaboration with Greenie and that is PART OF KRS-ONE's biography now...regardless of Greenie's own current fame level.. If you need, the article can read "KRS-ONE is choosing to create an album project with an unknown named Greenie"-- but even the PROJECT is notable [not that it needs to be]--because it's the first time in history -- KRS and MC SHAN will be together on a CD [on the track named "WATER UNDER THE BRIDGE"..and because it features MANY old school artists--i.e. Busy Bee Starski...
Either way, there is NO wikipedia guideline that would exclude a KRS project from KRS' biography because it's not notable-- KRS is a MAJOR recording artist and legend..any time he sets foot in the studio to do THE WORK THAT HE DOES-- his production is PART of HIS*** biography/discography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.130.21 ( talk) 05:35, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
What this comes down to is that you have provided two sources. One that is an unreliable fansite of some sort and a Youtube video (which is not a reliable source). Perhaps you should wait until the record is closer to release and more information is written about it by reliable sources. I understand that you may be personally involved with this subject which may be the reason you're so adamant to include the information. I suggest stepping back for a few days, looking for some information about the artist and the album from a reliable source, and come back when you do. Until then, the information cannot be included. I'm sorry this has been so tough. I know what it's like to be new and not understand all the policies and guidelines. Again, this is the last time I'm responding to you as I've explained every point here to you before. OlYeller Talktome 05:55, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
You recently marked " Susegad" for speedy deletion as nonsense - as the Times of London used and defined the term in an article, I have removed the tag. I have, however, requested that it be transwikied to wiktionary:susegad. -- Philosopher Let us reason together. 02:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Please respond on my talk page as I will respond back here.
I noticed you have voted twice. You do understand that nominating an article for deletion is your vote deletion? Mr. C.C. Hey yo! I didn't do it! 11:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I originally {{ db-attack}} for Cathophilia, then reverted as I was not sure if that template applied to institutions as well as people. When I notified the editor with the automatic message, I saw the message had to do with personal attacks. So it is for general attacks also? Thanks, Xtzou ( Talk) 15:30, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for dealing with Jon Nelson. The editor has removed my tags several times, as well as those of JohnCD. Xtzou ( Talk) 16:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
He's at it again! He has recreated the Jon Nelson page from the redirect. Xtzou ( Talk) 17:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
What do you think of Snoners? I labelled it a {{ db-hoax}} because it is a combination of parts of snoring and penile erection articles. Must be a convincing read. Xtzou ( Talk) 16:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
What do you think of Anabela Basalo? It turns out, if you translate one of the refs with Google, that the "she" is actually a "he" porno queen. Xtzou ( Talk) 18:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Field Studies EP, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is an article for the band who released the recording. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. The leftorium 20:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, OlYeller21. The File:Moonsalbumcover.png should have been tagged for WP:F9 (which is for images) rather than the WP:G12 (which is for text). In the long run it didn't matter because it was a copyright violation of this flickr image. The Creative Commons non-commercial license on it isn't compatible with Wikipedia. We can sometimes use album cover and book cover artwork in low resolution, if we can claim fair use. However, in this case, the claim that uploader had created the image was clearly false and I think it is better to simply delete the image and start from scratch. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 19:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Wait, what? -- Tgwti ( talk) 17:40, 10 April 2010 (UTC)Tgwti
Hi - I deleted two of your subpages that you had tagged with csd-u1, without reading the actual message in the tag. I've brought it up on WP:ANI, and another admin should be along shortly to fix the problem. Sorry about this. Alexius Horatius 20:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
You placed a notice about speedy deleting this article (well disambig), but I don't see anything on the page itself or the history. What am I missing? Wizard191 ( talk) 19:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
I believe the IP and the article creator of Madison Eagles to be the same person. I will be restoring the tag for this reason. I will remove it if I am proven to be wrong by a check user. !! Justa Punk !! 03:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
As I see it , his is an entirely different article from Demographics of India. Whether it might be overgeneralized and under-documented is another matter; whether this is the best title seem more than a little dubious. I don;t know the history of the article or the people involved, but whatever the problem is, I don;t really think its the best way to try to solve it at Speedy. DGG ( talk ) 00:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
I've done some work there and ask that you revisit Chris M. Allport. As the man does not always use his middle initial, it seems like many (not all) of THESE are our guy. More important though, and through further research, it seems the fellow received multiple awards and nomination back in the 90s that allow notability per WP:ANYBIO. I've begun sourcing these in Chris M. Allport#Awards & nominations. Now that it belongs to Wikipedia, and since even 1990s notability is not temporary, why not warn the author strongly about COI and we allow it to be improved through regular editing? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 04:41, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your efforts to prevent the possible deletion of the article I wrote about Donna J. Stone, and particularly for removing the request for speedy deletion. I did, in fact, write the article myself, and obtained written permission from Dr. Christopher Stone, Ms. Stone's son and the copyright holder of the photo I used in the article, to use the image in the Wikipedia article. (I know you didn't mention any copyright concerns about the image, so you probably saw that I got permission for the image.)
