Jump to content

User talk:Acroterion/Archive Q2 2011

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Banks Karter Page

Why did you delete the Banks Karter page? I was putting my life up because I'm a local famous rapper. Soon to be famous all over the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BanksKarter (talk • contribs) 14:24, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Replied on the user's talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 14:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC)


Spam

What disruptive editing am I doing? I'm trying to make the page as informative and correct as possible. I've never made a wikipage before and try to do my best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Displeasedron (talk • contribs) 13:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

See my note on your talkpage. Screenshots of commercial websites are not acceptable on Wikipedia and cross the boundary into advertising. Do not post the material in that form again. I am willing to consider that the subject is notable if you can provide references showing significant notice in independent media, which is a more appropriate route to inclusion, assuming it meets Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion. Please read WP:SPAM and WP:CORP. Acroterion (talk) 13:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Because I did not know why the page got the 'to be deleted' message I started adding things to the page to make it more informative, waiting to see what would remove the 'to be deleted' box. Nothing helped.
Checked the link and still don't get why some companies have a wikipage and discorder cannot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Displeasedron (talk • contribs) 13:48, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
All articles on Wikipedia must be on subjects considered notable under the general notability guidelines:see WP:NOTE. This is documented by notice in major media - substantial; articles in major publications, books, etc., focusing on the subject in some detail. That's the sort of thing you need to add, not screenshots. If newspapers or other such publications have covered the company, then it's probably notable, but you need to document that coverage. Companies already included on Wikipedia should have satisfied those notability guidelines - they're publicly-traded stocks or had articles in theTimes of London, Wall Street Journal, Variety or some other publications of similar stature. Acroterion (talk) 13:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Acroterion (talk) 14:34, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

You are right that Wikipedia should not be a promotion portal. The thing is that the page for Displeased Records was not created by us, but by someone external to the company. We had to edit it pretty soon after it was made, because it was full of mistakes. Since then we have monitored the page, so no wrong info was added. I think the only one to moderate a company's page is someone from within the company, because only there correct info is available.

I have edited the Displeased Records page, so it's similar to another label site that is not about to be deleted. No use of subjective words like Great, The Best or Awesome were used. Nor did I use these subjective words in the Discorder.com wikipage. Is a wikipage for discorder.com not possible at all, or should it be more informative and without screenshots like the Displeased Records page I just adjusted?

Sorry about being so uptight this morning. Not that it is any of your concern, but my 16 year old cat died last night. So I was shortfused.

Displeasedron (talk) 15:38, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Displeasedron (talk • contribs) 15:29, 2 March 2011 (UTC)


The deletion proposal is just a notice of deletion in seven days if no sources or evidence of notability is added. You can contest the deletion by removing the notice, although it would be best to address the concerns by adding references first; I can help you format them. I assume you've got some sort of press archive? There's no absolute bar to editing with a COI, you just have to be careful to avoid promotion and to maintain a little objective distance. I think the article asserts notability - it just needs to be backed up with some references.
You have my sympathy concerning your cat - I understand that sort of thing. We have four dogs, two of whom are likely to go in the next year, and it's going to be hard for us to let them go; I expect to be fairly savage myself when the time comes. Acroterion (talk) 15:45, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Shifra Smart Homes Page

Dear Acroterion,

I have been attempting to publish a wiki entry on Shifra Smart Homes which is an organization from Dubai. I know that you deleted it for violating article A7 for speedy deletion. Kindly help me on making the necessary changes to re-instate the article. I have worked hard on creating unique content and I have referenced and cited very relevant pages, what more can I do?

Appreciate your help.

Thanks.

Rbd1428 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbd1428 (talk • contribs) 01:38, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

You will need to indicate that the firm has received non-trivial coverage in major press outlets with a reputation for factual accuracy. Since Wikipedia is not a business directory, all subjects must be notable by reference to major third-party sources or media. See WP:CORP for more information, as well as the general notability guidelines at WP:NOTE. Acroterion (talk) 01:42, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassador Program

Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:06, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Éberswilly

I am a little surprised. You undid and eradicated the comment on User talk:ClueBot Commons, but did not give user talk:Éberswilly a warning for what I presume was at best not WP:constructive or at worst WP:vandalism. Somehow one or the other seems disproportionate and out of sync. I would have myself given him/her/it a warning, but as I can't access the content it would be a mere shot in the dark for me. No need to respond, I just thought this might be an oversight. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:28, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Never mind. Currently blocked. Good work! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:32, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Actually, I did warn them, but was following a policy of providing a little more rope, apart from being distracted by the more pressing matter of no printers working in the office and a proposal needing to be printed. I see somebody else got them. Acroterion (talk) 20:38, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


Timothy143

Hello, I only have one account, and that's this one. Also, what article are you talking about? You can block any account that isn't this if you wish, but please note that it won't be me. This is my only account

Thanks,

Timothy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timothy143 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Redoubts

I'm impressed.

All I was trying to do was sort out the mess that having Reduit have two meanings. A general one and a nation specific one. I thought moving the Swiss stuff into its own article would allow people to link to that specific specific information if they wanted to. I named the article National Redoubt (Switzerland) as a dab page off the main article National Redoubt. I considered doing the same thing for National Redoubt (Belgium) but went for National Reduit (Belgium) with a link from the other name. But I am not wedded to it and would be just as happy to see it under Redoubt as Reduit. I suppose in both cases Reduit is probably slightly more accurate but we should follow the lead of the common name in English language sources. --PBS (talk) 04:35, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. National Reduit for Belgium suits me. I was having issues of scope on both articles and hadn't returned to them to decide what should be delegated to daughter articles - you can see that parts are uneven in scope and sourcing. I read French much better than German, so there's an inbuilt bias toward the French side of Switzerland and Belgium - places that are mostly sourced in German, Italian or Dutch are harder for me to assimilate. Acroterion (talk) 04:45, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

thanks

thank you for giving me a straight answear thats all i wanted to hear — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oscarh51 (talk • contribs) 14:39, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk:United States/FAQ

Hello, Acroterion. I think you may have deleted this page by mistake. You deleted it as the talk page dependent on the nonexistent United States/FAQ, but it is meant to be the FAQ subpage of Talk:United States. It is displayed when one clicks "[show]" in the FAQ box at the top of that talk page. Could you please restore it? Thanks, Brian the Editor (talk) 01:17, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Argh, you're right. Somebody created a parent page called United States/FAQ that was vandalism, and I deleted the talk page thinking it had been copied in. Thanks for picking that up. Acroterion (talk) 01:24, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Freeman Dre

Dear Acroterion, deleting administrator for Freeman Dre

02:17, 8 March 2011 Acroterion (talk | contribs) deleted "Freeman Dre" ‎ (A7: No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content))

I have re-done my entry. Please confirm it meets the criteria

Freeman Dre is a [[1]] singer-songwriter, one of four children raised in split custody by divorced parents in [[2]], [[3]]. He is known for his unique brand of [[4]] [rock] infused with poetic lyrics, and romantic sentiments centered on his Toronto neighbourhood [[5]].1 Dre's band is known as The Kitchen Party, The name is a nod to the timeless tradition, and a literal reference to a kitchen in a partied-out bachelor pad where the group descends each a week to jam. Dre produces and publishes his own records. Dre won the popular NOW Magazine reader’s poll for “Best Songwriter” in 2010. 2 That same year, He recorded his debut LP Red Door, Second Floor with producer John Critchley at Green Door studios. 3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andre Flak (talk • contribs) 20:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't see any indication that the artist is covered by any of the 12 notability guidelines at WP:BAND. Please review to see if the artist satisfies any of those criteria. Also, when you want to do an internal link, you can just place double square brackets of either side of the referenced term - i.e., [[foo]] will link to foo. External links shouldn't be embedded in the article - they should go in a separate section. Acroterion (talk) 21:30, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Opinion on blocking?

Do you believe a block of Mmann1988 to be justified? He has a history of making personal attacks and being otherwise disruptive (e.g. this AFD), and if you look at his talk page, you'll see that I gave him a uw-npa4 a few months ago. Today, he's started in at me again, calling me a dictator and twice telling me (1, 2) that I've violated 3RR at Template:Cobb County, Georgia, which you can easily see is incorrect — he should know better, since I've told him that he's wrong, and he's been blocked for 3RR in the past himself. If he were pestering anyone else, I'd block for NPA and disruption, but as the target of the personal attacks, I'm uncomfortable blocking lest it appear that I'm involved and thus ineligible to block him myself. Nyttend (talk) 01:53, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

You shouldn't do the blocking in any case, and you've run out of reverts. I'd agree that he's out of line on the personal attack line; I'll leave him a note. There should be some engagement to warn of 3RR and NPA, rather than a block out of the blue. I don't buy the argument that only Atlantans can understand what East Cobb might constitute. Acroterion (talk) 02:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of the wikipage Ayna

Hello Acroterion! Would you please send to me the page that you'v e deleted: Ayna . It is about the first search engine in the Arab world. This website is active until now, is getting traffic and is enhancing its services. I spent hours of valuable time on the page enhancing and bettering it. Please take my request into consideration. --Salah Almhamdi (talk) 17:14, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Userfied and replied at your talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 17:40, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

hey

why do you keep deleting my nikolas laus page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cro pro (talk • contribs) 23:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

There was no indication of notability. It appears to have been deleted only once. See WP:ATHLETE for notability guidelines. Generally, if a person has to be described as "up and coming", it's safe to say they aren't yet sufficiently notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 00:01, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Request for assistance in Best Place page

Would it be possible to get the original encoding back? It took me a long time to get it all written.

(Butterflyangelblue (talk) 00:18, 11 March 2011 (UTC)) butterflyangelblue

Your draft is still available in your userspace. See my message on your talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 00:29, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about the WP:REFUND

I have never done undeletion/userfy requests before. I just saw the user in distress while vandal patrolling in Huggle and stepped in the only way I knew how. Now I know for the future. Thanks for being patient (and helping the newbies)! —Tom Morris (talk) 00:32, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I'm glad you're willing to help the newbies too - there are all too few people who spend the time. The WP user interface is detestably hard to use and the whole process is intimidating. Acroterion (talk) 00:34, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Banana Republic

it is you OPINION that those statements are opinions. They are facts. Look it up in the dictionary. If you ban me i'll just start another account and start again. Please stop attempting to play into the Corporate gameByron670 (talk) 01:11, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Don't play word games, and don't make threats. Any recurrence, and you (and any subsequent accounts) may expect to be blocked. Acroterion (talk) 01:12, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

"word games"??? more opinions from you?? I thought were were supposed to keep bias out of the equation?Byron670 (talk) 01:27, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

and I love how you describe my statement of fact about my rights of use as a 'threat'. Once again I thought we were supposed to keep bias out of the equation. Perhaps you should work on that yourself.Byron670 (talk) 01:28, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


Banana Republic

I have included only facts. I am the target of the edit war, not the originator. Please go bother those that continually add their own bias by removing factsByron670 (talk) 01:21, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Now you attempt to deny data. Data given by a global luminary. I think it is obvious to everyone else where the true bias lies. With you and your self-serving rewrites. You are just trying to stroke your tiny ego. I ask you to please take your abusive behavior somewhere else. I have reported you.Byron670 (talk) 01:56, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

So I see. Please not that the use of multiple accounts to win an argument is considered a bad thing. Since you've taken my advice to heart, I've saved you some trouble.Please note also that no personal attacks is a policy: I've not directed my criticism at you (apart from a certain unwillingness to listen to criticism), merely at your edits. You, however, have tried to personalize matters. The correct way to approach this is to find more than one "global luminary" to quote. Acroterion (talk) 01:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Please realize that you are the one in violation and you are the one who is making things personal. And what multiple accounts are you referring to? I have been using this one account all along. I suggest you realize that the world does not revolve around you and your opinions. You attempt to attack me again just proves my point.Byron670 (talk) 02:13, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Others appear to disagree. You might wish to stop now, but I tend to doubt you'll listen to well-meant advice. Acroterion (talk) 02:15, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

You 'advice' as you call it is nothing more than a poorly veiled and poorly worded attempt to violate NPOV and not get in trouble for it. You should be ashamed for your abusive tactics. Including using multiple accounts to 'pretend' to be other people. Shame on you.Byron670 (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Uh, excuse me, are you accusing Acroterion of using multiple accounts? Would you please provide some evidence of this astonishing assertion? Antandrus (talk) 02:52, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I see you're already blocked. Never mind. Antandrus (talk) 02:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
See AN/I for the full effect. Acroterion (talk) 02:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Yep, I just finished reading the ANI report, as well as his talk page. I'd say this editor is very close to being shown the door; he clearly doesn't get the concept of NPOV and a collaborative environment. Byron, if you are reading this, you have to understand that we must always be neutral in our writing. Antandrus (talk) 03:01, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Unexplained revert

