User talk:331dot/Archive 2

For older posts, pleas see Archive 1.

Please place new comments at the bottom of the page. If you are responding to a post I left on your talk page, please do so there.

Bank

Ok, i will update previous articles with more information, then create new with more references. Thanks for your guidance. Ameen Akbar (talk) 16:55, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

request

It was released uNder GFDL--శ్రీధర్ బబు (talk) 13:36, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi

By the way, you are going to regret deleting the GoldKey page when it is world renouned and I have the power to embarrass you in front of the world because YOU opposed GoldKey. Just thought I would let you know.

---

Whatever, I correct myself: You tagged it for speedy deletion. If you think it is not the right kind of article, you write one. Use goldkey.com as a reference.

---

Are you going to take my challenge, or what? Let's see if you can do better in five minutes. (which is what I had) Force4good (talk) 20:17, 16 January 2015 (UTC) Force4good (talk)force4good

I have no interest in any challenge. You are welcome to recreate the page yourself and make it so that it complies with Wikipedia guidelines. If you want to start with the page you had originally, you can contact the deleting administrator who can reverse the deletion if you indicate that you want to do legitimate work on it. I would suggest that, if it will take you some time to work on it, that you indicate that work is in progress either by using an article template or posting on the talk page. 331dot (talk) 04:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

hmm, rwacolyd

Thanks!

I am glad that there is a rational way to redirect readers to a better page!

is a 10:59, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm not the most knowledgeable person in wikicode but I know that one. :) 331dot (talk) 11:01, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Balloon boy xxx

I think we're well into WP:Don't feed the trolls territory now. If were you I would have stopped after this. I asked Materialscientist to extend the block to include talk page access here if you want to add to it, Meters (talk) 18:39, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I really don't think much more can be added to the situation anyway. Given what they have said about themselves I'm not sure they should be editing here anyway. I think your request is appropriate. 331dot (talk) 19:25, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Zingindiapower

Zingindiapower obviously doesn't speak english natively, so writing your long essay isn't really going to help. I've left a nice draft space for him to start in, though it will probably never make it to the mainspace... EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)}

@EoRdE6:Quite possibly, but I am ever hopeful. Your draft space should hopefully be helpful. 331dot (talk) 02:22, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Dirt it looks like dirt

To let you know that user already got warned 4 times and I submitted an AIV report on it see here. I been keeping good eye on that article. —Mythdon 01:07, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Good to know. Thanks for the information. 331dot (talk) 01:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

No problem. I thought I'd fill you in because they been blanking their own talk page of the warnings apparently to cover up the fact they been warned and I'm not even the only user to have submitted an AIV against them as another editor did right after me. —Mythdon 01:10, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

User talk:Supersoftdevelopers

Hi. I'm just pointing out that we do not delete user talk pages. I have corrected as necessary. If you think the user should be blocked for spam name and/or spam edits, that's another issue, one which you can take to the appropriate noticeboard. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:54, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

@Kudpung: Thanks for your explanation and I understand what you are saying; but the administrator who blocked the user, Orangemike deleted the page and then recreated it with the block notice. I have seen this done before in instances of blatant spamming on user talk pages, so I thought that would be all right. I did additionally report Supersoftdevelopers at the Username board. 331dot (talk) 11:23, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

OK, well let's not argue with OrangeMike, he's been an admin even longer than I have - and he's very good ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:32, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

That said, I don't really see anything wrong with what you said, it is just different. Again, thanks for the explanation. :) 331dot (talk) 11:45, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

A user, especially a blocked user, needs a talk page; but there is no reason to leave blatant and shameless spamming of the kind I deleted, even back in edit history. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:48, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Well said

Removed per request of The Rambling Man.

ITN

Thank you for your comment, just added a reply. Busy Moose (talk) 02:46, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Roking on

I've declined your nonsense, as it's mostly Lithuanian. It's now tagged A1 instead. Peridon (talk) 21:25, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

@Peridon: Thanks for the clarification and change. 331dot (talk) 10:59, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Swabble

Why is Swabble getting deleted? There's nothing wrong with it— Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam12110 (talk • contribs)

@Adam12110: The reasons are given in the deletion tags. If you wish to discuss them, please click on the "contest this deletion" button or post directly to its talk page. 331dot (talk) 20:36, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Your state...

The Northeast is the only region of the country I haven't visited. I always imagined the rugged coast of Maine would be beautiful – perhaps a little like the North Shore of Lake Superior in Minnesota, my old state.

Speaking of which, how's your state of mind? Mine corresponds to today's weather: leaden skies, cold rain. Sca (talk) 22:59, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Did you notice the 'forgetful' comment? Sca (talk) 14:06, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. 331dot (talk) 14:09, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

^{Click link. Sca (talk) 15:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)}

^{PS: NYT notes: "Ms. Lee suffered a stroke in 2007 and has been living in an assisted-living facility." Sca (talk) 16:02, 4 February 2015 (UTC)}

I have a hunch that there was nothing improper there; TRM might not have even been aware of the stroke and was trying to make a point. 331dot (talk) 16:07, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

^{But she is 89. Sca (talk) 16:14, 4 February 2015 (UTC)}

I still think it is most likely that TRM was just making a point there and likely not aware of her personal health situation. 331dot (talk) 16:22, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

^{Granted, but given her age the tone seemed inappropriate, IMO. She is a living person, after all Sca (talk) 16:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)}

A friend sent me this today – from "Connecting," a newsletter for former AP journalists:

"As reported by AP's Jay Reeves, hometown friends and fans of the To Kill A Mockingbird author are struggling to reconcile the publisher's sensational announcement – that her decades-old manuscript for a sequel had been rediscovered and will be released – with the image of the elderly writer at her sister's recent funeral.

"Grieving, ill and seated in a wheelchair, Lee talked loudly to herself at awkward times during the service for her beloved older sister and attorney, Alice, according to two family friends who attended the November service. Lee mumbled in a manner that shocked some in attendance, said one of the friends."

Sca (talk) 19:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Review

Hi 331dot, I made an article in my sandbox, and I was wondering whether you could look over it for me. WPPilot is also looking over it, but I think that 2 pairs of eyes are better than 1. Especially 2 pairs that belong to experienced editors.Skate Shady - talk to me 14:42, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

@Sca: Maybe you could look at it too?Skate Shady - talk to me 15:51, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

@Skate Shady: I admit to not being very familiar with how articles on animals should be constructed, but from what I can see what you have seems like a good start. You have what I think is necessary and appropriate basic information about the animal and it all is cited. 331dot (talk) 16:11, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Alrighty, is there any improvements that you see needed? I mean, as in grammar and such. I just wanted to get the article going.Skate Shady - talk to me 16:14, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I too know nothing about the subject, but I'd suggest this beginning should be fleshed out a bit with descriptive text. Sca (talk) 16:19, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

The grammar all seems OK to me. Gotta run now but it looks like a good start. :) 331dot (talk) 16:23, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