I know about the Wielder of Words website, of course, since I linked to it in the article and included it in the references. Dr. Stone also holds the copyright to the site. What I'd like to clarify is that I wrote the Wikipedia article before Dr. Stone made his website. This is verifiable by the recorded creation dates of both web pages. The history section of my Wikipedia artice, which can be viewed here, shows that I created it and wrote the bulk of it on December 29, 2009. The Who Is website shows that the Wielder of Words site was created on April 5, 2010, which can be seen here. (You'll have to enter the domain name to see the date; I can't link to it directly.)
Although I don't think it was necessary given the free nature of Wiki information, Dr. Stone did get my permission to incorporate the text from my Wikipedia article into his website about his mother. (I'm certainly not implying that he violated any copyright, either.) I believe the dates of creation should allay any concerns about copyright infringement.
As for the numerous references, I was trying to list everything even alluded to in either the article or its links. Admittedly, my compulsive nature probably led to overkill, with some references having only a tenuous connection to the text of the article. I'm a literary historian (with a special interest in modern poetry), and am prone to being overly inclusive. I'm happy to clean up the references section.
Since it seems unlikely that most readers of both web pages would check the dates the pages were created, your concern that the page I wrote might be deleted due to copyright concerns is a very good point. I can think of a couple of ways to prevent this. The easiest thing would be for me to ask Dr. Stone for permission to use text from his website in my Wikipedia article. Another option would be for me to rewrite the article from scratch, although I must admit that the time and effort involved make this a less desirable option for me. But I don't want the article to be deleted. What would you recommend?
Thanks you for reading this long entry.
Mary Ann
-- Mah Jong ( talk) 08:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi Mary. Thanks for the detailed message. It made it very easy to understand what's going on. I thought that there was a chance that wielderofwords.com borrowed the text from Wikipedia but I didn't think to check the whois on the website. This is a little over my head as far as Wikipedia's copyright policies go so I'm going to call in an expert to help out. I'll message her now and invite her to discuss the situation here or on the article's page. I'll make sure that you're notified of the location of the discussion so that you can participate. OlYeller Talktome 14:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
In response to your question at WP:AIV, edit summary warnings do not count towards the required notices. Please see WP:WARN for more details. caknuck ° needs to be running more often 02:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC) Will do. Thanks for the info. OlYeller Talktome 03:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey, guess I've mistakenly edited your signed comment, sorry pal =D Betelguese000 ( talk) 22:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I posted a reply on my talk about your signature. CTJF83 chat 18:32, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Please review the AFD and the article at The Tenderloins. The darn thing still needs work, but now that I have found the independent reliable sources to meet the nominator's concerns, perhaps your "weak" might now become a little stronger? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 09:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Your point was well taken. I was about to send a curt note to the editor who removed that person from the list, but then I saw that it was a blocked editor and that the editor who did the removing was an administrator. The administrator should have stated his reason for taking the editor off the list. ScottyBerg ( talk) 15:09, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm just browsing anonymously , i didn't edit from this ip . I guess someone else was on it from my ISP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.180.40.212 ( talk) 03:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jagdverbande Mitte, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Olaf Davis ( talk) 21:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Lil Crazed requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
OlYeller
Talktome
03:22, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
Civility Award | |
To OlYeller21 in recognition of notable patience in explaining to an article creator why the speedy deletion was going to have to be completed. Your calm demeanor and clear reasoning are beyond reproach, and inspire me to do as well in the future! With best wishes always, Jusdafax 23:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC) |
Wow, thanks! I think this is my second barnstar ever! OlYeller Talktome 23:58, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi OlYeller21, if you want to leave similar messages in the future you'd be much better off leaving them on the talk page of the deleting admin, as you created the Talk:Pickle Drink page after the Pickle Drink page had been deleted you've essentially just created a G8. Just thought I'd let you know. Cheers, Jeffrey Mall ( talk • contribs) - 00:49, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
It appears an autobot has rejected the article for possible copyright infringement. I hope you are a human being. This is not an infringement. The Website the autobot tagged is an ecommerce site that posts news stories to generate traffic from searches to generate marketing revenue. They even cite Wikipedia as their source. Please see for yourself at http://www.the-home-business-place.com/ponzi-schemes.html. There you will find many posts that use the word ponzi, fraud, and scheme with dates and names of many people. They have no claim to the intellectual content in any of their posts.
