User:Chrislk02/archive24

Note

Until ~May 27th, I attempted to move posts here linearly in the order they were received. I have started to move posts here as they are satisfactorily resolved now instead of in the linear fashion. Just wanted to make sure anybody looking through these at some point does not try to find something by date expecting them to be truly sorted by date.

2015 Archive

The Bugle: Issue CVI, January 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Jonas Vinther on Hitler and Cliftonian on the Rhodesia Regiment Interview: 2014 Military History Newcomer Award nominees Review essay: Nick-D on the Australian War Memorial Op-ed: TomStar81 on the birth of strategic bombing Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:27, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Museum hacks and museum edits

Hello there!

Upcoming events:

• February 6–8: The third annual ArtBytes Hackathon at the Walters Art Museum! This year Wikimedia DC is partnering with the Walters for a hack-a-thon at the intersection of art and technology, and I would like to see Wikimedia well represented.
• February 11: The monthly WikiSalon, same place as usual. RSVP on Meetup or just show up!
• February 15: Wiki Loves Small Museums in Ocean City. Mary Mark Ockerbloom, with support from Wikimedia DC, will be leading a workshop at the Small Museum Association Conference on how they can contribute to Wikipedia. Tons of representatives from GLAM institutions will be present, and we are looking for volunteers. If you would like to help out, check out "Information for Volunteers".

I am also pleased to announce events for Wikimedia DC Black History Month with Howard University and NPR. Details on those events soon.

If you have any questions or have any requests, please email me at james.harewikimediadc.org.

See you there! – James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 03:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia DC celebrates Black History Month, and more!

Hello again!

Not even a week ago I sent out a message talking about upcoming events in DC. Guess what? There are more events coming up in February.

First, as a reminder, there is a WikiSalon on February 11 (RSVP here or just show up) and Wiki Loves Small Museums at the Small Museum Association Conference on February 15 (more information here).

Now, I am very pleased to announce:

• Tuesday, February 17 from 10 AM to 3 PM there will be #WikiTurgy at the University of Maryland. Join fellow theatre enthusiasts for a “mass act of public dramaturgy!”
• Thursday, February 19 from 10 AM to 4 PM we are hosting the Howard University Black History Edit-a-Thon. We are working in partnership with the Moorland-Spingarn Research Center to improve Wikipedia’s coverage of African-American and African diasporic history.
• Tuesday, February 24 from 6 PM to 8 PM we have the Black History Month “First Edit” at NPR. Help improve Wikipedia and help others make their first edit to Wikipedia!
• Finally, our monthly dinner meetup is on Saturday, February 28.

There is going to be a lot going on, and I hope you can come to some of the events!

If you have any questions or need any special accommodations, please let me know.

Regards,

James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 18:19, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Bible beater listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bible beater. Since you had some involvement with the Bible beater redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVII, February 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Nick-D on the British Pacific Fleet Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the advent of chemical warfare Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Editing for Women's History in March

Hello,

I am very excited to announce this month’s events, focused on Women’s History Month:

• Sunday, March 8: Women in the Arts 2015 Edit-a-thon – 10 AM to 4 PM

  Women in the Arts and ArtAndFeminism Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at the National Museum of Women in the Arts. Free coffee and lunch served!

  More information • RSVP on Meetup

• Wednesday, March 11: March WikiSalon – 7 PM to 9 PM

  An evening gathering with free-flowing conversation and free pizza.

  More information • RSVP on Meetup (or just show up!)

• Friday, March 13: NIH Women's History Month Edit-a-Thon – 9 AM to 4 PM

  In honor of Women’s History Month, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is organizing and hosting an edit-a-thon to improve coverage of women in science in Wikipedia. Free coffee and lunch served!

  More information • RSVP on Meetup

• Saturday, March 21: Women in STEM Edit-a-Thon at DCPL – 12 PM

  Celebrate Women's History Month by building, editing, and expanding articles about women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields during DC Public Library's first full-day edit-a-thon.

  More information • RSVP on Meetup

• Friday, March 27: She Blinded Me with Science, Part III – 10 AM to 4 PM

  Smithsonian Institution Archives Groundbreaking Women in Science Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. Free lunch courtesy of Wikimedia DC!

  More information • RSVP on Meetup

• Saturday, March 28: March Dinner Meetup – 6 PM

  Dinner and drinks with your fellow Wikipedians!

  More information • RSVP on Meetup

Hope you can make it to an event! If you have any questions or require any special accommodations, please let me know.

Thanks,

James Hare

To unsubscribe from this newsletter, remove your name from this list. 02:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Review essay: Nick-D on the Australian Fleet Air Arm Museum Op-ed: TomStar81 on submarine warfare in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Upcoming attractions in DC

Hello!

Here are some upcoming DC meetups in April and May:

• Tuesday, April 14: National Archives Hackathon on Wikipedia Space with American University – 2:30-5pm

  See the latest work on the Wikipedia Space exhibit in the new NARA Innovation Hub and brainstorm on new ideas for a public exhibit about Wikipedia

• Friday, April 17: Women in Tech Edit-a-thon with Tech LadyMafia – 5-9pm

  Team up with Tech LadyMafia to improve Wikipedia content on women in the history of technology.

• Saturday, April 25: April Dinner Meetup – 6 PM

  Dinner and drinks with your fellow Wikipedians!

• Friday, May 1: International Labour Day Edit-a-Thon – 1:30 PM to 4:30 PM

  An edit-a-thon at the University of Maryland

Hope to see you at these events! If you have any questions or require any special accommodations, please let me know.

Cheers,

James Hare

To remove yourself from this mailing list, remove your name from this list. 22:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Portal:Contents/Portals/Intro

There's a problem at Portal:Contents/Portals/Intro. Earlier today, a new user moved this page to Portal:Ahm masum/Sandbox, and its talk page to Portal talk:Ahm masum/Sandbox. The new user then edited the redirect at Portal:Contents/Portals/Intro so that it needed an admin to put it right. I tagged it with {{db-move}} and you did the deletion - but not the move. Perhaps I messed up the tagging? Meanwhile ‎Moxy (talk · contribs) has recreated the missing pages, but the history of the original portal page and its talk page are still at the wrong location. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:30, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I was confused about what needed to be done, sorry for the mixup, I think I fixed it now! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:32, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! The portal page looks good now, but could you do the same fix to the portal talk page? -- John of Reading (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Should be done! Let me know if there is anything else I can do for you. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:42, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Looks good now - thanks! -- John of Reading (talk) 17:49, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

WP:CSD of laminomycin

Can you review your decision on deleting the page laminomycin. I am in contact with CAS and RSC about it. I also have images of the molecule. - Offhandluca — Preceding unsigned comment added by Offhandluca (talk • contribs) 17:39, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable sources you can cite? I did a cursory google search and found nothing. WP is not the proper place to report new findings. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:41, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

That's because this is the first instant it has appeared. I have created it. Asinex said it hasn't existed and that this is the first case it has been reported, they gave me the Systematic name. The RSC said that it is not in any of there databases and am asking both CAS and RSC if i have created it. Let me keep it up until it has been reported otherwise. - Offhandluca

FYI ,you can end a post with 4 tildes (the ~ symbol) and it will automatically sign your posts. Re laminomycin, Wikipedia is not an appropriate venue for the 1st reporting of new scientific information. Unless you can provide a reliable 3rd party sources, the articles does not belong here. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:53, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Isn't Wikipedia a place where knowledge can be shared by one another. Making it public and letting other people decide whether they want to see it or not. I'm sure I have some rights to post it on wiki and contribute to society - offhandluca Offhandluca (talk) 19:58, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

You can read WP:NOT, specifically WP:NOT#OR for more information on why this venue is inappropriate for your discovery. What you are writing an article on, as it is new, undiscovered and/or unpublished is considered Original Research, and not appropriate as encyclopedic content. You have the right to appeal this deletion at deletion review WP:DRV, but before you do so, you are encourage to read the links I provided above (specifically the stuff at WP:NOT). Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:36, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Template:Istanbul Metro M2 route diagram

Did you skip this deletion for a particular reason, or was it just an oversight? Thanks. Useddenim (talk) 19:59, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Not sure, I know I looked at one and it still had a mainspace link. it could also be that it had a WP:PROD and not WP:CSD tag? Either way, I took care of it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 21:42, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Deleted Page :17:55, 23 April 2015 Chrislk02 (talk | contribs) deleted page Vijnana Bharati (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)

Hi , Please reconsider the deletion of the article Vijnana Bharati. It is meant to be an encyclopaedic article & not an advertisement. Vijnan Bharati is the largest scientific organization in India accredited for many achievements by Government of India & a huge number of citizens. Please also advise on how to modify this article so as to prevent future deletions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 10001kudos (talk • contribs) 02:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I will take a look at it some time tomorrow, I cannot make any promises, but I will put some extra effort into the research and let you know what I decide and why. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 02:39, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

It looks like it was already re-created. Just be careful to to copy pasted directly from external sites, that is a quick way to get an article deleted as a WP:COPYVIO. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:18, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Tea production in Bangladesh

Hi, you deleted the above yesterday because it was created by a sock of User:Bazaan - which I completely understand. Is it within policy for me to recreate it as it was? My only involvement with it was that I reviewed it for DYK as a QPQ - and it did appear as a DYK. It wasn't a bad article - although it could do with some changes. Is it possible for me to get access to it and recreate it? DeCausa (talk) 06:44, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

I do not have an objection to that, as long as you are not another sock of said user! IMHO, the articles did not seem problematic, but in the past I have been involved with SOCKS that created BS articles that looked good, but were all bogus. If you want a copy of the deleted content, let me or another admin know. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:13, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIX, April 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the landing at Anzac Cove Op-ed: TomStar81 on the debut of poison gas in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 06:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Caliphesses

The word "caliphess" and its derivatives gets 287 returns on google books therefore r3 does not apply. Therefore I will recreate it. Please do not abuse your admin tools. Hhplactube (talk) 13:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to re-create it if you feel it is appropriate to do so, at the end of the day WP:IAR is pretty powerful when used appropriately. Re the deletion of it, you may want to contact User:WikiDan61 who tagged it for speedy deletion. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

@Hhplactube: Caliphess might well be a valid term for a female caliph. Caliphessify, Caliphessly, Caliphessification, etc, are not valid words. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

@Hhplactube: I also suggest that you read up on WP:AGF before you go accusing people of abusing tools, it is a quick way to offend people who volunteer their time, and in general, do there best to make the right decision, which in my experience, is most administrators on this project. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:26, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry. I sincerely apologize. Hhplactube (talk) 14:35, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

No problem, trust me, I understand it is frustrating when something gets deleted. Thank you for your contributions! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Deleted Page :12:43, 27 April 2015 Chrislk02 (talk | contribs) deleted page Exeter City Supporters' Trust (A7: Article about an eligible subject, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

Hi, I am curious as to the deletion of this article and the reason for it not meeting the criteria for a credible claim of significance. As the organisation is similar to Pompey Supporters Trust, I used that article as a guide for this one. I feel that my article makes equally as credible claims as that of the Pompey article. I am however, happy to add more references from other sources (which I was planning in doing this week) if that would help my article to meet the necessary criteria (such as http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/3044589.stm or http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/24458891); or anything else that can help. I look forward to you answer Ze gooner (talk) 15:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Let me look into it, I will get back to you shortly (on this page). Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:04, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

The reason that I deleted that article was that all of the references provided were from the website of the organization being written about. In WP:NOTE, the first line of the General notability guideline states "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." You can also see Notability requires verifiable evidence. Can you provide citations from any 3rd party references (news sources, journal articles, etc) verifying that the organization you are writing about is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia? If you can provide me with some links that pass muster, then I can undelete it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:10, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the speedy reply. I fully understand the reasoning behind why the article was deleted. I have found the following 3rd party references which will hopefully be enough to undelete the article:

Supporters set to take control: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/3044589.stm

Trust increases Grecians funding: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/e/exeter_city/7324294.stm

Record numbers for Exeter trust: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/e/exeter_city/7476860.stm

Exeter City: The fans who wouldn't take no for an answer: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/24458891

Exeter City director Paul Morrish backs fan ownership model: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/29789449

Exeter City: More fans to join club's board of directors: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/28971871

Hartlepool curb Exeter’s bounce to spring from bottom of League Two: http://www.theguardian.com/football/football-league-blog/2014/oct/12/hartlepool-exeter-bottom-league-two

Supporters Direct celebrates growing list of fan ownership success stories: http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/16/supporters-direct-fan-ownership-supporter-ownership-week

Exeter City supporters praised after floodlights fundraising success: http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exeter-City-supporters-praised-floodlights/story-24528268-detail/story.html

Exeter City Supporters' Trust to have more members on the board: http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exeter-City-Supporters-Trust-members-board/story-22847852-detail/story.html

Exeter City fans' anger at supporters' trust and club board following PFA £100,000 loan: http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exeter-City-fans-anger-supporters-trust-club/story-21186871-detail/story.html

Exeter City supporters keen to help club pay back PFA loan: http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exeter-City-supporters-keen-help-club-pay-PFA/story-21217775-detail/story.html

Ze gooner (talk) 15:33, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I will undelete it, and watch it. If it is not up to an acceptable standard by tomorrow, it may be deleted again. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I am curious to know if the article meets the criteria now. Thanks in advance! Ze gooner (talk) 17:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Looks better, it no longer seems to qualify for [WP:CSD]]! The inclusion of links to external reliable references helps substantiate any claims made in the article. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:21, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Would it be possible to remove the Issues tag from the article? Or are there other issues that could be solved? Ze gooner (talk) 20:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed it, there seemed to be several reliable sources cited.. Somebody more familiar with article standards in the area may come along and add their own tags/etc. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:31, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Cytherea (actress)

I see that you made a deletion of Cytherea (actress), citing "G6: Deleted to make room for an uncontroversial page move", apparently to enable an "uncontroversial" page move of Cytherea (pornographic actress) to Cytherea (actress). This does not seem to have been proper, as there was an RM just this month that concluded that this same move should not take place. I suggest that you should check for recent RM discussions with contrary results before taking such actions in the future. I did not actually figure out how you concluded that G6 applied and that the planned move was uncontroversial, but I suppose someone must have claimed that (apparently incorrectly) somewhere. Please also see my related remark at User talk:Fortdj33. —BarrelProof (talk) 15:42, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I arrived at that article because it was in the CAT:CSD which I patrol regularly. I tend to WP:AGF, even as an administrator, and nothing seemed out of place for the request, and the summary of the deletion was auto populated from the requestors template when I performed the deletion. Can you provide a link to the RM so that I can make sure everything ends up at the proper place? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

It seems to have been a good-faith submission – apparently the submitter did not check either (despite having been warned about the exact same issue for another article about a different pornographic actress this month). I reverted the move. The RM I was discussing is currently found at Talk:Cytherea (pornographic actress)#Requested move 24 March 2015. After being reverted, a new RM has been filed at Talk:Cytherea (pornographic actress)#Requested move 27 April 2015. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:25, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Deletion Inquiry

why did u delete the amazing atheist i just completed it daamit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolidon (talk • contribs) 16:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Because it was not a Wikipedia article, and the content was unlikely to be appropriate for Wikipedia as it was the 8th time it had been deleted. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry About templat:fullurl

I want to create page Templat:fullurl for Wiki on Indonesia. I'm very sory. Thank you ^_^, Gbu StephenTai93 (talk) 17:21, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

No problems at all! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:39, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

16:23, 27 April 2015 Chrislk02 (talk | contribs) deleted page MAAYA (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.itu.int/wsis/stocktaking/plugin/documents2.asp?project=1299663306)