A tag has been placed on your user page, User talk:INDO ROAD TRANSPORT COMPANY, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be blatant advertising which only promotes or publicises a company, product, group or service, and which is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages; user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you can indicate why the page is not blatant advertising, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: Click here to contest this speedy deletion which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy deletion candidate). Doing so will take you to your user talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also edit this page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would help make it encyclopedic. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:11, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, above notice is rather silly in context. I won't delete it, just for your own amusement. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:13, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what you are getting at. 331dot (talk) 16:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry. You notified user regarding promotional user name. User proceeded to replace your notice with, you guessed it, an advertisement for his company. I requested speedy, but since you edited his page before he did, you were the one to receive the delete notice. Rather than remove the notice from your talk page, since its yours, I decided to comment on the absurdity of the situation, and let you remove it if that's your preference. That's all. If nothing else, consider this a note of appreciation for your good work here. Cheers! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:18, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

@78.26: Ah, I understand now. Thanks for the clarification. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

ITN

What's up with with that weird RGloucester? Guarding the sacred honor, I mean honour, of the British Empire? Sca (talk) 16:04, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll just say it is what it is, and leave it there. 331dot (talk) 16:06, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Much to-do about nothing. Sca (talk) 16:14, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Mazzoleni London

Hi 331 dot. You sent me a message earlier today, saying that my post was deleted because it seemed like a test. It was not a test. I am having difficulty uploading information about a gallery and would appreciate your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edmichie (talk • contribs) 15:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

@Edmichie: It looked like you were trying to post an article on the talk page of the Main Page, which is only supposed to be used to discuss changes to the Main Page. If you are trying to create an article, you can visit this page to do so. 331dot (talk) 17:04, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Adminship

Have you thought about an RfA? I know you'd make a great admin! I, while not respected enough to fully take on a nomination for you, could co-nom, and I'm sure you could find an admin who's willing! Thoughts? --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 17:24, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

I am honored that anyone would think I would be a worthy admin but I'm just focused on helping out Wikipedia where I can, improving the articles that I am able to, and trying to bring another viewpoint to ITN. I do appreciate the kind thought, though. :) 331dot (talk) 17:36, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

That's fine. :) Regards, --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 17:40, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

You'd be an excellent admin. Don't forget, if you became an admin and made just one positive administrative action, that'd make you a super excellent admin. I know my endorsement probably means nothing, or worse, but I sincerely mean it when I say you have the qualities we need in admins around here... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:57, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I do appreciate your comment. It means something to me coming from someone who I've always observed acting properly as an admin. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Smith

Hi I'm interested in starting a page for Jonah Smith British tennis player? Would be brilliant if you could tell me how— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bandit33399 (talk • contribs)

If you want to create an article about a person when a different person has the same name, you need to add something to disambiguate the title of the page; usually this is done with the occupation of the person, so in this case your article should be titled "Jonah Smith (tennis)" or something like that. You can also visit Articles for Creation for more information. 331dot (talk) 18:13, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay thank you. Would it be possible for you to make the page? With the same information I attempted to post by accident?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bandit33399 (talk • contribs)

If you click the following: Jonah Smith (tennis) it will bring up the edit page. If this is about a living person you will need to have at least one reliable source in the article. 331dot (talk) 18:22, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

OK thanks a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bandit33399 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

AN3

There is a thread at WP:AN3 with which you were involved. You are invited to comment — kikichugirl ^speak up! 21:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

My priority only in this free encyclopedia is make a new page called "Clash of Clans Troops" and others.GOOD LUCK— Preceding unsigned comment added by Clash of Clans Troops (talk • contribs)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic Loma Linda University Medical Center. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!-- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Empire News

The current Empire News (as opposed to the defunct UK printed newspaper) is somewhat equivalent to The Onion - the 'paper' that had an 'interview' with J.K. Rowling in which she claimed to be promoting Satanism, and another item which really upset the Chinese Government because they hadn't realised that it was a satirical paper. Rather like the UK Daily Express front page headlined weather to come, if it's there you don't believe it. Both come below The National Enquirer as reliable sources. (That actually got something right not long back...) Peridon (talk) 14:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

@Peridon: I suspected that but I didn't get so far as to checking it out. Thanks for the information. 331dot (talk) 15:40, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

ITN

...which isn't required and specifically discouraged as an argument.

??? Sca (talk) 14:08, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

You said that the pipeline was "Not of significance outside North America"; geographic based objections are not usually relevant(as most stories are only relevant to certain regions) and specifically discouraged on the ITNC page (Do not....... about an event relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This.....) 22:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey

Please let me put some sort of information about my company on wikipedia since isn't that what that what this site is for? A definition site of free search knowledge. I'm not spamming.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Flave2015 (talk • contribs)

First, the talk page of the Main Page is for discussing the contents of the Main Page(as it states at the top) and not for posting information about companies. Second, Wikipedia is not for promotional purposes; subjects must be shown with reliable sources to meet notability guidelines such as those for companies. Lastly, if you are associated with this company, you should not be creating a page about it yourself per the conflict of interest policy. If your company is truly notable, you can request that an article be created about it at Articles for Creation. 331dot (talk) 17:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Hey 331dot,

Thank you for the message. My username was changed and submitted accordingly. Please advise.

Best,

Thomas Bulletproof Studios (talk) 01:53, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

As long as your name meets the guidelines, you should be all set, though changing your username does not eliminate any conflict of interest that might exist. I would just suggest reviewing that policy and proceeding accordingly. --331dot (talk) 02:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

No big deal, but

[1] it's "him". "Amaryllis" refers to a flower that I like, my favorite one in my collection. Don't feel bad though, I'm used to it. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 00:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I apologize for my error. I'm not even really sure why I put it. I will fix it --331dot (talk) 01:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Lakun.patra. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Revise n learn, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Lakun.patra (talk) 20:59, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Username

Hi, thanks for informing me, I have sent a request for a name change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CinemaForPeaceFoundation (talk • contribs) 16:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

@CinemaForPeaceFoundation: I don't know where you sent it, but username change requests are usually handled at the username change page. 331dot (talk) 16:03, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

@331dot: okay I think it is probably a really stupid question but on this page they say you should not fill the subject box, yet when I finish my request I receive ERROR - Incorrect or missing CAPTCHA: Subject/headline

@331dot: my mistake I worked it out. Should be through now.