It would be impossible to write a biography on this important figure, Micheal Owen Traynor, and exclude the words ponzi, fraud, church, scheme and the dates of his activities. Please insert human intelligence to distinguish what the autobot cannot.
More importantly, the Traynor article I posted cited the sources and included links to other unimpeachable sources, ie. the official Florida Department of Law Enforcement Website and the Florida Department of Corrections Official Website. The article I posted was based on an original news story by Tod Ruger as cited, an original piece to which I was a source, not cited.
Furthermore, it is important that Wiki remain a provider of all information. Please do not be hindered by false claims to intellectual property by marketers. Not that marketing is bad, they just do not own this. Also note the Traynor news story has been hijacked by plaintiff attorneys not related to the case and not located in proximity to any victims ie johnschapman.com. Please note that John Chapman Law is in Cleveland, OH. Has not investigated nor had any involvement with Traynor or his victims. I am in a position to know ALL aspects of this case and investigation.
Most importantly, it is very important that Wiki continues to be a conduit of candid information. The revelation of the facts surrounding Micheal Owen Traynor are important in many ways. One, it is a report of a historical figure that used his position to influence and ultimately harm those that trusted him. Two, his deception was discovered. Three, his victims were never compensated. Four, he is "paying" a price for his deception in his custody of the authorities. Important information worthy of Wiki.
Regards,
Newomatt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Newomatt ( talk • contribs) 03:33, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Why did you remove the warning on User talk:Ilovealexcrimmins3 about Alex crimmins? The warning was still applicable. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
You said it was locked, but indeed it wasn't even deleted! Which is it? — Timneu22 · talk 18:08, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, DJ Surge-N, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DJ Surge-N. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Accounting4Taste: talk 19:39, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Tamadis Young requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
OlYeller
Talktome
04:24, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Just a heads up. Usernames are generally only blockable as promotional when the directly or susbstantially match that of a business. People are allowed to have their own, real, personal names as their username or a part of it. Even if they write their own autobiography, that doesn't instantly make their username a violation of policy. The autobiography writing is an issue that needs to be discussed with the user in light of WP:COI, but there is no username violation. Take care when nominating at WP:UAA that the username itself is a blatant and instantly blockable violation of the username policy. -- Jayron 32 05:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
hi i wrote an article called "The Big Green Bus" and I believe that it is meritable enough to be kept on Wikipedia. When will I know if you are satisfied with the notability and its sources? thanks
Pose716 ( talk) 05:40, 26 May 2010 (UTC)pose716
I think the above user is a sockpuppet of User:Sngbengal. I would put up a Sockpuppet investigations, but I need to ascertain if there are others. Can you help?-- Nilotpal 42 16:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I initiated the SPI Not sure that I did it correctly (used Twinkle). OlYeller Talktome 16:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I've declined the speedy because I can't find the text on the page. Could you recheck it? The page definitely isn't in a good state, and it really would be better if it were deleted, so if you could show me bits that have been copied that I overlooked, I'll be quite happy to delete it. Nyttend ( talk) 17:20, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I was considering removing the hangon from The Smolen when you removed it first. My reason would have been that it was added by an IP editor, not by the page creator, and the CSD tag and policy only make reference to hangons being added by the creator. I decided that was too wikilawyerish and perhaps an AGF violation, so didn't, only to see that you'd removed it due to no justification in 2 hours. Is there some policy or consensus that says that's okay? In one sense, I suppose that you can argue that since the hangon tag says that it will be ignored if not justified that removing it after a decent interval such as you did is acceptable since it will be ignored anyway and, by removing it, you may jog the creator into re–adding it with a justification. This isn't a criticism, I like the idea, but hoping you had some specific authority justifying it. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 17:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi again. I hope you don't mind, but I undid your revisions to the Donna J. Stone article. I'm in the process of cleaning up some of my articles, and have been working a lot on this one. I've used the CompactTOC8 in this and other articles, customized a bit for size, to save space and eliminate blank areas. It's actually a lot of work, but I think it makes some of the articles look cleaner. Since it is an option made available to us, I don't see a problem using it. As for the spacing issue, I added the extra spaces to accommodate inline citations, which sometimes obscure divisions between paragraphs (and did in this case).
On another note, I noticed the Columbus, Ohio meet-up tag on your page. Are you from that area? I'm not, but one of my colleagues is. Coincidentally, Ms. Stone was also from there. Just curious.
Thanks again for your interest in the article. I hope you understand my reasons for reverting to the previous style.
Mary Ann -- Mah Jong ( talk) 19:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Just a friendly reminder to check the page history before tagging for a no content speedy. An editor had come along and blanked the page, so I reverted back to the pre-blanked version. Cheers! -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I added points #9 and #10 to Talk:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day/Requirements for gallery of depictions of Mohammed. Do you support the 12-point list as revised? Greg L ( talk) 00:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I meant the hangon for any Npp-ers who might come along and tag it. I think he's notable, but I just don't have enough experience with BLP's to properly write the article. See Google News archives, Google scholar, and Gooogle Books. There's info, probably even enough for notability, I just don't know how to get it into the article. You like to rescue articles - will you help me rescue this one? PrincessofLlyr royal court 20:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
You can find Kenny Winfree's music by going to Smithsonian Folkways Recordings and search for his stuff. But, you must type in Kenny Winfree. Also, how do you add external links to his article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unioncard1 ( talk • contribs) 22:16, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Dear OlYeller21,
Thanks for your explanantion that my latest page violated guideline A7. I'm new at this so I'm requesting your help, assistance and/or guidance as to my next steps.
I'm confused/uncertain as to why an A7 tag was placed on my page. There are numerous other summer college baseball leagues with their own page. In reviewing them I don't see anything particularly special about any of them that would necessarily warrant a page, other than to provide reference and information. In fact, one page, the "Hawaii Collegiate Baseball League" contains far less information that I was attempting to provide.
So, please, can you guide me and/or advise me on what it is that my proposed page is missing? I would be very, grateful (from one Buckeye to another).
Thanks.
Roy Snyder Deputy Commissioner Maryland Collegiate Baseball League —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starflight7 ( talk • contribs) 00:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
OlYeller, have you seen this RfC on Talk:Draw Mohammed? Greg L ( talk) 02:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi can you help me improve "Amén"? I put a lot of new thinks the last days!! Really need your help please! -- 89.217.203.15 ( talk) 17:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Jeez, that’s what I’m talking about. Thanks for reverting that ( ∆). That editor clearly either disagreed with the gallery criteria, or didn’t read it. That sort of drawing is just the sort of “pushing things“ that can cause a pendulum to swing too far the other way. Speaking of “galleries,” as I recall, some Black Panthers back in the 60s arrived at the California state assembly house, during live debate by state legislators, and sat in the gallery while openly armed with guns to make a point that it was their right to do so. The lawmakers in turn demonstrated their right to pass new laws faced with needless provocation that fell far short of any common sense. I think the current 12-point metric—if properly adhered to—should keep Wikipedia properly encyclopedic without outrageous POV-pushing and avoid a huge and utterly needless scandal. Greg L ( talk) 19:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
HI There,
I just wanted to address the edits made to the Big Green Bus page yesterday. I realize it's not a huge page, and I'm hoping that it grows some, but I think the issues with the maintenance templates were fairly well addressed with the additions I put on yesterday.