This page was speedy deleted without taking into account my statement about the fact that the copyright infringement accusation was not standing. The ITU cited page presents the MAAYA institution using information from the MAAYA site the same way that the MAAYA presentation I made in Wikipedia. So the very source is the MAAYA site and not the record made in this ITU page ...and anyway both the MAAYA site and the ITU site are public information. Danielpimienta (talk) 15:59, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a repository of "public information", it is a place for encyclopedic content. As the site you retrieved the information from does not have the same goals and objectives as this project, a copy paste makes it highly unlikely that that the content would be appropriate for this site out of the box. Additionally, unless you are the original author of the content, or have received an explicit release of the information from the original author, the content is still subject to WP:COPYRIGHT. Either way, as it stood, it was not appropriate for wikipedia. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:03, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

If your job is to demotivate the potential contributors to Wikipedia, I congratulate you, you are doing an outstanding job. The argument about "public information" was just to tell you that the copyright argument is pure and absolute nonsense... and by the way, yes, as the actual Executive Secretary of MAAYA, I am the original author of the content which has been retaken by ITU from our site and which I was using as the first draft of an article about MAAYA on Wikipedia with the will that others (and myself) will in sequence enhance it. I should have started with the French version of the article instead of loosing my time with a stubborn closed mind person that does not understand that Public domain and copyright are incompatible concepts. Danielpimienta (talk) 20:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

First off, this is not my job, I do this on a purely volunteer basis. Secondly, I go above and beyond to help and motivate users whenever I can. Now, to your complaint. I reviewed the site in question and nowhere (that I can find with a reasonable amount of effort) is there an assertion of the copyright status. In these cases, the standard is to assume copyright, unless the copyright holder explicitly licenses it under a different license or releases it to the public domain. If this is what you would like to do, and you can verify that you are the creator of the content in question, there is a way that you can do this through the WP:OTRS. I personally am not prepared to do the necessary verification that you are in fact the creator of the content, a quick post on my talk page saying "I am the original author of this content, and I release it under this license" is insufficient. An easy alternative (that requires more effort on your part) is to re-write the article not using direct text from the site, instead, writing it in a format that is consistent with Wikipedias style guidelines . I hope this helps to clarify the issue! Thanks, Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 21:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dutch Doll of Finedon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cellar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

From Peter Munton

Hi Chris once agin thank you for your help I now know how to ust "Talk" Peter.Munton (talk) 17:16, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

No problem, glad I can help! Let me know if you have any other questions. FYI, it is common for people to reply to a comment you leave on their page on the same page (although I am going to go and let you know on your page). A quick way to keep up if somebody has replied is to add the page to the your watch list (there should also be a button at the top of the page to do that). Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:31, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

27 April 2015 Chrislk02 (talk | contribs) deleted page ZappRx (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)

Hi Chris! I created an article on ZappRx, which you deleted. I would like to improve this page. It is already referenced in two different articles that already exist on Wikipedia, including Jeremy Levin and Inc. 30 under 30. Is it possible for me to get access to it and recreate/improve upon it? I've been editing articles here and there for two years, but that was my first time creating one, so would like to try again. Thanks. Khv422 (talk) 20:31, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I reviewed the deleted article, and, after a deeper inspection, it appears as though it may not have been written like an advertisement as the speedy deletion criteria G11 requires, so I undeleted it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:50, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Corratel

Hi Chris, I was notified of a speedy deletion ... I took some time to create a page for this company as I am performing a study of some of the top players who have significant market share in the Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) industry. This study specifically pertains to major multinational corporations who have dealings with Fortune 500 companies and have market share in this industry. I would like to include this company in my study and I have corresponding wiki page for each company in my study. I am new to wiki but I am passionate about the industry and would feel honored to contribute in any way.

If you compare it to the other BPO companies in the space the text that was written was not promotional as Sykes Enterprises displays services as well. I was just following some of the other companies in my report. We can remove that section and only leave main description but I am unable to access what was there now. Mrbpo112722 (talk) 16:57, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Based on the description of your project, Wikipedia may not be the place for it. That being said, I may be wrong. I suggest some for of a Draft of what you are trying write. I will look at what you wrote and see if it can be moved into your local space so that you can work on it. I will get back to you here. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:23, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I just reviewed the deleted Corratel article, and there was very little content in it. I encourage you to read through Wikipedias notability guidelines before you try to recontribute this (or similar articles), as it was the 3rd time it was deleted. A good guideline in determining notability is a google search for the name, and looking through what comes up? Are there books about the company (e.g. Microsoft, Google), or is it mostly promotional material for the company? Having a book written about a company or coverage about the companies notability from a major publisher or news outlet is what you need. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:29, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Deleted page while I was creating it

Excuse me, I was in the process of adding content to a page I created an hour ago and have been steadily updating since, when it was deleted out from under me. What gives? This isn't a joke, I give money to WIkipedia. How do you expect new things to get into an encyclopedia if you delete them out from under someone who is making it? How do I get my work back so I can keep working on it?

----Isabel  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Idraves (talk • contribs) 18:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC) 

Firstly, I encourage you to create it in a draft at, say User:Idraves/draft. Secondly, let me review the deletion, and I will get back to you. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I moved the content to the draft page above, feel free to work on it there as long as you need to! If you want help moving it back when you feel it is done, please let me know. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Chrislk02, would you mind please taking a look at what I have made, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Idraves/draft , and let me know if you think it is ready for prime time. IF so, would you mind moving it back to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Technology_(discipline) which I have already told people about and asked them to edit (I found people who were defining the term on their blogs and so forth and asked them to comment). One thing - I felt that the other existing page on this topic which is a teensy stub and has existed since 2010, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_in_Creative_Technologies , should be incorporated into the Creative Technology page, so I made a paragraph for academia and added to the list of schools offering the degree. Would you mind please deleting the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_in_Creative_Technologies page if you agree - no content will be lost as long as you publish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Idraves/draft . Thank you for your interest. Idraves (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2015 (UTC) Isabel

Speedy Deletion of Article Celebrities Concierge & Staffing Services

That you didn't read my statements on the talk page, or simply didn't care to check the references is pretty apparent by your remarks in the post-deletion notice. That Celebrities Concierge & Staffing Services has been hosted on CNBC as an authority in the industry (See Billion Dollar Listings and notice that this more than "anecdotal"). If I thought it would make a difference, I could easily provide you with literally hundreds of news articles, news video footage and other indisputable proofs that this is not some fly-by-night or insignificant company. Ormr2014 (talk) 18:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I did follow several of links, specifically the one to the WSJ, which took me directly to TMZ. This, and how most of the topic of the articles were not about the company itself, but on the industry it served. Are there any articles where the notability of that company is the primary topic? If so, that would go a long ways. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:50, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

You know, it's really sad that while editors and authors have no real say-so over whether or not their content gets deleted, there is no real arbitration process. The dictatorial attitude of many of you editors and admins is astounding to say the least! Ormr2014 (talk) 18:48, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

You are welcome to take it to Deletion review, or if you would like to take some time to address the concerns I posted above, I am not opposed to undeleting it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:50, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

As I see you deleted the comments I posted on your talk page attempting to help you with this, and instead of attempting to resolve the issue peaceably, acted in a retaliatory manner (the warning for which you also deleted from your page), I am beginning to question the Good faith nature of your actions. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

EXPG

Please restore EXPG to my user space. (Why did you delete it so fast? I had some sources prepared for it.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 20:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Not to sound unfounded: [1], [2], [3], [4]. I have more, but I didn't really know what I could do with them. I will try to find more. I will probably write something that looks like the opening paragraph here: [5]. (I cann't use this one as a source directly cause it's a blog.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 20:52, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for bothering you again. When I prepare it, will you be able to restore the acticle with its edit history? (I guess it would mean to restore all the deleted revisions.) Cause I can create it from a scratch, but I would prefer to preserve the edit history. --Moscow Connection (talk) 21:51, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I am pretty sure that I can do that. Just let me know, Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:29, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Why was this closed?

Why would you close a presently tied 3–3 !vote discussion as a consensus keep: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louisiana State University rugby? And that had just been re-listed three days ago? This article did not have sufficient independent sources at the outset to support a determination of notability, and a significant effort to improve it was underway. Your premature close prejudged whether those efforts were/are sufficient. I urge you to reconsider, and wait to close it after it's been relisted for a full week, and others have had an opportunity to review the newly added sources. Thank you. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:42, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Let me look at it. I was just going through the "AFD old" and based on what I read leaned towards a weak keep. I will get back to you. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:30, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

I just looked at the votes @Dirtlawyer1:, it appears to be a 3 keep, 2 delete? Is there a delete I am missing? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:32, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Chris, we count the nominator as the third "delete" vote. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

After reviewing it, in the absence of another vote, I counted a 3-2 vote in favor of Keep. Additionally, this was after a 3rd re-list with heavy discussion going back and forth between two primary editors. After further reviewing the discussion and the references, I agree with many of the objections to the article, and understand the concerns. "Will this open the door for every intramural/small college team to have an argument as to why their team is notable?" On the other hand, I see it as a good example of an article that, on the surface, would have been rejected, but due to a lot of hard work and an effort to bring something up to Wikipedias standards, sets an example for the level of effort one must put in to do so. This article has more detail, effort and citations then many other sports teams that articles exist for. Additionally, the following things to me imply some level of notability such as players who have played in this program went on to play on the United States national rugby union team, and that the conference the team is part of the Southeastern Collegiate Rugby Conference. It is for these reasons that I believe keep to be the appropriate decision. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:49, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Neither of the reasons you just cited for notability -- the appearance of one or two former LSU players on the national team, the club's membership in the SCRC conference -- have anything to do with the applicable notability guidelines: WP:GNG and WP:ORG. Notability is not inherited. Nothing matters in this discussion except the existence of significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources, with an emphasis on the sources being independent of the subject. Normally, when an AfD is relisted, it is relisted for seven days, not three. Your close is premature, and your cited reasons for closing it as a "keep" are outside the applicable guidelines -- this amounts to an administrator super vote. The SCRC conference membership of the LSU club, and the subsequent placement of former LSU players on a national team have absolutely nothing to do with the notability of this club team. Nada. Let this play out, so we have a proper precedent on point regarding college club sports. Given the work being done by Barry, it's just as likely that I will change my vote when he is done, but that's not a decision for a closing administrator to make. You know this is a premature and shaky close; please do the right thing and let the process play out during the 7-day relist period, as intended. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:55, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Here is the deal, I read the arguments, I read the article itself, and my interpretation was a keep, albeit a weaker one. Here are the reasons why.

• Rugby Notability Guidelines I deferred to the definitions in the wiki project which says a team is notable if, "Provided an administrator, player or coach of a High Performance Union." In my above answer, I cite both of these things in the reason why I chose to close it as a Keep. This right here should have been enough to close it after the last voting period.
• WP:CONSENSUS "Consensus on Wikipedia does not mean unanimity (which, although an ideal result, is not always achievable); nor is it the result of a vote. Decision-making involves an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines." Which is exactly what I did. Honestly, the nominator contributed very little to the overall consensus, as they did not contribute in the discussion. A Keep where somebody cites a specific policy explaining why it is appropriate has far more weight than the delete of a nominator who posted it to AFD as a hit and run.
• WP:IAR - At the end of the day, including this article in Wikipedia does it no harm, and in fact, in my opinion, adds value to it for the following reasons:

• That it had been in debate for almost 3 weeks, when there is SO many more articles that are in desperate need of attention is to me, a huge waste of effort and resources (another reason for WP:IAR)
• Somebody put a lot of work into the article, and as a reader with experience in peer review, I, although by a weak margin, felt it asserted notability, and that the sources were good enough for inclusion, far better than hundreds of other articles I have seen that nobody is fighting to have deleted.
• The Strict definition of notability" which you argue for, is no where near as cut and dry as you make it out to be. For example, a reputable school news paper may be an independent source, assuming nobody from the rugby team is writing the article. That is something that we have to judge, not blindly throw away.
• If more editors went to the effort to clean their articles up, include as many references as possible, and make an honest Good faith effort to bring an article that would have been nothing more than a stub up to an article that actually has a good amount of content, this significantly improves Wikipedia as a whole.

• Additionally, that you were a huge proponent of a Delete decision AND were the one who re-listed it, and you are the one complaining about its eventual closure after a 3rd re-list is also something to be brought up as well.

In summary, I came in with no background and an objective mind about the decision to be made, and was not afraid to make it with the available information. The AFD had been open for more than 2 weeks with enough consensus in my judgement to close it, and, even if in the next 3 days, 5 hit and run deletes came up, they would have had to have very strong arguments given what I provided above. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:30, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

• Yes, Chris, you are correct in this respect: I am the one who re-listed the AfD. If you read the discussion, however, you will see I re-listed it for the express purpose of giving Barry another week to complete his work -- that's called being collegial, not gaming the system. Frankly, I could not care less whether this particular article is kept or deleted; I am greatly concerned, however, about the rash of poorly sourced, mostly un-notable club team articles that WikiProject Rugby Union is grinding out, and some of the misconceptions about notability and sources that are being tossed around. There are only two primary notability guidelines that apply here: WP:GNG and WP:ORG. WikiProjects don't write their own specific notability guidelines for subjects within their scope. That would be insanity. As for school newspapers being "independent" of their school's teams, we routinely delete articles about college athletes wherein the sources include completely reputable college newspapers and other student media -- they may be reliable, but they are captive media for a captive audience, and they are no more "independent" than the university athletic department, the conference, or the national governing body. Chris, if I didn't think that Barry's work would get this article over the GNG/ORG line by the end of the week, I would take your close to DRV. Your close has multiple problems, including no basis in the guidelines, ignoring a snarled 3–3 !vote, and a premature close of a 7-day relisting. That said, I can see you do not want to re-open this AfD for the duration of the 7-day relist. If you intend to close college sports discussions again in the future, I hope you will take the time to re-consider what I have said here, and may eventually come to the recognition this was a really weak rationale. I would hate to see a decision like this in an AfD where it really matters. I expect to see weak AfD reasoning like this from WP newbies trying to save their pet articles, not from an administrator with 9 years of on-wiki experience. Please think on it. And with that, I am done badgering you. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:12, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I sincerely appreciate the input. Honestly, I hope/believe that this article will make it easier to delete un-notable sports team articles in the future as kind of a benchmark, they did have players that went on to play on the team that goes to the Olympics, set that for the benchmark/criteria for inclusion and a lot of future articles won't make the cut. My goal was to summarize the available information and make the decision that I felt was in the best interest of the project overall from a variety of measures of outcome, including hoping that I have not offended you. It is frustrating, I understand, I have been on both sides of the aisle. I can understand where you are coming from, and would honestly not appose/be offended by a WP:DRV if you choose to pursue that. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 21:35, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

"Additionally, that an editor who was a huge proponent of a Delete decision AND was the one who re-listed it, is also something to be brought up as well. If you are participating in a discussion, and the voting period has ended, extending the choice to extend it should be made by somebody impartial/uninvolved in the discussion, otherwise, it turns into a, 'if I can relist this before an admin closes it, then I can get more time to change the outcome.'"

Chris, I was not "offended" before; I just thought you had made a bad decision. Now you are actively mischaracterizing my reason for relisting the low-participation AfD for another 7 days. That is a pretty shitty thing to do. Here's what was actually said in the AfD:

Barry: "I'll continue to work over the next few days on continuing to find more cites and on replacing existing cites with better cites."

Dirtlayer: "Barry, I appreciate your efforts to improve the article; that's partly how the AfD process is supposed to work. . . ."

Barry: "Thanks for the positive suggestions on how to improve the article. I've added a few more cites, and will continue to add more over the coming days."

Dirtlawyer: "Barry, if you're mining a productive vein of new sources, I would be happy to slap another "relisting" template on the bottom of this AfD to buy you another week -- would that help? If you're being productive in your research, you should have the time to finish. Let me know."

Barry: "I've continued to improve the article since this discussion began 4 weeks ago. It is up to 26 cites now from a variety of sources. Unlike in previous posts, where the article was improving as the discussion progressed, I think the article improvement project is reaching a point of diminishing returns. Hopefully the article is good enough as-is. I don't plan to work on it much further at this point. I hope we can reach consensus, close this discussion, and keep the article."