BD2Media is not a business name.... bd2media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bd2media (talk • contribs) 14:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Unnecessary hatting

This seems unnecessary. I have already stated that I am not going to be participating in ITN, so it's not like I'll be prolonging the sub-thread. And hatting in this manner basically allows it to end, without any response from the accused, with TRM's suggestion that instead of talking about an issue I talk about child abuse. I understand your unwillingness to hat his comment because most of it actually related to the topic of the thread, but that's the risk someone takes when using an otherwise on-topic comment to make an off-topic and unnecessary jab. Really, the hat should be complete or not at all. -- tariqabjotu 08:32, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

I will just leave it alone, then(change it back). My goal was to encourage the dispute to at least move elsewhere if not end but I understand what you are saying. Best wishes 331dot (talk) 08:40, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Muay Farang

Hi, i read Wikipedia's guidelines and in the article was place many reliable source talking about the company, also this is one of the most important companies in Muay Thai (Martial Arts) World. I can understand if this article was elogiative, but it only talks about the companys structure and what it actually covers. Please i would like more helping around this, since this is a free(dom) encyclopedia, how come money buys buys everything? (To this i refer about the "big" companies that can actally do everything). Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muayfarangagency (talk • contribs) 14:13, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I would suggest that you refrain from further edits until your username change has gone through. I believe part of the reason that the article was tagged for deletion as promotional is the fact that you seem to be associated with this organization; generally one should not edit in areas where they have a conflict of interest and I would suggest reviewing that policy. The page does also not indicate what is notable or significant about the organization per notability guidelines. If the page is deleted I would suggest going to Requested articles and request that others create a page about it. 331dot (talk) 14:20, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi, ok thanks for help. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.27.66.114 (talk) 01:22, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Users' unblock requests

Could I ask you please, when you find an unblock request awaiting admin decision (such as Marleystateofmind, for example) that you refrain from commenting on it? I appreciate that you have the best of intentions, but commenting or acting on these requests is an admin task, and your comment in this case, while wholly correct, is unnecessary. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 14:07, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

All right, thank you for the information, but can you point out to me where it states that it is forbidden? I've done it before with no one saying anything. Thank you 331dot (talk) 14:10, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

My friend, I did not say it was forbidden; it is not. But it is unnecessary, and as you have no ability to change the status of the block it is best left for an admin to deal with. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 14:16, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

A further thought; I do note comments made earlier this year, but have you thought again about trying for adminship? You have over 19,000 live edits, spread nicely over the various aspects of the project, and appear to have a good understanding of admin tasks. It would not be my decision, of course, but I suspect you would pass with flying colours. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 14:30, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

That's kind of you to say, thank you. I've never really thought about it a great deal, as I've been content to help out in the ways I have but perhaps it is something I will consider. Thanks again 331dot (talk) 00:45, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

hi 331dot

he page you've deleted the human rights of the family caregiver is not promotional but from information on a campaign recently also become European awareness on the violation of these rights by the Italian State, the only European country not to have recognized the family caregiver. This campaign is the Italian media for a few years as you can verify by some links to broadcasts that have discussed:

• Bulleted list item

human rights of the family caregiver discussed in State Television RAI 1

• Bulleted list item

human rights of the family caregiver discussed on national TV MEDIASET 4

• Bulleted list item

human rights of the family caregiver discussed in the national and international TV

• Bulleted list item

awareness campaign with subtitles on human rights of the family caregiver Italian

In addition, the European Parliament is working on a petition that signals the violation of human rights of the family caregiver in Italian Protocol 302342 / 10.02.2015 image registration to the role — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ribbonblunavyorange (talk • contribs) 22:52, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I have deleted nothing, as I am not an administrator. What you are doing is what promotion is; you are posting information about a cause and while I'm sure it's a great cause, Wikipedia is not for telling the world about your noble cause. There may be ways to write objectively about this issue, but the current article is not such a page. 331dot (talk) 22:56, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Ik si Maa

Okay saw you reverting the afd back to it again-you might want to check this for the page creator: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vamsiraj. Thanks! Wgolf (talk) 18:50, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Grass

Clock = time. Sca (talk) 13:52, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

I still don't really understand what that means as a reply, but my only point was that documenting the word count and length of discussion seems unnecessary and suggests a significant discussion is undesirable since you only seem to do it(could be wrong) on lengthy discussions. If you think posting the word count is necessary for some reason it should be done for all discussions- which personally I don't see the need for. 331dot (talk) 13:56, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Me neither. However, as mentioned at WP:ITNC, blurb nom for such a towering figure shouldn't have been controversial in the first place, and so much discussion shouldn't have been necessary.

Re time, a person dies only once, and breaking news grows old after a day or so. There's no "continuing" category for RDs (unless you're Franco).

ITN itself morphs constantly. An ITN blurb is not forever. Sca (talk) 14:52, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

We should only post quality articles, Grass' article was junk before it was pulled. We do have a continuing category, they are eligible for a week and stay put (unless pulled) for a week. That's ongoing enough for most recent deaths. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:35, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

"Time is an ocean but it ends at the shore." – Bob

Sca (talk) 21:40, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Userfy

Thanks for the userfy, but I was advised by an admin recently that minors' autobios should be blanked and speedied, rather than userfied. Just a heads-up. Dai Pritchard (talk) 15:13, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the information; I will keep that in mind. 331dot (talk) 15:15, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

doriscarnival

Thank you for your comments and advice. I will modify the content of my page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doriscarnival (talk • contribs) 15:09, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Hillary Rodham Clinton - Move Discussion

Hi,

This is a notification to let you know that there is a requested move discussion ongoing at Talk:Hillary_Rodham_Clinton/April_2015_move_request#Requested_move. You are receiving this notification because you have previously participated in some capacity in naming discussions related to the article in question.

Thanks. And have a nice day. NickCT (talk) 18:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Wiki of Pharmacology

Hi, I was watching that that page since I'd removed the unacceptable text myself yesterday, but all the action has taken place while I slept! He has ignored your warnings and broken the 3RR rule, so talk page access now removed. Thanks for that Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

I figured you might be away for some reason(that's allowed ;) ) but I just wanted to keep the situation with you. Thanks for your reply 331dot (talk) 10:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Tags

Actually, you're incorrect. I can indeed remove Speedy Deletion tags from articles I wrote that I nominated for deletion by completely blanking. Ormr2014 (talk) 22:29, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

You can blank a page you created, but it will still result in it being deleted as doing so is interpreted as an author request to delete. If you do not want to blank the page, you cannot remove a speedy deletion tag from a page you create. 331dot (talk) 22:32, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

It was my intention to completely remove the article as a matter of principle. There are over 30 other articles in the Web Design Companies Category and only a small handful of them actually meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia, yet no one was tagging them with Speedy Deletion requests. My article, despite only having a couple references, was about a company with a 9 year track record of providing services to some of the largest corporations in this country, many of which also have articles on Wikipedia. The reason there were not an abundance of references was because the article was just written and still in development.

In any event, it was my intention to simply delete the article myself, rather than allow some power hungry "Wiki-dictator" to have it deleted... Ormr2014 (talk) 22:47, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

If you choose to overreact and not provide even a statement that you are adding more information to the page, if not the information itself, that is your choice, but it doesn't make me a "wiki-dictator"(thanks for the name calling). If you had done either of those things, I would have gladly removed the tag. As it stood when I saw it, the page said little more than the company existed, which does not merit a page on its own per notability guidelines. There was no indication of further development in progress; I will state again, had you simply contested the deletion and stated more work was underway, I would have removed the tag. Other stuff exists and has no bearing on the existence of any other page. If you feel other pages merit speedy deletion, you are free to do so. 331dot (talk) 23:07, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Vince

Vince Matias: Why shouldn't I remove the deletion notice on the page DZXY-TV? Is it illegal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vince Matias (talk • contribs) 09:42, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

@Vince Matias:It is not "illegal", but it is against policy to remove speedy deletion notices from pages you create yourself. Please discuss the speedy deletion tag on the talk page of the article. 331dot (talk) 09:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Vince Matias: Why Can't I Remove The Speedy Deletion On My Page? This is an page created for educational purposes only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vince Matias (talk • contribs) 09:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