Orphan: I put links to the page on the Dartmouth Outing Club page as well as the Dartmouth College page. I suppose I could look for a few more places, but that seemed sufficient to make it not an orphan at least.
Citations: I put inline citations in almost every sentence.
Notability: I think the national media attention that this program has received, detailed extensively in the article ought to be sufficient to establish notability.
Please let me know what more you think ought to be done to correct these problems and what the proper protocol is for removing those maintenance tags.
Bigroryg ( talk) 12:53, 6 June 2010 (UTC)Bigroryg
"The article is still an orphan because it has less than three article linking to it. You didn't actually add citations to the article, you added external links. When I tagged the article, notability was very questionable. If the external links were in reference format, it would probably be easy to tell if the subject is notable but as external links, every link has to be checked and read to determine notability. I didn't feel like reading them over last night and was/am coming back today to change the links to citations and attempt to address the maintenance templates as it seems like you've almost addressed them completely. OlYeller Talktome 14:46, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey, just wanted to thank you for your help formatting those in-line citations and with the categories and whatnot. I had just figured out what you meant by external links are not citations and I was a little intimidated about doing that. Anyway, I just thought I would reach out and say thanks!
Bigroryg ( talk) 21:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)Bigroryg
Hi There,
Just checking back in on this article - It has now the coi and tone boxes and I'd love to work to get those off. Any specific suggestions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigroryg ( talk • contribs) 23:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
OlYeller21 - Hey, thanks for looking out for us newbies. I have had my article nominated for deletion, but there's really no info on WHY. I'm glad to re-edit, but I'm not sure just what that will take. I know how to make apostrophes but they aren't forming a bold topic for my article. ??
I have references that come from now-defunct magazines, etc. so I don't know how to document sources when there is not a current morgue of past article. (I have the tattered originals.) What else do I need to do to legitimize? Thanks. Ks15ko ( talk) 03:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)ks15ko
Hi again. Supporting "best seller" notation, how about the badge used by the publisher on the cover of the paperback edition "The National Bestseller." < http://www.amazon.com/Michael-Marons-Instant-Makeover-Magic/dp/044638187X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276870327&sr=1-1>
I trust the publishing house would not have been allowed to make such a claim.?
Beyond that there are several references I found by following the link you gave to Google news archive that list him as a beauty expert, noted beauty expert, etc., especially in a panel of beauty judges one for Most Beautiful Woman on TV with and another for Miss Teen America. [1] (TV Guide picks 10 most beautiful women. The voters were Way Bandy, Nina Blanchard, Eileen Ford, Aida Gray, George Hurrell, Elsa Klensch, Shirley Lord, and Michael Maron. They ought to know beauty when they see it. Byline: Liz Smith) I think politically they were listed alphabetically, which put Mr. Maron last.