Please explain this?  Chzz  ►  01:29, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I must have clicked "rollback" while scrolling though my watchlist - apologies to Snottywong. Acroterion (talk) 01:34, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
I guessed so; no worries. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  01:48, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

rev deletion request

Hi, I saw you have revdeleted some of 123.236.241.218's rants. There are a couple in the same vein - edit summary insults - [6], [7]. Can you pls rev del these too? Thanks!--Sodabottle (talk) 05:52, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Done, thanks for the notice. Acroterion (talk) 05:56, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

GRTE

Hi Acroterion...I am slowly starting up the work on Grand Teton National Park...the way I will be working on it is to do one section at a time, following a formating akin to the one used in Glacier and Yellowstone NP's...I think the section on the park creation and the "fight" for preservation needs to be included as that was a bigger issue then in Glacier and Yellowstone (unless you ask the Blackfeet about the former as they were none too happy about that)...but I don't want that section to be more than a couple paragraghs...the article lacks a lot, it needs great expansion on the glaciers, lakes, streams, geology, geologic history, historic structures, hiking, climbing, flora and fauna...you name it...I usually go back to the intro AFTER the main article is done so it can be summarized easier...I'll probably do a paragragh on the glaciers there as a first step...that should be short as they are not significant nor well studied.--MONGO 16:06, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd say two paragraphs is about right, the issues can be summarized in that length. A daughter article could always be written to cover the administrative history of the park. I've written NRHP articles about all of the listed properties in the park that can be linked. You should mention the dude ranch industry; maybe I can write a summary article on that, since there's a lot of material, and/or I should probably write a summary article on the historic structures and properties in the park or in Jackson Hole. You should reference John D. Love's Creation of the Teton Landscape (a revised edition by his son came out in 2003) and John McPhee's Rising from the Plains (which I highly recommend as a general text on Wyoming, and which features Love's family) for geology. Acroterion (talk) 18:46, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
I can't estimate the amount of time it will take, but it'll get done...depends on what momentum I get going as I am still in my contemplative mode about it...the biggest problem I have is with prose. I appreciate any additions you may have and links to source material.--MONGO 16:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Found Love's book online via GTNHA at [8]...super.--MONGO 16:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Gap View Farm

I was wondering if I could use this image on the Gap View Farm article, even though it is insanely small. It is the only image I can find that shows Gap View Farm in recent times. All other images are from the 1930s. What do you think? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 09:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

...or the following: these images, the one at the top, or this one. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 09:11, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Ignore the above, I got that taken care of. I need some help with another matter though. Could you take a look at this Commons conversation between myself and a Commons admin and let me know what to do with this image? My choices, I think, at this moment are leave licensed as is, switch (slightly) to {{PD-USGov}} or switch to {{PD-US}}. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 14:18, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Jim, is entirely correct - you can't upload what was certainly a personal picture of Buckles' to Commons as full PD or PD-USGov. You have a case for fair use on WP, but the image must be hosted here, not on Commons, because Commons doesn't host FU images - too much opportunity for mischief. You can't use that image of Gap View Farm at all, because it exists and it might always be possible to obtain a free image. The other images might qualify for FU, but, again, they can't be held at Commons. Jim (whose word I trust) is being very patient; please work with him. I've dealt with this often before on National Register work - not all images on US Government servers are free - in fact, a high proportion aren't. Acroterion (talk) 14:27, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
It is hosted here, please see File:Frank Buckles at 16.jpg. According to this source (from the US Army), the image was taken in 1918.
Yeah, that is what Materialscientist said. So I found an image that is from Defense.gov, so that should be Public Domain under the rules (as I understand them). - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 14:38, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Not necessarily - it requires a certain amount of divination of intent and source, and Defense.gov has images that weren't shot by DoD personnel, and there's no telling that that particular image was taken by a DoD photographer, given that it's on Buckles' front porch. It is, however, probably FU-able. This is why I don't fool with fair use. Acroterion (talk) 14:42, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
So, which template should I use? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 14:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Crap! Looked at the page the image came from..."Copyrighted photo by David DeJonge, used with permission". Well, it's gone. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 14:47, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

<Undent>Shall I delete it? This is the consequence of a free-content environment - we are extremely limited in our image selection. It's worse in places where freedom of panorama doesn't apply, likje works of art. Acroterion (talk) 14:54, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

*sigh* Yeah, go ahead. Damn, I thought I found a good image.
On another image, this one, it is from the VA at VA.gov, but I can't find a source for the image, just the VA. Should I template it to FU too and if so, which template should I use? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:04, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
All right, updated the sourcing and licensing templates on File:Frank Buckles at 16.jpg. Should I do the same with File:Buckles-at-monument-2.jpg? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:15, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes - can you give a link to the page it appears on, with context? Acroterion (talk) 15:20, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Sure, please see here. With it not having any information to it, I sourced it to government. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
The VA links to a generic "best practices" page for digital content. I've been burned too many times by DoI and DoD material to have much faith in anything less than an explicit declaration of PD, and even then, in particular with the National Park Service, the declaration of PD has turned out to be flat, provably wrong. Acroterion (talk) 16:49, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
OK, could you give a look-see to the updated licensing at File:Buckles-at-monument-2.jpg and File:Frank Buckles at 16.jpg and let me know if that will work? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 16:59, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Paradise Historic District

You need to look at this article you created, as I think there is a year typo. I question that there is information available for a forest fire in the year 185 for the state of Washington. I do not have access to the reference you cited or I would of corrected it my self.
Keep up the great editing.--RifeIdeas Talk 13:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, it was indeed 1885. Acroterion (talk) 14:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

User:SodaGuyImStillHere

Hi, I just noticed that you blocked him for sockpuppetry. I was also wondering if it could have been User:Sodapaps? I was just about to file for a new investigation on him but I guess we don't need that now. De728631 (talk) 20:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

"missthecraicaphobia"

Acroterion,

I am wondering as to why my addition to wikipedia the free encyclopedia was deleted with much haste. I am an Irish student who does not mean any harm in what i said on the page. Having the craic is something we are renound for and unfortunately there are some people who do suffer from this condition. I have coined the condition as "missthecraicaphobia" and hoped that adding it to your site would give it a better sense of legitimacy.

You used G3: Vandalism as your reason fro deleting my addition. Your website itself states that "Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting patent nonsense into a page.". I cannot see how I am guilty of any of the above, but if I am I would love if you could explain to me how.

Look forward to hearing from you so as to sort this little problem out

Kindest Regards,

Pjfsmith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjfsmith (talk • contribs) 23:54, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Obvious nonsense and hoaxes are also considered vandalism. Please do not make up words and represent them as fact. Acroterion (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I understand where you are coming from. But you have to agree with me that I did not break any of the rules stated. I use the site on a daily basis and hate to see people abusing it. I appreciate the work you do, but would like to stress that I am serious about this. It is a trait that Ive studied amongst people of my age and I am considering focusing some of my Uni studies on it. Maybe the choice of name wasn't very clever but really, this isn't or a hoax of any kind.

If you would be able to outline to me how I could have this published on the site in accordance with regulations I would be very grateful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjfsmith (talk • contribs) 01:16, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

It would help if it wasn't something you'd made up. See WP:NOTMADEUP. Wikipedia deals in verifiability and reliable sourcing. If you'd like to apply some of your Uni experience to improving articles with verifiable, referenced content, that would be a positive act. Adding hoaxes and nonsense (and then attempting to justify it) wastes your time and ours. I will agree that there's an age where people like to make up words: I remember doing it before there was an Internet. Probably a dozen such neologisms are deleted every day. Acroterion (talk) 01:22, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I would like to thank you for your sound advice. I do not mean to waste your time and do value wikipedia as a valuable resource. I shall look into this further more and hopefully have a more useful addition in relation to this social anxiety condition which is actually a condition amongst young adults I assure you.

I will be back. Thanks again for your advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjfsmith (talk • contribs) 01:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd call it social anxiety - it seems fairly universal and somebody's probably written a dissertation on the subject somewhere. It's certainly a part of the evolution of language. Acroterion (talk) 01:34, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

boxofficeBUZ.com Website Article

The article I write about a website, keeps getting deleted, even though:

1. Its not advertising anything 2. It explains perfectly the content and owner of the website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geeksuiteinc (talk • contribs) 02:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

However, there is no indication that the topic meets the guidelines for inclusion for web content. I left a longer note on your userpage, please review that and the other notices, which provide links to Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines. Acroterion (talk) 02:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

ark music factory

just wanted to know why that page (ark music factory), and a different one by someone else about rebecca black were deleted. it was in no way meant by me to be 'advertising'. the song is hilariously bad, and has become an internet hit, growing and growing all the time. i thought some record of it was warranted at least. i wrote about the awful reviews it has been given, but for the rest, tried to be neutral, as instructed. i dont often make pages on wikipedia, but after setting up my own little wiki for my society i thought it seemed like something i may as well have done once. it lasted all of 2 minutes. come on man. at least, if you can, look at some of the sources and see that this shit isn't advertising. i wouldn't really care, but it just seems like even more of a waste of time than it was while i was doing it. if you can, please reinstate the fruits of my procrastination.

thanks

Adshenshall (talk) 02:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

There have been a number of postings about the singer, many of which violated our biographies of living persons policy - this is a 13 year old kid. Your article wasn't about ARK - it was about Black, which is what we call a coatrack, and gave no indication of notability for the company except by association, which isn't enough. The meme is three days old. I appreciate that you did some research, and the meme has received some coverage, but there's been some nasty material posted and we need to be careful where people, p[articularly minors, are involved. I've posted my concerns at the administrator's noticeboard/incidents. Acroterion (talk) 02:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

fair play i suppose. the company does have other reasons for notability which it itself cites, but i'd need to be a member to find out more detail about them. though, in hindsight, a couple of well worded google searches might've sufficed. at least i finally tried my hand to creating something on wikipedia. ah well, maybe now i'll get back to the essay i should be doing. have fun x

Adshenshall (talk) 02:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I was in the middle of getting a grip on the Black meme and had, in fact, seen the ARK connection - you may well have an article with a little work, and I don't mind moving it into your userspace. I'm mostly concerned about the BLP angle. Acroterion (talk) 02:31, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

nah, it's alright. i think my next contribution to wikipedia might be something more intellectual. study related or something. this whole venture has inspired me to play about in the sandbox like a child again :)

Adshenshall (talk) 16:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

That's fine, we're all volunteers, and if we're not having fun, what are we doing this for? Acroterion (talk) 16:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Photo Question

I was wondering if we were able to use yfrog photos (link Twitpics, just a different site) here? It is of Frank Buckles lying in repose at the Arlington National Cemetery Chapel. If not, what about this image? It is taken by someone from the EPA, so it might be able to be released per {{PD-USGov}}. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 16:09, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

In this case, EPA means "European PressPhoto Agency," [9] so no go. I have no idea about yfrog, but the images would have to have been uploaded under CC-by-SA, which would be unusual. Acroterion (talk) 16:44, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Damn and that EPA picture was a REALLY good one too. I will check the yfrogs, but I kinda figured it would a no-go too.
On a slightly related note, could you give this section a look-see (first paragraph). I have numerous states, sourced, lowering their flags to half-staff, but it is getting kinda long. I would like to keep the states in there (since some are and some aren't), but do you have anyway to make it a shorter paragraph or is it OK as-is? Bear in mind, it is up for GA. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 16:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
The list of states seems kind of cluttery, as if it was forced in you by the citation method. I'd summarize and say "XX states ...", and if you really want to list the states and refs, you can place it all in a footnote. Acroterion (talk) 16:54, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
See, that is my main problem. There are only one or two sources for each state (at present). There isn't one source for all the states (which would be really nice). Plus, they all signed proclamations on different dates, so that adds more information. :(
Also, do you know anyone who does signature SVG files? Just found a signature for Buckles (see here). - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 16:57, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
A footnote with all the refs sounds like the best way to unclutter that paragraph. I don't know anybody who works with signatures - you might see who uploaded some of the sigs that you see on presidential articles. Acroterion (talk) 17:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Well, I still have Alaska and Ohio to add still, possibly Nevada and Colorado, though I can't confirm those last two. When I get the section finished, could you do a footnote? I actually don't know how to do one of those. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 17:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
I did it at Ouvrage Rochonvillers - see nb1 in the "Description" section, {{#tag:ref|English-language sources use the French term ''ouvrage'' as the preferred term for the Maginot positions, in preference to "fort", a term usually reserved for older fortifications with passive defensives in the form of walls and ditches.<ref>Kauffmann, p.13</ref> The literal translation of ''ouvrage'' in the sense of a fortification in English is "work." A ''gros ouvrage'' is a large fortification with a significant artillery component, while a ''petit ouvrage'' is smaller, with lighter arms.<ref>Kauffmann, p.20</ref>|group="nb"}}, with the target <references group="nb" /> where you want the note to appear. Acroterion (talk) 17:18, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
OK, but how would that make multiple sources appear? Oh and add South Dakota to the list. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 17:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

