User talk:AJCham/Archives/2010

AJCham
User	Talk	Archives	E-mail	Awards	Contribs	Count	Subpages	Sandbox

Luis Contreras

You have let some info on Luis Contreras....Luis was my cousin...obviously, his father, Robert was my Uncle...do you have a contact for any of the family??? My Mother died and with her went all the info of how to contact them...I haven't spoken to Roberts wife Irene in over a year...her number doesn't work...can you help me??

(redacted) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.93.92.34 (talk) 04:15, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

You might wish to email him instead.  fetchcomms☛ 22:49, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Um, I must say I don't know what you mean – I know absolutely nothing about Luis Contreres, and don't know why you think I would. Do you have me mistaken for someone else? AJCham 20:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Motto of the Day

Hi there, AJCham! Thought you might be interested in Motto of the Day, a collaborative (and totally voluntary) effort by a group of Wikipedians to create original, inspirational mottos. Have a good motto idea? Share it here, comment on some of the mottos there or just pass this message onto your friends.

MOTD Needs Your Help!

Delivered By –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:22, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 02:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Ganzfield

Please help me make this article more notable -- it's about a fiction series that just had its first book published. I work in YA literature, and I really think this series can make it and be something big. But it's new, so it doesn't have a lot of support yet. Would blogs written about YA literature help? How about quotes from reviews? What else can I use? Please advise so I can get this included...it *will* be notable, I guarantee you that!

Ashtar96 (talk) 00:45, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Ashtar96 «email removed»

There's nothing I can do to make it more notable - it either is or is not. My best advice to you would be to be patient. The book is still new, and if the series is indeed guaranteed to become notable, we can create an article then. In the meantime I suggest you familiarise yourself with our notability guidelines for books.

Key points are that blogs are not suitable for referencing. Reviews are exactly the kind of thing you should be looking for, but they have to have been published in a reliable source, such as a magazine or newspaper, so customer reviews on Amazon.com wouldn't be appropriate, for instance. Any other type of coverage in those same publications would also be suitable. Furthermore, we would need multiple such sources, and they would have to offer significant coverage - passing mentions would not be sufficient.

Most importantly though, please don't be discouraged. I appreciate that you are keen to write about a subject about which you are passionate. But we have notability guidelines for a reason. As someone who is involved in the industry professionally, you must be aware of the huge number of new books published every single day, the vast majority of which will be lucky to sell a few hundred copies before being forgotten. I don't mean to imply that Minder is one of those - it may well be very successful - but I'm sure you understand that we couldn't possibly accept articles on every book so soon after they are released.

Just to reiterate, if the series really is as good as you say it is, you have nothing to worry about – it will get included in the encyclopedia at some point once it has gained notability, but now is not that time. Feel free to drop me a line again if you have any further questions. All the best, AJCham 01:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback – LaJoconde89

{{Talkback|LaJoconde89}}

Responded. AJCham 16:51, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Bexley RFC

Hello, you appear to have declined my article for the following reason:

"This suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. See the speedy deletion criteria A7 and/or guidelines on organizations and companies. Please provide more information on why the organization is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. Thank you."

From the link "guidelines on organizations and companies" under "Decisions based on verifiable evidence" it says:

"Notable means "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice." Wikipedia bases its decision about whether an organization is notable enough to justify a separate article on the verifiable evidence that the organization has attracted the notice of reliable sources. Notability requires only that these necessary sources exist, not that the sources have already been named in the article."

Via the references, I have shown that the Club has attracted notice from the press, the English Rugby Football Union and the Bexley Council. I would imagine there are many more notable references in non-internet related publications such as Rugby World.

also under the heading "Additional considerations are":

"Nationally famous local organizations: Organizations whose activities are local in scope (e.g., a school or local chapter of a club) may be notable if there is substantial verifiable evidence of coverage by reliable independent sources outside the organization's local area. Where coverage is only local in scope, the organization may be included as a section in an article on the organization's local area instead."

There are many articles in the local press that cover Bexley RFC and it's local rivals as well as club developments, achievements and results.

"Factors that have attracted widespread attention: The organization’s longevity, size of membership, major achievements, prominent scandals, or other factors specific to the organization should be considered to the extent that these factors have been reported by independent sources. This list is not exhaustive and not conclusive."