If people could remove speedy deletion tags from articles that they created, it would defeat the purpose of the tag. Again, please discuss the tags on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 09:54, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Terms of disparagement

Our friend Gloucester has declared, in regard to the royal baby, that WP "has no place for such dribble." Sca (talk) 17:25, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Disappointing, but I'm not surprised unfortunately. 331dot (talk) 20:10, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Nor am I surprised by what's-his-name's The Great Oz's exchange with you, Aronzak and Formerip. How can this sort of thing continue? Sca (talk) 00:43, 3 May 2015 (UTC) Sca (talk) 15:59, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

If there's things I've written on ITN that have incited personal attacks/incivility then I'm sorry that the discussion isn't approaching a useful conclusion. -- Aronzak (talk) 05:39, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Aronzak, I don't see any obvious issues with your comments. I think when some feel strongly about something they don't necessarily see that opposing views are legitimately possible. I just try to do the best I can. Others will say what they wish. In the case of the royal birth, there are many even in the UK who have posted agreement with the idea that position in the succession order is relevant; it isn't a bias issue as is claimed. 331dot (talk) 09:06, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I applaud your restraint in handling TRM's at-times caustic commentary.--WaltCip (talk) 03:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I don't claim to always be successful, but I do try to handle things in the best way possible. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Applause from me too. I also appreciate the manner in which you handle some of the inane and banal and frankly mindless comments that appear at ITN from a number of editors. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

New question raised regarding Talk:Hillary Rodham Clinton/April 2015 move request

Some opposers of this move have now contended that there is a "Critical fault in proposal evidence", which brings the opinions expressed into question. Please indicate if this assertion in any way affects your position with respect to the proposed move. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:34, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Greenback

I have new fans that trust Wikipedia more than my personal site. I have a song on FM radio and Wikipedia is vital right now. If I was on a record label they would've created it but I'm independent so I do my own record label work. My page is harmless and brings more people to Wikipedia. Please unblock and allow my page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenback98 (talk • contribs) 14:23, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

@Greenback98: Since you could post to my talk page, you are not blocked from posting to Wikipedia, and I have no authority to unblock you even if you were. Regarding your page, Wikipedia is not to be used for promotional purposes, and articles must indicate something notable about the subject with independent reliable sources per notability guidelines(in this case, for music). Being "harmless" is not sufficient reason to have a page, otherwise, everyone would. Lastly, you (and your record label if you had one) should not really be creating pages about you per the conflict of interest policy. If you really feel that you meet the notability guidelines and merit a page, I would suggest visiting the Requested Articles page and request that others create an article about you. 331dot (talk) 14:28, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Pis that all you do go around deleting people's pages and acting important in real life? What do you get out of shunning hard workers? Keeping your Wikipedia for the elite. What clout does that give you in reality? I'm trying to understand your motivation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenback98 (talk • contribs) 03:05, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I have already posted a reason on your talk page. I have no power to delete a page; that was done by an administrator. If you have further comments, please post below this comment and not at the top of my talk page, as directed. 331dot (talk) 09:08, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

@Greenback98: - I have been a musician for decades and have released several albums, but I don't have an article on Wikipedia and if I did it would almost certainly be deleted per WP:CSD#A7. Sorry to sound harsh, but you really don't need a Wikipedia article to be successful. If you really feel you need one, you need to have made an impact in the national music charts and have several articles about you in outlets such as The Guardian or the New York Times. If this sounds unfair, I'm afraid it's not really any more or less unfair than the music industry in general (see 20 Feet from Stardom). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Hotel Okura Amsterdam

Just a quick note, I decided to send this article you nominated for CSD to AfD instead here as there some sources available, though all I've found so far seem to be trivial or adverts. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. 331dot (talk) 09:28, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Create album

This album under his Gngv and the release of Rykvrdz Island.--151.238.132.179 (talk) 12:32, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

I do not understand what you are referencing. 331dot (talk) 12:32, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Will you help me

will you help me start the america's next top singer page please (brett2341) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superrams97 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I would suggest reading the introduction page but if you want to get right into editing, the first thing you will need for your page is reliable sources which support the content in the article. This might be a news story talking about this upcoming program, or coverage of the announcement of this program. If you have such sources, you can post them on the article talk page (click "Talk" at the top of the page) and I or others can format them properly.

You might also want to read the Your First Article page which probably gives a better explanation than I could. 331dot (talk) 20:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Boris

• About your message on Boris Schreiber

Thank for your message. I probably made a mistake. My username (user account) is Association Boris schreiber, but the subject of the article is: Boris Schreiber. Thank you to help me. I'm not familiar with Wikipedia ; and, as you probably have noticed, english is not may native language. ABS.

Waco

Latest update. Sca (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 9 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the United States House of Representatives elections in Maine, 2016 page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Revert rule applies to all

Have u given same notice to Human 2013 ? because Revert rule applies to all.

Not necessarily; please review the links posted on your page. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

3RR violation

You are inbreach of the 3 revert rule. So please stop edit warring. --Dr John Peterson (talk) 16:44, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

I did not think WP:BRD is edit warring, but I pledge not to further edit the page. 331dot (talk) 16:46, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Good --Dr John Peterson (talk) 16:49, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

That said I disagree with your calling my actions "edit warring"; I was preserving the established status quo as established on the talk page. It's up to the IP user to demonstrate that their edit is needed. 331dot (talk) 16:50, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• FWIW, in case you missed it, Peterson is a sock and is now blocked. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:35, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

i shall add

i shall add my those writings to Bangladesh army Yasmin542 (talk) 02:34, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Crow. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Doomsday timeline, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Crow^Caw 22:54, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Vektra, 331dot.

Unfortunately Josve05a has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

User removed important templates, is unreferenced, might be AfD worthy. Will let someone else review this again.

To reply, leave a comment on Josve05a's talk page.

Why was my article deleted?

I wrote an article about Shoppa.ee as neutral as it can be and got speedy deletion tag. Why? I contested the article later and wrote my comments why it should be as it is. Will be clad to hear Your comments and what should i have to do now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janekpoiss (talk • contribs) 10:12, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

@Janekpoiss: Articles must indicate why the subject is notable with independent reliable sources; the mere existence of a company or website does not merit a page. You may wish to review the notability guidelines for web content or those for businesses to get an idea of what is considered notable. I did not see your message about the page so you could ask the deleting administrator specifically why they deleted it. 331dot (talk) 22:02, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Bills roster

See User talk:BillsMafiaBig86. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Roberta Piket

This is very frustrating. I am new to Wikipedia and I have no interest in spending time becoming an expert on usin the Site. And there are a ton of links in your message. I'm not sure which one I'm supposed to use to "verify my identity". If you want to verify I am Roberta Piket pls contact me via my web site and/or Facebook page. I was born in 1965. It has been propagated incorrectly on AMG for years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjzzp131247 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I truly apologize for any difficulty. I don't necessarily believe that you are incorrect; but we have no way of knowing who is on the other end of the computer. You can use the email info-en@wikimedia.org to contact those who deal in identifying persons who state they are notable figures. If you can provide somewhere where the correct information is written down and can be verified(your personal website if you have one, would be fine for basic information) that would help a great deal; but please understand we cannot just take your word for it when we can't be certain of who you are. 331dot (talk) 13:27, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Wow. You changed it again. I know what year I was born. Do you want me to send you my BIRTH CERTIFICATE?!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjzzp131247 (talk • contribs)