<undent>Just list all the references within the confines of the note - you can move the whole paragraph in and write a neat summary on the main body of the article, with nb1 or whatever to link to your big list of state, governors and references. Acroterion (talk) 18:08, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, cause I can now add Nevada (confirmed finally) and Oregon to the list, so it is getting longer by the minute. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 18:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
  • After 26 hours of edits (non-stop), the page is done. :) I even found a picture of Buckles lying in honor, via the US DOD, which was awesome. Give the page a look-see when you get a chance. It is up for GA re-review tomorrow (Wednesday), so cross your fingers. Thanks for your help today. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 01:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion

Hello, the notability page says VERY specifically that it is not a criterea for speedy deletion therefore your deletion was in error. Thank you. Theelephantsays (talk) 01:11, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

See WP:A7, and read WP:BAND all the way through - there was no credible indication of notability. Around a hundred bands, performers and similar artists are speedy-deleted per day. Please feel free to provide sources documenting notability in compliance with WP:BAND. Acroterion (talk) 01:18, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Regardless what you feel regarding its notability or how many bands you delete per day (is this an everyones doing it so it must be OK justification?), it says, in bold that notability is not a criteria for speedy deletion. I have not been given time to provide justification, the system cannot and should not instantly delete every page created, as no page will be that developed instantly. Theelephantsays (talk) 01:23, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I did read "all" I contest that the musician is notable, which is grounds to require a proposed deletion in of itself. Theelephantsays (talk) 01:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

There must be a credible assertion of notability in the article. The contested tag just means that you disagree. You should feel free to develop an appropriately referenced article in your userspace if you feel you can't addd sufficient content, and you'll note that I haven't deleted the re-created article, even though it was tagged appropriately and is subject to speedy deletion at any time. I'd suggest you devote your efforts to finding references to back provide a credible notability case. Acroterion (talk) 01:30, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

The point is that I don't need a case to avoid speedy deletion, the Notability page says "A mere claim of significance, even if contested, may avoid speedy deletion under A7, requiring a full Proposed deletion or Articles for Deletion process to determine if the article should be included in Wikipedia." Thus simply becuase I indicate significance, a proposed deletion is required.Theelephantsays (talk) 01:33, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

It's poorly worded, but that claim must be made in the article. "In order to meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and notability, the article in question must actually document that the criterion is true. It is not enough to make vague claims in the article or assert a band's importance on a talk page or AfD page – the article itself must document notability." I suggest rather than arguing deletion policy that you work on improving the article, because in its present state it's subject to any of three deletion procedures. Acroterion (talk) 01:43, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Is there a way an article can be edited without it being live and then brought live when completed?Theelephantsays (talk) 02:01, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely - I'd encourage it. Copy the material (without the deletion tag) to User:Theelephantsays/sandbox, and you can copy the developed article into article space when it's ready to go. Acroterion (talk) 02:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I did that, I you can now remove the live page.Theelephantsays (talk) 02:07, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, there's no prejudice to re-creation, and feel free to ask for help if you need it. Deleted as G7, "user request." Acroterion (talk)

I'm sorry, but...

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to request that you refrain from interfering in my discussion with FisherQueen. Thank you. 65.32.47.2 (talk) 03:02, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok my bad bro. Look, let's move forward. I'm done with the bs. I'm now talkin wit Krash about something. you're more than welcome to check it out and weigh in. I want it resolved. 65.32.47.2 (talk) 03:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, but my statement was "The Florida Department of Corrections has been well documented for its corruption and guard misconduct." Is this really violating NPOV? It's more of a summary of the sources. At least that is what my intentions were. I was originally gonna create a section for it to detail the corruption our previous DOC director had to deal with, but I figured it might get removed for detracting from the article. I am still unsure of the rules on that stuff. If my sentence is not appropriate then how could I make it proper? I feel that it must be put into the article somehow. What would you suggest? Does wiki have a consensus area where people weigh in? The discussion page gets no looks so I would rather shy away from there. You're also an admin so obviously you know what's up. That's why I've come to you all. Thanks for helping so far. 65.32.47.2 (talk) 03:44, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I really am going to sleep in a few minutes, but I'd advise using the talkpage to make proposals, even if it's low-traffic. You'll need to avoid issues of coatracking, but I think you can produce a valid criticism section. It's best to start small and approach it from a less direct position than "the Florida DOC is one of the worst ..." You might want to look at comparable articles on corrections departments and major police forces to see what's been done there. Also, your sources should be entirely based on hard news stories, rather than editorial opinion or quasi-editorial opinion, and the sources themselves should be major publications. Time is good, some of your other sources less so. Acroterion (talk) 03:49, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


i've not really changed this too much, but as her single is now out on sale, and there is a wiki page already devoted to her would my ark music factory page be suitable? if it isn't at the moment, then if she reaches a degree of success with the single, would it be appropriate then? User:Adshenshall/ARK Music Factory

Adshenshall (talk) 19:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Frank Buckles (Part Idaknow)

I am probably going to lose the image on the infobox on the Frank Buckles page. I was wonder if the black and white image on this page would be any better? The only problem with it is it just says "submitted photo". - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I thought it was locally uploaded and had a FUR? Acroterion (talk) 21:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, but if a similar version (same picture, different name) is removed from Commons, it makes it all but certain it will be removed here. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:26, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
"Submitted photo" indicates a private, non-PD source. Acroterion (talk) 21:29, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I thought so, but wanted to make sure. I just don't know what to do with the photo that is there. My GA seems to be hinging on the outcome of that photo on Commons, since it is similar in nature (just different name). So....I am not sure what to do. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:38, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

ARK Music Factory vs. Ark Music Factory

Hello. I see that you deleted Ark Music Factory. I'm not sure what kind of content was there when you deleted it, but it's back as ARK Music Factory. It is the record label for Rebecca Black whose song Friday is the subject of an ongoing AfD which looks like it is leaning fairly strong to keep. I wanted to seek your advice (as well as other Wikipedians involved in the Rebecca Black discussion) before moving the article back to where it belongs, if it is to stay at all. Thanks! Illinois2011 (talk) 05:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I have no opinion on the proper capitalization, but it's mostly the same material I deleted and userfied for the present article creator - the capitalization was his choice. I discussed the article with him and advised him on improvements, helped with formatting, and it was not in my opinion speediable at that time, but told him it might be subject to a deletion debate. Acroterion (talk) 11:35, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

You Earned It

This user helped promote Frank Buckles to good article status.

- Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 21:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I didn't actually write a word of it, though, but thanks. Good job! Acroterion (talk) 21:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
True, but you did help. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 03:35, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Bosnian Pyramids

I'd like to know how my deletion of certain sections of the article that were not proven, and were pure opinion of an individual, constitutes me adding some of my own? If this is truly an Encyclopedia, then no opinion at all should be added, I agree all articles should be neutral, hence why I deleted the sections that were not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.32.85 (talk) 01:14, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

You've been selectively removing sourced material describing the rejection of the man-made theory by professional archeologists, skewing the article in favor of what appears to be your preferred version. "Neutral" appears to be your opinion in favor of man-made origin. Acroterion (talk) 01:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of MYRETAILORDER

Please Provide an explanation to your act of deleting the talk page of MyRetailOrder — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amanmittal1991 (talk • contribs) 11:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

The article made no credible indication of the subject's notability and was deleted. The orphaned talkpage was deleted as is normal practice. Please review WP:CORP for notability guidelines for corporations. Acroterion (talk) 11:42, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
I am writing/editing an article for the first time and have done my best in explaining the context of the matter . Pls illustrate your point .Do I need to provide the turnover and the revenue generation model of the company too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amanmittal1991 (talk • contribs) 11:48, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
You will need to show how the company is notable by reference to significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject - articles in major media of more than trivial length and more than purely local in coverage. Wikipedia isn't a business directory - you will need to indicate why the company should be in a global encyclopedia. Acroterion (talk) 12:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

TBS

Thanks for tidying that up - I didn't realize the history had been left behind, given the typos by VH2. Acroterion (talk) 01:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for reverting the title change!  :) —David Levy 01:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk:MTV

The talk page for MTV was left behind at Talk:MTV (TV channel). Could you fix this? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 01:22, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Done, thanks for spotting it. Acroterion (talk) 01:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

for the vandalism cleanup.--SPhilbrickT 01:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome - the vandal's thought to be Tile join (talk · contribs). Acroterion (talk) 01:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

TB

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

--GnoworTC 20:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

block evasion

He Acroterion, you just blocked user:EarthquakeDisassemble as a sock puppet. Could you also block the ip 208.54.87.67 for making this edit twice? L.tak (talk) 21:41, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Done. The target articles might need semi-protection if it continues. Acroterion (talk) 21:46, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
tnx! and 208.54.87.56.... L.tak (talk) 21:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC) (you might be right about protection; will you do it, or shall I request it?)
It's a very narrow range, so I just did a /24 rangeblock - we'll see if it works. Acroterion (talk) 21:51, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
and we have a new one! 208.54.44.76. I am afraid that makes the range a bit wider.....L.tak (talk) 22:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Your recent revert at the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami‎ talk page

The revert you made here [10] with the edit summary 'rvv' was incorrect - it was not vandalism - the IP has been trolling the article and talk page with comments about people being 'disassembled' for some days now - he also edited my post here [11]. If that isn't vandalism, I don't know what is. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:30, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm well aware of the IP's activities - I've rangeblocked them and semi-protected the talkpage. They're flip-flopping back and forth between IP's, and my initial revert went back to one of the bad versions. I have long since reverted back to your version. Feel free to remove the Ip's work as you see fit. Acroterion (talk) 22:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
From what I can see, the section (with vandalism) is still on the talk page. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:42, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
By all means, feel free to remove it: I'm trying to figure out an appropriate edit filter. I've just blocked another sock and semi=protected another articleAcroterion (talk) 22:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Guess what?