Bexley RFC has a long History and has been in existence for 53 years there are generally around 100+ members and at senior level alone attract 45 to 60 players every week plus a significantly greater amount of Junior and Mini's. achievemnts have taken time to come but through dedication and investment in youth. Bexley have been successful in Junior tournaments.

Please Can you explain to me why this article is not notable.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcmjco (talk • contribs) 13:52, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Well a dictionary definition of notable is not very useful to us – by it's nature, whether something is "worthy of notice" is entirely subjective, hence why we have defined standards to help us make such judgements objectively (although we are human, so a degree of subjectivity is inevitable). The basic standard is significant coverage in reliable independent sources. The sources you provided are:

• Rugby Football Union. The page in question appears to be a Bexley RFU press release, and is therefore not independent.

• Bexley RFC (x2). Of course, not independent.

• News Shopper(x2). Local press, in general, is not unacceptable but may be held to a higher level of scrutiny than national coverage. With sports clubs in particular, I don't think local press carries much, if any, weight in terms of notability. There are thousands of small teams in the UK alone that will get substantial coverage in the local paper; even school or pub teams. This is of course where my own subjectivity has come into it, but I notice I am not the first to decline your submission on grounds of notability so maybe others share my opinion. Furthermore, as you quoted yourself, "Where coverage is only local in scope, the organization may be included as a section in an article on the organization's local area instead."

• Dartford Times. Trivial mention in an article about a former player. Not significant coverage.

• Bexley council. The document is 52 pages long so you'll forgive me for only skimming it, but as far as I can tell this is an analysis of all sports fields in the borough - it acknowledges that Bexley RFC exists, but I don't see how it could possibly indicate any degree of notability beyond that.

I hope you understand my position, but if you have any further questions feel free to ask. Regards, AJCham 21:45, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt reply and I understand your position, however I hope you also understand that I am purely trying to get a article published about a subject that I feel passionately about.

Comment:I fully appreciate that, but I can't let that sway my judgment. No offence intended, but have you considered that your passion for the subject may have clouded yours?

My first point is that I have not posted a dictionary definition of notable but I have in fact quoted the Wikipedia “guidelines on organizations and companies” as directed in the decline notice.

Comment:You did indeed refer to our policies, but you began the paragraph with the dictionary definition, which I felt was irrelevant. I see now that the guideline page does use the phrase "worthy of notice" as well, but even still it isn't worth focussing on that phrase too much.

The RFU page is not a Bexley Press release but in fact an RFU page dedicated to the club there should be a page for all member clubs. This shows however that the RFU recognise the Bexley RFC amongst all other member clubs and the value to the game and local community.

Comment:I disagree. The page discusses the club in the first person and is advertising player vacancies. It was clearly written by a representative of the club and is intended to promote the club. In any case, the RFU's recognition of membership is not indicative of notability. They recognise more than 3,000 clubs – I'm sure looking at it objectively you would acknowledge that not all of them are notable.

The Bexley RFC links are not intended to show the clubs notability but are related to quotes from the history.

Comment:That's fine (to an extent – see WP:Primary sources), I only mentioned them for completeness.

The News Shopper articles refer to the clubs and effectively backs up the main article through the commitment to developing youth in the sport and the history of the club.

Comment:My concern was not the content of the articles, but whether the source was significant for purposes of establishing notability. I stand by my previous statement.

The Dartford Times article refers to a player developed by the club who has represented his country at a national level. Harry Fry is still connected to the club and he helps train the juniors when possible. This article further backs up the article and the clubs commitment to the local youth and how this commitment helps the sport at a National level.

Comment:I'm sorry, but you're stretching things a bit now. The article says nothing more than that Fry played for Bexley as a five-year-old. Everything else you've stated is interpolation and not supported by the article at all. Also, notability is not inherited – that a former player has gone on to greater things says nothing to the notability of Bexley. Furthermore, even if notability could be inherited, there would be nothing to inherit from Harry Fry as he does not meet the notability guidelines at WP:ATHLETE.