Dirtlawyer: "Thanks for all your work, Barry. It's obviously a lot closer than it was before you started working on it. I re-listed the debate for another week yesterday, so we should have some breathing space. I'll take a look at your new references in a day or so, and let you know what I think."

Your DRV comments grossly misrepresent my reasons for relisting the AfD in order to better justify a poorly reasoned closing rationale, and, yes, that does offend me. Your implication that I was attempting to game the system to buy 7 more days to rally more "delete" votes is bullshit. This has gone from a bad rationale to a gross mischaracterization of my collegial conduct to another discussion participant. Can you not see that? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 11:20, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I in no way say that, I just state that, as a principle, it is a poor idea for a proponent of an AFD, in either direction, to be the one who relists it.for discussion. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:07, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Chris, that is exactly what you said: "otherwise, it turns into a, 'if I can relist this before an admin closes it, then I can get more time to change the outcome.'" And that's exactly how two of the DRV participants have interpreted what you said about my relisting. Furthermore, you continue to ignore the dialog between Chris and me, and my stated reasons for relisting the AfD. You raise the spectre of "gaming the system," and now you tell me that's not what you really meant? Perhaps you should explain what you really meant in the actual DRV: that it's a bad idea in principle, but in no way did you mean to imply that I was attempting to game the system. Are you willing to clarify that? And if that's not what you meant, why raise the point at all? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:19, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

It is a general principal, not an accusation. No where do I accuse you of acting in bad faith. In research, it is called "Fishing and the Error rate problem"; If a researcher, trying to achieve a certain outcome, fails to achieve the desired outcome and continues to keep searching, the probability that it will occur by chance increases. Many do not understand this, so, when they do it, it is not bad faith, it is a lack of understanding/structure/policy. I was merely stating that, regardless of onces stance, participating in a discussion AND being the one to relist it introduces a potential problem, which, from reading the WP:DRV, seems to be a sentiment echoed by several others. No where do I say you acted in bad faith, and I don't think you did. That being said, it is still a bad precedent to set for a number of reasons. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:27, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

First, the correct word is "principle," not "principal." Second, I was a trained economist and statistician before I attended law school; I don't need a vague statement of "fishing and error rates" in research methodology that has precious little to do with your closing rationale, its basis in the guidelines, and your weighing of arguments. Third, you still have not answered the question: why raise it at all? You were asked to justify your close, and you defended it at the DRV. You mentioned the relisting, and raised the spectre of a conflict of interest in the relisting. Why do so, if, as you say, you believe there was no bad faith, and it did not impact the outcome, why mention it at all? Did it impact your decision in closing rationale in some way? Do you believe the good-faith extension of time to keep looking for significant coverage in additional independent sources somehow prejudiced the "keep" side of the argument? If so, how so? Frankly, from my perspective, raising the issue only serves one purpose: it is a not-so-subtle ad hominem attempt to discredit me and my arguments. Otherwise, raising the issue is pointless. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I have made my statements, and believe this discussion has run its course. I want to again reiterate, I do not think you acted in bad faith, and I made the close that I felt was best. It is clear that we do not see eye to eye on the issue, which I am honestly ok with, we are two different people with different backgrounds, experience, etc, it is to be expected, and in my opinion, celebrated. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:54, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

"I want to again reiterate, I do not think you acted in bad faith . . ." Then have the fundamental decency to say exactly that in the DRV, instead of fobbing me off by saying that your raising of the issue was some innocuous statement of principle. Because that's not how others are interpreting it. Stifle, in fact, is basing his entire rationale for endorsing your close on my relisting of the AfD. Apparently, he thinks the relisting had some impact on the 3–3 deadlock and that it justified your "consensus keep" closing. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:05, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

You are welcome to post a link to where I said it, but it is something that all editors should strive for, and should be assumed unless presented with only the strongest of evidence to the counter, not something that has to be explicitly stated. I will say, it is a good practice to avoid the "mind reader" mentality, and to avoid assuming what is behind another's actions (such as Strife's endorse vote). After reading the comment, I have no reason to believe he had any concern other than the general one of principle that I had, no where does it turn into an Ad hominem argument. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:34, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

On second thought, I may have come across as a bit of a tool above, I will leave a note at the WP:DRV @Dirtlawyer1:. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:51, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Land reforms by country

Hi Chris,

You just deleted Land reforms by country/year and Land reforms by country/place. As I explained in their talk pages, these pages were used in Land reforms by country#Summary table to add style in a consistent way. If you think these pages should not exist, then, can you please suggest another way to achieve this? --Erel Segal (talk) 18:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Erel Segal: the problem (Believe) is that they were not in the template space (e.g. precededed by template) but were instead in the mainspace.. I would try to re-create them in the template space. You might get a more in depth answer/help at Help talk:Template Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I would happily do that but I don't have access to the deleted content. Can you please do this for me? (I will then correct Land reforms by country#Summary table accordingly). --Erel Segal (talk) 18:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I will put them into a draft space for you, and you can move them where you need to. User:Erel Segal\draft1 and User:Erel Segal\draft2. Give me a few minutes to finish the move. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:58, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
    • @Erel Sega: I have moved them to the links above. Feel free to move them/reformat them (they probably belong in the template space). Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:03, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
      • OK, thanks. --Erel Segal (talk) 19:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for Louisiana State University rugby

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Louisiana State University rugby. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:45, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I replied at the DRV. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:43, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

AFD updated discussions for Visual Collaborative

Hi Chris, Thanks for observing the effort made at getting the article to WP standards. Please see updates / discussion, sources have to be added to support the integrity of the article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Visual_Collaborative reference and page modification madeJuneHazinek (talk) 00:41, 7 May 2015 (UTC).

I re-reviewed this and my stance of "weak delete" remains unchanged. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:02, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Emotion Media Factory

Hi , could you please reconsider the deletion of the article about Emotion Media Factory. the aim of this article to be an encyclopedic article & not an advertisement. EMF is the leading multimedia company that created the Multimedia Fountain Roshen ( the largest in Europe) already listed on wiki.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vinnytsia_Fountain_Roshen There are a few more similar companies already listed on wikipedia too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WET_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mack_Rides

Please also advise on how to modify this article so as to prevent future deletions Thank you. Laserland (talk) 18:53, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I re-reviewed the article, and it is clearly written in the form of an advertisement, in a tone that is completely unencyclopedic, take for example the following unreferenced claims, "In 1992, <organizations>’s shows in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil dazzled world leaders...", "... in addition to a string of stunning award winning shows..." and "In 2005 <organization> further established itself as a world leader, with a spectacular state of the art multimedia installation...". If you would like to create an article on this organization, the first thing you will need is several reliable sources that have covered the organization itself (e.g. an article talking about world leaders which mentions this organization in passing is likely insufficient). When/if these sources are located, and are found reliable (e.g. the companies website is unreliable, but , an article in, say, the Wall Street Journal would be much better), you start the article using the information in the citations. When writing it, you avoid assertions about how great or notable the company is that you cannot back up with a reliable citation. Hope that helps. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:00, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

John B. Tsu

Hi! You surprised me at John B. Tsu! I was going to write a few sentences to replace the promotional copyvio I'd removed (well, I had written a few sentences, just hadn't saved them). I'm absolutely indifferent to whether we have a page on him or not, but had thought that he might be notable because of the Commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders appointment. If you choose to restore it I'll add those few sentences; if you don't, I'll cheerfully do something else. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:39, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I restored it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:42, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I saw. Thank you! I've put a stub there. Do you want to restore the talk page too, or shall I start a new one? I don't remember if it had anything of any importance on it. Thanks again, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:12, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

I restored the talk page and am working on figuring out how to do the revision redaction. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 22:29, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

And I just took care of the RD1 revision removal tag. Thanks for the hard work! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 22:38, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Sujit Meher

--122.172.38.229 (talk) 09:06, 8 May 2015 (UTC) Admin please note this article was deleted for Vandalism and again created .--122.172.38.229 (talk) 09:06, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Erased Tapes Records

This article was "speedy deleted" while I was adding some references to some "citation needed" in the text. I do think that record company is notable, considering their roster has several musicians and composers who have made the soundtracks to Sherlock, Broadchurch, Children of Men, etc. and even had songs featured in movies like The Hunger Games. And they're always getting praise from Rolling Stone, Clash magazine, Drowned in Sound and such sites / magazines. Two of their acts will perform on BBC Proms in august in the Royal Albert Hall. Those are some reasons why I didn't think that page should've been deleted. --Timla177 (talk) 15:34, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Ok, can you provide me some links to those articles in Rolling Stone/Clash Magazine? It was deleted for lack of reliable references, so if they exist, I would gladly undelete it so it can be improved. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:36, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Sure. http://www.clashmusic.com/feature/label-profile-erased-tapes & http://www.rollingstone.com/music/pictures/10-new-artists-you-need-to-know-april-2015-20150416/michael-price-20150415 for starters. Then there were citations needed that FELD and Gregory Euclide was collaborating with packaging and design: http://gregoryeuclide.com/2013/05/performing/ & https://www.behance.net/gallery/Erased-Tapes-Collection-V/12971421 and just an interview in Drowned in Sound: http://drownedinsound.com/in_depth/4147970-erased-tapes-founder-robert-raths-on-the-independent-label-market . --Timla177 (talk) 15:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Its done! Let me know if I there is anything else I can do to help you out. Thanks for going to the work to get those references! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:02, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! Well, I could just ask you directly if it's a good idea to add the label's discography or listing the free compilations mentioned in the text (by name and release date)? --Timla177 (talk) 16:09, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

As a rule of thumb, it is a good idea to find an article on an very notable example and see what they do. Additionally, anything you add should be linked to a citation/reference. I am not familiar with articles in this area so it is hard for me to say "sure" or "no" other than the advice I provide above. Sorry if I could not be any more help Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:11, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

That's alright, thanks for the suggestions anyway! I'll fix the references for the current version at least. Thanks again! --Timla177 (talk) 16:19, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Black Fig Designs

Hi there, Could you please explain why you deleted my article about Black Fig Designs? A lot of people are interested and would like to know a meaning of the name. This is not an advertising!!! Katerina — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eugene1984 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Let me look into it, I will get back to you shortly. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:10, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I deleted your article for several reasons, most importantly that the way it was written it qualified it for [{WP:CSD|speedy deletion]] according to Wikipedias policies. The specifics include a.) It is unencyclopedic: lines like "...strives to bring you the beauty and romance of both ancient and modern Uzbek home décor products..." is not something you would find in an encyclopedia, it is something you would find in an advertisement b.) It is written like an advertisement, and wikipedia is not a place for that WP:NOTAD. c.) There are no reliable sources WP:RS provided; Wikipedia is not a provider of original content d.) No assertion of notability. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:16, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Sujit Meher

--Rohtak camp (talk) 18:41, 8 May 2015 (UTC)Admin please note this IP address may be Blocked Because they are attempting again & again and creating vandalism . Sujit Kumar Meher is not a public figure . He like other 25000 NIFT Alumni . This Article is not meeting Wikipedia guideline . He was a below average Accessory Design student as per this final year his graduation project result he was awarded 6 point and grade C in his graduation projecthttp://www.nift.ac.in/Downloads/Result_Jan_June2013_AD_VIII.pdf . Article is written with poorly source information and totally vandalism . How come about Accessory Design specialization person anyone can write Fashion Design ? Wikipedia is a reliable source and I am really worried if this wont be permanently deleted it will be problem . It really looks funny when anyone will write anything Vandalism about them . All photoshoot and his work on poor sourcing and created by himself . This article may be deleted and IP Address should be banned . Same IP address with different user name this article is creating again again .For your review and kind attestation --Rohtak camp (talk) 18:41, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Dean Roberts Deletion

I noticed a discussion at WP:VPP#Speedy_deleting_old_pages that discusses your deletion of Dean Roberts. Looking at the version that was deleted, I think they are right that it doesn't meet the A7 criteria; while it has some notability issues as a result of being totally unreferenced, the article does include credible claims of importance including a blue linked group he was a member of. As no one else has requested you undelete it yet, I figure I should get the ball rolling. (Note: The deleted history of the DAB the article was moved over are mixed in with the article history) Monty₈₄₅ 01:48, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

While it might not have universal consensus, I find User:SoWhy/Common A7 mistakes to be a helpful guide. Regards, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:10, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

@Monty845: sorry for taking so long to reply, I am not nearly as active (if at all) on the weekends. I delete a lot of stuff, and every now and then, something slips through the cracks. If I make a mistake, please feel free to undo it (e.g. undelete it). we are all here trying to make Wikipedia a better place, so I won't be offended! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:03, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

No problem on the delay. I take the same view on things, but since it wasn't a pressing issue, I figured it was better to err on the side of asking. Monty₈₄₅ 20:32, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for undeleting it! I honestly delete so many WP:NN band articles that there are a few (like that one) that slip through the cracks. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:41, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

DXJJ

Here, you mentioned this page: http://www.amfmph.com/star-fm-manila-dwsm-102-7-mhz-1484.html but that page did not mention DXJJ or a station of Star FM in Surigao City. --Bluemask (talk) 04:45, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, ok. It must have been in the cached google results that showed up on the search page, I did not spend a ton of time trying to research it, just proof of whether or not it existed. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:06, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Nicholas E. Alahverdian

I'm a new editor, so forgive me if this was obvious, but I'm curious what this page didn't meet the GNG. I'm not familiar with the previously deleted version, so I can't compare, but the page has reliable sources and several points of general notability. Nicholas_E._Alahverdian ThomG (talk) 15:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

you can see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas E. Alahverdian, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas Alahverdian, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Alahverdian on all 3 times this article went to WP:AFD Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:05, 12 May 2015 (UTC).

Thanks. The previous complaints seem to have been about WP:GNG, but this new article does attempt to address points of notability beyond the court case against Rhode Island DCYF. I still can't tell if it's possible to view the deleted articles to compare (I'm assuming not), but this version does attempt to address general notability. I get that it's a subjective decision, but it seems to meet significant coverage from reliability, secondary sources, independent of the subject. Thanks. ThomG (talk) 15:25, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for Nicholas E. Alahverdian

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Nicholas E. Alahverdian. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ThomG (talk) 00:18, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Added a comment at the DRV. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:13, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Credit Card Insider

You have randomly removed my tag for the deletion of Credit Card Insider, which is a promotion-inducing article for a non-notable company, without any discussion being done.                     ~Rayvn  02:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

The article asserted notability (albeit questionably), and had citations. It was not an easy speedy delete decision, so I declined the speedy, and suggested it be taken to WP:AFD Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:07, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Beitar Jerusalem F.C. (women)

Hi There, I have to contest the speedy deletion of this page, which was deleted by you last night. The article regards a women's football (soccer) team, which have played in the Israeli women's football league for 6 seasons (out of the 15 played so far) and in the women's national cup during the same period. The club's participation in these competitions makes it notable for inclusion as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Notability#Club notability. Therefore, please reinstate the article, and, if needed, I will make the changes that will clarify the article's notability and eligibility. Eranrabl (talk) 05:21, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I just had a previous delete taken to review for following notability suggestions other than WP:GNG. I deleted the article specifically because it did not assert why it was notable. It was a team that played in a now defunct league, which did not even win at the highest level of competition within that league. I am not opposed to undeleting it and listing it at WP:AFD, give me a minute or two. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:09, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

After reviewing this, I stand by the speedy deletion. 1.) It does not assert notability, the closest thing is finishing 3rd, in a sub-division, of a now defunct league. 2.) There are no WP:RS, the only link provided is a dead link. If you would like me to move a copy to your userspace so you can try and clean it up/add to it, let me know. Additionally, you are welcome to take it to WP:DRV. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I stand by my claim that the deletion is wrong. :-) According to the footy project notability guidelines, the club's final position in the league (which, by the way, is not defunct, just changed format) doesn't impact its notability. However, as the article does need improving, please move it to my userspace, thanks.Eranrabl (talk) 19:43, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I literally have an article at WP:DRV for applying localized notability guidelines over WP:GNG ([[Wikipedia:Deletion review#Louisiana State University rugby). I closed an WP:AFD using a little admin discretion citing a wikiprojects notability guidelines and it generated pages of discussion. I will move it to your userspace, just know that that notability guidelines in these areas can be fuzzy, and many will say WP:GNG is the end all/be all. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:47, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

@Eranrabl: It is now at User:Eranrabl/draft Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Please have a look. I have fixed the links and clarified the article. The article now lists the two premier reasons for notability and eligibility: 1- The club's appearance in the Israeli league and cup (which makes it notable as per the football project guidlines); and 2- the club affiliation with the men's club Beitar Jerusalem, which makes it notable as part of the Beitar Jerusalem organization. I think the article can now be reinstated. Eranrabl (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

It looks better. Are there any other references? Is there anything in English? I just don't want it to go to WP:AFD. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:35, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm searching for more references, but the web is a little thin on the whole Israel Women's League before 2007, especially in English. I've added another ref (which I knew existed), and I'll keep searching (I'm still researching the whole filed, as there are teams which I want to make articles for, and league data for the period is still unknown to me). Thanks for your help.