I don't want to be sent anything, nor do I even really disbelieve you, but we need to be able to demonstrate what you state is true; your word is not sufficient, again, because we have no way to know who you really are. If I said I was Barack Obama, would you believe it? It isn't up to Wikipedia users to seek you out for information; it is up to you to do what I have already written that you need to do. In the interim if you would like to attempt to argue that the source given currently regarding the birth year is not a reliable source, please do so on the article talk page, Talk:Roberta Piket. 331dot (talk) 15:30, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I would like to have assistance addressing the matter under discussion above; the user states that they are Roberta Piket and would like to correct the birth year, but they don't have an RS for it other than themselves. I've tried to help the user but I don't know if I have done so correctly and am uncertain if I've given the right advice. Thanks 331dot (talk) 15:36, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Her personal website has a post about this specific matter: [2] 331dot (talk) 15:38, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I will take a look at it. In the meantime, arguably her website could be used as a primary source unless you feel it's a contentious fact worth enforcing WP:V on it since allmusic.com has a conflicting date? Mkdw^talk 17:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I have no issue with the information itself or with using her personal website as a primary source; my concern was more the identity issue and (until linking to her site) the lack of a source for the change other than claiming to be her. 331dot (talk) 17:33, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry you had to go through that; you didn't deserve it. Sometimes I wish people could see what the articles would look like after even a week of vandalism without the behind-the-scenes efforts of editors like you. It truly is a thankless job so thank you for all that you do. Mkdw^talk 18:19, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Source Siting

I noticed you sent me a message about editing a Star Wars page, first of all, i did source the links since i always make sure to do, and since i edited it prior to the new movies, i don't wanna get a message from you again. Thank you for your cooperation. Basically blogging (talk) 13:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@Basically blogging: Please indicate the edit where you provided a source for your information. Also please review what exactly vandalism is, which is an intent to disrupt Wikipedia, which I am not trying to do. Removing unsourced information is not a disruption. All I would like to see is the source and I would be happy to reverse my edits. 331dot (talk) 13:08, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I sourced all of the information on the page that i'm editing and you're still un-editing what i put down. I'm not sourcing anything that is bad, just re-writing because of the new movies. I would like you to accept what i put down. Thanks. Basically blogging (talk) 13:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@Basically blogging: You have not added a source other than saying "new movies". As the movies are not yet released, we need to know where you are getting your information. 331dot (talk) 13:44, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Plot leaks, they release plot leaks and i'm able to put together pieces of information. Abrams even stated in an interview that leaks are allowed online. That's all i can say. Basically blogging (talk) 13:46, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

That's fine and good, but we need to know the source of your information in order to verify it. It is not enough to say "new movies" and "plot leaks". We need to know specifically. If you are unable to say, you won't be able to have your information posted until you can say.

Also, if and when you do have a source, the information that is already present should not be removed, as it comes from novels that have been published prior to now. Likely your information will need to be in a separate section. 331dot (talk) 13:48, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

The Expanded Universe in Star Wars does not exist, it's a fan-fiction not created by George himself, so it wouldn't matter if i replaced it with something that exists like the new trilogy. Unless you can edit it prior to these films because i want this to be done. Basically blogging (talk) 13:57, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

The first thing that matters is that "plot leaks" cannot be a source; we need to know where the leak was published to be able to verify that it is a reliable source. Regarding replacement, if you want to argue that the current information is not valid, you can, but you should do that first before removing it. 331dot (talk) 14:01, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I noticed how you said i would argue over the sources that do not exist in Star Wars, and i will. How can you possibly publish something that wasn't created by Lucas himself? That makes no sense whatsoever, that's like going about the Harry Potter movies then writing a shitty fan-fiction and calling it " real " it just doesn't happen, and as for my " sources " i get them from many websites from professional director's. Such as IGN.com or MoviePilot.com, if you don't believe me then look them up yourself. Basically blogging (talk) 14:24, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

The information is from published, authorized novels, not "fan fiction"- but you should bring this up on the article talk page. Regarding sources, It is not up to me to look up sources for your posts; you must provide them. If you need assistance in doing so, please ask. If you wish to comment further, please simply edit this section instead of creating a new one. 331dot (talk) 14:29, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Fong

can you do it for my plz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evan fong (talk • contribs)

Can I do what for you? 331dot (talk) 17:13, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps provide some asssitants? Sca (talk) 12:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Thibodeau

Idot-I keep updating Michael Thibodeau's page and you keep changing it back. I am his communications director. I've sourced the changes. What's the problem here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimcyr (talk • contribs) 17:36, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I have made posts on your talk page; User talk:Jimcyr; please review them and post there, I will see any messages there. 331dot (talk) 20:59, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

tutor-web deletion

The tutor-web is an on-line resource (not a web page), including a mobile web system (being developed into an "education in a suitcase" system). It is a completely public, free and open resource and quite unique in that it includes self-assessment for students, peer-evaluation etc etc etc. My plan was to start with a little stub and continue writing it with the help of others in the tutor-web user community.

The wikipedia entry got deleted (following your suggestion) within a few hours of generation. I believe I was only up to a sentence or two: (The tutor-web is an on-line system for learning and providing educational material. The tutor-web uses an internal currency, the Smileycoin (SMLY[1]) to reward students for their performance.) Speedy deletion meant I simply missed the opportunity to object.

Can you clarify whether this means I can not expect to ever include a description of this project on Wikipedia? Gstefans (talk) 18:03, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia article subjects must be shown to meet notability guidelines (in this case, those for web content) with independent reliable sources; the mere existence of something does not merit an article. If you have such sources, you can recreate the article- or request that the deleting administrator restore it so you don't have to start completely over.

If you are still working on a page, you should indicate that on the article's talk page or the article itself so others know what is going on. 331dot (talk) 20:31, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

How to delete pages

I was told i had to delete a page how do I do that?

Halljo22 (talk) 07:58, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

If you are referring to Waterside Workers' Union; the page is already tagged for deletion, and only administrators can delete pages. If you want to request that it be deleted, you can add {{db-author}} to the page. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

The Traditionalist (talk) 22:04, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

about "flyin.com" article

Dear 331dot, Thanks for your message; please could you help me to convert the article to prose? I don´t know what I should edit or improve, having in mind that this article is a translation for an Arabic article approved in the encyclopedia: https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%81%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%8A_%D8%A5%D9%86 Waiting for your answer, Thanks in advance

Sections of the page that are in bulleted lists (such as the "Agreements" section) would be improved if they were instead written as a paragraph. I would also suggest that the "Mission" section simply be removed; in my experience most pages on companies don't have such sections because they are promotional in nature and are virtually impossible to independently verify(as a "mission" is simply the company stating what it feels its purpose is). 331dot (talk) 12:36, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

you are good friend 😸🐈

you are good friend.

😸🐈 (meow)

--50.141.35.49 (talk) 03:19, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Lakun.patra. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Choosing your baby's gender, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Lakun.patra (talk) 14:51, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Jimmy Carter and Israel-Palestine

There is an occupation in the Palestinian territories. Carter opposes the Israeli occupation not the "Israeli defence against the Palestinian insurgency".--Opdire657 (talk) 13:11, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

• A Brutally Frank Jimmy Carter Calls Out Israel on Permanent Apartheid
• Israeli leaders don’t meet with Jimmy Carter during Middle East visit

I have no opinion on the specific issue at this time; but edit warring as you are is not permitted. I also believe that since the subject involves the Israel-Palestine dispute that there are additional, stricter sanctions possible after only one revert. I would strongly suggest you cease reverting the material and discuss the issue on the talk page. 331dot (talk) 13:14, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

I have stopped reverting and are ready to discuss this issue.--Opdire657 (talk) 13:20, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Frozen Computer

Hi. I took the liberty of deleting a speedy tag you placed on Frozen Computer, because it seemed inappropriate. Your point was that the article does not expand on Hang (computing), but why should it? It's a completely different topic, after all. To elaborate, the article describes a procedure commonly employed by system administrators on computers which are 'exposed' to a multitude of users. To be honest, I doubt you will find a common term for such systems in literature (frozen computer seems to be a random term from one book). Disk cloning is often part of the procedure, but there are alternatives, so it wouldn't be a good redirect either. Probably it will get deleted due to lack of references and questionable notability anyways, I just wanted to explain why I removed that tag. Rh73 (talk) 20:33, 15 August 2015 (UTC) Hrm, I just noticed that the editor who created that frozen computer article tried to push it into Live CD with the obvious intention of advertising a specific software. I offer apologies for doubting the legitimacy of your actions. Rh73 (talk) 21:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rh73: I appreciate it but no apology is necessary; I do understand what you said above which I did not see before; It is also true the page initially seemed designed to promote a specific software as you state. I had removed a link directing people to a site where such a program can be installed as it seemed to have no other purpose but advertising. Do you think what is left of the page is worth keeping to expand on the meaning you explained to me? 331dot (talk) 00:43, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the late answer, I thought it would be best to leave the article alone for a few days and watch what happens. I feel it should be renamed to something more likely to be the primary search term, but don't have any good suggestion to offer here. Rh73 (talk) 19:12, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I think there is no reason we can't wait a bit. I don't really have any suggestions on a name yet either. 331dot (talk) 21:25, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Recent edit to Chuck Garfien

Hello, and thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to the Chuck Garfien article. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 22:31, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

I thank you and appreciate your notice. I was hoping that the message would be quickly removed by the user whose attention I was trying to get as they don't seem to be paying attention to their talk page or the article's talk page. I do however understand your message. Thank you again 331dot (talk) 23:13, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of hotelscan page

Hi 331dot, I saw that you nominated for "speedy deletion" the entry for the site "hotelscan" that I created this morning, was there something wrong about that page? Can you tell me if there's something that I can do to be able to add a page about that site on wikipedia? Should I make a request from "Requested articles"? Seeing that there are other pages on Wikipedia dedicated to similar sites (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momondo or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scout_%28travel_website%29 ) is there a way to understand what those pages have that was missing from the one I created, to be sure that it's good enough for wikipedia standards? Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilucaki (talk • contribs) 13:13, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

OrangeMike explained it pretty well on your talk page. Other stuff exists and the fact that some other businesses in your field might have pages doesn't mean that yours gets one; each page is judged on its own merits. Not every business or website merits a page. 331dot (talk) 20:31, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

thanks a lot for the help, as you can imagine i'm not used to wikipedia, i hope to learn more in the future :) Wilucaki (talk) 09:03, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Warminster Township, Bucks County, Pennsylvania

Your recent editing history at Warminster Township, Bucks County, Pennsylvania shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Specifying Coach Bill Belichick agent

Hello, 331dot. You recently undid my edit to Coach Bill Belichick's page, specifying that his agent is Neil Cornrich. You asked, "if you represent Coach Belichick please say so." Please let me know what you need from us to prove that Neil Cornrich (with whom I work at NC Sports, LLC) is Belichick's agent. For starters, here is an article from SI.com that mention's Neil as Belichick's agent and also includes a picture of the two of them together. More recently, here is another article that mentions Neil as Coach Belichick's agent as well. In addition, and perhaps more importantly, this edit is being done at Coach Belichick's request in an effort to curb people/companies who are misrepresenting themselves as his agent. Given how powerful Wiki entries can be, particularly on website searches, it would be beneficial to Coach Belichick to have his agent clearly delineated. To that end, our preference would be to put this information ("Belichick is represented by Neil Cornrich") somewhere in the lead where it will have the best chance to reach the most people and accomplish the goal of preventing rampant misrepresentation. Please let me know if you need any additional information to proceed. Thank you very much. Jhurst59 (talk) 14:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)jhurst59

I certainly agree that who Coach Belichick's agent is should be on his page; it just needs a citation(which you seem to have) in the article along with the information.

Regarding yourself, since you seem to represent or work for Coach Belichick(and, I assume, are being paid by him) you will need to clearly declare that on your userpage(click your username at the top of the screen); please review this page for more information regarding that. You also may want to review the conflict of interest policy; generally users should not directly edit articles in areas where they have a conflict of interest and instead should bring up concerns on the article talk page first. This is not to say that you have done anything wrong, just to head off future trouble. 331dot (talk) 14:51, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

I have added one of the citations you provided above and restored the sentence. 331dot (talk) 14:58, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

WP:AN discussion

There was an issue brought to AN where I have mentioned one of your actions of A7 tagging as a step in the whole sequence of events. —SpacemanSpiff 13:54, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

For delection isard

Thanku so much for delection a non profit organisation page. Vnayak4u (talk) 15:09, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

@Vnayak4u: I'm very sorry, but the fact that an organization is non-profit is irrelevant here. Wikipedia is not for promoting or publicizing any organization, for-profit or non-profit. I'm sure the organization you were writing about does good work, but Wikipedia is not for telling the world about good causes. Article subjects need to be shown to meet notability guidelines(in this case, those for organizations) with independent reliable sources. That didn't seem to be the case with the page you had written. If you do have independent reliable sources(which could include news stories, books, etc.) which indicate something notable about the organization per the notability guidelines, you are welcome to re-create the page- though if you re-create it without such sources it may be deleted again. If you have any questions about this, please post them here. 331dot (talk) 18:33, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tip & Cash

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Tip & Cash requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. discussion ==

There was notification in my box where you have mentioned something about speed deletion. I am sorry, but I dont understand this. I am very new in here. Can you please explain me what this page validated? There is similar page in wiki which I used as pattern and this page seems to you unproblematic. I will really welcome any advice, so I can set my article correctly. To be honest I didnt even know, how to make this discussion correctly. Somehow explanation on help did not actually help. Sorry for it.Casadmiral' 14:23, 8 October 2015 (CET)

I marked the page for speedy deletion because it did not seem to indicate with independent reliable sources what was notable or significant about the business per the notability guidelines. The mere existence of a business does not allow for an article about it to be written. If you think this business meets the notability guidelines and have sources to support it, I would suggest reading some of the links that are posted at the top of your user talk page(what you called your 'box') which have information about creating pages. 331dot (talk) 12:57, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Ceco aneez ahmed et al

I knew I had seen this 'crap' before! This time by Alphabet Subsidiary (talk · contribs). I have now speedied Wikipedia:CSD#G4.