[2] (‘TV’s Most Beautiful is Collins’ . . . according to a panel of 10 experts. . . panel of makeup artists, modeling authorities, fashion photographers and beauty editors selected by TV Guide. “ You can tell she absolutely loves to be beautiful . . . and consequently is, “ said panelist Michael Maron, celebrity makeup artist and photographer.) Ocala Star-Banner, Dec. 10, 1984)
[3] TV guide – 10AM channel 13 – Wil Shriner Show – guests Steve Allen, Jayne Meadows, Teri Austin, Tony Hendra, Michael Maron St. Petersburg Times - Google News Archive - Jan 21, 1988 (Not a bad lineup to be invited on the same show with Steve Allen and Jayne Meadows.) So, if the "best seller" is still questionable, certainly he garnered some notability from these books as well as his corrective and charitable work. What do you think? ( Ks15ko ( talk) 14:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)ks15ko Ks15ko ( talk) 14:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC))
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. MBisanz talk 02:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
True, I forgot that offline sources counted as citations, but seeing as though said source is available on the internet at ERO website I thought it was better if someone could dig it up. I'll link this to the page now. <- Gadfium has already done it. Techhead7890 ( talk) 02:14, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Re this, I tagged it as an A7. That is not spam, it's notability. Your reason for removal was therefore invalid as it was not tagged for the reason you removed it. Have anything to show why this person is notable after it has been deleted so many times?-- Terrillja talk 17:22, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Lol, I think we're done here. Try using Twinkle sometime. OlYeller Talktome 14:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I've been following article guidelines, got lots of references both to notability and best selling author. I've got them set up in References and Notes and hyperlinked. Other than that, what else do I need to do. Was I wrong in practicing this page in my personal sandbox? Can I use that and just have whatever editor is available check it over? Should I try to get the original speedy deleting editor to pass on it? Is that necessary? Could you look it over and see if there's anything critically wrong with it, still? Thanks, Ks15ko ( talk) 04:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey, why don't you better help me improving my own sentence? I'd be glad to listen what's wrong now. If you want to dispute whether or not it should be in that section - tell me, if not, then don't revert it to "criticism" section but change only sentences. Userpd ( talk) 22:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, OlYeller21. I have read you message at Talk:The Firehouse Restaurant, where you said "To the patrolling admin, if you are going to delete this article, please userfy it first for the author. I have a hunch that some news articles can be found and we can easily remove the copyvio if that's the case. I also think that, from their intense editing, the author would do most of the work with the right direction." I have decided to comply with your request and userfy the article, although my own instinct was to delete it as spam. We will see whether you are right in thinking that the author will make a good job of it: I hope you are right. JamesBWatson ( talk) 08:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi there,
I got your name from the Wikimedia:Meetup/Ohio 1 page. I will be in Columbus Aug 8-11 and was wondering if any Wikimedians would be interested in meeting up then. If so, I started Wikipedia:Meetup/Ohio 2 for quick planning :) best, -- phoebe / ( talk to me) 17:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
About a month ago, I was patrolling new pages and ran into a page for a restaurant that was very likely notable but had to tag the article for deletion because it was a copyvio and blatant advertisement. I then asked an admin to userfy the article so that I could help guide the user in cleaning up the article. After a few attempts, the user disappeared so I ended up writing the article myself and posting it to mainspace. Afterwards, the user came back and tried to add copyright material that read like an advertisement. I removed it and through a short conversations, found that the user was from the company. After explaining the issues and asking them to work through me to circumvent a conflict of interest, they got upset. They said that my customer service skills were poor and that they wanted to speak to management! I thought it was funny enough that I wanted to save it here so that I can get a laugh if I need it. OlYeller Talktome 20:33, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
I didn't realise at first there was also GoCar Tours hence the previous revert. I agree it has to be disambiguated, however I think maybe "GoCar Club" may be better than "GoCar of Ireland"? Since it is a club... would you be ok with that?-- NorthernCounties ( talk) 17:13, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I assume your edits have been in good faith, however, it is not acceptable on Wikipedia, that if a song needs to be disambiguated, that you call it, for example, "Drummer Boy" (single). The correct title should be, as it was, "Drummer Boy" (song).