Diyar-e-Dil

Diyar-e-Dil was a redirect, not an article. It shouldn't have been deleted. Wrong spellings are supposed to be redirected. WilyD 16:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

10-4, taken care of and restored. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Advocacy Ducks

You deleted Advocacy Ducks 2 minutes after it was nominated. The page that was the subject of the deletion discussion was COI Ducks, not Advocacy ducks and the pages are not the same. AlbinoFerret 20:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Were you aware of the ongoing ANI discussion when you deleted this? [6] Personally, despite having strong reservations about the essay myself, I think that a speedy deletion isn't appropriate. Not only was the original essay under another title, but it has since been subject to considerable editing by multiple contributors. If the essay was nominated for deletion in the normal manner I would probably support doing so (it runs counter to WP:AGF in my opinion) but the debate should not be preempted. Accordingly, I suggest you restore the essay and let the community decide its fate. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:10, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. The community may yet build consensus to delete this newer essay, but it's substantially different enough from the one that was deleted that I don't think speedy was warranted. --BDD (talk) 21:42, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

As the nominator, I thought I saw that the essay looked largely the same as the one that was deleted. Normally, people go through deletion review before recreating deleted content, don't they? I don't think there was enough community input about whether the new essay is appropriate considering the incredible community input that went into the deletion discussion. jps (talk) 21:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

There is enough concern from established editors that I undeleted it, it probably needs to re-go to WP:MFD. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 21:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

And just a note, I patrol WP:CSD pretty heavily and do a LOT of deletions. When there is this much ruckus over it, I would rather not be the one who unilaterally makes the decision. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 22:01, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring it. AlbinoFerret 22:03, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

No problem! Please note that my restoration is not an endorsement of it, just me saying "I should not be the only person who makes this decision giving the concern raised on my page" Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 22:06, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I understand, I have a feeling someone will nominate it for deletion, and there will be a discussion on it if that happens. But at least the proper procedure will be followed. AlbinoFerret 22:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Administratorly question

So, you deleted Chrislk02, a page clearly intended as a slap at you for your actions against a particular user. I don't disagree that the page needed to be deleted, but isn't there an issue of WP:INVOLVED here?

I ask not so much because I believe you acted wrongly, but to clarify my own understanding. I've begun drafting my own RFA (several users have suggested I should over the years; I'm finally seriously considering it), but if I move forward I'd like to get feedback from other admins about some the of the actions they take.

I appreciate your thoughts on this. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

(stalking) I was gnoming away on CAT:CSD and I saw this. If Chris hadn't deleted it per WP:CSD#G10 as a blatant attack page, I would have done. If anyone else would have done the same thing (and I think they would) you're not WP:INVOLVED. It's not uncommon for admins to get yelled and screamed at for just doing their job, so if you want to file an RfA you need to be aware of that. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:17, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate your thoughts on this. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC) , good question! Here is why I deleted that article without a second thought and no remorse!

1.) This "Chrislk02" fellow clearly does not pass notability standards. There were no reliable sources, no external citations. His rudeness was not expressed in a way that asserted notability so a clear WP:A7

2.) WP:IAR as WP:DUCK test for trolling/unencyclopedic content, this is clearly vandalism, regardless of who is involved in it. In this case, any rule that prevents me from deleting this article only serves to bog down the process.

3.) WP:G10 while this "Chrislk02" fellow may be notable for his rudeness, this is also considered a blatant attack page which can be speedy deleted under WP:G10

In all seriousness though, I have been doing this a long time, and have had many disgruntled people create attack pages here and there. Whether it was about me, or anybody else, it is an attack page that is unencyclopedic, which is supported at WP:INVOLVED "...In straightforward cases (e.g., blatant vandalism), the community has historically endorsed the obvious action of any administrator – even if involved – on the basis that any reasonable administrator would have probably come to the same conclusion". Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:24, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Chris. Keep up the good work and thick skin. And @Ritchie333:, I've been around the edges of admin space enough to know the abuse that is heaped on them. I'm well prepared for that aspect of the job. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

PS: I note that this is not the first attack page that has been made against you. <sarcasm>You must be quite rude indeed!!</sarcasm> WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

@WikiDan61: I know, I am a terribly rude, lazy, and inconsiderate person I guess, perhaps that can be my assertion of notability when I get an article created for myself. Re an WP:RFA, If you are interested in an additional nominator, I would have no problem with that. I have seem you around WP:AFD and a few other areas and think you do good work. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:44, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm far too new an admin (only a few days but it already feels like I've been one for ages) to file RfAs, but I have seen WikiDan61 around on NPP for some times, and occasionally disagreed about CSD tagging - always politely too. He seems to know his stuff alright. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Foreign wiki problems

Okay well sometimes people seem to put the link to the foreign wiki like its the article in the other language instead of it being a link. Which is what I figured it out-but yeah it is odd. Thanks. Wgolf (talk) 18:22, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Matru mukti muktavali

Thanks for deleting this article. I was scrambling to find the right way to tag the article; it was really just a copy and paste from a book, but the book is unavailable online, so when I tried to use {{G-12}}, it kept indicating I needed an URL. Ormr2014 (talk) 19:23, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

No problem! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:26, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

PINKVILLA

Hi User:Chrislk02,

You deleted a page on Pinkvilla. Could you please help me understand why so that I don't repeat the same mistake I did. From what I understand there is a misunderstanding coz we are neither a startup nor a website with little traffic. We have been around for 7+ years now and do about 20 Million Page views a month. Pink villa is a brand name in Indian Entertainment Media and Fashion Circuits. Were the citations I gave not enough? Sites like Times of India, DNA, and other biggies often quote our stories. Anyways reposting the links here. Hope we can resolve this issue:

http://www.dnaindia.com/lifestyle/report-death-of-the-gossip-columnist-2074628 http://www.verveonline.com/90/people/nandini.shtml http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/Bombay-Velvet-All-you-need-to-know-about-the-film/photostory/46671977.cms?from=mdr http://www.hindustantimes.com/photos/entertainment/ahanadeol/article4-1082178.aspx http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/pinkvilla.com

And here's all the quotes of PInkvilla on Times - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/topic/Pinkvilla

Do let me know how we can sort this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mukul1067 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Having your sources quoted by other sources is insufficient, is there any coverage of the organization itself? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:11, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Chrislk02,

If you check the 1st two links i pasted above you will know yourself. Anyways posting again. Here's a coverage on the founder and the property by Verve which is a popular magazine - http://www.verveonline.com/90/people/nandini.shtml And here's one more which speaks about the site and the type of content the site does - http://www.dnaindia.com/lifestyle/report-death-of-the-gossip-columnist-2074628 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mukul1067 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I did, neither one of those articles was about the organization itself, it was mentioned in the context of another discussion. That being said, the coverage did seem to be questionable enough that a speedy deletion may not have been appropriate. I am going to undelete it, and suggest that it be taken to WP:AFD for a more in depth discussion. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:00, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Actually, scratch that, the article was not deleted for notability issue, but because it as a blatant advertisement. You are welcome to rewrite it in a non promotional manner if you like. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:02, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Chrislk02,

Thanks! Now this sounds fair. Can I have it back in drafts or somewhere, where I can edit the article please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mukul1067 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I undeleted it and moved it to User:Mukul1067/Draft. When you think it is ready, I can look over it and possibly move it back if it passes muster. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 11:20, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Chrislk02,

I have edited the article and removed terms like "Leading" and "Go To destination". I don't think it looks promotional anymore. Please do help me with your feedback on this. Do let me know if anything else needs to be dropped from the article.

Hi User:Chrislk02,

Can we go ahead here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mukul1067 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

First of all, please sign your posts by using the 4 tildes ( see WP:SIGN). Secondly, the article still reads like an advertisement/spam, and fails to assert notability. For example , "It caters to the latest buzz, biggest moments, the hottest trends, and the best tips in entertainment, celebrity, fashion and beauty." sounds like an advertisement, and would be more encyclopedic if that entire sentence were removed, as the intro description implies this (e.g. "Pinkvilla is a Bollywood News and Gossip Website." ). Additionally, the Alexa rank does not belong in the article as it is unencylopedic, and being 1219th surely does not imply notability. When you remove all of the content that reads like an advertisement, or is not of importance, there is pretty much nothing left. Frankly, I do not believe that this article will ever be capable of passing the necessary requirements to be a Wikipedia article. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Chrislk02,

Please help me understand how these two are still allowed in that case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koimoi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollywood_Hungama

They are similar genre portals with similar traffic as the alexa ranks they are quoting is old.

Mukul1067 (talk) 18:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for signing your post, it makes it easier to communicate when you can see who posted something and when they posted it. Re your question, the 1st one of those sites that you went to WP:AFD (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Koimoi, where one of the arguments for keeping it was "Current version not promotional in tone". The current version of the article that you have written is incredibly promotional in tone. The second one also went to WP:AFD and was kept (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bollywood Hungama). Among the rationale for this site being kept was that it was covered as the topic in an academic journal. Additionally, both of these sites seem to have rankings in the 500-600s. In short, both of those articles are not written like promotions, and additionally, they have significant external coverage. You are welcome to rewrite the article in a non-promotional tone citing as many 3rd party reliable sources as possible, that is your best bet. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:58, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Chrislk02,

Thanks for bearing with me for so long. I have removed everything objectionable and linked the Biggest Media Houses articles where there is a reference to Pinkvilla on their sites. Have linked Yahoo, Koimoi, SantaBanta, Hindustan Times, Times of India, and DNA which pretty much means 99% of the top India Media houses. I have just taken 1 backlink per site even though there are several as I thought 1 link per site should be adequate. Please do let me know if these references are enough? Mukul1067 (talk) 19:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

No problem, glad I can help. That looks much better, I have moved it to Pinkvilla. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:32, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi User:Chrislk02,

Thanks a ton. Any reason why the title and link reads as Wikipedia: Pinkvilla? Mukul1067 (talk) 19:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I made a mistake and moved it to the wrong place. I have now fixed it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks again. Works fine now. Mukul1067 (talk) 19:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

NP, hope you decide to hang around and contribute to other areas of the project, there is always stuff to be done! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:41, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Honestly I would love doing that in my free time. It would be great if you could guide me on the same as I am new here.Mukul1067 (talk) 19:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Business Social by B-NOVO

Hi, User:Chrislk02, I wanted to ask if I could have the material I used for Business Social page for later improvement. I am aware that is was not correct on my part to post it the way it is, and I would like the chance to improve it and make it less promotional and more informative. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indre Jankute (talk • contribs) 06:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Can you give me a link or two covering this organization from a reliable sources? If it is truly promotional, I am reluctant to even restore it to the userspace. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:10, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

DRV for Louisiana State University rugby

Thank you for this [7], this [8], and this [9]. I appreciate that you were able to reconsider your original close, after reviewing the comments of others. FYI, this is how I left it with the AfD nominator: [10]. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:02, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

You should also be aware of this now-closed AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shreveport Rugby Football Club; and something similar that's still pending: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cardiff University Korfball Club. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

@Dirtlawyer1: Thanks for the note, I have no problem reassessing my position when presented with new information. I did really wanted to make it clear that it was not because I had some bias, or because I had an agenda, or was out to get anybody. I honestly don't care, I was just trying to clean up some unfinished administrative tasks. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:17, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your attention

Thanks for your attention at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion today, you really did a great job in that important corner of admin backlog. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 13:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Wikicology: Thanks! I usually get into work at 8 am local time and start chipping away at it in between other tasks. It's a dirty job, but somebodies gotta do it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Seth Goldman (Businessman) Page

ReviewingEditor (talk) 14:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I understand you deleted the page for Honest Tea's co-founder & TeaEO Seth Goldman. While the rationale for deleting the page of a CEO that has no accolades beyond the company seem reasonable, Mr. Goldman built a $130M+ business, is a NY Times best-selling author [11], on the board of the American Beverage Association [12], and was named the #1 "Disruptor" in the Beverage industry by Beverage World Magazine [13]. Additionally his parents were prominent professors at Harvard University.

Admittedly I am a novice at Wikipedia so I would love an opportunity to discuss this with you and perhaps gain your guidance in how to reestablish the page.

ReviewingEditor (talk) 14:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Let me look into it. Based on the references you provided, it seems that he does pass the WP:GNG guidelines. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:08, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I deleted the article because it had been deleted previously (WP:G4) at this AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seth Goldman (businessman). You will need to take it to WP:DRV if you would like to overturn this. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:11, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Additionally, it seems that several others have answered this question for you as well (just look at this editors contributions), please refrain from admin shopping. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:20, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

ReviewingEditor (talk) 14:35, 15 May 2015 (UTC)Thank you Chris Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider}. I am just learning about how this site works and what admin shopping is. Not my intention to cause problems. Candidly I am finding it difficult to navigate so I truly appreciate your assistance.ReviewingEditor (talk) 14:35, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Geneviève Billette

The subject of this page is identified as having been won the Governor General's Award for French-language drama which recognizes a significant contribution in their field as a creative professional. --Big_iron (talk) 14:19, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I undeleted it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:22, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Big iron for catching that, and thank you Chris for correcting it! --PureRED (talk) 14:25, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Anila Naz Chowdhury

I understand that Anila Naz Chowdhury was created and deleted once before, but that just shows that this is an important article which is of interest to readers. as per the really old https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anila_Naz_Chowdhury there were no verifiable sources for the notability of this singer. but see here https://facebook.com/anilanaz almost 300k fans. don't you think that is notable enough? apart from having verifiable information, the article was also linked from related articles. so I request that it be undeleted soon. and if you are still not convinced, do a google search for "Anila singer" and listen to her soothing voice.... thank you.RedBookCamel (talk) 13:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Please read WP:RS, Facebook is not a reliable source. Congratulations on the large number of fan/followers, but that is insufficient to meet wikipedias notability requirements. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 23:34, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

ok the point is that she is not really a publicity seeker, so that explains the lack of media coverage. but I did find one article on her in the major newspaper of the country. (finally.) and it has her photo as well. http://archive.thedailystar.net/newDesign/story.php?nid=64209 please have a look and see what can be done. thank you. RedBookCamel (talk) 03:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Honestly, I do not think she currently meets wikipedias notability requirements. There are many upcoming artists who want articles here, but do not meet the aforementioned requirements. For example, I googled [14] and got ~5000 hits. In comparison, I did the same search with metallica which returned 21,000,000 hits. In short, given what I have seen, and based on my research, this artist is not yet encyclopedic. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

her full name is rarely used, even in album credits it's just Anila. https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/hit-factory/id978473618 So this search combines the two artists that she usually works with, and it gives About 97,200 results https://www.google.co.in/search?q=%2B%28%22sumon%22%7C%22fuad%22%29+%2B%22anila%22+-facebook+-wikipedia+-youtube+-blog+-linkedin&btnG=Search&nomo=1&hl=en-IN&filter=0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedBookCamel (talk • contribs) 05:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I stand by my assessment that " In short, given what I have seen, and based on my research, this artist is not yet encyclopedic". The information you have provided above does not change that. There are on Reliable sources and this artist does not seem to pass Wikipedias general notability guidelines. Arguments such as "she is rarely credited" or "she is not a publicity seeker" or that I should "listen to her soothing voice" are nowhere provided as exceptions to these policies. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

ok tc — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedBookCamel (talk • contribs) 05:23, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Sama language

Hi! I was just trying to work out what on earth had been going on at Sama language (including a seriously incompetent page move) when you deleted it. What bothers me: it looked as if someone who should have known better had done a cut-and-paste move there on 9 May; I was about to list it at the C&P holding pen when it disappeared in a puff of dust. All I'm trying to say: the history of the deleted article may need to be merged into that of whatever ends up there. Oh, and sorry if I'm adrift on this. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Can you state that in a specific request of what you need me to do? I will be glad to undelete/merge something, but need a little more than what you gave me. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Chris, I don't know. What I think I was seeing was that Northamerica1000 had on 9 May done a cut-and-paste move to Sinama, which Kwamikagami then moved, for reasons which I cannot begin to understand, to Sama language (), complete with those silly little brackets. The history of that page consists of little more than the messing about of those two editors; the history of our article on the Sinama language was, I believe, deleted in good faith by you together with the Sama language page. A possible solution might be to undelete it and undo everything those two editors have done. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

You might want to consider what's best for the article. Reverting useful edits could be taken as vandalism. If I messed up the article history due to not noticing that the move was cut&paste, I apologize. As for the moves, Sama language accords with WP naming conventions, as well as ISO. The parentheses were a placeholder until the article could be moved back to its original location. — kwami (talk) 20:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

You would think an administrator and a former administrator would not have messed it up that bad, but something does seem off. I will undelete the article Sama language. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:04, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I merged to two versions into a single version at Sama language, hope this fixed it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:10, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

That looks good, except that there are 21 rd's to the location you deleted, which need to be rd'ed before a bot deletes them. I'd do it, but for some reason AWB is not working. — kwami (talk) 20:29, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I recreated the placeholder until the rd's are fixed. (A bot should take care of them.) Once it's an orphan, you can safely delete it again. — kwami (talk) 20:32, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Glad it is/will be taken care of. I still don't really understand what went wrong here, oh well. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

This all started before I became involved. In the revision history for Sama Language (link), notice how the articles have been moved back and forth several times by other editors (September 2014, October 2014, December 2014). It appears that a hist merge has occurred at this point, as the revision history for Sinama reveals, and as per the above "I merged to two versions into a single version at Sama language, hope this fixed it." When trying to access the previous content of the page using view and restore deleted pages, nothing is there except for the redirect at this point. When I moved the page as per a request on my talk page and as per commentary at Talk:Sama language, a histmerge at that point appeared to be problematic as per WP:PV. Attribution is still provided in the respective revision histories. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:23, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:12, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your work regarding this matter. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Americord Registry Page

Hi Chris, I see that you deleted the page for Americord Registry. While the rationale for deleting the page of a company seems reasonable, Americord is a INC500 company, and the first ever to commercially preserve placental tissue stem cells, and has been featured on the front page of the Wall Street Journal. Its CEO Martin Smithmyer was interviewed for this article, was featured on Fox, and in numerous other business articles and journals. It's Medical Director, Dr. Robert Dracker, is the Chair of the Hematopoietic Cellular Therapy Advisory Board for the New York State Department of Health(1) and a member of the New York Governor's Council on Blood and Blood Transfusion. Dr. Dracker was instrumental in drafting the New York State regulations for cord blood banking (1), is on the FDA's panel for Pediatrics (2). Admittedly I am a novice at Wikipedia so I would love an opportunity to discuss this with you and perhaps gain your guidance in how to reestablish the page.

sources: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/PediatricAdvisoryCommittee/UCM439317.pdf http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?FetchFilingHtmlSection1?SectionID=1737042-177139-182885&SessionID=exKYFHhUWjkOrR7 http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/americord-client-featured-in-front-page-wall-street-journal-article-on-cord-blood-banking-256984531.html http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/07/03/7-things-should-know-about-cord-blood-banking/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.64.102.190 (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

I deleted the article because it did not assert notability. I just reviewed it, and it is only a few sentences, stating what the organization did, but not why it was notable. You are welcome to re-create the article using the above resources, but keep in mind, it is important to assert notability and back it up with reliable sources. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Alex Cottriall

Hi,

You deleted the page about young actor Alex Cottriall. He has been in RSC shows and also films and very much deserves a wikipedia article. It was in the bare bones as i had other things to do, i am a novice to Wikipedia and I didn't mean to publish it. How do i get it back — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledgeabledolphin (talk • contribs) 08:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I deleted the article for several reasons, most obviously was what is called the WP:A7 criteria. The article did not assert notability, and provided no reliable sources to back up any of what was there. The actual article was only two lines long, and contained very little content. You are encouraged to create the article as a draft, and once it is ready to go (if you would like, I will review it), move it to a more appropriate location. For example, I suggest User:Knowledgeabledolphin/draft as a place to rewrite the article. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: TomStar81 and Simon Harley on the sinking of the Lusitania Timeline: This month in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

WWE Global Warning

You made a mistake when removing the speedy deletion. It was a G4 - under WWE Global Warning Tour. Your reference to a prod was not accurate. Please review your decision. Dragonfire X (talk) 23:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

@Dragonfire X: The article that I had declined the speedy for (WWE Global Warning) had only a PROD deletion which was readily available (which is exempt under WP:G4) (you can follow the link in the AFD tag in this revision to see that [15]). Additionally, the nomination for WP:G4 did not provide a link to any prior WP:AFD. In the absence of the information you provided me above (the alternate name the article existed under), I made the correct decision. In light of that information, I will go ahead and delete the article. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 01:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

@Dragonfire X: considering that the article the AFD was created for had been salted, I went ahead and salted this version as well. If any other variants pop up, please feel free to let me know. In the future, it REALLY helps to link to the prior AFD when the name of the article has changed. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 01:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

You can see these, same objectionable redirects.

• Kashmiri Freedom Movement
• Kashmir Freedom Movement
• Thanks for all efforts.

Redirects

Hi. I've seen you have deleted some valid redirects under WP:G3 and WP:G8, as none of those redirects meet the G3 criteria which is for "pure vandalism and blatant hoaxes". The nominations were made by an editor with aggressive nationalist motivations and no logical rationale has been given as to why these redirects, which have existed for years, were nominated. Please note that these redirects in question meet WP:RNEUTRAL so I think you've jumped the trigger with this one. For example, there was absolutely no reason to delete Indian occupied Kashmir as that is a common alternative terminology for the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir (there is a redirect on Pakistan occupied Kashmir) neither was there any logic behind deleting Kashmiri independence movement which redirected to a page on Kashmiri separatism. I'd like you to review and undelete all the nominations made by Human3015 as they are faulty, were made single-handedly without input, and most importantly, none of them meet G3. Mar4d (talk) 06:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

See edit by this user [16] where he is calling "designated terrorists" by UN as "Freedom Fighters" and decide who is nationalist. Most of these vandal pages are created by this user itself. I will tag Pakistan occupied Kashmir for deletion. This term should not be used. --Human3015 Say Hey!! • 06:59, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Human3015 This is the seventh or eighth time you have brought up this edit from five years ago. You were not even editing Wikipedia back then, and you have no background knowledge or understanding of the context of that issue to be able to have a position on it. That template's previous name was Jammu and Kashmir freedom movement, and there was a category called Category:Jammu and Kashmir freedom struggle. The parameter was named after that category and the template name. Both the template and the category were renamed later, so no issues were raised by me or others for the terminology to be changed. I don't know why you keep bringing this up. You obviously have mala fide intentions of WP:COATRACK and WP:POINT which is disruptive. As your lampooning of this edit is continuing, I am going to have to take action and bring an admin's attention to this issue. Mar4d (talk) 07:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Also we can read WP:TERRORIST, we can't call something as "independence movement" or "freedom movement" when UN, US , India recognizes them as "militant activities" or "separatist activities". Only Pakistan recognizes it as "Freedom movement" Pakistan calls Kashmiri separatists ‘freedom fighters’ and this user's user page says that he is from Pakistan and he is following his national agenda by doing such edits on Wikipedia. "Indian Administered Kashmir" and "Pakistan administered Kashmir" are proper neutral terms used on wikipedia. We should not use "occupied" territory word on Wikipedia. Both nations have democratic government in their respective area.--Human3015 Say Hey!! • 07:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Redirects don't have to be neutral. They can be created as long as they are commonly uses/searched terms. See WP:RNEUTRAL. Mar4d (talk) 10:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Using word "freedom movement" for "militancy and killing innocents" is not "commonly uses/searched terms" in civilized world. --Human3015 Say Hey!! • 10:22, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

militancy and killing innocents = that is your POV. Your argument does not meet WP:RNEUTRAL. Your assertion that it is not a valid term is not true [17] Mar4d (talk) 10:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

No major news site on google search, all are "local made" websites by militants. Whatever you search regarding Kashmir, they will show some Wikipedia articles regarding Kashmir [18] --Human3015 Say Hey!! • 11:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Those were not "local made websites". They are books. Mar4d (talk) 11:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I said you type anything you will get some sources. Look at this search [19], they are showing template that you made on separatist and some reliable sources of "Stanford", also many other sources. I said, you type anything on google. It always works. So don't give reason of google please. --Human3015 Say Hey!! • 11:18, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Frankly, I do not want to touch this issue with a 10 foot pole. I deleted the articles because their seemed to be a large number of redirects to this topic, disproportionate to other similar topics, and they were tagged with a WP:CSD that seemed appropriate. I did not look into it any further than that and really have no desire to. I assumed good faith of the nominator, and if this assumption was invalid, then it needs to be taken up at an noticeboard or something like that. Honestly, if you want somebody to undelete them, find another administrator, I won't fight it. Other than that, please take this discussion elsewhere. Thanks! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I went ahead and restored them. I do not believe they meet G3 and they don't meet G8 at all. -- GB fan 15:37, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you @GB fan:

Thanks for deleting my user page

This title could be sarcastic, but it isn't. I really appreciate you getting to the CSD so quickly.  :) --EpochFail (talk • contribs) 15:44, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

@EpochFail: I get so many complaints on my page about WP:CSD, sometimes I dread reading new messages. Thank you for the compliment! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Can you give me back the draft

I had already done some modification and would like to at least repurpose that. How do I go about recovering the information you deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by VAPaco (talk • contribs) 16:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

This issue has been addressed extensively on the users talk page. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:55, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Kinphonic article

Kinphonic article - Hi Chris, you recently deleted the Kinphonic page on here and I understand the reasons (it was written in a promotional manner). However, we were editing this so that it did not breach this rule and then was deleted mid-edit. Would we be able to retrieve what was written at all and then go from there? thanks, Jordan — Preceding unsigned comment added by JWellsy123 (talk • contribs)

@JWellsy123: You left this comment at the top of my page and I just not found it. Do you still want me to look into this? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

SLAVE MACHINE METAL BAND

Hi User:Chrislk02,

You deleted the page Slave Machine and I don't understand the reason. I read all the admissibility criteria and I don't understand. The band was in the charts in western Europe: In the TOP 20 of metal band. The band was selected and integrated in Terrorizer Magazine in the CD sampler near international band like Sepultura and other. Terrorizer magazine is printed in UK/USA/CA/AU/NZ. I have all the sources. What are the reasons please. Thx --DavRevan (talk) 09:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

@DavRevan: let me look into, I should be back to you by the end of the day. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I have reviewed the article in question. It was deleted under the WP:A7 criteria, but it also seemed to qualify for WP:G11 (written in a blatantly promotional manner). In terms of A7, it failed to assert and provide reliable sources that verified notability. Can you provide me any links to external reliable sources that have covered this band? Most of the links were to Facebook and social media. If there are enough reliable sources, I will gladly help you get started with a re-write. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:19, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Xplode Magazine

You deleted this page due to it being incomplete and moved it to draft - it is complete now, any way you can move it back? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saeed.atcha (talk • contribs)

Note: This was left on an archive page of mine and I almost missed it ([20]). Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:02, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

It appears that this has been resolved. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Recent Draft Deletion

Hi Chrislk02, I just wanted to drop a note about a draft you recently deleted, Draft:Madura Kulatunga. One of the purposes of the AfC process is to allow editors to make mistakes and correct them before a page becomes a live Article. If anything, the Draft process is precisely the place for an article deleted at an AfD discussion, as they can correct the issues and hopefully improve it. It is rare, but I've seen a few drafts become more than what they were deleted for and approved for the article space. I'm not actively taking part in having it reinstated (as the creator is already dealing with that) but I thought I should at least mention something to you. Primefac (talk) 19:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I was tempted to undelete it out of the box, but I re-reviewed the WP:AFD where there was a pretty strong consensus for delete (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madura Kulatunga). I am open to giving second chances, but based on the discussion, it seems like a long shot. Is it worth the effort? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:36, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Ah, good point. To be honest I only skimmed the discussion, missed the "blatantly not notable" bits. You're right, this wouldn't be worth the effort of MfD'ing further down the road for wasting everyone's time. Primefac (talk) 22:08, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Blade Brown

You deleted the Blade Brown page, but I would appreciate a clearer reason for doing so, as I necessarily agree with the credibility argument as the artist in question has charted in the UK and there is relative attention to his upcoming UK tour. Oltianruci (talk) 19:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

@Oltianruci: let me look into it and I will get back to you. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

@Oltianruci: I undeleted the article, but it needs to be expanded. I deleted under WP:A7 because it did not clearly assert why they were notable as an artist. Can you add information about the "attention" he is receiving from reliable 3rd party sources to make it clearer why this artist is notable and why they should be included in Wikipedia? I am adding a reminder for me to follow up on this in a few days, and if there is no expansion/improvement, I will take the article to WP:AFD. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:54, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Quick question; If i can provide evidence of his recent mixtape being included in the official UK Chart, as well as reliable third party sources about his upcoming UK tour then in theory he would meet the relevant notability guidelines? Oltianruci (talk) 19:59, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

If by "evidence" you mean links to Reliable 3rd party sources, yes. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:01, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, in reference to the charting, I mean 'evidence' from the official UK Chart website archive and profile. Oltianruci (talk) 20:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Is there any coverage of this artist from any websites other than information about their charting? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I am just gathering some of that now, he has, for example been recognised as a 'Top 10 UK Rappers You Need To Know' by Vibe, as well as being in the '15 European rappers you should know' by XXL (magazine). What should I look for in particular? Oltianruci (talk) 20:09, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Those are EXACTLY the types of references that should be included, and the content from them synthesized into an assertion of notability. I have set my follow up date for monday (although it mght be tuesday) unless you want me to look over it sooner. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:10, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Cool, I have included those that I mentioned just now, but I will add more information regarding his career, frequent collaborations with other more established artists in the scene such as Giggs and Skepta. I will also add info about his mixtape releases, especially the ones that have officially charted. I have a uni exam on Tuesday so if I haven't finished it by then could it be Tuesday evening? Oltianruci (talk) 20:14, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Sure. Just make sure that whatever you add comes from a WP:reliable sources! Good luck with your exam. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:15, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Paresh

Did you look at the history of Paresh Lamba before deleting it as a "Test page"? Here's the lead:

Paresh Lamba (born June 26, 1966 in Mumbai, Maharashtra) is an Indian fashion designer and business executive, best known for his clothing company, Paresh Lamba Signatures, popularly known as PLS, which is a multi-national company. It makes clothes for both men and women.

I know that it was tagged as being a hoax and being unsourced, but it was tagged that way by the same person who removed the references to five different English-language South Asian media outlets. None of them are press releases. This isn't the only article about Indian fashion designers that the same editor has tagged as an unsourced hoax; perhaps you'd like to look through his deleted contributions to see if there are any others that need reviewing. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I just made that connection a second ago when I came across another article with the same type of tagging that was reverted. Give me a second and I will reverse it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate your quick response. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:21, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

No problem! I volunteer here to make the Wikipedia a better Encyclopedia, and that means fixing my mistakes when I make them. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Skunk2 Racing

You deleted this page due to it being Unambigous Promotion. It was marked for speedy Deletion. Can I get the Material back please. I am trying to Create a page for the large company Group-a-Engineering, DBA skunk2 Racing. Several Notable employees are already on Wikipedia because they hold such pivotal roles in the aftermarket manufacturing and sport compact racing industry. they are a multi-million dollar engineering firm that has pioneered a number of new technologies now seen as common in the industry. This page should be similar to K&N engineering(Wikipedia Page), Edelbrock, LLC(Wikipedia Page). This page is not designed to promote a Brand, or a specific product. This page is intended to be informational only. On the size of the operation, the contributors to the company, current technologies, facilities, the 20 year racing history that helped define the Sport Compact industry and NHRA (Also a wikipedia Page). Also the legal story behind the name for Skunk2, as their legal battle with Lockheed Martin (Wikipedia Page) required that they change the original name from Skunkworks. If I could Please Get the Content back, I can make some changes to ensure the Objective nature of the content. As I intended to make the changes, but the page was up, and deleted in less than an hour. I think the mistake I made was I gave External links/Citations that lead back to the companies website. That is where I got the information from, and personal knowledge. let me know if there is anything that you can see that needed immediate changing and I will see to it that it gets done.

Cheers,

Group-A-Engineering (talk) 22:28, 21 May 2015 (UTC) Joe

Before I go to the effort to do that, Can you provide me links to 1 or more reliable sources about the topic in question? Please note that content from the organizations website is not generally sufficient to meet Wikipedias general notability guidelines for inclusion. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:14, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Recent page Deletion

I recently saw that you deleted Scouts Royale Brotherhood page that I was working on. I understand now that these are the new standards. Years ago it was not like this. I will be recreating the page on my page for now and hopefully you will not delete it. So how is it any different to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau_Gamma_Phi . It would look somehow like this when its done. Thanks Chris. Junjimalaza (talk) 22:45, 21 May 2015 (UTC)Junjimalaza

You are welcome to create it as a draft. What I encourage you to do is provide as many reliable sources as possible in whatever you choose to write. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:15, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Chris, wikipedia was not like this before the page was deleted eons ago, I did not remember the mypage part back then. And then when I got back the page was already vandalized. Would you be likely to comment on the draft by next month.Junjimalaza (talk) 00:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Recent page Deletion: Jewish terror in Israel

Hi, I saw you deleted the page I started translating from Hebrew (Jewish terror in Israel) for being an Attack page. I did not create a new topic or wrote any new material, I was simply translating a page that already existed in Hebrew and Russian into English. Can you please explain? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfkspfkjsl (talk • contribs) 14:56, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

The article listed the names of many individuals claiming that they were "terrorists" and other various claims without a single reliable source. This is a textbook no-no on Wikipedia (read WP:BLP). Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:59, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

1) It doesn't name any individuals as terrorists, it only says they were accused of terrorism by the Israeli justice system. 2) This is a loyal translation of a well established Hebrew wiki page (you're welcome to check for yourself, the Google translation is not too awful). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfkspfkjsl (talk • contribs) 15:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Too fine a line for me to walk, and I would rather err on the side of caution. There were several similar articles that I deleted for the same reason. You are welcome to make a request at WP:DRV to get a few more eyes on it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:39, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Can you please answer my second point, i.e. the proposed page being a translation from a well established wiki page in another language? If still unresolved, I'll make a request as suggested. Regardless of the outcome, thanks for your time! Jfkspfkjsl (talk) 15:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I am unfamiliar with the rules that govern that particular wikipedia (e.g. notability guidelines, legal requirements for WP:BLP etc). In this case, a large list of accused terrorists seems to be potentially problematic for the English Wikipedia. It may not be, but as I said before, I would rather err on the side of caution, and get some more people to review this. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:54, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Added a request:

Remove

Hi, Can you please delete this revision and next revision? Thank you — Supdiop ^talk 15:45, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

@Supdiop: Done Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:50, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Resolution Ordered Archive

Redirects you deleted

• redirect ISI terror activities which redirect to Pakistan and state-sponsored terrorism just got deleted under G3(vandalism), if main page has such words then what is vandalism in this redirect? Also this page already has redirect named Inter-Services Intelligence role in terrorism which is same like deleted redirect. They can go for RfD instead of speedy delete.
• redirect Killings of Hindus in Pakistan which redirect to Hinduism in Pakistan which has section of "persecution of Hindus" also got speedily deleted under g3(vandal). What vandalism in it when Persecution of Hindus in Pakistan existed and Persecution of Muslims in India also exits. They can go for RfD.
• Both of them are not speedy or vandal. WP:RNEUTRAL --Human3015 Say Hey!! • 17:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

As usual, I was just working to the CAT:CSD backlog, I did not tag them for speedy, just deleted them, and had no strong preference one way or another (other than I have NO Desire to get involved in a dispute on these matters). For the first one, I will undelete it, that is fine, if you want to RfD it, go ahead. For the "Killings" title, I am not comfortable undeleting that. As you state, the existing standard is a redirect from "persecution", and the subject section is also "persecution" in the article it is redirecting too. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:10, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Actually, scratch that, I want nothing to do with this, all of these should go to WP:RFD or WP:DRV as they seem inciting and appear to add little value to Wikipedias search and organization structure as a whole. Both of the ones above had multiple tags, and while they may not have been vandalistic in nature (which I am going to be more careful in the future when multiple tags are on a speedy to make sure this one is used correctly), both of these seem to be deletable under WP:G10

• For example, if the standard is "persecution" in the name of the redirects, why then is in this situation, it "killing"? This seems to be inciting, and providing little or no value other than to create a redirect that that is a more severe and refined description than the topic that is redirects to. Given that none of the other examples you listed use this language, it seems to have no reason to be used in this situation either, this one can go to WP:DRV.
• The ISI terror activities is not as clear cut of a case, but still appear to qualify under WP:G10 but in this case, the redirect only serves to single out an organization that is a subset of the article that it redirects to, and explicitly call them terrorists as well. While this may or may not be the case, this redirect has no other conceivable purpose.

In short, I am uncomfortable undeleting these as they seem out of place on Wikipedia, and would prefer another set of eyes on them. If you would like them undeleted, you can either list them at (WP:RFD), after which I will undelete them to allow them time for discussion, find another administrator who wants to get more involved than I do, or take it to WP:DRV. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for taking care of deleting Norburn Creighton Hyatt. I hated to nominate as I personally know the guy who wrote it, but he understands. Eric Cable  |  Talk  18:03, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

@EricCable: no problem, just working through the deletion logs for the day. Thanks for the work nominating it for WP:PROD. There are a lot of jobs that nobody really wants to do but need to get done, and that definitely is one of them. Keep up the good work! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:35, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Quixotic plea

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 04:34, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Corona Network

Hello, For some reason this page has been deleted. I contested the deletion, but no reply was made. It is unacceptable! In a week someone else would come and recreate it, and be the first. I don't understand why Ethereum is allowed but not Corona. Deleting an article, stating it can be contested but ignoring it completely. If someone else opens the page I will not forgive you.... What's the point in contributing if you can't contribute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by June.davis84 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

The article in question is Corona Network, and I will review it and let you know why I deleted it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:16, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I deleted this article for 2 reasons, only one of which was in the deletion summary. 1.) A7 criteria for speedy deletion - This article does not assert notability, why is this site important? Why is it notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia? 2.) G11 criteria for speedy deletion - In the lack of an assertion of notability, this article only serves to be a placeholder on wikipedia where the company/organizations name and a very brief description of what it does and how there are "thousands of developers" (sic, the quotes were used in the article to surround the phrase), and what it can do for them. If someone else "opens up a page" that meets Wikipedias criteria for inclusion, then you will be welcome to contribute to it in a collaborate manner. I suggest that you write the article as a draft, and provide as many references to reliable third party external sources as possible. Hope that helps! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:22, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

The American Nurses Foundation Page Help

Good morning, Just wanted to see if I have formatted the American Nurses Foundation page and cited the sources properly so that I may move it from draft form to article form. thanks ANF2015 (talk) 12:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@ANF2015: let me look at it and I will get back to you. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:50, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@ANF2015: I reviewed the article at User:ANF2015/draft, and there is a significant problem with the only references being to your organizations website. Are there any links to external 3rd party reliable sources? In its current form, it would likely go to WP:AFD, and very likely deleted as the reliable sources criteria is very important. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Chrislk02 Thanks for the update about the references, I have added additional resources and throughout the document and think that it may be more along the lines of what you are looking for. Please let me know if this is what you were describing and if I should try to find additional resources. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ANF2015 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@ANF2015: I have moved the article to American Nurses Foundation, the 3rd party sources were exactly what was needed. Ideally, none of the references should be to your own site, but that is an area that can be improved upon in the mainspace. Let me know if you have any other question. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:15, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Herman Laatsman

Bonjour Chris,

A. The biography of this personality was deleted from the encyclopedia on the motive: G12. Unambiguous copyright infringement. I did see the notice for speedy deletion and answered immediately on the talk page of the article to this argument and to the others that were raised. No answer was produced during the days following my answer.

1/ The small part of the previous publication which had been reproduced in the deleted biography was a public explanatory memorandum issued by Harry Truman, President of the United States, explaining why he had decided to honor Herman Laatsman by giving him the Medal of Freedom Silver Palms.

Such public acts usually does not bear copyrights and can be freely reproduced.

2/ This publication could not infringe a copyright licence because I was the original author of the previous publication and this publication had no exclusive rights.

B. Other motives were wrongly used to justify a deletion:

1/ The biography did not concern a living person: Herman Laatsman died in 1976.

2/ The biography did not contain "no reference": 19 footnotes had been provided to credit the facts displayed and several links had been inserted.

Could you please reexamine the decision taken. If other difficulties are raised a posteriori I will be glad to solve those. But I would be grateful to adopt a positive attitude. This biography concerns the Commander of the French Section of Dutch Paris Escape line - which saved the lives of more than 1000 people, including more than 100 allied airmen, during WWII. Concerning those airmen, Winston Churchill once wrote: "Never was so much owed by so many to so few".

The Commander paid very heavily for his fight for freedom. He was arrested, tortured and deported to one of the worst Nazi concentration camp (Buchenwald).

Merci d'advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alain.souloumiac (talk • contribs) 02:13, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

~~Alain Souloumiac~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alain.souloumiac (talk • contribs) 09:13, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Alain.souloumiac: I will review this deletion and get back to you. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:07, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Alain.souloumiac: I have reviewed it, hat the copyvio was not blatant, the overlap was not significant enough, so I have undeleted the article. Thanks for bringing this to my attention and sorry for any inconvenience Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:17, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Merci à Chris (au nom de la France). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alain.souloumiac (talk • contribs) 16:53, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Misunderstanding

Hello. It's your job not true, Please return my articles. It's User to dont with me. Jacilason (talk) 19:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jacilason: Your request is nearly unintelligible. I am going to look through your history to see if I can figure out what you are asking. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:36, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I am going to need you to state your request for clearly. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

What was my work bad it? Such behavior is not true, is my Articles standard, I was asked many times, but no one not listen me, Now my request is clearly of you, back my tried (articles) and Permit activity. please, Thanks. Jacilason (talk) 01:17, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Mr. Why do not you answer? I ask you Request i have, Please back my tried articles. It is not ethical behavior. Jacilason (talk) 02:13, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

First off, it appears that english is not your first language, as your requests are nearly unintelligible. Additionally, I have reviewed the deletions, and it appears that you have been accused of being a sock puppet of a disruptive editor who has been banned. This is something that you need to sort out before I can undelete the articles. Additionally, you are welcome to request a deletion review. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:14, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

First: Language Not my problem. tow: Articles have been standard. three: How do you know your, Block me is not an insult to me? four: What are the opportunities? six: I've asked many times but he did not listen me. seven: It is my request clearly, Back my article, PLEASE! Jacilason (talk) 19:13, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

First off, language is a serious problem. This is the English language Wikipedia, we communicate in English so that we can clearly understand the needs goals and objectives that we need others to perform. Your english is VERY poor, and one of the reasons it takes me so long to respond. Now to your request; this account has been accused of potentially being a sock puppet of a disruptive editor at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/پارسا آملی. This needs to be addressed before the articles can be undeleted. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:28, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

I repeat, this is an insult. The problem lying insulting and created problem On behalf of a user Mohsen. Im have two years of silence, but ut this time I'm standing for due me. More than a dozen have been blocked user mistake. Answer, Where are the law? Jacilason (talk) 10:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I understand that it is frustrating, but please keep in mind, I was not the one who accused you of being a sock puppet (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/پارسا آملی). If you want to find an administrator who is more involved in this case and has a better understanding of this, and you get them to undelete the articles in question, I have no objection. In the absence of that, I am not familiar enough with this sock puppetry case to overturn the deletion based on this complaint, I am sorry. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi and sorry to interrupt, just one thing if you didn't notice yourself, despite his poor English, still you can read this, he is admitting he is creating sock accounts for 2 years. Mohsen1248 (talk) 12:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Mohsen1248: I was not able to get that when I read it the first time but I see it now (At least I think so). Feel free to add this to any sock investigations if you feel it is appropriate. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:00, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks and I see you already mentioned that, but one thing, I think you made a mistake by deleting this page Iran men's national volleyball team, I'm quite sure he didn't create this one. it was on wikipedia for so many years and was edited by so many users. Mohsen1248 (talk) 14:13, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Mohsen1248: you are correct, I have un-deleted it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:15, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Mohsen1248: I see what happened, it appears that the template was speedy nominated, and it transcluded to several other pages, I will need to go back and fix those as well. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion request

Is there any way to delete that unwanted nomination pge? There is a rule that If anyone is not a contributor to articles in that topic then, the user should inform prior to nomination. This was not fulfilled. Plus, he is no contributor. He did not even included other articles of her topic means there is a fault in ihis nomination. This is a premature, unwanted nomination. Please delete this. I want to take this topuc in first attempt. I did not nominated. Why should I be punished for others deed? My contribution has gone into vain. I am very sad.—Prashant 17:07, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Prashant!: 1.) I would leave a comment in the nomination with a note description explaining what you explained to me. 2.) I would post something at WP:ANI about this, keep it short and succinct, they may be able to help. At the end of the day, I am not familiar with the particular FA process or rules, just with the WP:CSD criteria. I would suspect that there is a way to close it but that is out of the area that I usually perform administrative tasks. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I was trying to tell you that It was an unwanted nomination. He did not even know the criteria for featured topic. Two of her articles are not even GAs. That's why I did not nominated it befor. But, that user nominated without thinking anything. Please help me as I dont want its history to get ruined again. Plus, there is a violation of law. So, you can delete it. Right?—Prashant 17:26, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Prashant!: First off: There is no precedent (that I am aware of) for deleting nominations like this, if anything, they are closed early with the closing administrator leaving a note why it was closed. This is why I suggest you leave a note on the nomination page. Secondly: The "history" should not be ruined from an unwanted nomination, this seems like a bit of an exaggeration. Thirdly: There is no "law" that is applicable here, what I suspect you are referring to is a guideline. I suggest that you make a request at WP:ANI where an administrator with more experience can address this. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

: @Prashant!: I was following up on this request, and on the page in question, an editor refers you to WP:OWN where it says "Work submitted to Wikipedia can be edited, used, and redistributed—by anyone", and goes on to say "Similarly, by submitting your ideas...you allow others to challenge and develop them.". I encourage you to read this as well. Additionally, if somebody nominated my article for WP:FA status, I would sincerely be flattered; who cares who nominates it? It means that somebody other than yourself thinks it is good. If it is not yet good, take the comments from the failed FA, use them to make the article better and resubmit. Your fears seem to be over exaggerated here, and you seem to be more worried about "being the one who nominated" than "being the one who wrote the content" Hope this helpsChrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Warnings

If a user wishes to remove warnings from their page or discussion unless it's related to an ongoing block they can remove at anytime and normally we won't restore it. If you check WP:BLANKING it acknowledges they read it even if they don't Hell in a Bucket (talk) 18:03, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Hell in a Bucket: I understand the policy on "blanking", and there is also a time for WP:IAR. At the core of this is an obvious misunderstanding, and a frustrated editor, and several editors who want to reach out to them. Their talk page had no warnings, it was blanking actual good faith attempts to help resolve the issue out of what is presumed frustration (not an attempt to "remove warnings"), and this goal of the community is echoed by another editor posted a response immediately after I did. Additionally, the page was blanked in the middle of a comment that I was leaving that required the rest of the content to provide context. Should the editor choose to blank it after the comment that I left, I have no issue with that. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

KK good enough for me didn't know if you did it without knowing or had a reason. I hope they take the advice 8). Hell in a Bucket (talk) 18:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Hell in a Bucket:, @Prashant!:I agree, I hate to see a good editor get frustrated, I have been there before, and have been at the point where I was ready to quit so I empathize What frustrates me though is how potentially negative that attitude is to the overall project. It should be celebrated that an article or topic that you worked hard on got nominated for featured status! If it fails, it should be celebrated that you got others eyes on it in the community, and that the community provided resources (via peer review) that will enable it to be made better as a whole. It is arrogant to say "I do not want community review" because it will "ruin the article." All that does is serve to separate an editor from the community that they operate in, and not in a positive way. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:16, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• Didn't realize you were admin lol. Hadn't seen your name around so I had a belly laugh about my reference to WP:BLANKING Hell in a Bucket (talk) 18:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

@Hell in a Bucket: Yea, I have been an admin for a "few days"*, I generally avoid doing that (reverting a blanking) , but I was in the middle of writing something and got edit conflicted with the blanking. I know that the editor was frustrated and lashing out so I finished writing was I was going to write. . (Note: * "a few" refers to 3 or more) Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 18:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I just noticed we deleted the first attempt at featured article? I disagree with this deletion very strongly. As you were the admin involved during the issue would you mind restoring it or would is be better to go to DRV? Hell in a Bucket (talk) 12:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Hell in a Bucket: can you be more specific? I deleted hundreds of articles yesterday. I have no problem reviewing it, I just need to know what article you are talking about. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:11, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

The subject of this thread lol, the FA nomination and subsequent blow up. I'm not sure if you actually deleted it or not, I meant you were familiar with the proceedings. Prashant and Frank Boy's. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 12:13, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Gotcha, you mean the the Featured topic nomination that there was the blow up at yesterday? I did not delete it, but I will look into it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:14, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Hell in a Bucket:I left a note at User talk:PresN for the admin who deleted the nomination. I strongly disagree with his rationale, feel free to chime in there. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:24, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Yash!:, @Hell in a Bucket: I have left a note at the deleting admins page (as you both have seen). Looking at his activity, he is probably AFK, so I will give him some time to get back to it and review it. If by the end of the day, I have not heard anything, I intend to take this to WP:DRV. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:10, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Can't you guys let it go? Please. Just for the sake of that it was a premature/faulty nomination created by an user, who was not aware about the criteria and went on to nominate it. I ts my humble request to please let it go. —Prashant 15:49, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Prashant!: What Wikipedia policy allows the deletion of the good faith actions of an inexperienced editor, and the associated discussion to be deleted? In the absence of a policy that supports this, the action says "We will do this because you want us to". You threw a temper tantrum to get what you wanted, and then had somebody ignore the desires of several other involved editors to get it. In that discussion, multiple editors opposed this deletion/. This type of activity in no way improves Wikipedia, and IMHO, does the opposite. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Yash!:, @Hell in a Bucket:, @Prashant!: @GamerPro64:: I have undeleted Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Priyanka Chopra/archive1 as there was no valid rationale that qualified it to be speedy deletion, after notifying the deleting administrator, and getting an ok to undelete it. [21] If this needs to be deleted, it should go through the WP:MFD process. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Very well. I didn't think there were any grounds for it being deleted anyway. Cheers. GamerPro64 16:48, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Wow.....You did it. Well done.—Prashant 16:49, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Prashant!: Firstly I regularly undelete things that were not deleted properly, including deletions that I perform myself, and I do my best to ensure that it is done in accordance with Wikipedias guidelines and policies. While I am admittedly appalled at how you responded to this, I would have done the same thing even if the editor acted and responded in the kindest of manners. Secondly,I do want to thank you for your contributions, you do good work, and that can often go unappreciated, I hope there are no hard feelings. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:02, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Brian Lyn

Hi. Why did you delete the article Brian Lyn? He is an Olympian, all of which are notable. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:29, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Lugnuts: Let me look into it, I will get right back to you. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. WP:NOLYMPICS explains the notabilty if you're not familar with it. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

I mistakenly thought that they had to have medaled. I will undelete it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:32, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Lugnuts: Done Sorry about that! I delete hundreds of articles, and every now and then one slips through the cracks. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:34, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

No problem - thanks! Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 19:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Nonato Luiz

Hello,

You speedy deleted my article, from Nonato Luiz, Can you recovery the page? How can I donate copyright text to wikipedia? I manage the official website and can donate the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laioviana (talk • contribs) 11:50, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Laioviana:I am looking into this, I will reply shortly. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:36, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Laioviana: I double checked this, and the copy vio does not appear to be blatant, there was some original/new content added around some key facts which likely came from that site. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:56, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Jean Griswold

Hi! You speedily deleted an article that was posted about Jean Griswold due to the fact that the page was previously deleted. I'm not sure of the content of the original page that was created and originally deleted, but the more recent one that I created yesterday was backed by reliable publications. Also, Jean Griswold is in fact very notable. Any woman that started a national organization back in the 80's while fighting MS should be considered notable. Please explain why this page was deleted again, besides referencing the fact that it was deleted previously. Thank You! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarodkarns (talk • contribs) 14:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jarodkarns: I am looking into this and will get back to your shortly via my talk page. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Jarodkarns: I re-reviewed the deleted version and the new version, and they are not substantially identical (which is good news!). The new article cites several reliable sources and would seem to pass an WP:AFD(on the surface) in its current form. I have undeleted the article and removed the speedy deletion tag accordingly. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:54, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

BLPPROD

Hi,

I saw you deleted Molly Leach due to a BLPPROD tag. The article was actually more or less only citations (attributed quotes), so it wouldn't seem to qualify. Not a good article, no, but BLPPROD does not, if I understand correctly, require inline citations. I pointed this out to the user who tagged it a few days ago (User_talk:Compassionate727#thanks for your hard work, but please try to be careful with tagging), but it looks like he/she didn't opt to do anything about it. The message I left was in the context of noticing multiple other problematic nominations and tags. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 19:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Rhododendrites: I am looking into it and will get back to you shortly. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
• @Rhododendrites: I see what you are saying. I deleted the article because the prod tag had not been removed (see WP:DEPROD, you are welcome to remove a PROD tag if you contest the deletion). I have undeleted it, thanks for bringing it to my attention. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:36, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• Thanks for your prompt response/action. I guess I sort of hoped the user would remove it on their own, then forgot. "AGForgetfulness" :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 19:38, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
• @Rhododendrites: NP, glad I could resolve it. If I am going to volunteer my time, i am going to do my best to make sure I do a good job at it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Andrew Dunlop, Baron Dunlop

Hello. You speedily deleted an article that was about a new peer Andrew Dunlop, Baron Dunlop, because 'A7: Article about a real person, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject'. I think that every current member of the House of Lords has to have an article in Wikipedia and that importance and notability of British parliamentarians are quite obvious. Why did you delete this article? --Editor FIN (talk) 19:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Editor FIN: I am looking into this and will reply shortly. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:36, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

@Editor FIN: First off, there is no Wikipedia policy that states "every current member of the House of Lords has to have an article". That being said, it appears that this individual may meet the basic criteria for inclusion per General Notability Guidelines for Inclusion as far as I can tell, but I would really like to see some more references. I personally deleted the article because I am not familiar with the British parliamentary system, and as a rule of thumb, truly notable politicians most often have a wealth of available reliable sources available, and this article was a single line long with only 1 references. I will go ahead and undelete it, but it would be wise to add more references if they exist. If they do not exist, it is likely that it will go to WP:AFD where the community as a whole will scrutinize the notability of this individual. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for Jewish terror in Israel

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jewish terror in Israel. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. . Cheers.

I have replied to this DRV request at the DRV. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Daniel Yu

I wish to contest deletion of this article which I created. However, I have not been given this opportunity as it was deleted soon after any notice was given. Reportoning (talk) 19:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Reportoning: I will look into it and get back to you. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
• @Reportoning: I have reviewed the deletion, and stand by the G11 criteria for speedy deletion of this article for the following reason. While the article does cite a reliable source, I searched through it for anything to support the language which in the deleted article says "He has cultivated a reputation as a feared menace to publicly listed companies with reporting irregularities" This prose is not encyclopedic in nature, it is written in a way that promotes or advertises the individual in question, and is clearly biased. You are welcome to recreate the article, but I encourage you to do so in as a draft (e.g. at User:Reportoning/draft. Once you are done, you can get me to review it, and if it passes muster, I will be glad to move it to the article space. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I came here to see whether the user had asked for this to be undeleted. Although the wording needs to be made more neutral, the article did cite two articles in reliable sources all about the subject: the Daily Telegraph one and a Financial Times one. I also found this in Bloomberg from 2014. (Also, while WP:OTHERSTUFF applies, the article on the company is much worse.) Yngvadottir (talk) 03:37, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Yngvadottir: I suggest a re-write. The article was only a few lines long, and those lines were mostly written in extremely promotional prose. You are welcome to write the article in an appropriate tone, as I have no disagreement that this individual would most likely pass the general notability guidelines for inclusion. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Nanobit.pro

I would like to make a complaint on your speedy deletion of Nanobit.pro article. The author haven't been warned about the lacks of this article and had no chance to reconstruct it into a better form. I ask you to allow him to edit the article or to save the work of him in some form. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ActimelPL (talk • contribs) 21:03, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• @ActimelPL: I have reviewed the article in question, and stand by my deletion according to Wikipedias A7 criteria for speedy deletion. Wikipedia is not a place for a listing of every company that provides a service of some sort, it is meant to host encyclopedic content that meets a threshold of notability for inclusion. The article in question provides nothing of the sort, and as far as I can see, the only expansion to the article would be promotional in nature, which would possibly make it qualify for G11 criteria for speedy deletion. You are welcome to create a draft article at User:ActimelPL/draft to try and make an article that will meet the criteria laid out above, but based on what I have seen, it is unlikely that it will meet the criteria. Hope this helps. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 23:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Riad Bajić

I wish to contest deletion of this article which I created, Riad Bajić is a professionally footballer for the biggest pro football club in Bosnia-Herzegovina, FK Željezničar Sarajevo, he was also called up to the Recent call-ups but withdrew due to injury. Bosnalopta

• @Bosnalopta: I deleted your article because it qualified for Wikipedias G4 requirements for speedy deletion. More specifically, this article went through an articles for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riad Bajić) where there was a community consensus to delete. You are welcome to take it to WP:DRV, but unless something has significantly changed in the career of this individual since the AFD discussion cited above, it is likely to be upheld. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 23:13, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Distributed Collaborative Organization

This term was not invented/coined/discovered by me, or by anyone I know. It is a new form of company, and while it may not be popular yet, it is growing. But more importantly, it is quite significant, because a DCO is neither a "for profit" or a "non-profit" model, but a new "bottom up" model that distributes the value of an organization among all of the people who use and contribute to the organization. It is entirely new, and only possible with recent technology developments such as the blockchain (the tech used by BitCoin). If you let the page live for a few days, I will ask those in the community to contribute a more thorough and cited entry. Then if you think it's still not worthy of an entry yet, I will understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.249.57.190 (talk) 22:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

First off, I did not tag your article with A11 tag, that was @Ahecht:, I just performed the deletion. Secondly, in the absence of any reliable sources (which there is not a single citation in the article), statements such as "The term was coined at a legal summit ..." indicate that it was in fact recently made up. If there is a scholarly publication, a news story, or some other reliable 3rd party source that provides coverage of this, you are welcome to re-create the article using these references as the foundation. Otherwise, what you are writing about may be considered Original Research, which directly violates the wikipedia policy of No original research. Hope this helps. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 23:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Deveo

Hi Chris, you have recently deleted the Deveo page based on section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Since the source that was referred to was a wiki with a GNU GPL v2 license, I thought it was okay to copy the article facts. I have since examined the compatible license more closely and realize that it is not. As such, I would like to ask you if it would be possible to reinstate the article or return it to me as a draft so that I can address the issue? Unfortunately, I had missed the speedy deletion contention. InfoByTom (talk) 06:19, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• @InfoByTom: I am looking into this, I will get back to you shortly. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:29, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• @InfoByTom: I went to review the article in question, and I stand by the deletion. I am particularly concerned about A7 criteria for speedy deletion (which was not tagged at time of deletion but still applies). In this case, the article does not assert notability? Why is this product notable? What makes it encyclopedic? Wikipedia is not designed to be a repository of software products, but a repository of encyclopedic information? In its current form, not only is there significant overlap with content that is not compatible license wise, the content itself is also not up to par with Wikipedias standards. Do you have any reliable 3rd party sources that you can use as a reference? (note, content that is user contributed, or from sites associated with this product generally do not qualify?). If so, feel free to post a few of them here, and I can help you get started re-writing the article as a draft based on these sources. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Rockhouse Partners

Hello Chris,

Thanks for your attention at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. The community is proud of you. However, am aware of your recent deletion of the above article per A7. The criterion does not applies to article with assertion of notability but I have no prejudice against its deletion through WP:AfD if its notability is in doubt. I think the article is likely to survive AfD anyway. I found Reuters and Billboard to mention few. Could you please restore the page? Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 21:23, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Wikicology: When I deleted it under the A7 criteria for speedy deletion, I also felt that it was possible G11 as well, although it was not tagged as such. Nowhere in the article does it say what is notable about the organization itself apart from the organizations it services, and am reluctant to infer notability based on an "impressive client list" or every contractor and small organization that, say, provides services for google or amazon, may have an "Assertion of notability". I do understand that this is a fine line, and in this case, upon further inspection of the references, only 3/4 of them or so link to the site of the organization in question, and a few of them seem to be external sources. To err on the side of caution I have un-deleted the referenced article per your concern, but do not entirely agree with you. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 23:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring the page. However, am not in any way insinuating that it passes WP:GNG but my concern is on the deletion per A7. I really have no prejudice against its deletion through WP:AfD if its notability is still in doubt. I believe that subject of an article does not necessarily need to claim, for example that " this company won 5 award this year"..., the company is the leading service provider in Europe..., this company is notable because..." to assert notability. Am not trying to pick anything negative from your use of admin tool or comment, in fact you are one of the admins I so much respected and it will be very stupid of me to assumed that you are unfamiliar with the use of A7 and I understand that you delete hundreds of pages on a weekly basis. Meanwhile, out of 1000 pages deletion per week or month, we are likely to wrongly delete about 0.001% which amount to about 1 of 1000, which I will consider reasonable. Perhaps this is 1 out of 1000 even 5000 pages you had deleted this year. Cheers! Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 11:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Wikicology: After another review, I agree it was a borderline (IMHO) A7 case (especially after I realized all the citations were not to the organizations site). I will respectfully disagree, and say that I think it is incredibly important for an article to "assert notability" as soon as possible in the introduction, (e.g. explicitly state that it is the largest provider in in a geographic area, and provide citations to support it). Once this notability has been "asserted" (explicitly expressed) the rest of the article should then expand upon that assertion, provide additional evidence, and other minor assertions of notability. Otherwise, a reader is left to "imply" notability, and they may (rightfully or wrongfully) infer notability for the fact that it is included in Wikipedia. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I think care and diligent is necessary at times in dealing with pages with no obvious claim of significance. I usually try to look for sources that assert notability before considering such article for deletion. I realized that articles on notable topics with no obvious claim of significant are usually created by New editors and inappropriate nomination and deletion of such page could discourage them yet I frown at spammers on spot, they are nothing but WP:MOSQUITOES. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 12:37, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Wikicology: I respectfully agree with everything you said above! Personally, I have been trying to find ways to make sure that I am more reliable as an administrator who performs a large number of deletions on a regular basis, and do not want to WP:BITE Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:46, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. You are such an amazing administrator! Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 12:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Wikicology: Not sure if you are interested or not, but this ended up at AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rockhouse Partners. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:52, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion: List of deaths inspiring Black Lives Matter

Hello Chrislk02, I see you deleted the above article per G4, being "sufficiently identical and unimproved copy" of List of controversial killings of African Americans in the 2010s. However, I would contest that the article is actually not identical, and is improved. At the AFD of the first list, closing admin noted that other users ... have suggested that this topic be covered at Black Lives Matter, which is what was done. Furthermore, there is an additional column in the table, called Link, for the list you deleted. In this column, there are two source, one primary, one secondary, linking each death to Black Lives Matter. This is present in List of deaths inspiring Black Lives Matter and not in List of controversial killings of African Americans in the 2010s. Therefore, I request that you restore the page. Thank you. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 08:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: In the case of this deletion, I viewed the deleted content and the lists, and a huge portion was word for word from the deleted content. I am not opposed to you finding another administrator who is willing to undelete it (and you can link them to this reply in the request), it was just too much like what was deleted (entire blocks were word for word copies). Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:04, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• Okay, I have done so. I don't object that a lot of content is exactly the same. I just don't think that's a valid reason for deletion, because the subject of the article is being framed differently. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 12:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Part of what I do at CAT:CSD is try to stay separate from the topics I am deleting (to the extent that I can). I try to avoid using rationales such as "it is framed in a different light" on topics I am unfamiliar with, and instead, leave that to editors who are more familiar with the topic. In this case, the content was sufficiently identical and I am not familiar with the topic at hand. Again, feel free to find someone more familiar who is comfortable with un-deleting it, I will have no hard feelings. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, as the admin who closed the AFD I have looked at the remade table and found that sourcing each entry to the Black Lives Matter movement has resolved the WP:OR issue. I have therefore restored the table (and proceeded to merge it). I would like to thank you for handling this case with a very reasonable approach. Referring and delegating the issue of undeleting is exactly the correct way of doing it. Best wishes, Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:41, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

@Sjakkalle: thanks for the note, and being willing/able to look into this more, it is appreciated. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:16, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Dont want the deleted article to be shown in google search, Radium Exports

You have rightly deleted the article page on Radium Exports 13:30, 27 May 2015 Chrislk02 (talk | contribs) deleted page Radium Exports (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)

I dont want the deleted page to be shown in the google search results of Radium Exports.

Please guide me how do i untag it

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neha Shah Radium (talk • contribs) 10:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Neha Shah Radium: I am honestly unsure of how to do that, I suggest that you ask at the Village Pump (Technical), they may have some more insight into this. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:11, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Neha shah Radium: In addition to Chris's suggestion, you may contact Google here. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 12:58, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wikipedia has no control over Google. But you probably shouldn't worry about this. It can take a day or two before a deleted article disappears from their search engines. In the meantime, if someone sees that in a Google search and clicks on it, all they get is a notice that the page has been deleted. --MelanieN (talk) 15:04, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Bertho Driever

I will be appealing the speedy deletion of Bertho Driever and request that the page be preserved until I do so. I thought I'd submitted evidence about why this entry should be left as is, but I now understand that you are looking for something other than notability. I will research that and try to address your unstated specific concerns. Theodulf 13:27, 28 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theodulf (talk • contribs)

• @Theodulf: I am looking in to this and will get back to you shortly. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
• @Theodulf: I have reviewed the deleted content, and it was deleted because there was not a single reliable source provided to verify notability. Can you provide me a link to any? I will be glad to undelete it in that case. Thanks! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 13:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Chrislk02 - I hope to continue my research and develop the articles about all four members of ALSQ, but since they are Dutch musicians I'm having trouble accessing much that's particularly useful. Of the resources available to me at this time, may I cite:

• O'Kelly, Eve (1990). The Recorder Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521366607. (Accessible on Google Books.)
• Nagle, Sigrid (November 1981). "The Festival of Flanders, Bruges". The American Recorder (The American Recorder Society). pp. 122–124. (Available online to members only. I can provide you with a PDF of this issue if you would like through some other means.)
• And in Dutch: http://www.fondspodiumkunsten.nl/nl/organisatie/adviseurs_meerjarige_subsidie/bertho_driever/

Thanks! Theodulf 03:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theodulf (talk • contribs)

• @Theodulf: I will undelete this and move it to User:Theodulf/draft. I will plan on following up in a week or so to ensure progress has been made, otherwise, it may be deleted again. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

International Association for Public Participation

Thanks for speedy deleting this! I had restored it per user request, intending to put it in their userspace for them to work on it. But I didn't notice that the original article was a copyvio, which meant I should not have restored it. Thanks for catching it so quickly. --MelanieN (talk) 14:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• @MelanieN: NP! I had been getting sloppy with my WP:G12 deletions (not actually looking into the copy vio report) and accidentally deleted some false positives. To help myself be more thorough, I have started trying to indicate the significance of the copy vio after inspection. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
• @MelanieN: Oh, and thanks for the positive note! I spend a lot of time at CAT:CSD, and most of my "new messages" are "how dare you delete my article about some business I started yesterday that I am the CEO, CIO, CTO and bag boy for", it is always appreciated to get a positive note! Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 14:51, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

LOL! Actually I appreciated the fact that you covered for me. I have only been an admin for a few months and I make some greenhorn mistakes. Still learning. 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 14:59, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• @MelanieN: I did the exact same thing (restored an article to the user space that turned out to be a 99% copy vio) User:Mthiesse/draft Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:42, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Good to know I'm not the first. I'll probably make every mistake in the book before I'm done. --MelanieN (talk) 18:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Contesting speedy deletion of Aquantia Corporation

It's a privately-held $160-million-funding (http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2014/03/17/semiconductor-company-aquantia-raises-16m-says-its-preparing-for-ipo/) company; fastest-growing semiconductor company in North America in 2014 (http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20141113006234/en/Aquantia-Ranks-Fastest-Growing-Semiconductor-Company-North), likely to IPO soon, which manufactures fairly generally used chips. Isn't that enough for notability?

(I created the page when chasing through the ownership-web around Avago and finding that, on the PLX page, certain assets had been sold to a company without a Wikipedia page)

Fivemack (talk) 15:55, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Fivemack: let me look into it and I will get back to you shortly. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
• @Fivemack: I deleted it under the WP:A7 criteria, but it also seems that WP:G11 also applies. 1.) WP:A7 The article makes no assertion of notability that is intelligible to an average reader of this project, and that is not promotional. Additionally, there are no reliable sources provided to back up any of the assertions that are made. 2.) WP:G11 (unlisted in deletion description but applicable). This article is full of technical specifics and jargon that compare it to its competitors (e.g. "allowed them to manufacture 90 nm transceivers with comparable power efficiency to the competitions' 65 nm"). You are welcome to try and write an article that will be up to par, but I encourage you to do so as a draft (say user:Fivemack/draft and start with as may reliable sources as you can find. I hope this helps. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:02, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fivemack/Aquantia_Corporation better? Fivemack (talk) 16:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Fivemack: yes, much. I moved it into the article space. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:37, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

The Westmont Montessori School

I was creating an entry for The Westmont Montessori School and it was deleted. After reviewing the reason for its deletion, I completely understand what I did wrong. (This is obviously my first time trying to do this). Can I edit the page and have it relisted?

Thanks! --Mthiesse (talk) 16:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)Melanie--Mthiesse (talk) 16:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Mthiesse: I am going to look into this, I will likely move it to User:Mthiesse/draft so you can work on it unless I find any other problems with it that will prevent me from doing that. If you want help/a review of what you have written to determine if it is more appropriate, please feel free to let me know. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Mthiesse: I have moved it to the draft link above. I offer the following suggestions if you would not like it to be deleted in the future. 1.) Find as many reliable3rd party sources (a news story, etc. NOTE, links to your organizations website is insufficient). 2.) Wikipedia is not a place for advertisement or promotion of services, even for schools. Ensure that any content that is there can be traced to a reliable source, and that the content is appropriate for an encyclopdia. I will follow up on this in a few days to a week, and if there is no significant progress, I will most likely delete it again as in its current form, it is written in a promotional manner that is not appropriate for wikipedia. Hope this helps. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 16:09, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Mthiesse: You appear to have entirely ignored this advice. You made some edits, but didn't add any sources, and then published it again. As a result, I've put it up for speedy deletion. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:24, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry! I started working on it before I read your note. I just added a source from a local paper for the school history. Does that help? Mthiesse (talk) 16:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I didn't mean to republish it, but I did not see a button to save my work only. Mthiesse (talk) 16:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Mthiesse: The draft was at User:Mthiesse/draft, you must have intentionally moved it to The Westmont Montessori School. You should have been working on it at User:Mthiesse/draft, like was advised above. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:35, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

OK, so I started trying to edit it before I saw the link above. Now it appears that the link above is not able to be edited. So should I attempt to edit on the page again to provide more citations and links? That is what the page is telling me to do. Mthiesse (talk) 16:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@Chrislk02: I added more citations and links to the page. I hope this helps its entry. Again, I am sorry for my novice mistakes and I hope that the page is now acceptable. Thanks. Mthiesse (talk) 17:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Mthiesse: At this point, it is not up to me as an articles for deletion request has been started at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Westmont Montessori School. You should go there, and make your case for why this school is notable using the strongest reliable sources that you can locate. Be sure to indicate that you are the author in your note. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:16, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

New version of Circle Research

andydalg Hi Chris - have edited the circle research page so hopefully meets the guidelines now. Do let me know if not and I'll have another bash. Thanks. — Preceding undated comment added 17:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Andydalg: that looks better. (P.S. please use the wikipedia signature functionality to sign your posts!) Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Chris - appreciate your time Andydalg (talk) 18:01, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Buffy Summers House 2.jpg

AMCsoldier Hi Chris - I've been trying to remove my picture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Buffy_Summers_House_2.jpg) from some time now but can't figure out how. I noticed you recently removed my "speedy deletion" formatting on the picture's page. Would you be able to assist me in using the proper formatting to produce a speedy deletion? Thank you. — Preceding undated comment added 19:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@AMCsoldier: the correct tag would be the db-g7 template for speedy deletion which you can read about at WP:G7. I will go ahead and delete this on your request after I ensure that it is appropriate to do so. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

@AMCsoldier: done. In the future, please login before making requests such as that, it was rejected (among other reasons) because it appeared that an unregistered user was making the request. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 19:51, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Chris! I'm learning as I go - thanks for your assistance and patience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMCsoldier (talk • contribs) 01:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Sam Deroo

Why did you delte Sam Deroo page? DariaPolonia (talk) 22:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• @DariaPolonia: let me look into it and I will get back to you shortly. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
• @DariaPolonia: The user who create it had been suspected of using multiple accounts (e.g. sock puppetry) and was blocked earlier today. In the case of that, when no other editor has contributed to it, it can be deleted. In this case, I did not look close enough at the edit history to see that you had contributed to it, so I have undeleted it. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
• So, you have to delete all pages created by this user? Oh, it so much work. I see you had to delete a few more pages about volleyball players, so I have to recreated them. Thank you for your answer! DariaPolonia (talk) 22:28, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
• @DariaPolonia: you are welcome to re-create them. If you see any new editors that mysteriously appear and start editing like the banned editor, give me a heads up, it is a common thing to occur after a sock puppet gets blocked. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:30, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
• @Chrislk02: Alright! I'll remember that. :) DariaPolonia (talk) 22:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Contest Speedy Deletion of Edward James, III

I would like to make a complaint on your speedy deletion of Edward James III. The author wasn't warned about the lacks of this article and had no chance to reconstruct it into a better form. I ask you to allow him to edit the article or to save the work of him in some form. I just need time to edit the wording. Thank you in advance.

Kaydiddy35 (talk) 20:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Kaydiddy35: I will look into this. On a related note, a speedy deletion means that it can be deleted immediately due to some serious flaw with it, I will let you know more in a moment. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
• @Kaydiddy35: I deleted this article, among other reasons, because a large block of the text was copy pasted from an external source in violation of copyright. You are welcome to re-create the article, but please do not use direct text from external sources. Additionally, please try to make sure that the tone is not promotional, but appropriate for an encyclopedia. I suggest that you find as many reliable sources as you can before you start. Hope this helps. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 20:38, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Trying this again Kaydiddy35 (talk) 22:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Kaydiddy35:I reviewed the new version and there was no copyright issue (the tag was a false positive). I have removed the speedy deletion tag because the individual has an assertion of notability and what appears to be several reliable sources. I cannot guarantee that it will not go to WP:AFD, but for now, it looks ok. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:18, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

New pages

Hey Chris. As you may have noticed I recently started patrolling New Pages Feed. This after many months of recent changes patrolling. Obviously I'm in the process of familiarizing myself with the way things work and was wondering whether I am too quick to nominate certain articles for deletion? I imagine it's a careful balance of deciding what to delete and what to tag without pissing on a new users battery to the point of discouragement. Any advice you may have would be welcome. Cheers Robvanvee 07:32, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Robvanvee: do you have any articles in particular that you would like a second set of eyes on? Personally, to avoid discouragement, I attempt to leave custom messages a custom warning message here is a custom block message. It is easy to create them as templates in your userspace if you desire, and to subst them when you give the warning (although these I typed out personally on a case by case basis). It takes a little extra time, but can encourage an otherwise problematic editor to potentially change their mind. Hope this helps, and thank you for the New Page work, I know that is where I started when I started on Wikipedia. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:23, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Chris! Robvanvee 16:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Yo Sé Que Mentía

Hi - me again (cannot manage to retire cleanly). A different situation this time: the article did not have any references, and had been tagged as such since 2012. But a speedy deletion nomination in 2014 was declined on grounds of there being a claim of notability, and after making the very similar nomination yesterday the nominator gutted the article, removing at least one claim of notability. The creator, AntonioMartin, has asked for undeletion here but apparently didn't think to ask you, and the Google Cache version linked to in the response there is the gutted version. AntonioMartin has just been desysopped so can't see what happened; could I request you to consider making the nice gesture of reconsidering based on the article history, and maybe sending the article to AfD, as was suggested to the earlier nominator by the admin who declined speedy deletion then? Thanks for looking again. Yngvadottir (talk) 10:39, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Yngvadottir: I am reviewing this. Firstly, the version I deleted only had a single line with no assertion of notability. The content that was gutted had maintenance tags requesting verification of the facts since 2012 (> 2 years), and these were the "assertions of notability". This appears to be the only content that was "gutted", and in the absence of reliable sources, I agree with this content removal. Do you think there are citations to back up the assertions "...became one of the most viewed Puerto Rican telenovelas in history, and the show's main song, also named Yo se que mentia became one of Chacon's biggest hits as a singer."? Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 12:34, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Berek. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, American Nurses Foundation, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Berek (talk) 11:22, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

@Berek: You will have to forgive me, I am unfamiliar with the term "unreviewed"?