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ceco aneez, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Google ceco aneez, and User talk:Aneez CECO. Sock drawer open! Just FYI. 220 of ^Borg 16:05, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

2015-2016 NBA Finals

I am working on this article, please give me some time. ThisGuyIsGreat (talk) 14:43, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

@ThisGuyIsGreat: Note that you can remove a PROD yourself, unlike a speedy deletion tag(from a page you created). I have removed it and tagged the page to indicate you are working on it. 331dot (talk) 14:45, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, Thanks! I know there is a couple resources out there for me to use. ThisGuyIsGreat (talk) 14:49, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Support on merits

For another perspective, you might visit WP:FPC. While support on merits isn't required there either, a view has emerged that discussion in a collegial manner is thought-provoking and helpful toward reaching consensus. Sca (talk) 13:46, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

But with an ITNR item the consensus on the merits already exists; that's the whole point.(maybe I don't totally get the process but I don't see an "recurring featured picture list") If the merits are going to be discussed every time then then there is no point to the ITNR list. Debating something that's already agreed to seems unnecessary to me. Opposing on the merits is also not done at ITNC for an ITNR item; those who oppose need to advocate the item's removal from the list. 331dot (talk) 13:53, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

In regard to ITNR, a consensus existed at some point, but new opinions might be offered by newbies, or some oldsters might change their minds. These things shouldn't be set in concrete, IMO.

At FPC earlier this year, we had a lengthy discussion about whether those voting to support should be required to provide some rationale. I was in favor, but there wasn't a consensus, so the situation was left as it was: A vote to support without reasons is considered a statement that the nom. meets sufficient criteria listed at WP:FP?.

So, the voting rules are:

• Write support, if you approve of the picture. A reason is optional.
• Write oppose, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture. All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image....

Since the discussion was closed in May, a rough plurality of regulars has chosen to explain reasons for supporting, since that may help others decide. "A reason is optional" was added to the instructions as a result of the discussion. Perhaps something similar could be added at ITNC. Sca (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

With this ever dramatic world including WikiDrama, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day! SwisterTwister talk 18:11, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Jay Ward Prod.

Hi can you tell that other guy that his version of Jay ward productions is wrong plus it looks like crap — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karah kenze (talk • contribs) 15:18, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

@Karah kenze: I have no opinion on the specific dispute you seem to be in, but you need to stop insulting other editors and discuss any concerns on the article talk page. That's how things work around here. If that does not help the dispute, there are other things that can be done to help resolve any issues. 331dot (talk) 15:21, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Buena Regional Middle School

Oops, I see I left a user message on n undo that you actually made. Darn edit conflicts... Meters (talk) 22:11, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

@Meters: No worries. I think there are cases where more than one person saying the same thing helps. 331dot (talk) 22:12, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Help!

Hi thank you for the editing im sorry i did not know that you could not put a middle school up i would like to ask you would you be will ing to help me use and edit wikipedia thank you Jonathan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon4201 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

@Jon4201: I think a good way to get a start on how to use Wikipedia is to do The Wikipedia Adventure, which you can find by clicking this link. [[User:331dot|331dot][ (talk) 22:22, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

331dot Umm its not working :/

In reviewing its talk page there does seem to be some sort of issue with it; there seems to be a discussion about it here. I am willing to help you but I will be leaving my computer shortly; I would suggest visiting the Teahouse, a place where new users can ask questions of more experienced users. 331dot (talk) 22:49, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Confused..

Hi 331dot Full disclosure, I am an employee of the company and looking to update information that is out-of-date. I feel I stated why I made changes for the edits I proposed. Could you help me understand what I need to do to, or NOT do, to ensure my company's wikipage is current? Thank you kindly JF22094 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JF22094 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@JF22094: Thank you for your response. I will list what is going on:

• If you are associated with this company, you really should not be directly editing the page about it; please review the conflict of interest policy. I was thinking that you might be when you put language like "leading transportation and midstream service provider" in the article, which is just promotional language.
• Further, if you are being paid to edit the page as an employee of the company, you will need to clearly declare that on your user page(click your name at the top of the screen) or user talk page; please see this page for more information. Even if you aren't being specifically paid to edit the page, you should still declare your association with the company on your user page.
• You also seem to be removing far more than you are adding or just changing, and directing people to the company website for the details that are being removed; detail is generally not a problem here. If you have specific concerns about things on the page, you should list what they are on the talk page of the article(click "Talk" at the top of the article).

I know this is probably a lot of information, but the biggest thing to take away is that you really should not directly be editing the page, at least without seeking outside review. There are several ways to do that, which I can go into later. You also need to make your status as an employee clear, as you did here. 331dot (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

I would lastly suggest that you remember to sign your talk page posts, which is done by typing ~~~~ at the end, or you can click the Signature button on the screen above where you type your post(it looks like a scribble). 331dot (talk) 22:19, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@331dot Thank you very much for the detail - I have some brushing up to do on my Wikipedia knowledge and skills. I appreciate your time and advice. Regards, JF JF22094 (talk) 17:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello 331dot. I wanted to follow up on my ping thank you on the United States Of Antarctica page. I couldn't decide whether to use the "No content", "hoax" or a couple others so that is why I chose the one that I did. I remember reading this book back in the 90s and, for a second, I thought the article might be about it. Thanks again for changing the template and enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 16:48, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

@MarnetteD: You're welcome. There was no problem with what you did at all; I just figured I would add a clearer one. If I hadn't done it, it would have been perfectly fine. Thanks for your wishes, and best wishes to you 331dot (talk) 16:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

AlteredAddiction

this guy removed Altered Addiction as well a band listed on MTV's website I don't write well but feel they should have the right for people to know there history as well, the words I used are public domain listed on reverbnation and purevolume too, they also have ex-members of other huge bands like Days of the New, Flaw and Tantric all big bands from Louisville next I will be trying to post the band Heaven Hill which I know his a big band but not listed on here too, I am working on finding a few things like this by Thirteenth Step and Altered Addiction both of these bands have sold over 150,000 records each they have also posted sales figures through the roof on ITunes and cityfiderecords.com website the label they are signed with took forever to get Big Smo listed on here too— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alteredstate502 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

@Alteredstate502: Please see the talk page of the article for my reply. 331dot (talk) 21:47, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm not trying to be an ass I just have no idea what you mean by talk page, I think I had my info wrong on this band at the time outta pure confusion

FYI

Just so you know, it is likely that you are being trolled at User talk:DatBichPhuc. See this news story. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:07, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

That did cross my mind even though I was AGF, but I had nothing to call them out on as their edits seemed OK. 331dot (talk) 19:23, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Nutrition in pediatric cancer

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Nutrition in pediatric cancer requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 11:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I assume the above is because I moved the page. 331dot (talk) 11:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I have a picture from the Leo Paper here in Louisville not sure what that would do I'm a slow connection though maybe can look it up I know the Leo Paper it's self has a Wiki of it's own not sure how much info that gives though

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Profile is not getting indexed in Google, Why?