Please take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs for information regardinging the style and formatting of naming articles. Thank you -- Patyo1994 ( talk) 15:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate your impatience, however, as I have stated, I am now awaiting more people to give their inputs on the issue. __ meco ( talk) 21:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I was going to userfy it for you but it turns out that what was deleted was a single sentence and I believe you've already included everything that was in it in your current draft. You've written an acceptable stub, the deleted sentence didn't even contain the claim of notability which you include. Guy ( Help!) 19:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
There's really basically nothing there that you don't already have. The only new info is that he used to write about "Notre Dame and Northwestern football and Northwestern and DePaul basketball" at the paper he worked for, and that he used to live in Berkley. JesseW, the juggling janitor 04:03, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
If you'll reread what I wrote, my entire point is that I think there may be a misunderstanding. Your comment struck me as quite harsh, and based upon WP:AGF, I'm assuming you didn't meant it the way I summarized it. The point of talk pages is to talk, and reach agreement, so I explained how I read your comment. I was hoping your response would be something along the line of "no that isn't what I meant, so I'm rewriting to explain what I really mean". However, you've reiterated that you don't care who's at fault, so I assume you really mean it. I'm not sure what action we should take. Is it your position that a block, supported by a [[Wikipedia:Ani#Block_of_User:William_M._Connolley_by_User:The_Wordsmith|solid consensus[[, should be revoked because Ol'Yeller doesn't care who's at fault? I'm genuinely puzzled what you think should happen, and why it should happen. (I don't want to drag out an off-topic discussion at WMC's talk page, so I'm responding here. If you'd rather not pursue this, that's fine as well, but I'm truly interested in what uninvolved editors think about this situation, and how they reach such conclusions)-- SPhilbrick T 14:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
<-Jehochman declared that the sanction was "arguably improper". As an experiment, I decided to start from the assumption that it was imporper, and decided to see if I could make such a case. My efforts started positively, and I was close to posting my defense of WMC on his talk page. If you are willing to read it, you will see why I did not.
In partial defense of WMC
|
---|
In partial defense of WMC The probation page contains both a scope and a remit:
Neither phrase was carefully defined. "Broadly construed" obviously allows a fair amount of leeway. Presumably, this was deliberate, as the borderline in article space could be fuzzy. Everyone assumes that articles about climate are included, along with bios of people significantly involved in the field. I trust everyone accpets that the associated talk pages are covered. We got some measure of the limit when it went unchallenged that dog was outside the boundary. But what about user talk pages? I suggest it isn't immediately obvious that a user talk page is a page about climate change, and reasonable people might disagree. Accordingly, it would have been helpful had it been clarified. (I haven't read everything, maybe it was clarified, and I missed it.) I did a quick perusal of the log, and in quick review, noticed that the sanctions covered article and article talk pages, but not explicitly user talk pages. WMC has asserted that the CC-sanction does not extend to user talk pages. Based upon experience, that position seems valid. The remit is unreasonably broad. Understandably, when one is crafting a one-time policy, rather than a WP wide policy, one might not want to spend days agonizing over specific wording. I trust that if the sysop instructed WMC to send a check for $100 to everyone who asked, that would be considered out of bounds, so clearly we don't literally mean "any other measures". So what are the bounds of what can be imposed? One way to think about it is to consider the types of things that are generally allowed, or sometimes disallowed. Editors are generally able to edit any article at any time, but often, restrictions are placed. So limitations on edits to article space are permitted. Similarly, edits to article talk pages are generally permitted, but occasionally restricted. It is not uncommon to restrict the article, while allowing edits to the associated talk page, so restricting edits to talk pages is generally a "bigger deal". However, we give wide latitude to users to manage their user space as they see fit. We have policies covering the editing of comments of others WP:TPOC. A relevant admonition is "Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning". WMC's act to insert a bracketed comment into someone else's comment did not violate this. We very rarely restrict the right to edit your own talk page. It seems reasonable to conclude that the phrase "any other measure" includes the usual measures, and does not include unreasonable limits on edits to one's own talk page. In summary, WMC has a good case that the probation was never intended for user talk pages, and the remit is unreasonably broad, so that declaring that a sysop can take "any other measure" is not intended to be literally true. He is right to assert that the specific sanction is malformed, and not enforceable. Except: While double-checking sanction log, I noticed two exceptions. The first is quite minor (at least for this discussion). A sanction applied to Jettaman was quite broad and included a prohibition from a user page, but notably, this was someone else's user page. However, there is one other exception, and one sanction specifically did address editing one's own talk page. So we do have precedent for a limitation on editing one's own talk page, and as far as I can see, there was no conclusion or even serious discussion that the sanction was out of bounds. That sanction applied to WMC, so this makes it quite difficult to argue that the probation scope excluded user talk pages, or that WMC might have reason to think it doesn't extend that far. I also felt that inserting a clearly identified (using brackets) phrase into someone else's comment was a close call whether it should be considered editing someone else's comment, and one could reasonably conclude it was not. Except - WMC affirmatively stated it should be construed that way. To make an analogy, suppose we know the proper way to challenge someone to a duel is to slap them on the face with a glove. What do we conclude if someone slaps another person with a mitten? We could debate it, unless the slapper simultaneously declares, "please consider this mitten a glove". That removes all doubt, and even if the anal convicting argue it wasn't a proper challenge, it is tough to argue that the intent to duel wasn't there. |
In summary, I tried to find a way to support WMC and I failed. Perhaps I didn't try hard enough, so I'll leave it to others to explain why his actions should be ignored.