The Bexley council document goes further than recognising the club exists, there is also a passage on page 21 that says “It is recognised that Bexley RFC plays an active role in developing rugby in the borough, and has a long term ambition to return to a local ground”. This document clearly recognises the impact Bexley have on the game.

Comment:Well, as I said I only skimmed the document. Nevertheless, that a council might be interested in the activities and plans of any local organisation is nothing much to shout about.

Finally I have noticed that the article “English Rugby Union System” under “The System” it refers to the league setup in England and although not complete contains articles on leagues involved. Within those leagues that have articles created so far are the teams that are involved, with links to those teams that have articles created already. I would have thought that the Bexley RFC article needs to be created to help Wikipedia complete this article on Rugby Union.

Comment:There are, unfortunately, a huge number of articles on here that ought not to be, and some of the club articles you refer may fit that description. It's an uphill struggle to keep up with them. However, the existence of these articles is cause to try to solve the problem, not add to it.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcmjco (talk • contribs) 15:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I've added my comments inline for clarity. One final point, have you considered that a more specialised wiki, such as http://rugbyunion.wikia.com/wiki/Rugby_Union_Wiki, may be a more appropriate location for an article such as this? AJCham 19:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback – Bigdanprice

{{Talkback|bigdanprice}} Responded. AJCham 22:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Farm Ideas rejection

I would be interested in our help in getting Farm Ideas a presence on Wikipedia.

It's an important magazine, as it helps farmers produce more, waste less and be kinder to the environment.

Wikipedia recognises other publications - I looked up Top Gear and it's entry included the issue price, circulation and so on. This is published by the BBC which has far greater resources with which to promote the title.

So if you could tell me what I have to do, I would be grateful. I can send you originals of testimonials - if you can guarantee to return them. I even have a letter of congratulation from HRH The Prince of Wales. My publication has been going since 1992, so longevity can hardly be an issue.

Best wishes

Mike Donovan, editor, founder and publisher. (redacted) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Farmideas (talk • contribs) 14:12, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but you seem to be misguided as to the purpose of Wikipedia. We're not here to provide a platform from which to promote your organisation. For the most part, the various articles we have on other publications exist as a result of ordinary editors writing about a subject which is deemed notable according to our guidelines, not some PR effort from the publisher. Any article would have to be written from a neutral point of view and be properly sourced from reliable, independent sources. Neither your original testimonials, whatever they are, nor the letter from the Prince of Wales are suitable for this as they cannot be readily verified.

Before continuing, please consult the above links and also our conflict of interest guidelines, and address the username issue I've raised on your talk page. AJCham 18:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks re Refs errors

Cheers for sorting out my HelpMe re Ref error msgs. - all clear now, of course. Thx, Trafford09 (talk) 18:29, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem. BTW, you might be interested in the thread I started at the Village Pump – it provides some insight into this. AJCham 18:41, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

from Banch1965

hi and thank you for your help, Laura Ford sent me an email with the pic this morning and I can forward it on to you if you want to verify it. I am getting serious neck cramp and brain ache from dealing with this as I am a newbie so am appreciative of your help.

MHere is a cut and paste of said email:

All I've got at the moment ! L xx

---

Original Message-----

From: John Ford (redacted) Sent: 13 July 2010 07:54 To: (redacted) Subject: wikipedia

Please send me a photo for Wiki and any other bits of biog, news etc

-- (redacted)

DSC00461.JPG

Banch1965 (talk) 18:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Well there are two issues here. First, it would be no use sending me the email – the only people able to verify permission via private communication are members of the volunteer response team. Also, the permission would have to be explicitly releasing the image under a free license, with the full understanding of the implications of doing so (basically anyone can use the picture for any purpose). If you are not comfortable with the process and you're sure Laura is willing to provide the image under those terms, I could communicate with her on your behalf. Just send a request for me to do so by email and I'll explain to her what is required to verify permission.

As an aside, please be aware that this page, just like all others on Wikipedia, is openly visible to anyone who should decide to pass by, and I would recommend against disclosing personal contact details. AJCham 18:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Re above point, you may be interested in a similar event and its solution, details of which I'm sure User:Chzz User _Talk:Chzz would be happy to supply, should you see fit. Regards, Trafford09 (talk) 19:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I've already taken care of it on my end – just waiting now. But thanks anyway. AJCham☻ 20:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

yw --Trafford09 (talk) 20:29, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Copyright

are you joking me? the page clearly says all content is creative commons share alike/non commercial, doesnt the bot read??????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Legrosandre (talk • contribs) 20:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

No the bot doesn't read, which is why it only places submissions on hold until a human such as myself can verify it. As you say, the article clearly states creative commons share alike/non commercial. We cannot accept content licensed only for non-commercial purposes. AJCham 20:15, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

it means you cannot uses their bio to make money. i wrote them an email so they will change the wording —Preceding unsigned comment added by Legrosandre (talk • contribs) 20:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I know what it means, thank you very much, but if that bio is to appear on Wikipedia people have to be allowed to make money with it if they so wish. AJCham 20:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

i think they really wanted to be on here, they already made the change Legrosandre (talk)

Yep, I'd noticed. I've already reopened your submission, so it will be reviewed again in due course, by myself or one of our other AFC reviewers. AJCham 20:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

thanks, i think they deserve an article, generating more and more talk with their 7-9 hours performances live on the net Legrosandre (talk)

also, i see on twitter all the time so many misspelling of the name, be it musik 4 machines (most common) and music for machines (also pretty common) any way to have the typos redirect to the real article if its accepted?Legrosandre (talk) 20:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

That's not a problem and we can cross that bridge when we come to it. Help:Redirect explains how redirects are made. AJCham 20:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi

{{tb|Fridae'sDoom}} Sorry about all the muckup, I didn't know that cvs had to be reported, I assumd there was a separated entity among the WPAFC that dealt with cvs. Well now I know :D Thanks Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 12:02, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh and nice userpage, could you possibly help me with mine because it's a mess atm. Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 12:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

More messages. I've made a big mess, and no I'm not doing this intentionally if that's what you think. I honest to goodness meant these in good faith. Fridae'§Doom | Spare your time? 12:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Even more messages. I knew that MiszaBot archive config script would come in handy one day :P Fridae'§Doom | Spare your time? 12:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Thanks for your feedback here: [1]. The user in question is Wittsun and, as I pointed out in the discussion thread, I don't think I personally should be the one to warn him about his edits since it will only provoke him to anger (due to the fact that he has expressed his dislike for me in the past). That's why I think things would turn out better if you were to warn him, since he hasn't argued with you before and as a result he would be more receptive to feedback from you than from me. Stonemason89 (talk) 16:55, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, will do. But just be prepared for the possibility of this coming back to you, as it would not take a great effort on Wittsun's part to discover that you and I have been in communication. If it comes to that I hope Wittsun will be able to see that I entered into this as a neutral third party and am not trying to take sides. AJCham 17:02, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Forgot to mention, but I of course hope he'll also see the effort you've made to be fair and balanced, and that raising this potential issue was not a vindictive act on your part. AJCham 17:46, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, about three hours after you posted the warning on his talk page, he deleted it. Well, we won't be able to say we didn't warn him. Stonemason89 (talk) 00:08, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed. Not to worry; just confirms that he read it and, as you say, if he gets into trouble he can't claim he wasn't warned. AJCham 00:13, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Annika is real

A friend helped me identify this person, but was unable to get other information out of her. And as for the similer writing, if you pay attention to a person's writing carefully, you can coppy it and make it look like the person you are coppying wrote it, in this case, this annika person did that on me. If i knew more about her, i would tell, but as i said, my friend was unable to get any other information out of her, and her place of livving is in canada too, but I do not have permition to tell even if i knew. If you're still wondering, I am going to sum it up for you. Identity thieves are out there, and they would have to be smart. I have watched Judge Judy quite a bit, so I would have a good idea on what they do and how to tell it is them. I am an honest person, and i do not tell lies, as i hate them. I hope you and the other administrators understand what i am getting at, and also that there is such an Annika out there who just so happens to share my IP address. Remember about the 'this may be a shared IP address' notice, as that is how i found out her IP address. She would have to have the same address as me, or she wouldn't have access to my talk page, or any other place where i have made edits. Now she knows about my movie, and I bet she is trying to ruin my reputation so i won't be able to help wikipedia as much. I am working on the possibility of an account, but due to probloms with my screen reader, it is prooving to be impossible. I am doind everything i know how to do to stop Annika from trying to be me. No more speculation, case closed, there is an Annika, and for the record, I don't care for her at all. I am going to leave her a message on my talk page to her, and if you have anything to add to it about why not to steal someone's identity that i missed, you are ore than welcome to help me keep her from trying to ruin someone's reputation that they don't even know. This is no joke, i promice you on my life! Please tell the people who doubte me that it is true that there is an Annika. Hopefully she doesn't get me blocked, this way i can help the wikipedia articles when needed. Hopefully Annika hasn't ruined my reputation on the reference section, as I may need it in the future. Thanks a lot for caring, no more speculation, Annika's real, god bless. 204.112.104.172 (talk) 12:49, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I'm finding it difficult to find a plausible motive for someone to commit "identity theft" for such trivial purposes, and especially to go to all the effort it would have taken to imitate your writing style. Confounded further as this is someone you allegedly know nothing about; why would someone you don't know have an axe to grind? Your IP address doesn't identify you personally so even if it is discredited on Wikipedia, that would have zero impact on your own reputation elsewhere.

Put simply it is an unlikely amount of effort, with an implausible motive that wouldn't succeed anyway. (A 'smart' identity thief would know this.)

Furthermore, I actually hope for your own sake that you have been lying, as the first mention of this person's name was by yourself. If this person does exist you should not have revealed personal information about them. Granted, a first name is not much information, but even still this would be of greater concern to me than the issue I've already raised. Frankly, the only reason I didn't bring up outing as an issue is because I didn't believe you when you claimed there to be another individual involved. AJCham 13:37, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Phoenicia Hotel Malta

Hi. I just wrote to Hi878 with this:

I think the hotel might be notable. I've found a few independent sources, one of which is this. I'm not sure why the govt press release wasn't okay. Plus. it was built by the old Prime Minister of Malta. I'm new to AfC, so please advise. I'd like to learn. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I think it was AJCham who said it wasn't notable. I will post this message there too. Tks.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:00, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi there Anna. I didn't actually say the hotel wasn't notable, only that it lacked independent sources to demonstrate that it was. That Forbes link is fantastic and is exactly the kind of thing we're looking for. It is a reliable source, it is independent and the coverage is significant (i.e. the article is about the hotel and doesn't just mention it in passing). If that and preferably one more can be added the page we should be able to accept the article. (It could do with a touch of copyediting and wikification, but those are not barriers to acceptance).

Welcome to the project – we can always use a helping hand around there, especially when reviewers such as myself haven't been pulling their weight recently! One piece of advice I'd give is to consider using Tim Song's AFC Helper script. It makes reviewing much easier as it provides a simple list of possible decline/hold reasons (with the option to add a specific comment), automatically informs the submitter of the review decision, can automatically blank BLP or copyright violations and handles some of the housekeeping when an accepting an article. Regards, AJCham 16:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback – Ababayan (talk)

Hello, AJCham. You have new messages at YOUR USERNAME HERE's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

hello, i have several external source website links in my submission, after decline I said ok, maybe that's true, maybe it's really not enough links or sources are not very good. but today I found a page on wikipedia for a company having the same name (abbreviation) as one that I published. And guess what? it's online.. it has several lines of text 4 links from one website, links in my submission comparing to that are much better. I just really want to understand why submission with 3-4lines of text and with 4 links to some website can be approved and another submission which has nice text about company history, more than 4 links is declined? thanks

Practical Farm Ideas

Hello AJCham. I have re-written my submission for Practical Farm Ideas and hope you find this version satisfactory. The essay style used previously has been substituted by a much simpler and direct info page. farmideas —Preceding unsigned comment added by Farmideas (talk • contribs) 12:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

OMG - dont buy ANYTHING from Jessops camera company. Aftersales service is utterly pathetic! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.156.49 (talk) 13:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program

Hi! Thanks for signing the Online Ambassador interest list. We're gearing up for the next term right now, and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program will be supporting considerably more courses, with considerably more student activity... possibly upwards of 500 students who will need mentors.

If you're still interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors in the coming term. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:27, 16 December 2010 (UTC)