I have been noticed that my wiki profile https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deborah_Ferrari is not indexing in Google. Few days ago, it was showing in Google while search my Name "Deborah Ferrari", but now it disappears from the search results. Please let me know what is the error and how to fix it.

Look forward for your kind response.

Deborah Ferrari

I'm not entirely certain but I don't think user pages are indexed by search engines. You may wish to ask at the Help Desk and hopefully someone more knowledgeable than I can better answer you. Note that userpages are not meant as social media profiles or promotion, but as a space to briefly introduce yourself. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Re Unreferenced template

OK, I'll try to lay out the sequence of events here so we can sort out what's gone on and what is desired.

1. This change was made to the template in a bold fashion.
2. I did not object to the change itself, but I found the use of parentheses awkward for such a template and not any less confusing than what it was before. I posted an edit request on the talk page to remove one of the words outright(suggesting the "(sources)").
3. The edit request was rejected because there was no consensus for it(even though there was no consensus for the original change). I was further told that such a request was not the proper way to initiate a discussion.(which is fine with me, whatever)
4. I then added an RfC to ask if the original change should be reverted, but no consensus emerged for that.
5. The user Nurg, who posted to that discussion, then started his proposal discussion to change the template to "This article does not cite any sources", which is a variation of what I had originally requested, though here he proposes removing "references".

My only interest was in removing the parentheses from the template; I had no preference as to which word was used, though others seem to disagree on whether it should say "references" or "sources". Personally I think if there is no agreement as to which word to use, the original change should be reverted. I'm not sure if this explanation helps. Just FYI it may possibly be at least 8-10 hours before I can comment further(possibly more). 331dot (talk) 23:49, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

The change made being this:

This article does not cite any references or (sources)

Your sequence of events pertains to one issue here, but we actually have multiple issues.

1- A bold change (above) was made, without discussion. The bold reversion that WP:BRD would allow was not made (although requested), and then it was asserted that the reversion required consensus. This is an inversion of BRD, and affects what the status quo should be if there is no consensus.

2- The deeper issue is what wording is most suitable. This depends on the (a) condition being tagged as an error, and (b) the meaning of the words "references" and "sources". This has implications beyond this template.

3- A possible issue is that, depending on how references/sources is resolved, there may be an argument for renaming the template (per the closed Template_talk:Unreferenced#Requested_move.2C_pursuant_to_the_above_discussion).

These issues interact. I'm not clear on the best way to resolve them. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:58, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I am not worried about the sequence of events to date. Let's just make things good.

I don't see any implications beyond this template that need hold up turning the first sentence of the template into a more accurate and elegant sentence.

I propose the sentence be changed to:

This article does not cite any sources.

The current wording of "references (sources)" implies that "sources" is another word for references, which is not accurate. Sources are things external to Wikipedia. Citations, or references, are text we write in Wikipedia about those external sources. This is clear at Wikipedia:Citing sources, where the first sentence reads, "A citation, or reference, uniquely identifies a source of information". The proposed wording is consistent with the next sentence in the template, which talks about "citations to reliable sources". Nurg (talk) 09:05, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems to me that if the original bold change had no consensus that it should be reverted on those grounds, if nothing else. Then we can talk about what word it should be changed to. As J Johnson indicates, BRD was inverted here. 331dot (talk) 10:29, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree that "sources" and "references" are not synonymous, even though they are often used as if they were. But SMcCandlish disagrees, having said "they're the same thing" when he made that bold change. So this would likely be controverted (issue #2b).

I feel inclined towards "does not cite any sources". However, that does have an implication regarding the name of the template, as to whether it should be renamed "unsourced" (issue #3). Some folks would object (see the comments in the closed Move discussion), and that would likely affect the second issue.

Which takes us back to the first issue. If any proposed change fails, what wording should be left in effect: revert to that prior to the bold change? Or implicitly accept the current wording? And should a reversion be done prior to discussing a better wording? This is moot if we have consensus for something better. But lacking that it would become another issue, all the more muddled because it would combine multiple issues (respect for BRD, the status quo, and wording preference).

If these issues are not clearly identified and separated the discussants will (as the prior discussion shows) get them all tangled up, and everything will be just as confused as before. If we want a change we need to work out exactly what it should be, and why, and just as importantly, how to deal with all three of these issues. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:11, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I think @SMcCandlish: was being a bit loose when he made that change and the edit summary. In the subsequent discussion he said "I'd suggest we just go with 'sources'", so I expect he would agree with my proposal. Nurg (talk) 09:30, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Nurg: asking SMcCandlish to self-revert his bold change might resolve the first issue, except that you were ambiguous as to whether he should simply revert, or move ahead to your preferred wording. Also, while he may have been a bit loose with his bold change, I see that you have boldly proceeded in a like manner with your unilateral and undiscussed changes at Template:Unreferenced/doc, and even at Template:Citation needed/doc. Running ahead of any resolution of the deeper issues (such as whether "sources" and "references" are "the same thing") is mainly making the issue more complicated and harder to resolve. Please consider self-reverting your own edits, and refraining from further boldness until there is consensus. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:00, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I've commented in the ongoing discussion on the template talk page. There's no utility to changing the wording of the template, in any direction, mid-discussion, and people might see it as disruptive, so I decline. Yes, I do support just "any sources".  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  23:07, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of ITandFactory

Hello 331dot. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1), content (CSD A3),or significance (CSD A7) moments after they are created, as you did at ITandFactory. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks.. A new user deserves more than one minute to complete their work om their first article. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 13:40, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

The user had already drafted the page on their user page, so I didn't think that necessary; however, I will strive to be mindful of that. Thank you 331dot (talk) 21:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

SpectroCoin article update

@331dotCould you please check the SpectroCoin article one more time and provide me a feedback if it looks better? I have tried to remove lines that could be promotional and leave only facts. Gille4me (talk) 14:02, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Typo

Thanks for catching that! Please feel free to do a good faith fix if you see such an obvious oopsy again. I promise to proof my posts better, especially the first and last of the day. In this case, it was near last, so I can call mulligan. Thanks again. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:25, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome! Happy to help, and thanks for your advice above. We all make typos and can always improve(especially me :) ) I always try to tread carefully in that sort of situation; I feel like I am still learning that good faith edits like that are almost always well received, even though I've been around a bit. Thanks again 331dot (talk) 00:09, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

(Season's Greetings)

Viggo Johansen: Happy Christmas (1891)

X

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year

X

Frohe Weinachten und

alles gute zur neuen Jahr!

Wesołych Świąt i

Szczęśliwego nowego roku!

Linksmų Kalėdų ir

laimingų Naujųjų Metų!

X

Sca (talk)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Thanks

Thanks for the guidance. I wasn't sure if that was a right name or not. Will do my best to stay on track.

Lars — Preceding unsigned comment added by Port of Mattawa (talk • contribs) 20:48, 22 December 2015 (UTC)