Hello, Acroterion. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
A mail, you gotz it! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 18:52, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Republic of the Earth

What is wrong nel'articolo I quote "Republic of the Earth"? Because I was deleted? I reloaded the page indicating the link under related initiative in the name of "Repubblica della terra" okay? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Romagu (talk • contribs) 16:28, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no indication of notability: see the comments I left on your talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 16:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Notability: on Google, "republic of the earth" occurs 231,000 times in Italian; "roman republic" occurs and 213.00 times. Like about Dhana, this is something unusual and for this reason the Republic of the Earth is poorly understood by many people. But it's known by many others. However, reading our text and cited links, it is not difficult understand. Romagu 15:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

As noted below, you provide no acceptable reliable sources. Acroterion (talk) 15:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Dhana

Dhana has existed since June 14, 2001. The first 6 billion Dhana were secured by this act. This is the certificate of Avatar Spa. Than all is true. On Wikipedia are given hundreds of currencies not legal tender. Why can not insert Dhana? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Romagu (talk • contribs) 17:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

As I noted, there is no indication of notability for any of the organizations you've written about, and you article on the currency describes something that appears to be either a hoax or a scam. Please provide references in reliable third-party media coverage, rather than in self-referential websites. Acroterion (talk) 17:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Notability: on Google, Dhana (currency) occurs 23,100 times in Italian and 55,300 times in English. Hoax or scam: Internet, there are still old articles in Italian on Dhana, all completely overtaken by judicial decisions, as specified to the Italian Wikipedia administrators citing the sources; hoax is something that does not exist about Dhana because Dhana exists from more ten years, a scam involves trickery while Dhana is entirely transparent. Self-referential: we have cited external sources except those who have had direct relations with the initiative. If needed, we can cite all public institutions of various countries who responded to the initiative. Unfortunately, this is something unusual and perhaps for this reason Dhana is poorly understood by many people. Certainly the issue of currency is a complex issue and therefore must be addressed in complex ways. However, reading our text and cited links, it is not difficult understand. Romagu 14:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

As I noted before, you provide no references in major independent media to substantiate anything that's been written. Google yields no reliable sources (and only a few relevant hits in those 55,000 results), and the only references appear in forums or self-referential postings similar to those you've attempted to create in Wikipedia. The Italian Wikipedia is entirely irrelevant; what goes on one is not necessarily acceptable on another. Show me sources like the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, the Economist and the like, and then there's something to work with. Acroterion (talk) 15:08, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, The Economist and other newspapers "of system" will not ever speak of Dhana and Republic of The Earth until they will continue to receive dollars and other legal tender currencies. The only way of the power to prevent acknowledgement of Dhana and Republic of the Earth is not talking about it. Do you understand? Thanks. Romagu 16:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

That's too bad, because Wikipedia relies on The System to validate serious content. Until there is serious coverage on the subject from such publications, it will be ineligible for inclusion on Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 17:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Almost none of the currencies shown on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency were cited by the Wall Street Journal, etc.. Romagu 17:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The presence or absence of material that exists elsewhere on Wikipedia has no bearing on the subject at hand. Please refer to WP:RS for information on reliable sources. Acroterion (talk) 17:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I saw the rules. I am Rodolfo Marusi Guareschi. As president of Holos Holding SA, I have secured the issue of the first 6 billion Dhana with a pledge of 150 billion euro. Then, I made ​​up hundreds of companies around the world to make Holos Global System and guarantee Dhana subsequent issue. In Italy, I have been opposed and later acquitted. All this appears in the documents issued by Italian authorities and other countries. On Dhana, opinions were expressed by famous professors. What else is to say the simple truth? However, if Wikipedia will not accept the word Dhana and the other that I have proposed, patience. I just wanted the largest encyclopedia in the world, that declares itself free. had this information.Romagu 18:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Mr. Ehrman

Hello, my fellow classmates and I are befuddled and slightly aggrevated that our retiring teacher, who avidly promotes the use of Wikipedia to search for any information about history, has had an article created about him removed/deleted. Maxsimonead7 (talk) 03:41, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

No doubt Mr. Ehrman, who must certainly appreciate your esteem for him, would advise you that as a worldwide encyclopedia, Wikipedia has notability guidelines for individual biographies that require significant coverage in major independent media to successfully assert notability outside of the local community. Wikipedia also has requirements for reliable sourcing, which I'm sure you'd agree is vital for individual biographies. Since the article doesn't provide appropriate sourcing and doesn't claim notability outside of Oceanside, we must reluctantly conclude that his biography doesn't meet Wikipedia guidelines: see WP:BIO for further details. Acroterion (talk) 03:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Since I noticed you ran into one of the students, thought you might be interested in the note I left at Wikipedia talk:School and university projects#Semarang State University "Papat Limpad" competition. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Article deletion

Did you just delete something within 10 seconds of being posted? I was editing the article why did you do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tüzes fal (talk • contribs) 15:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Can you give a few minutes next time...? I can promise you it's a legitimate topic. Tüzes fal (talk) 15:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Replied on the user's talkpage; YouTube accounts aren't notable unless there's substantial coverage in dependent media. Acroterion (talk) 15:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
I will add sources there are many of them, give me a few minutes and I'll add many sources. Tüzes fal (talk) 15:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Page Move

Got asked this question as part of the Online Ambassador program and to be honest, I am unsure how to proceed. I am even unsure as to where to put the article since there is already a like named article. Can you help? - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 17:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

If it's a clean history merge (I haven't looked), it's moderately simple to move in and tidy (I hate doing it, I always screw it up). See WP:HISTMERGE for the whole miserable process. I'm not quite sure what to do w/r/t this kind of merge when one comes from userspace, since we can't use a {{copied}} tag, as far as I can make out. I'll look at it a little later and see what's to be done. Acroterion (talk) 17:14, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
'Tis cool. If you have to bring in another admin, that is also cool. Just let me know when the page is moved, so I can let the mentor know as well. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 17:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
It's a straightforward history merge - the last edit at Tiered service was last September: the userspace edits are all this year. Let me know if they want to go ahead. Acroterion (talk) 17:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
I just emailed the Prof about the history merge, as he had previously asked that the students do the moves from userspace to mainspace, but since this requires admin action, we are going to have to circumvent that request this time around. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 18:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Per this, it appears we are in a "holding pattern" on the history merge. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 19:45, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
And also, thank you very much for offering to help WormTT · (talk) 20:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Holding pattern over, we have the green light, repeat, we are go WormTT · (talk) 08:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Roger that. Acroterion (talk) 11:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
History merged. The original user will have to re-create their sandbox. Acroterion (talk) 12:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanky very much WormTT · (talk) 12:25, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Awesome! Taken care of. :) Much appreciated Acroterion! :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 14:19, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk back

Hello, Acroterion. You have new messages at User_talk:SDPatrolBot/ErrorReports.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- Kingpin13 (talk) 20:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Zip Firelighters

Hi Acroterion

I hope you are well? I am looking to write an article on this company as they are a massive company in the UK and europe and are well known and have a deep history as well as a little piece about the history and science of Firelighters. How can I go about doing this without it being taken down for speedy deletion as just observed?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Kind regards

SimonZIP (talk) 15:45, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

You should review Wikipedia's guidelines on the notability of companies and organizations at WP:CORP and be sure that the content satisfies those guidelines and that you provide appropriate references to third-party media - see WP:RS. You should strictly avoid promotion of any kind (WP:SPAM), and since you have a clear conflict of interest, you will need to follow the guidelines found in WP:COI. I'd strongly advise that you create the content in a user subpage, such as User:SimonZIP/sandbox. Please remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a business directory or platform for social media advertising. Acroterion (talk) 15:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Wood Buckles

Perhaps you could chime in again on this section. There is some against consensus editing going on. I have posted to User:Wehwalt, who responded previously, but he seems to be offline. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 15:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I've added my opinion: birth names are commonly provided, and are something most readers are interested in knowing, even if it's not otherwise fundamental to a person's history. Acroterion (talk) 18:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I actually didn't know his name was not Frank Buckles until his passing. It wasn't something that he said even in the LOC documents. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 19:11, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Ray William Johnson

Hello. Please know that a page you have create protected was non-the-less, been created. 117Avenue (talk) 19:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't see that in the edit history, or the protection history. 117Avenue (talk) 19:30, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
It's past speedy deletion, and is a distinct improvement on the version deleted by AfD. No problem with the unprotection. Acroterion (talk) 19:31, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

CiedWeb is a fine -Meets all guidelines Kevinmik (talk) 00:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

CiedWeb

CiedWeb meets all guidelines. It is a legal page Kevinmik (talk) 00:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC) why?

Well, it might be "legal," but it conclusively fails to assert sufficient notability for inclusion on Wikipedia - see WP:CORP, and I note that the company came into existence ... today. Acroterion (talk) 00:23, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

XC2000

Hi, I just saw that you deleted the content for XC2000, which I inputed today earlier. actually, it is not finished, I will edit it again, and then decide if it complied the wiki rules. BR Jindi

I strongly suggest that you write it in a sandbox in your userspace and make sure that it's encyclopedic - what I deleted amounted to an advertisement. Acroterion (talk) 14:45, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

speedy deletion of page Christine Tabbert

Dear fellow user,

I am a new user to Wikipedia so please forgive me if I am not following Wiki protocal.

Christine Tabbert is the official Liberal MP candidate for in the current Federal Election in Canada. The other candidates have Wiki pages so it would appear appropriate for Christine to have one too. If this is incorrect, then I can work on speedy deletion of the other candidate's pages.

If you agree that Christine's page is valid, please advise what I need to do to reinstate it.

Thank you, Steve

Stevedempsey (talk) 15:38, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Please take a look at WP:POLITICIAN. In general, individuals are not considered sufficiently notable for inclusion on Wikipedia if they are simply candidates for office - they must indicate independent notability apart from the fact of their candidacy. I did not see such indication in the article. Please feel free to re-post the article if you can make credible assertion of notability according to WP:BIO on matters independent of her candidacy. You may wish to work on the article in a user subpage first to give you time to develop the material - you can use User:Stevedempsey/sandbox for this purpose. Please remember that all biographies must bne appropriately sourced to reliable sources. Acroterion (talk) 15:56, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

new!!

There is a new user page on my user. As it says on the bottom, do NOT delete it, come back next thursday for an update on my stub user page and friday on another stub page. Signed, --Neptunemusic (talk) 23:01, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I removed one link on the the above user's userpage as it appeared the user was trying to link to a file on his PC. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 23:06, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Of the user's edits today, I have CSD'd one as A1 and one as G8. One edit was reverted by another editor. I am unsure of the user's intent, but it appears they are trying to maybe create articles with a "Coming Soon" or "Check back soon" ideal, per this. It almost looks like a violation of WP:MYSPACE, but I think the user could be a good editor with some help and leading in the right direction. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 23:11, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
I think the editor needs a little help with appropriate sourcing and the fact that Wikipedia isn't a discussion forum. I left a note on his talkpage; he's writing what he knows, not what he can source. I also gave him a link to WP:OWN. Acroterion (talk) 13:48, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Okie Dokie. The pages that I CSD'd as A1 and G8 were deleted, just FYI. - Neutralhomer • Talk • Coor. Online Amb'dor • 20:34, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

New theory of light and ether article

I'm trying to publish this article, previously I have made an error in editing so the article has been deleted, but now I see what I have to do, so Please just let me continue.

Udrea Sergiu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serudr (talk • contribs) 01:34, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't publish origjnal research. There are already substantial articles on the subject with appropriate references to published material. Acroterion (talk) 01:37, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

TB ian

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

hello

Good evening Acroterion, I was wondering if you could make my alternative account (User:SunCountryGuy01) a filemover and IP-block exempt. In reference to IP-block exempt At my university I read a study not ten minutes ago about City College of new York being the top 40 most active place for Wikipedians to reside which got me worried because I did not want to be block as I use this account mostly for edits whiles I am on the CCNY campus. In reference to filemover I can be trusted with this right as I already have it on my main account. Thanks and cheers. Jessy T/C 01:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Have you had any trouble when editing from CCNY? In general, as WP:IPEXEMPT notes, it's not granted widely and is subject to removal once it's not needed. There would be no problem with granting it in principle (I've done it before for editors with exactly your situation, but only when it's a clear problem. As far as filemover goes, I'll make the change now. Acroterion (talk) 01:58, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
You've been a filemover since 3/21 - NawlinWiki did it. Acroterion (talk) 02:01, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I made a mistake. The account is SunCountryGuy012 and I have not had a problem but I just want to be safe rather than sorry. Thanks and cheers. Jessy T/C 02:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
I'd be happy to make the account IP exempt if and when it's needed, but until there's a demonstrated problem, it's not something that's done. As for filemover - no problem. Acroterion (talk) 02:09, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Jessy T/C 02:13, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

New pics!

Hi ... traveled near Cumberland, Maryland today and had time to stop and grab pics of seven additional NRHP sites. Given all your good work out there, I thought you might like to know. Beautiful day for pictures!--Pubdog (talk) 23:08, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

It was a nice day - it always seems to be gray when I'm in Cumberland. Great pix! Acroterion (talk) 12:20, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Adding Revivial

I wanted to add this word to the mix, how can I alter the post so it doesn't get deleted?

Revivial A small group of passionate believers that live in Northern California. They hold a strong belief that the small river running through Petaluma, Ca will be the life-force of the community and they have devoted their lives to letting the world know they will meet once a year to celebrate and rejoice in it's glory.

[ri-vahy-v-e-uh-list] -noun a person who revives former community customs, methods and waterways

http://youngnomad.com/2008/03/revivial/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youngnomad (talk • contribs) 16:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

First of all, Wikipedia isn't a dictionary; you're proposing a dictionary definition. Second, the group you're discussing doesn't appear to meet the notability guidelines for inclusion on Wikipedia - see WP:NOTE and WP:ORG. Notability is documented by reference to coverage in multiple independent sources in significant published works, which also help satisfy the basic requirement of verifiability. Acroterion (talk) 16:53, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion

hi, why you have delete my wiky on easy facebook android sdk ?

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magemello (talk • contribs) 00:46, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

You appear to be promoting something, which is not appropriate on Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 01:42, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Heritage Brewing

The sad thing is that over-zealous admins who delete article after article is one of the main reasons why many editors leave wikipedia and why many people never join wikipedia. Mr.Badlands (talk) 03:32, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

As NortyNort told you on your userpage, the article was more of an ode to their beer than an objective discussion of a notable company. Another problem with Wikipedia is the creation of large numbers of marginal articles that never get improved to an appropriately encyclopedic level. With 3.6 million articles, it's increasingly hard to find new independent subjects that are noteworthy. One exception to that is in the visual arts, which are woefully underserved by Wikipedia, as opposed to performing arts, in which hundreds of albums are documented every day. It depends on the subject you're trying to add - there's plenty left to do in Italian history, for instance, or the improvement of existing content, but there's a limit to the new material that can pass the notablity bar. The fun times when you could write the article on blue are long gone - we are well into the consolidation and incremental improvement phase, which is bound to be less attractive. Acroterion (talk) 11:28, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Figs meson April Fools

Just read Rules for Fools. I should have read it before. I learned from my mistake. Sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirc El (talk • contribs) 23:27, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Dolf

Hey. I had just started an AfD as it seemed that the author had included a new reference that wasn't included in the previously discussed version. Do you mind cleaning up the AfD (just deleting it)? OlYellerTalktome 02:41, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll delete it - it's a self-published newsletter reference, and the content (which was more of a complaint than anything else, fell under A7, A1, etc. Acroterion (talk) 02:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Ricky McCormack

You deleted my posts saying they were unsourced. However I was the transcriber. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sallen2006 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Ricky McCormack

You deleted my posts saying they were unsourced. However I was the transcriber. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.232.52 (talk) 06:45, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

As I explained to you on your userpage, a personal transcription is original research and is not acceptable on Wikipedia. You must obtain a transcription (which doesn't appear to exist) from a reliable source, not your own personal analysis. Acroterion (talk) 11:27, 5 April 2011 (UTC)


2ndofafew

you deleted my post as vandalism when it was a personal attack im very disappointed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2ndofafew (talk • contribs) 14:29, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Deletion

Acroterion:

I was notified that you wanted to delete the page about "Kerry Ann McEwen' and the importance is, she is an actress/commercial star, and people often wonder who she is — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krazykk97 (talk • contribs) 22:13, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

There is no indication that she is notable. See WP:ENTERTAINER for notability guidelines. Moreover, it is an unreferenced biography of a minor. Acroterion (talk) 00:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

My Future

Why was it deleted? 98.109.78.160 (talk) 01:45, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

It was deleted last November because its content was, in its entirety "It's cold." Acroterion (talk) 01:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Freak Geeks

Why have you deleted my article Sir ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Absarar (talk • contribs) 11:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Because it is obvious advertising, which is unacceptable, for a website that doesn't appear to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for web content. Acroterion (talk) 12:02, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

My Page Was Deleted

I am a representative of Bulwark Exterminating LLC. I previewed it once and it was instantly gone, I had no time to revise or properly cite anything. This is unfair and I have every right to write this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pestsites (talk • contribs) 00:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia's guidelines concerning conflict of interest: you are strongly discouraged from writing about yourself or your business. Wikipedia does not accept advertising, and articles about organizations that do not indicate compliance with the corporate notability guidelines may be deleted at any time. As a private website, there is no right to edit Wikipedia; please respect our policies. Acroterion (talk) 01:14, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Berkeley Partners for Parks

I have to say that this is a mistake. This is the parent organization for Friends of Five Creeks a clearly notable organization. This group stewards several of these. The article is new. Its notability is claimed and cited. Let it grow.Thisbites (talk) 05:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

The article makes no assertion of notability at all; there is no support in secondary sources. It appears to be a purely local, unremarkable organization, referenced to itself. Friends of Five Creeks appears to be marginally notable, but that doesn't make a parent organization notable - notability is not inherited in either direction. Rather than speedy-delete it (for which it is eligible), I have listed it for deletion debate. If it is notable, please provide evidence in reliable, secondary sources.Acroterion (talk) 11:28, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Removing quotes from footnotes

Hi, your blanking of quotes from footnotes on Berkeley Partners for Parks‎ appears overzealous as an interpretation of any copyright guideline I am aware of. I am not ignorant of the issues or the guidelines we normally apply and I know of no consensus that would make these appropriate short and attributed quotations anything to worry about in practice. You could argue that they would be better integrated into the article body, but this is a question of improvement and blanking appears overly aggressive. Unless you can point to an unambiguous consensus that quotations of this type are not appropriate and the correct action to take is to blank them from such articles, then I propose to revert your changes on this basis or if you prefer I would be open to an independent review from someone well versed in these copyright interpretations. Thanks Fæ (talk) 21:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your userpage. Acroterion (talk) 21:50, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
By saying that you would take my word for it, does this mean that you have no objection to me reverting your deletions? --Fæ (talk) 21:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Be my guest; it would be a crazy thing to argue about - I just think it's unneccessary, and I'd strongly advise you to ask for an opinion - I believe it's against a number of policies. Acroterion (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

hello

Hello I posted a request for help with an administrator issue earlier on the main page. I gave a description of the issue without giving any user specific information or details. Nonetheless I have now been blocked by that administrator who has determined me to be a banned user who is abusing wikipedia privileges. This is the basis for my initial complaint. Bans and blocks are issued continuously without any solid proof of wrongdoing, and more and more names are added unfairly to the list of duplicate and abusive accounts that are allegedly operated by one specific banned user.
I have knowledge of others who too have been blocked in this way based on their particular area of interest on the site (which is the community New Rochelle and related geographic, social and cultural subjects), including three public school teachers, a librarian, the local historian and for New Rochelle and her interns and the mayor of New Rochelle. I have recently talked with the owner of the local Thanhouser Company (historic resource archives and website) and he too experienced the same problems when on the site (immediate blocking even after just one or two simple edits). To pursue any sortof defense against these claims is an impossible task.


I have worked to make productive contributions to articles and have even tried to create some new ones as well. I continually follow the proper guidelines and my contributions have always been factually accurate and very well referenced to sources. When counterproductive edits are made to articles I have worked to restore the content while improving on it if at all possible (ie. finding better sources, expanding or summarising text if necessary) yet in these instances too I have been blocked without cause and my work was immediately erased. I do not believe that there has been any substantial evidence of "vandalism", plagiarism, falsification of information etc. in connection with the many "banned" user claims and blocked accounts that have surfaced over the past year (I have tried to research the online documentation and am still looking back further to 2 + 3 years ago). I am hard pressed to find any truly problematic activity which would explain the extensive list of jvolkblum's abusive duplicate accounts.

I attest that I am not jvolkblum and am not connected to them in any way. There is no reason why I should not be allowed to contribute to the site and create relevant new articles. I hope you will respond to this message and welcome any helpful suggestions you might have. <redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.255.164.105 (talk) 22:31, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Jvolkblum's probably managed to get half of New Rochelle and surrounding areas blocked, either through direct blocks of IPs and autoblocks from his socks, or through mistaken interpretation of edits by others. He's pretty thoroughly poisoned the well, making it difficult for anyone who's not an established and trusted editor to work in the subject areas associated with New Rochelle. Not all of his edits are bad, but enough are problematic to make it difficult to sort the good from the bad. He's wasted a great deal of editors' and administrators' time. I have no doubt that the innocent have suffered. He's also gone through several attempts at redemption that ended badly, sowing mistrust. I'm not unsympathetic (and neither is Wknight94), but the abuse has been corrosive. In an open editing environment our tools are limited; there's one prolific serial vandal who's gotten a large portion of Pakistan blocked by myself and others on a regular basis. Approaching AN with an accusation of administrator abuse is unlikely to get a useful result: while abuse occurs, administrators aren't mind readers, whether with respect to your intentions or those of problem editors, and without facts, we have to do detective work which may not always yield the desired result; most administrators have been burned at one time or another, trying to do the right thing.
I'll give this some thought over the next few days - I'm not familiar with Jvolkblum's most recent activity. I don't doubt that there has been significant collateral damage. There are more tools at our disposal than in past years, with pending changes review, but that's still not fully up and running, and takes its own toll in supervision. Acroterion (talk) 02:27, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello Acroterion. SInce this is the IP's only edit on Wikipedia, I suggest that there is no particular need to extend good faith here. Jvolkblum is the master of plaintive appeals. There could be reason to simply remove this kind of post. Note that the IP provides no details that you could actually check. (He says he has edited, but gives no examples). EdJohnston (talk) 23:57, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

please provie me a copy of the Phillica Entry

Hello,

I do not wish to contest the deletion of the entry titled "Phillica" that you deleted, but if you can email me a hard copy or however admins usually go about providing these, I would be very thankful. <redacted>

Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buckeyemac9 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Emailed per your request. Acroterion (talk) 22:14, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Being an Admin

I want to become a respected administrator like you. Any advice? Thank you! Intoronto1125 (talk) 23:19, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't know about the "respected" part: any prospective administrator should realize that "reviled" can be applied once one starts doing admin tasks, but thanks for the compliment. You seem to be well on the way; you have a respectable edit count, but you've only been here a few months. I assume you've reviewed WP:ADMIN? I'd suggest that you consider balancing article work against participation in the mechanics of Wikipedia operation: deletion debates are a good place to start, also a modest amount of vandal-fighting and newpage patrol. Be aware that newpage patrol is a minefield at the moment. Creation of reviewed content like featured and good articles is always a positive. Experience in dispute resolution, or at least evidence that you can deal with problems sensibly, is extremely desirable. Participation on content review is good. I'd suggest in general that you branch out and see if administrative-type work suits you. Watch WP:RFA and see what is expected there. You should understand that the sysop flag is not a badge of rank, nor an award; it's just a way of helping out with more tasks. Acroterion (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the advice! Intoronto1125 (talk) 00:06, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for dealing with the toe rag who left what must have been an awful message on my talk page, although, being human, I am curious what he said. I assume it had something to do with my less than full throated admiration for the WWE. Drmargi (talk) 01:16, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Kind of hard to tell what the issue was; it consisted of a poorly-spelled, ungrammatical rant against your gender, profession and professional qualifications. You may draw your own conclusions as to motive and attribution. Acroterion (talk) 01:28, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh, it was probably to do with the WWE jazz. I just wanted to have enough sense of it to keep an eye out for the offender, given he has a block for block evasion. Thanks again! Drmargi (talk) 01:43, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Morgan Medacier page.

Hello, I would appreciate it if you'd stop deleting the Morgan Medacier page. I can assure you that he does exist, and his work is commendable. Thekevin711 (talk) 01:56, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

User warned on talk page. Acroterion (talk) 02:00, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar


 The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thank you for your work on the September 11 attacks article! MONGO 23:27, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you: it's been uncharacteristically quiet over there, but it's good to know that so many people care and are keeping an eye on it. Acroterion (talk) 02:32, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
It's usually quiet there when I'm quiet...maybe I need to create an "most obnoxious contributer" barnstar for myself.--MONGO 02:35, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps the "sleeping dog annoyer barnstar" would be in order for you? Acroterion (talk) 02:42, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Brainss

hey I saw that you deleted my page that I wasn't even done with. For I will be posting it again because it is an assignment for my english class..you can delete it later but I would appreciate it if you left it up at least for a week. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muzzyb (talk • contribs) 18:59, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest that you develop a draft in your userspace where it will be reasonably safe from deletion, rather than a jump into article space with a topic that duplicates existing, sourced content. You can work in your userspace at User:Muzzyb/sandbox. If you wish, I can place the deleted content there. Acroterion (talk) 19:04, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

A-Class Review

Hey Acroterion, I was wondering if you could do an A-Class Review on the Frank Buckles article. User:HJ Mitchell was reviewing the article, but his computer is "on the blink" and I have talked to him by email and he says it is going to be a few before it is fixed. If you can give it a look-see, I would appreciated it, but if you can't, that's cool too. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:54, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I've never done an A-class review; I'll give it a look - it might not be a formal A-class review, but I'll offer my opinion. I'm somewhat otherwise occupied, so it may be a bit strung out. Acroterion (talk) 01:01, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, I have requests into others, so they could do the main review and you could tell me where things need to be tinkered with. That's how it was with HJ. He was doing the main review and about 4 others were giving opinions on what needed tinkered with. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:04, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
User:Nick-D is going to be the substitute reviewer. If you still wish to give the article a quick once-over and let me know of anything that needs fixed, please feel free. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:39, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello friend

I found that you recently snuffed out the flame of Glac before its glorious light was able to bless the virgin faces of consumer/believers round the world. No more will its sugary sweet enlightenment, lent only through the grace of our blessed Lord and Savior Raja, be known to the begging tastebuds of children around the world. This is a strict impediment our group's implicit rights to practice and preach our religious beliefs. If you do not comply with our terms, which be only that you allow the glorious glory of Glacs to fed the effervescent glow of eternal internet, then we will regretfully and irrevocably be forced to brand you, Acroterion, a Glacist and suffer the eternal bane and general ill-will of our Lord Raja.

Signed, All those who bow to the glorious Raja and his greatness and so on and so forth. And whatnot.

Hail Raja, Who art in a box of corn flakes, Hallowed be thy name In every morsel of Pyridoxine chlorhidrate In all flavor of riboflavin Who is bright and fierce Who is fully moral but with great rage To those who do not partake in a complete breakfast Amen

File:Http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/217033 10150167168906544 571596543 6654291 7269769 n.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by AztlanShark (talk • contribs) 12:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Speedy was contested as you deleted

Hi there, just after you deleted Taurusoft, the author contested the speedy tag on Talk:Taurusoft. He/she most likely tried to contest before you had deleted the article, so I guess if you find their reason compelling (I doubt, personally) you might want to restore the article. If that's not the case, then you should delete the talk page per G8. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 17:53, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

InfiniMiner

why you are redirecting Infiniminer to Minecraft? --Kirov Airship (talk) 01:09, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

It looked like a double redirect; I see I was mistaken. Please don't add YouTube gameplay links to the article. Acroterion (talk) 01:12, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
I had to add so that people like you could see that it is a different game. In last half the Inifiniminer link was redirected to Minecraft again and agin by many wiki user. wiki users act without reading the contet but only by looking at the images. --Kirov Airship (talk) 01:16, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

deletion of Sports Craze

hi can I know about why Sports Craze deleted from wikipeida, please guide me how to make a good new page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esens34 (talk • contribs) 09:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

The entire content consisted of "Sports Craze is website for Sports Crazies. Are you crazy about Sports and Sports Celebrities? Then you are on the right place! A blog about Cricket, Football, Tennis, Race, Boxing, Hockey, Snooker Crazies!" The article was deletable as advertising or promotion, as an article on a website with no credible assertion of notability in major third-party media, and on grounds of insufficient contexzt. You would need to address each of these items: see WP:SPAM, WP:WEB and WP:YFA. Acroterion (talk) 11:28, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Question

Would it be considered canvassing if I pointed the people who worked on the A-Class review to the FAC for the Frank Buckles article? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't think so; they are necessarily interested in the subject, there can't be very many of them (six?), and FA is the usual and expected step after an A-class review. I, however, have no experience with FAR, so I don't know what's customary. Acroterion (talk) 12:11, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, six responded, but a few others worked on the article. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I asked Wehwalt, he should know. He has been through more FACs than "Carter has liver pills". Don't ask, something my Mom says. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 12:22, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
My mother's family (from the WV panhandle) says the same thing. Acroterion (talk) 12:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Fshellom

I do not think that my page, Fshellom, should be deleted. I have started a ginormous chain letter and this is a place for receivers to learn more about it. I thank you for your time, (you have way too much) and consideration. I do not think I am promoting this word, only providing information about it. Fshellom (talk) 23:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)Sincerely, Fshellom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fshellom (talk • contribs) 22:52, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't a place for you to promote a made-up word. Acroterion (talk) 22:57, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

please see sniglets for examples of made up words. sincerely, Fshellom, distressed and violated Wiki user

You'll note that Sniglet has 11 references. Acroterion (talk) 23:25, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

also see daffynitions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fshellom (talk • contribs) 23:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Both are covered by book-length treatments and are notable. See WP:RS, WP:MADEUP. Acroterion (talk) 23:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

i do not doubt that "sniglets" or "daffynitions" are real but i think that this page is promoting made up words. Showing that someone gained great reputational and financial success is promoting them.--Fshellom (talk) 23:37, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

what is the best way to get this word referenced so a peeve like you can't take them down?--Fshellom (talk) 23:40, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

If you have read WP:RS as I've advised, along with WP:V and [{WP:NOTE]], you'll know that significant coverage in major third-party media is required. You may be unhappy that the word you've made up (and as you yourself note above, are trying to promote) has been deleted; we are unhappy that you're abusing Wikipedia to promote things you've made up, and are compounding that by being rude to editors who are correctly removing your inappropriate post. Acroterion (talk) 00:01, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I never said I was trying to "promote" Fshellom. I believe you are mistaken when you say this. Is there any way for me to show that people out there care about Fshellom. If I can get 50 people to support me will Wikipedia let this post remain on the site?--Fshellom (talk) 02:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

No. Wikipedia uses published sources, as I've explained several times. It is not a popularity contest, nor do "ginormous chain letters" (the promotion to which I referred) have any weight. Acroterion (talk) 03:41, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Contact

how can i contact you non- wikipedia? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.232.82 (talk) 02:33, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Um, you don't. What do you need, perhaps I can help. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:36, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
You will need a Wikipedia account with email enabled to contact me off-wiki. Is there something I can help with here? Acroterion (talk) 03:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
I am wondering about the creator and corporate "leader" of Wikipedia. I am also wondering about how administrators view all of the incoming pages? Is there a screening process or it it all manual? Also, Acroterion, is there more than one person using your account. I see that you are on Virtually every hour of the day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.232.82 (talk) 02:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Jimmy Wales is the founder of Wikipedia. Anyone can see new pages as they are created by going to Special:Newpages, where they can be seen and patrolled. I make small edits from time to time through the day, since I work most of the time at a computer and can keep an eye on areas that interest me. Acroterion (talk) 02:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.232.82 (talk) 23:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Need Some Help

On the Frank Buckles FAC, User:Nikkimaria is wanting {{PD-art-3d}} on this image. Problem is, that image is on Commons and they frown upon PD anything and hence they don't have the PD-art-3d template. I am unsure what to do. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Lights, camera, yellow bar. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, was headed off to bed and not sufficiently alert to field an image policy question. I have little familiarity with FA image policies and will have to research this one; as we have family coming in shortly, it may be a while. Acroterion (talk) 14:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Given the somewhat odd restriction to Wikipedia projects (which I thought was not acceptable on Commons), I share Nikkimaria's concern, but I don't see any way of changing that short of contacting BrokenSphere to change the licensing. The image is not of high quality, and I see little danger of its use elsewhere (and in any case, use of a Commons image for non-Web uses requires normal permission from the author - I've had images used in print and granted permission directly - I'm not sure what BS is concerned about). Acroterion (talk) 15:59, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Delete

why did you delete my page? it was for a school project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.Will11 (talk • contribs) 03:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Posting hoaxes with content copied from elsewhere on the Internet in violation of Wikipedia's rules, and doing it three times, doesn't appear to me to be a good use of your time, nor an appropriate school project. If you do that again, you will not be allowed to edit Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 11:21, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

The Raven King

If you truly think my report is A1 then you may but help me make it better. The black wings of zathers shale never falter 20:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The raven king of ulatemanu (talk • contribs)

Deletion of MECA CLUB page

i have recently created a page about a club in my college, called MECA CLUB, i noticed then that you deleted it because it has no reason of why it should stay in the Wikipedia.

i hereby tell you that the page will be further edited & improve as to explain why this contribution is useful for Wikipedia readers. i also appreciate it if you explain to me more about the reasons and more about Wikipedia expectations, to be able to decide whether we can meet those expectations or no.

N.B. please notify me when you reply or leave me a message on my talk page, i did NOT add this page to my watch list.

Thank you!

Mtantawy (talk) 21:40, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Replied on user's talkpage and userfied. Acroterion (talk) 21:46, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay, i will see what i can do to prove that it is notable, in the mean while i will edit the page in my sandbox, but after finishing, how can i publish it outside the sandbox? should i notify you to review it first instead of publishing it then you delete it as happened? Again, Reply on my talk page please!

Mtantawy (talk) 21:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks...

for that. Boy, a year is a long time to nurse a grudge. -- Rrburke (talk) 00:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Revenge is a dish best served cold. He certainly showed you who was boss, for a few satisfying seconds. Acroterion (talk) 01:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Just wondering...

If you could possibly place the confirmed, reviewer and rollback permissions on my alternative account: User:MauchoEagle-public. Thanks. mauchoeagle (c) 00:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Done. Acroterion (talk) 00:41, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. mauchoeagle (c) 00:57, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Joey Yates

Why was joey yates deletedthe tennis am —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.185.90.81 (talk) 19:23, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Because it appeared to be a hoax. If there are any references in reliable sources to substantiate the claims made in the article, please provide them: all biographies of,living persons must be referenced. ."A quick search turned up nothing useful, which is not what one would expect for the "greatest amateur tennis player of all time. Acroterion (talk) 19:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Loctician

Can I repost the same info without putting the salons website info on it. she is actually the first person to have to word trademarked and its on file with the commomwealth of Virginia state corporation commission. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simone105 (talk • contribs) 03:08, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

The most important issue is whether the term has received coverage in third-party media, like a story in a major newspaper. Trademarking isn't significant on its own - Wikipedia determines notability by reference to multiple instances of coverage. See WP:NOTE. If the term has widespread use, it could be included. If it's restricted to a single salon (and I would think it would be if it's trademarked - that's the point of trademarking), then it's unlikely to be notable. In no case would a link to the salon be appropriate. Acroterion (talk) 03:12, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
This term is used nationwide, however this person was the first to trademark it. The word had been in circulation since the late 90's but locs were not as popular then. It is semi popular but just as the dreadlock community is growing so is the popularity of the word. just google it. So how can i post the definition without being deleted, Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simone105 (talk • contribs) 03:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
can i re post? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simone105 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
I'd suggest that you develop a draft, with references, in tour userspace at User:Simone105/sandbox. You can write and collect references there without deletion. In generfal, unreferenced new articles don't fare well, so it's vital that you find high-quality references in newspapers and other publications to support the article. Acroterion (talk) 11:21, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you please block this user...

User:Zobian1, according to a message he left on my talk page he is a way for User:Thezob to evade his block. mauchoeagle (c) 18:32, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Taken care of - wasn't very long ago, and his parting shot had to be oversighted. Acroterion (talk) 19:00, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Just in case your feeling block-happy, I have another case for you, User talk:Boom Boom Bhusani. He is abusing talk page privileges. Could you also handle this. mauchoeagle (c) 20:02, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Acalamari already took care of it; thanks for the heads-up. Acroterion (talk) 20:09, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Morgan-Manning House

Hi: We have a problem with User:Blueboy96. He keeps re-adding specious information to Morgan-Manning House originally introduced by User:69.14.19.51 and repeatedly corrected by a number of well meaning editors. Thanks in advance for any assistance you can provide.--Pubdog (talk) 01:16, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

You might want to discuss it directly with him, don't you think? I wouldn't call the material he's reverting spam, although it reads like a little bit of local boosterism, but I'm not convinced that the use of sniper rifles and the relationship that gave the house its name are particularly germane. Blueboy's reasonable; talk to him about your concerns. Acroterion (talk) 01:39, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Will do--Pubdog (talk) 10:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Starving the trolls - "Riverton High School"

Hi Acroterion,
Though this of course doesn't show up in the edit history, I jumped in and added,

Riverton High School is a secondary school located Riverton, Illinois, America.

with the edit summary, "Starve troll by wikifying article".
Is it OK with you if I re-start the article? --Shirt58 (talk) 12:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Fine with me; I took is as a test article creation by someone showing off to friends, rather than real trolling. Acroterion (talk) 12:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Swanton, Maryland

Hi.. back to your part of the world. Article Swanton, Maryland demographics are out of whack. Any advice?--Pubdog (talk) 00:32, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with appropriate sources for that kind of demographic information: perhaps Nyttend might know where to look. Looking through the history I don't see a good version to revert back to. It's an area of high growth, so it could have changed population fairly quickly. Acroterion (talk) 03:46, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Rebeca the RocketNuggle09 (talk) 03:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)Nuggle09

Hello, I would like to start out by saying that I am happy wikipedi has contributers like you to keep wikipedia fresh and accurate. Today an article was written about Rebeca the Rocket, a person that I personally know and is near and dear to me. I can assure you that this is a real person with a huge reputation in columbia. Its very important to me that she, Rebeca, gets the recognation that she deserves. If there is any editing I can peronaly do to improve the article, and sources, or increase its signifgance, please let me know as soon as posssible. You can contact me at <email redacted>.

I appreciate the work you put into wikkipedia and hope you keep up the good work.

Nuggle09

From what you've written, there are no references to substantiate the article's claims, nor is there any indication of compliance with the notability guidelines at WP:BIO. You might want to try editing in a sandbox in your userspace if you can provide references. Acroterion (talk) 04:41, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Hudson Castle Group, Inc.

Could you educate me? There have been a series of edits of this article by a user named Registered1234 or somesuch. No problem. But I look at his contributions and see no changed for most of them. The column on the left and right seem to be the same. What gives with this? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 02:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Usually that means there was a spacing change, since a space won't show up in red. Acroterion (talk) 02:22, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, I am new at this. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 03:57, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Reviewer

Could you support me to become a reviewer on wikipedia here. Thanks Wilbysuffolk talk 14:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Why the delete?

Hey, I just started a page for the Buell Motor Company and you deleted it right away. The Buell motor company is NOT the same as the the Buell Motorcycle Company that followed it which needs to be known and it's history documented. Regards Gavin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agusta74 (talk • contribs) 00:58, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Replied and userfied at your talk page. Acroterion (talk) 01:15, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Page deleted?

Hi there

You previously deleted an entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Business_Group.

I have reviewed the original content, and have re-created it citing references as per the guidelines for the pages regarding organizations.

I am recreating the page with the references (and corrections to any issues regarding objectivity) and would appreciate your feedback directly if anything is still amiss.

Cheers!

Rwelement24 (talk) 22:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you please take a look...

at Bauhaus dance and tell me if CSDing is needed. mauchoeagle (c)

Seems reasonably notable, but lacking in sources. Pretty much anything to do with Gropius and the Bauhaus would be notable, and I recall reading about the dances. Acroterion (talk) 23:48, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
I am still on the edge so I will do an AfD, not to get it deleted but to attract attention so people can improve it. On an unrelated not, could you also take a look at Minecraft Crafting. mauchoeagle (c) 00:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
AfD really isn't a good way to improve references: not that it doesn't work, but it's not an appropriate use of the process. I'll see if I can round up some references. Acroterion (talk) 00:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Minecraft Crafting zapped; WP isn't a game guide. Acroterion (talk) 00:08, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
I have done AfD several times in order to improve article, yes I know I am a conman. :). mauchoeagle (c) 00:09, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Could you please delete Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bauhaus dance. mauchoeagle (c) 00:16, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Done. Now we can improve the article from the sources. Acroterion (talk) 00:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
I found a pretty good, up-to-standard reference but, as a precaution to not break anything, I will let you interpret the information, the source is Bauhaus, 1919-1933 By Magdalena Droste, Bauhaus-Archiv
Nice reference, feel free to incorporate it, or I'll see what I can do once I've finished cleaning up from dinner. I've removed the AfD notice from the OP's userpage, since that kind of thing can be off-putting for new contributors. Acroterion (talk) 00:32, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

IP 123.231.94.55

Thanks for the block. Unfortunately, it's a game of whack-a-mole as a range block on 123.231.64.0/18 would impact a large number of legitimate editors in addition to the vandal. I think it's the same editor from the article and talk page at Reporters Without Borders (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch. Multiple IPs in the same range had been edit-warring in the article over POV material followed by edit-warring on the talk page over the restoration of personal attacks (resulting in both the article and the talk page being semi-protected). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 04:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Ironically, they decided to make common cause with an obvious racist IP from Atlanta when they reverted WPCH-TV in their "Ghandian protest." I thought for a minute that the Atlanta vandal was using proxies. Acroterion (talk) 11:36, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Room 130

We were not attacking our "subjects" We were simply describing our classroom why did you delete our article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Room130 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

You were using the article to attack your teacher. As a veteran of drafting/AutoCAD classes, I know the feeling, but Wikipedia isn;t the appropriate forum for your views. Acroterion (talk) 18:00, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Taylor Britt

FWIW, it was also a hoax. Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I was running out of space in the deletion rationale. I'll nominate the images for deletion on Commons too. Acroterion (talk) 18:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Just for future reference, what would be a valid rationale for deletion for those images? Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:13, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
I use "out of project scope:personal images of a minor," which usually works. Acroterion (talk) 19:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

claudia beamish

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CSD#cite_note-Hasty-2 please restore i have only just created it and filling it out and notable under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:POLITICIAN —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirame (talk • contribs) 20:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Restored minus the initial copyright violation. In the future, please don't copy material from politicians' websites to start articles. It's easy enough to create a single well-composed article and use that as a template, rather than copying copyrighted material and changing it to a one-sentence stub that provides no context. Acroterion (talk) 20:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
sure i only had to click save as my browser was crashing otherwise i only put in my own wordings —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirame (talk • contribs) 06:16, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for Reverting Vandalism to my Homepage :) Floul1Talk To me 21:08, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks - it's Saturday night in the UK and the vandals are having their fun. Acroterion (talk) 21:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Acroterion

As you correctly point out in my talk page, my comments in the VegitaU talkpage weren't polite, so i delete them. Now, can I ask you why you delete my comments in the Talk:American Airlines Flight 77, being understood that this is a page for discussion. Thanks in advance. --Solde9 (talk) 14:33, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkpages are not platforms for personal opinions on the subject of the article: they are to be used for discussion of article improvement. Please take the time to find the timestamp for discussions: you appear to have been complaining about actions by VegitaU that were three years old, and you've been spamming the 9/11 pilots link all over the page in old discussions; if you have something new to say that relates directly to article improvement, please add it in a new topic at the bottom of the page.. In general, as I advised in my reply to one of your comments, advocacy organizations are not acceptable sources for anything but their own beliefs: they exist to promote a particular point of view and make no pretense of neutral, scholarly research. In particular, the 9/11 pilots group lacks credibility even among 9/11 conspiracy theorists. It is in no way an acceptable source except as documentation of a fringe group largely rejected by other fringe groups. Please do not spam the link, and please do not use Wikipedia as a forum for personal opinion. Acroterion (talk) 16:00, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I understand. I will not continue posting the link, but I am still believe they are not a fringe group. Thanks for informing me about the rules. --Solde9 (talk) 16:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

could you have a look at this users edits

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Derek_Mackay&diff=prev&oldid=429207843 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nirame (talk • contribs) 15:26, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

They certainly have a rather promotional tone: I assume this is Mr. Mackay or someone closely associated. A gentle expression of concern about WP:COI would probably be in order - their edits are much milder than many I've seen by politicians or their staff. Acroterion (talk) 15:53, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
thought that too given the schools info etc. though probably accurate if it is from the horses mouth theres probably no sources backing it all up. Yes i thought it was mild too no opposition bashing started(yet at least).Nirame (talk) 16:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I hate to sound cynical, but I'd agree that this is pretty restrained compared to some. Still, the additions may certainly be trimmed and rendered less glowing and more encyclopedic. Acroterion (talk) 16:03, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Medieval art

May I ask for your attention on this article? There is a RfC going on plus a noticeboard: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Johnbod_reported_by_User:Gun_Powder_Ma_.28Result:_.29. --Anneyh (talk) 15:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Canyons of the Teton Range

I just did a list/article on Canyons of the Teton Range...should it instead be Canyons in Grand Teton National Park? The reason I mention this is because all the real canyons are in the park and I intend to do a similar list for lakes, various animal/plant lists and related and they will be park specific....suggestions?--MONGO 19:44, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

While it's generally true that the big time canyons are in the park, there are some features on the back side/west side of the range, like Teton Canyon, and other features to the south around Teton Pass that are called canyons. I think you should stick to Canyons of the Teton Range and the few that aren't in the park can be so noted. Acroterion (talk) 19:55, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
That works...thanks for the input.--MONGO 10:33, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Garnett123456789

Thanks - I was just about to post at AIV to say I didn't think a block was necessary unless he returned to the charge. I hesitated whether to block, but I thought he had been rather BITE-ily met with warnings and no welcome, and deserved more explanation. I wish there was some way to explain to this sort of user when they register that if they think this is a free advertising platform they are in the wrong place. regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Your instinct was right - he posted the ad twice more, and I have now blocked. JohnCD (talk) 14:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
I've long been frustrated with the amount of spam from new users, and have occasionally succeeded in redirecting spammers into more-or-less productive activity, but it takes a lot of work and the success rate is low. I think they read an article about social media and think WP is like Facebook or Twitter. I usually start out with a level 2 warning rater than the red stop sign and give them a couple of chances, so my initial instinct (leading to the withdrawal of my block) was similar to yours. Unfortunately, this one was determined. At least we tried. Acroterion (talk) 15:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

How?

Boredsohere (talk) 15:52, 17 May 2011 (UTC)How can you ask for a speedy deletion? I really want to know because I have seen some random stuff. Or things without resorcous. Also, how can you ask for a block or ban because I have seen some people with obseen names...

You can find the criteria and templates for speedy deletion at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. Deletion should be approached with caution; if you tag things inappropriately, you may not be allowed to edit, and some of your recent contributions have been of a questionable nature (like Wowza, which I just deleted - if you don';t understand why it's inappropriate, you shouldn't be doing deletion tagging). For more general deletion, you can use Wikipedia:Proposed deletion. Again, you need to understand what you're doing first. If you see problematic names you can report them at WP:UAA; please read the account name policy (referenced on that page) first, and at all times, please avoid biting the newbies. Acroterion (talk) 16:01, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

What's wrong?

What were you talking about? I didt see any thing wrong. BiggBirdd (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC).

Talkback

Hello, Acroterion. You have new messages at Karl 334's talk page.
Message added 21:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RevDel request

Recent edits at Cathy Barry, just reverted by me. New editor apparently trying to ridicule a private person. Thanks. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:53, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Done, and warned the user. Acroterion (talk) 02:56, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, and thanks for handling the revdel on the other page he hit. I'd put in a request for oversight on that one, but it looks like you got to it first. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 03:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, that one was worse. OS can decide if they want to obliterate it . Acroterion (talk) 03:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Entry deletion

Hi there, I was wondering why you took off the link I added for social bookmarking sites? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrwebby1122 (talk • contribs) 03:47, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

In genera, a link should not be added unless the subject is notable. Since I deleted the article as lacking in an assertion of notability, I removed the link on the same grounds. As I noted on your talkpage, you're welcome to develop an article in your userspace, where you can sort out notability and referencing at your convenience. Acroterion (talk) 03:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Harold Camping

I thank you for your warning and I respect you administrating articles. However, I do not personally see my edit as vandalism. I do admit, however, that openly saying he is a "crazed lunatic" was the incorrect way to go about doing things. I believe in the merits of wikipedia and that it should strive for truth and excellence. There is absolutely no place in the current article about Camping that states science disagrees with his statements. Instead, the only mentions of disagreement are "As a result, some individuals have criticized him for 'date-setting'" and "they [a ministry] believe his entire method of Bible interpretation is flawed." If you would like, I can pen a section about the invalidity of his arguments from a fact-based scientific stance. If I cannot do it, someone most certainly should. Otherwise, wikipedia is no more than a medium for which inaccurate science can propagate through the minds of the public. When looking at a page such as homeopathy's, the second sentence reads "The collective weight of scientific evidence has found homeopathy to be no more effective than a placebo." Do you not think statements such as those made by Camping should get the same treatment? On a final note, 24 hours from now nearly the entire article I edited will be proven nonsense. The second sentence under this text box states "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." Yet, despite this, the second paragraph of his page states:

"He has used Bible-based numerology to predict dates for the end of the world.[2] His current end times prediction is that the Rapture will be on May 21, 2011 and that God will completely destroy the Earth and the universe five months later on October 21.[3][4] He had previously predicted that the Rapture would occur in September 1994.[5]"

The only verifiable thing regarding these predictions is that they are wrong, yet that statement is nowhere to be found. Tomorrow evening, or Sunday if you wish, please add the sentence "He was wrong about both of his previous predictions" to the opening paragraphs of his page.

GTownTrey (talk) 22:19, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

My only concern was the "crazed lunatic" change. Feel free to make your concerns known on the article talk page. Acroterion (talk) 00:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Re "The gay cowboy movie"

That was the slowest speedy deletion ever.