Please be more careful when resetting an article to an older version. Or did you have a particular reason for reinserting the dead weblink [6]? Regards, HaeB ( talk) 20:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank for your comment, but I am not Christina Thi. We might come from the same IP range or location; but surely I am not Christina Thi.
About the LogiGear page; I am not quite sure about the reason why Book section has been removed. I thought VISTACON information might be interesting audiences; If you think it likes an advertising, just remove VISTACON section, I am OK with that, but not deleting whole LogiGear article. All the information provided has the good references. I am trying to build Outsourcing company in Vietnam | Software testing company in Vietnam NewbieIT ( talk) 16:06, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
OlYeller21, Thank you again for your support. It inspired me to complete much more research and produce a first page I am proud of. However, User/Ks15ko/Personal Sandbox, continues to appear online, though it was in error, has no references and was the article nominated for speedy deletion. I created it in error, never intending it to go public in that state. I would like, as its author, for it to be completely retracted and the history made inaccessible except to high level administrators. Can I make that appeal through you, or can you guide me to the correct level of administrator? Thanks, Ks15ko ( talk) 17:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21. I am just letting you know that I deleted Fabio Agostini, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Courcelles 14:46, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I've just deleted Marcel Louzado which you tagged as a hoax. It took me twenty minutes or so of searching before I was sure enough - it seems there is such a Jiujitsuer, but I found specific claims of championships won which could be checked and were false. My point is that you probably did similar checks, or maybe have special knowledge of that scene: in a case like this it would be helpful to the reviewing admin if you noted on the article talk page your reasons for tagging it as a hoax. See, for example (if it's still there) Talk:Leandro Santinho Morales, which I have just written up and left for another admin to consider. Hoaxes that take a lot of checking before one is sure should normally go to AfD, but if the checking assembles damning enough evidence which once assembled can be checked quickly, a G3 speedy will usually be accepted. Well done for spotting it anyway, it's depressing how many get through. Regards, JohnCD ( talk) 21:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
you seriously can not be that dumb republican to belive that lies are not fiction! 71.99.92.124 ( talk) 14:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi mate, I am trying to start a page on my professional organisation, the Australian Veterinary Association, but it keeps getting deleted. Where am I going wrong ? I'm not really writing anything controversial, its a fairly dry history, and I have been basing my efforts on the entry for the American Veterinary Medical Association. Any tips ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by XPR250 ( talk • contribs) 02:11, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
thanks for the heads up, someone else already nailed it Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:09, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
I created a page yesterday for private transfer fees (admittedly, this was my first time creating a Wikipedia page, so there are certainly some formatting issues), and came back to find that another user (who has since deleted his accounts) made some pretty drastic changes that seemed to discredit more than add to the entry. The user deleted some of the headers, deleted the category listing, and removed all sources/citations. I was wondering what the best way to deal with this issue is. The topic of Private transfer fees is fairly controversial, with some large developers as their biggest proponents, but I don't want to get into a back and forth editing "war." Any suggestions? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolob ( talk • contribs) 15:32, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointer; I've deleted the page. Nyttend ( talk) 16:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, you can always stick on one of the CSD templates which will always be picked up sooner or later Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello OlYeller21. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Brook Waimarama Sanctuary, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to nature sanctuaries. Thank you. Kimchi.sg ( talk) 11:29, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I deleted Jacob Langvad as a copyvio even though you changed the speedy tag from G12 to A7. The actual source page uses CC-BY-NC-ND which is incompatible with Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA) so it was a copyvio after all. Kimchi.sg ( talk) 11:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |