This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion because in its current form it serves only to promote an entity, person or product, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic. However, the mere fact that a company, organization, or product is an article's subject does not, on its own, qualify that article for deletion under this criterion. Nor does this criterion apply where substantial encyclopedic content would remain after removing the promotional material; in this case please remove the promotional material yourself, or add the
![]() | This article contains content that is written like
an advertisement. |
tag to alert others to do so. See CSD G11.%5B%5BWP%3ACSD%23G11%7CG11%5D%5D%3A+Unambiguous+%5B%5BWP%3AADS%7Cadvertising%5D%5D+or+promotionG11
If this article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page, and you disagree with the given reason for deletion, you can click the button below and leave a message, explaining why you believe this article should not be deleted. You can also visit the talk page to check if you have received a response to your message.
Note that once tagged with this notice, the page may be deleted at any time if it unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria, or if an explanation posted to the talk page is found to be insufficient. Note to page author: you have not edited the article talk page yet. If you wish to contest this speedy deletion, clicking the button above will allow you to leave a talk page message explaining why you think this page should not be deleted. If you have already posted to the talk page but this message is still showing up, try purging the page cache.
Administrators: check links, history (last), and logs before deletion. Consider checking Google: web, news. This page was last edited by Gold Standard (contribs | logs) at 03:17 UTC (0 seconds ago)
Please consider placing the template: == Speedy deletion nomination of GNU C-Graph==
You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.
Thank you.
A tag has been placed on GNU C-Graph, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.
If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,
. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit
the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add
citations from independent
reliable sources to ensure that the page will be
verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
Visionat (
talk)
21:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
on the talk page of the author.
Hello, Visionat. We
welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things
you have written about in the article
GNU C-Graph, you should consider our guidance on
Conflicts of interest and take a look at the
Plain and simple conflict of interest guide.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Gold Standard 03:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Please post all messages on Talk:GNU_C-Graph
As the cited references, which point to statements by public agencies and officials clearly show, the article GNU C-Graph complies fully with Wikipedia's policies on Conflicts of interest, neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
As I suggested earlier, your apparent racial agenda - complicit with the intent of the regime of apartheid - is a gross conflict of interest with Wikipedia policy. Visionat ( talk) 17:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Please do not
attack other editors, as you did to
Talk:GNU C-Graph. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please
stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
ukexpat (
talk)
18:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello Visionat. I have deleted GNU C-Graph and wanted to expain why I have done so. First of all, to be included in Wikipedia, subjects need to have received coverage in independent sources - as far as I can tell this is not the case. Second, based on your signature here you created the software and therefore have a conflict of interest and it is highly advised that you do not create articles where you have a COI. I was also concerned that a large portion of the article was making accusations against others without suitable references - we have a strict policy that potentially libelous information about living people must be removed immediately. Finally, you appear to have been using multiple accounts ( Adriennegt and 72.252.229.15) which is forbidden. I'm sorry to throw so many policies at you and I am happy to explain any in more detail if you would like. Thank you SmartSE ( talk) 20:44, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
You do not appear to have a legitimate reason for deleting the page. The article "GNU C-Graph" does have coverage from independent sources. Firstly, it is independently a GNU package, and secondly the material - on theft, racial discrimination and apartheid - to which I believe is what you really object- is covered by documents published by public authorities cited in the text.
The defendants attacks are ongoing. They hack into my computer on an on going basis. I was unable to log into my usual visionat account, so I created adriennegt and switched back as soon as I was able to log in as visionat again. I then discontinued use of adriennegt.
AFAIK, the fact that I am the author of the software does not prohibit my writing the Wikipedia entry, and again is not a reason for the deleting the page. Had you read the article, you would have seen that the references are appropriate to Wikipedia policy. I was in the process of including such further suitable references when you deleted the page. The implication is that you seek to protect these references - concerning evidence of the crime of apartheid by eminent defendants - from public scrutiny.
It is your own actions that are in conflict with Wikipedia policy. Visionat ( talk) 21:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make
personal attacks on other people again, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Don't call Smartse, or anybody else, a racist again or you will be blocked for a good long time.
Bishonen |
talk
23:49, 3 April 2013 (UTC).
As you deleted the Talkpage for GNU C-Graph, I am posting my original message here for others to see:
Please post all replies and related messages to this Talk page.
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because...
As you point out, yourselves, "the mere fact that a company, organization, or product is an article's subject does not, on its own, qualify that article for deletion under this criterion".
If this were the case, then all Wikipedia articles on software would qualify for deletion. The fact that the article "GNU C-Graph" has been targeted for deletion is no more than a reflection of the fraudulent award of zero to the Dissertation that constitutes the unique subject's underlying work. Accordingly, this comes as no surprise when in fact the content of the article "GNU C-Graph" bears encyclopedic credentials well beyond that for Wikipedia's existing articles in the software category - as the development of GNU C-Graph chronicles an historic international criminal transaction seeking to preserve the crime of apartheid in universities.
Deletion of the article would evidently serve only the interests of the eminent criminal enterprise, complicit with the cover-up of the crimes. Such an overtly racially discriminatory act would be - at the very least - a flagrant abuse of Wikipedia's policies. -- 72.252.229.15 ( talk) 15:59, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
I have deleted your userpage version of GNU C-Graph as well. As Smartse pointed out at the help desk, "promotional" was far from the only issue with the article; it's an attack page, and I've deleted it per WP:BLP. Wikipedia doesn't host attack pages in article space, userspace, or anywhere else. Bishonen | talk 15:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC).
The discussion below has now been deleted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Requesting_review_of_speedy_delete . It took a number of attempts to copy the discussion to this page as each time I tried to paste the text, my browser would suddenly close!
Can someone take a look at User_talk:Visionat#Problems? I deleted GNU C-Graph ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) following this help desk post, explained to the editor why I did and now I have been accused of "preserving racism" and being a "pro-apartheid Wikipedian". The article wasn't entirely promotional, but I felt confident that most admins would also have deleted it on sight. SmartSE ( talk) 23:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Visionat ( talk) 15:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
This is to declare a conflict of interest under Wikipedia's Conflicts of Interest Policy in accordance with your Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, section 3(3), and to request reinstatement of the deleted article “GNU C-Graph” amended and uploaded to my user sandbox.
I argue that:
I am the author of the software package "GNU C-Graph" and the author of the draft article of the same name. While Wikipedia discourages the creation and editing of articles by authors closely connected with the subject, doing so is not prohibited; nor was I aware of the relevance of the COI policy until 3 April 2013, when the newly created article was “speedily deleted” (see [[User:Talk:Visionat#April_2013| message from User:Gold Standard]]. The purported criterion for deletion stated that the article appeared “to be written like an advertisement” serving “only to promote an entity, person or product”.
An objective reading of the deleted GNU C-Graph article would reveal that its content sought not to advertise, but to present verifiable factual information and evidence substantiating assertions that define the history of the software (typical software articles in Wikipedia devote a section to history). Rather than being promotional, the description of the software seeks to underscore its technical significance in the field as recommended in Wikipedia:NSOFTWARE. As I pointed out in the ensuing deletion discussion, Wikipedia's articles on software are all inherently promotional. Accordingly, the stated deletion criterion of promotion/advertising gives the appearance of bias.
The conduct of the administrators, which demonstrated (among other things) a lack of competence in matters of law, gave priority to responses comporting with bias: threats to block me for “a good long time”, disparaging remarks such as “soapboxing” and “boogeyman” claims. They failed to articulate what I have identified as the only breach of policy in the article – that although information likely to be challenged cited documents distributed by public authorities and public officials, the definition of “published” within the meaning of Wikipedia policy on verifiability pertains to sources distributed and accessible by the general public, not just individuals (see Wikipedia's definition of published in Wikipedia:Published, section 1.1.
It is evident from the amended draft article that under Wikipedia's Policy on Deletion, the administrators were obliged to first consider alternatives to deletion, and could simply have edited the article to remove proscribed content: “If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion.”
I submit that the administrators' breach of policy was motivated by a root contention that the evidence of racial discrimination exposed in the deleted article (particularly under the section “Theft Apartheid and Obstruction of Justice”) publicized the theft of rights in respect of software authored by a black woman. The summary deletion of the article for reasons pertaining only to ancillary background content corroborates the showing of bias already made apparent by the criterion noted for speedy deletion.
I've now had an opportunity to peruse Wikipedia's policies on verifiability, conflict of interest, and neutral point of view, with which I believe the amended draft article complies:
I look forward to your comments - and action.
Sincerely
Adrienne Gaye Thompson
Visionat (
talk)
18:51, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
This is to protest the misconceived, self-evidently unwarranted block imposed. Implicit in Wikipedia's "assume good faith" WP:AGF and other policies, is the Wikimedia Foundation's duty to ensure that those who wear the badge of "administrator" conduct themselves in accordance with professional and ethical standards governing services to the public. These include standards recognised by professional entities, national legislation, and international conventions. Recognition of the common practice of victimizing a person as a result of complaints related to bias is enshrined in the various instruments of national and international law - and is itself a violation of WP:AGF - to say the least. I regard further comments in this section as unnecessary, and therefore not worth my time. Visionat Visionat ( talk) 17:09, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
As discussed on ANI, you have been blocked for 24 hours for failure to WP:AGF and instead make a personal attack against the admin. If this continues an indef block should be implemented. Toddst1 ( talk) 00:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
I submit that the administrators' breach of policy was motivated by a root contention that the evidence of racial discrimination exposed in the deleted article (particularly under the section “Theft Apartheid and Obstruction of Justice”) publicized the theft of rights in respect of software authored by a black woman.
Long before I wrote the proposed article "GNU C-Graph", I included references under the articles Convolution theorem and Convolution for the benefit of students and their professors teaching and learning about convolution. These references were removed by MrOllie and Hu12. Notwithstanding my belief that GNU C-Graph meets the WP:Notability criteria, Mark viking pointed out "external links aren't required to be WP notable, just relevant".
Most reasonable people would agree that removing the reference to the only software that easily demonstrates the convolution theorem would be a disservice to the public. The text of the references reads:
Under Convolution#External_links:
Under Convolution_theorem#Additional_resources:
No doubt some WP:AGF administrator will recognise the educational value and reinstate the references for the benefit of the public. Visionat ( talk) 14:16, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
User:Visionat/sandbox, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for
deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Visionat/sandbox and please be sure to
sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of
User:Visionat/sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.
Psychonaut (
talk)
09:50, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GNU C-Graph signals.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 12:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GNU C-Graph transforms.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 12:57, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GNU C-Graph Homepage Background.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Psychonaut ( talk) 09:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion because in its current form it serves only to promote an entity, person or product, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic. However, the mere fact that a company, organization, or product is an article's subject does not, on its own, qualify that article for deletion under this criterion. Nor does this criterion apply where substantial encyclopedic content would remain after removing the promotional material; in this case please remove the promotional material yourself, or add the
![]() | This article contains content that is written like
an advertisement. |
tag to alert others to do so. See CSD G11.%5B%5BWP%3ACSD%23G11%7CG11%5D%5D%3A+Unambiguous+%5B%5BWP%3AADS%7Cadvertising%5D%5D+or+promotionG11
If this article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page, and you disagree with the given reason for deletion, you can click the button below and leave a message, explaining why you believe this article should not be deleted. You can also visit the talk page to check if you have received a response to your message.
Note that once tagged with this notice, the page may be deleted at any time if it unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria, or if an explanation posted to the talk page is found to be insufficient. Note to page author: you have not edited the article talk page yet. If you wish to contest this speedy deletion, clicking the button above will allow you to leave a talk page message explaining why you think this page should not be deleted. If you have already posted to the talk page but this message is still showing up, try purging the page cache.
Administrators: check links, history (last), and logs before deletion. Consider checking Google: web, news. This page was last edited by Gold Standard (contribs | logs) at 03:17 UTC (0 seconds ago)
Please consider placing the template: == Speedy deletion nomination of GNU C-Graph==
You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.
Thank you.
A tag has been placed on GNU C-Graph, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.
If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,
. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit
the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add
citations from independent
reliable sources to ensure that the page will be
verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
Visionat (
talk)
21:16, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
on the talk page of the author.
Hello, Visionat. We
welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things
you have written about in the article
GNU C-Graph, you should consider our guidance on
Conflicts of interest and take a look at the
Plain and simple conflict of interest guide.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Gold Standard 03:24, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Please post all messages on Talk:GNU_C-Graph
As the cited references, which point to statements by public agencies and officials clearly show, the article GNU C-Graph complies fully with Wikipedia's policies on Conflicts of interest, neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
As I suggested earlier, your apparent racial agenda - complicit with the intent of the regime of apartheid - is a gross conflict of interest with Wikipedia policy. Visionat ( talk) 17:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Please do not
attack other editors, as you did to
Talk:GNU C-Graph. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please
stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
ukexpat (
talk)
18:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Hello Visionat. I have deleted GNU C-Graph and wanted to expain why I have done so. First of all, to be included in Wikipedia, subjects need to have received coverage in independent sources - as far as I can tell this is not the case. Second, based on your signature here you created the software and therefore have a conflict of interest and it is highly advised that you do not create articles where you have a COI. I was also concerned that a large portion of the article was making accusations against others without suitable references - we have a strict policy that potentially libelous information about living people must be removed immediately. Finally, you appear to have been using multiple accounts ( Adriennegt and 72.252.229.15) which is forbidden. I'm sorry to throw so many policies at you and I am happy to explain any in more detail if you would like. Thank you SmartSE ( talk) 20:44, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
You do not appear to have a legitimate reason for deleting the page. The article "GNU C-Graph" does have coverage from independent sources. Firstly, it is independently a GNU package, and secondly the material - on theft, racial discrimination and apartheid - to which I believe is what you really object- is covered by documents published by public authorities cited in the text.
The defendants attacks are ongoing. They hack into my computer on an on going basis. I was unable to log into my usual visionat account, so I created adriennegt and switched back as soon as I was able to log in as visionat again. I then discontinued use of adriennegt.
AFAIK, the fact that I am the author of the software does not prohibit my writing the Wikipedia entry, and again is not a reason for the deleting the page. Had you read the article, you would have seen that the references are appropriate to Wikipedia policy. I was in the process of including such further suitable references when you deleted the page. The implication is that you seek to protect these references - concerning evidence of the crime of apartheid by eminent defendants - from public scrutiny.
It is your own actions that are in conflict with Wikipedia policy. Visionat ( talk) 21:41, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
This is your only warning; if you make
personal attacks on other people again, you may be
blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Don't call Smartse, or anybody else, a racist again or you will be blocked for a good long time.
Bishonen |
talk
23:49, 3 April 2013 (UTC).
As you deleted the Talkpage for GNU C-Graph, I am posting my original message here for others to see:
Please post all replies and related messages to this Talk page.
This page is not unambiguously promotional, because...
As you point out, yourselves, "the mere fact that a company, organization, or product is an article's subject does not, on its own, qualify that article for deletion under this criterion".
If this were the case, then all Wikipedia articles on software would qualify for deletion. The fact that the article "GNU C-Graph" has been targeted for deletion is no more than a reflection of the fraudulent award of zero to the Dissertation that constitutes the unique subject's underlying work. Accordingly, this comes as no surprise when in fact the content of the article "GNU C-Graph" bears encyclopedic credentials well beyond that for Wikipedia's existing articles in the software category - as the development of GNU C-Graph chronicles an historic international criminal transaction seeking to preserve the crime of apartheid in universities.
Deletion of the article would evidently serve only the interests of the eminent criminal enterprise, complicit with the cover-up of the crimes. Such an overtly racially discriminatory act would be - at the very least - a flagrant abuse of Wikipedia's policies. -- 72.252.229.15 ( talk) 15:59, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
I have deleted your userpage version of GNU C-Graph as well. As Smartse pointed out at the help desk, "promotional" was far from the only issue with the article; it's an attack page, and I've deleted it per WP:BLP. Wikipedia doesn't host attack pages in article space, userspace, or anywhere else. Bishonen | talk 15:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC).
The discussion below has now been deleted from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Requesting_review_of_speedy_delete . It took a number of attempts to copy the discussion to this page as each time I tried to paste the text, my browser would suddenly close!
Can someone take a look at User_talk:Visionat#Problems? I deleted GNU C-Graph ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) following this help desk post, explained to the editor why I did and now I have been accused of "preserving racism" and being a "pro-apartheid Wikipedian". The article wasn't entirely promotional, but I felt confident that most admins would also have deleted it on sight. SmartSE ( talk) 23:11, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Visionat ( talk) 15:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
This is to declare a conflict of interest under Wikipedia's Conflicts of Interest Policy in accordance with your Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, section 3(3), and to request reinstatement of the deleted article “GNU C-Graph” amended and uploaded to my user sandbox.
I argue that:
I am the author of the software package "GNU C-Graph" and the author of the draft article of the same name. While Wikipedia discourages the creation and editing of articles by authors closely connected with the subject, doing so is not prohibited; nor was I aware of the relevance of the COI policy until 3 April 2013, when the newly created article was “speedily deleted” (see [[User:Talk:Visionat#April_2013| message from User:Gold Standard]]. The purported criterion for deletion stated that the article appeared “to be written like an advertisement” serving “only to promote an entity, person or product”.
An objective reading of the deleted GNU C-Graph article would reveal that its content sought not to advertise, but to present verifiable factual information and evidence substantiating assertions that define the history of the software (typical software articles in Wikipedia devote a section to history). Rather than being promotional, the description of the software seeks to underscore its technical significance in the field as recommended in Wikipedia:NSOFTWARE. As I pointed out in the ensuing deletion discussion, Wikipedia's articles on software are all inherently promotional. Accordingly, the stated deletion criterion of promotion/advertising gives the appearance of bias.
The conduct of the administrators, which demonstrated (among other things) a lack of competence in matters of law, gave priority to responses comporting with bias: threats to block me for “a good long time”, disparaging remarks such as “soapboxing” and “boogeyman” claims. They failed to articulate what I have identified as the only breach of policy in the article – that although information likely to be challenged cited documents distributed by public authorities and public officials, the definition of “published” within the meaning of Wikipedia policy on verifiability pertains to sources distributed and accessible by the general public, not just individuals (see Wikipedia's definition of published in Wikipedia:Published, section 1.1.
It is evident from the amended draft article that under Wikipedia's Policy on Deletion, the administrators were obliged to first consider alternatives to deletion, and could simply have edited the article to remove proscribed content: “If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion.”
I submit that the administrators' breach of policy was motivated by a root contention that the evidence of racial discrimination exposed in the deleted article (particularly under the section “Theft Apartheid and Obstruction of Justice”) publicized the theft of rights in respect of software authored by a black woman. The summary deletion of the article for reasons pertaining only to ancillary background content corroborates the showing of bias already made apparent by the criterion noted for speedy deletion.
I've now had an opportunity to peruse Wikipedia's policies on verifiability, conflict of interest, and neutral point of view, with which I believe the amended draft article complies:
I look forward to your comments - and action.
Sincerely
Adrienne Gaye Thompson
Visionat (
talk)
18:51, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
This is to protest the misconceived, self-evidently unwarranted block imposed. Implicit in Wikipedia's "assume good faith" WP:AGF and other policies, is the Wikimedia Foundation's duty to ensure that those who wear the badge of "administrator" conduct themselves in accordance with professional and ethical standards governing services to the public. These include standards recognised by professional entities, national legislation, and international conventions. Recognition of the common practice of victimizing a person as a result of complaints related to bias is enshrined in the various instruments of national and international law - and is itself a violation of WP:AGF - to say the least. I regard further comments in this section as unnecessary, and therefore not worth my time. Visionat Visionat ( talk) 17:09, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
As discussed on ANI, you have been blocked for 24 hours for failure to WP:AGF and instead make a personal attack against the admin. If this continues an indef block should be implemented. Toddst1 ( talk) 00:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
I submit that the administrators' breach of policy was motivated by a root contention that the evidence of racial discrimination exposed in the deleted article (particularly under the section “Theft Apartheid and Obstruction of Justice”) publicized the theft of rights in respect of software authored by a black woman.
Long before I wrote the proposed article "GNU C-Graph", I included references under the articles Convolution theorem and Convolution for the benefit of students and their professors teaching and learning about convolution. These references were removed by MrOllie and Hu12. Notwithstanding my belief that GNU C-Graph meets the WP:Notability criteria, Mark viking pointed out "external links aren't required to be WP notable, just relevant".
Most reasonable people would agree that removing the reference to the only software that easily demonstrates the convolution theorem would be a disservice to the public. The text of the references reads:
Under Convolution#External_links:
Under Convolution_theorem#Additional_resources:
No doubt some WP:AGF administrator will recognise the educational value and reinstate the references for the benefit of the public. Visionat ( talk) 14:16, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
User:Visionat/sandbox, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for
deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Visionat/sandbox and please be sure to
sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of
User:Visionat/sandbox during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.
Psychonaut (
talk)
09:50, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GNU C-Graph signals.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 12:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GNU C-Graph transforms.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 12:57, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GNU C-Graph Homepage Background.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Psychonaut ( talk) 09:17, 21 October 2015 (UTC)