Can you please salt that page? It's a 4chan target today. --Σ ☭★ 00:05, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Protected now. Acroterion (talk) 00:08, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Advice please

Hello, Im an unclear as to why my post is a candidate for speedy deletion. It does refer to a company and website that offers a valuable and unique service for pet owners. This is significant to the millions of pet owners who, through internet forums, have expressed a desire for more information on natural, holistic veterinary medicines as well as their frustration at the lack of reliable information on the internet. Can you please explain to me why the entry is getting a tag for speedy deletion? This is my first entry and Im new to the wikipedia community so Im trying to learn the rules as quickly as i can. Is there some way I can (should) alter it so that it will be accepted. Im honestly not trying to advertise through wikipedia and that was never my intention but i do think its a very important entry. Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tennents (talk • contribs) 02:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I've removed your advertisement from this page and deleted the article, which was pure advertising. Wikipedia does not accept any form of advertising or promotion. You are discouraged from editing on subjects in which you have a direct interest, such as yourself or your business. See WP:SPAM and WP:COI. Acroterion (talk) 02:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Why did you delete a page I Made?

I created a page and you deleted it. I think you have no justification at all. Please reply. --TheDataMonster (talk) 09:26, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Please read WP:WEB for notability guidelines for web content. Acroterion (talk) 15:34, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Nice work

The Dam Barnstar
I hereby award you this damn dam barnstar for all your great work creating and expanding several articles on dams. Good job! By the way, you are the inaugural recipient.--NortyNort (Holla) 10:18, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! I was filling in material on the Minidoka Project to support Mongo's FA work on Grand Teton National Park and it kind of grew from there. The new dam(n) barnstar looks fine, by the way. Acroterion (talk) 15:36, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Your welcome. It is amazing how one thing (or redlink) leads to another, especially in this subject area. Thanks for the compliment on the barnstar, I am no graphic artist but I tried. It was, however, yanked off of WP:BARNSTAR though. Mostly because of my inability to read the entire page though.--NortyNort (Holla) 02:58, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Skullgirls Deleted Page

Hey there.

The "Skullgirls" page I created was a copy/paste of the page I wrote for Giant Bomb. I didn't think that counted as copyright infringement, since I wrote it in the first place.

How much will I need to edit in order to sidestep any such "plagarism" issues? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravidrath (talk • contribs) 19:42, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

In general, content may not be introduced from external websites unless the site explicitly is licensed under the same CC-by-SA copyright as Wikipedia's, or is public domain, and even then is considered bad practice. You should avoid citing your own work in any case: all material should be cited and sourced to independent third-party sources in major media, which also helps to establish WP:NOTE. Acroterion (talk) 19:47, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Black Hat PPC

I tried to create a new entry for Black Hat PPC. It's a term that is used among online marketers in the UK and the article was to explain what it was about and how it came to be. Could you let me know what you didn't like about the post and I'll amend it. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackHatters (talk • contribs) 21:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

You need to indicate how the term is notable according to WP:NOTE and WP:WEB by reference to independent third-party sources. If you want, I'll place the content into your userspace for you to develop and source. Acroterion (talk) 21:48, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

If you could do that it would be most appreciated. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackHatters (talk • contribs) 09:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.


The 3-tier diff and link series

Signpost

Category adds

Hoover Dam is not in a NPS unit. (most of the lake is, other than that very close to the dam, but that does not include the dam). I don't think Grand Coulee is either. Are you sure you are working from a reliable list?--Wehwalt (talk) 14:25, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I was unaware that Hoover Dam itself was not within the boundaries of LMNRA: I'll remove those and leave Lake Mead and FDR Lake in the categories. I'm contemplating some form of summary article on dams and reservoirs in U.S. National Parks (including proposed schemes), focusing on parks, proper, as opposed to the well-known national recreation areas. I had my doubts about Grand Coulee in particular and was just now looking around for some substantiation - cart before horse. Acroterion (talk) 14:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I think it is effectively an enclave within the LMNRA. Perhaps you could massage the name of the category a bit to include dams that impound lakes which are within NPS boundaries? I am not a dam expert but NortyNort and I brought Hoover Dam up to FA for the 75th last year and I helped him out a bit with Grand Coulee, so they are still on my watchlist.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:35, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
This brings up an issue of definition: Jackson Lake Dam, for instance, is solidly within Grand Teton National Park, but is owned and operated by the USBR, effectively an inholding. I'm not sure about O'Shaughnessy Dam in Yosemite - I assume the dam itself is owned by the City of San Francisco and has a property line around it. While the reservoirs are fairly easy to deal with, , I'm not entirely comfortable with excluding the dams from the "inside the park" category on the basis of property lines as opposed to geography - "in" vs. "within," I guess, which might be how the category should be worded. Any thoughts or suggestions? Acroterion (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
"in or adjacent to"? Avoid arguments that way.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:46, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
It's imprecise, but you're probably right; finding reliable sources, avoiding OR and avoiding arguments would seem to argue in that direction. Acroterion (talk) 14:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Imprecise, yes, but broad. Which will help anyone using the category.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:49, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
True, categories should avoid editorializing about content. Acroterion (talk) 14:51, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Just saw my watchlist explode and saw this conversation here. For a few reasons, I would say exclude dams from the category and maybe drop "dams" from the cat's name. Many of the dams are owned and operated by separate entities although they still might be under the Department of Interior. Many I see in Category:Dams and reservoirs in U.S. National Park Service units are USBR-owned. I don't have a list of which are within NPS units and it would take awhile to do the research. Another point is with the reservoir/dam article similarity argument that sometimes appears on Wikipedia. Only with dams in the U.S. do you often see a separate reservoir article here. In general, they are closely associated and I think just reservoirs in the category can help solve a few of the questions/problems above. You can still effectively categorize something associated with the dam. If the NPS doesn't own and operate the dam then it can be deduced that the dam has its own little "free zone" I think. I am about to call it a night and can look into this more tomorrow.--NortyNort (Holla) 14:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking "colocated with" too but that may be misconstrued as well.--NortyNort (Holla) 15:04, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

<undent>I'll pull the dams out, since the NPS owns no major dams. Apart from the technical issue of ownership, I do think some form of recognition/categorization of the issue of dams in national parks, and the symbiotic relationship between NRAs and dams/reservoirs should be addressed, somewhat complicated by the fact than not all national recreation areas are administered by the NPS. The tension between water rights and preservation is a major theme in NPS and USBR history that is understated, in my opinion, and I was trying to feel my way through it via the category, which is probably the wrong way to work through it. The word "colocated" has always given me hives as technobabble. There must be a way to figure this out, but in the meantime I'll scale back the cats. Acroterion (talk) 15:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I seem to remember that when I first visited Hoover Dam in 1996, they had a sign at the ticket window saying that they were not part of the recreation area and that the Golden Eagle Passport was not usable there.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I was there in 2003 and had an annual NPS pass; we would have used it had it been valid for dam tours, but I seem to recall that we had to pay, and that the visitor center and tour was a USBR operation. There was no NPS presence at the dam VC apart from perhaps a booth with a seasonal ranger. The main NPS VC is a couple of miles to the west. Acroterion (talk) 15:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
How about a separate and sub-category "Dams associated with (for, coupled with, of) reservoirs in U.S. National Park Service units" would help address the controversy?--NortyNort (Holla) 15:26, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Could be a possibility. I was grappling too with the matter of dams/reservoirs for non-NPS NRAs, so I think I'll have to diagram out how some kind of category tree might wok on a piece of paper. I believe I'll hold off until I've had lunch and feel smarter. Acroterion (talk) 15:29, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Reverting your own edits?

Hello. Why on earth did you revert all the valid edits you've recently made to all the dam articles? I don't see any reason to ruin those articles you had improved before. De728631 (talk) 15:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

See the conversation immediately above: I wanted to remove a category and forgot that I'd made the last bazillion contributions. Acroterion (talk) 15:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, be careful with using rollback. It's really only for fighting vandalism. The good old "undo" button does the job. I've already some of your reversions but you might still want to have a look at those articles. De728631 (talk) 15:29, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Actually, self-reverts are permissible, but can lead to problems per above. I've tidied up after myself. Acroterion (talk) 15:31, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Regarding deletion of Page Roadster diner

Hello you just speedily deleted the page I have created http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadster_diner  :) While writing the page I used the same structure used by another Lebanese restaurant chain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crepaway , since their page has not been deleted it seems weird that the entry which represents the other most famous lebanese diner chain is.

If you want me to rewrite the page again based on some other guidelines please just let me know.

Kindly let me know that you have responded to my request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdarine (talk • contribs) 19:57, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

You wrote the article as an advertisement, not as an encyclopedia article. I'm not opposed to an article on the topic, but it must be strictly non-promotional. While the Crepaway article is tagged as being written like an advertisement, it's not nearly as promotional as the Roadster Diner article was. I would not use Crepaway as an example of a good article to emulate. Please write any new version in an appropriately non-promotional manner, please provide verifiable andreliable sources, and please review WP:COI for issues on conflict of interest. Acroterion (talk) 22:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)


Thank you, I will try again :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdarine (talk • contribs) 11:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeay.me article/page

Hello,

I'd like to follow-up with you about recently added and deleted page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeay.me

My goal is to create a similar page as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blippy. Since it is my 1st wiki contribution I'm sure I missed some steps and it was deleted.

Would you please tell me what was the main reason of triggering deletion? Was it because it has too few information? Also, is it possible to delete it completely so it won't show that deletion message? Until I'll put together a better content.

Thank you in advance. Oct87 (talk) 04:08, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Oct87

There was no indication that the subject was notable. Blippy has been covered in major third-party media, conferring notability. See WP:WEB for information on notability guidelines for web content. You may delete the notice on your talk page, but please read it first, as it explains why the deletion took place. Acroterion (talk) 13:03, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

WTC7 talk page revert

Whatever your interests in promoting falsehood are, I cannot help but not you claim to be an architect. Not a structural engineer. If you had real knowledge on the subject ((Personal attack removed)) you would ask questions that need to be asked, such as why the 9/11 commission report did not mention WTC7 at all, or why if there has never been a steel framed building collapse due to fire how did three buildings (that were engineered to prevent this from happening) fail on the same day. Might i mention again both WTC1 and 2 were DESIGNED TO TAKE THE IMPACT OF A 707, FULLY LADEN WITH FUEL. Neither of the planes that did hit the towers had full tanks of fuel, nor would the resulting inferno be hot enough to weaken the steel. There are so many discrepancies within the 'official' reports that it would be downright ignorance to not follow them up. If wikipedia is supposed to support factual information freedom, do your duty as a moderator and inquire... 222.152.191.30 (talk) 03:04, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Note: Comment refactored with {{rpa}}. --The Σ talkcontribs 03:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
There are many forums on the Internet devoted to the Truther agenda; Wikipedia is not among them. Wikipedia is not an appropriate place to discuss conspiracy theories in general, except to the extent that these conspiracy theories are documented for their own sake. Wikipedia is not a place to right great wrongs, or to reveal information that is outside the mainstream of scholarly thought. Wikipedia does not publish original research, nor does it pursue or publish independent investigations. It is not my responsibility to pursue investigations: it is my responsibility to remove posts devoted to theorizing, as opposed to serious discussion of article improvement. I won't bother to correct the fallacious arguments you present: neither this page nor any other talkpage on Wikipedia is an appropriate forum, except to note that much of what you apparently believe has been shown to be untrue, and none of it is admissible in an encyclopedia based on mainstream sources. Resorting to personal attacks does not increase your credibility. Acroterion (talk) 04:22, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
If we only covered mainstream viewpoints, Wikipedia wouldn't have articles like 9/11_conspiracy_theories. Guideline & Policy Wonk (talk) 03:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Your point being? I know all about that article; I reverted vandalism from an anti-truther there today. Acroterion (talk) 03:39, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Page Deleted

The page I created called "Delaney's Dog Haus" was deleted by Phantomsteve on May 31, 2011 at 03:11 for "A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject (CSDH))" and I fixed it and added more information as I could about the company including references and saved it and at 03:24 on 31 May 2011 you deleted the page again for "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion", but I don't own this company nor am I involved with the company and there are many other restaurants that do the same thing as my articles did, but yet they haven't been deleted I request the page be restored. Please reply here and also on my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MBGuyCasey (talk • contribs) 03:38, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The article was obviously promotional from beginning to end, and was entirely unsuitable as an encyclopedia article. Whether or not it is your company is beside the point: Wikipedia is not a vehicle for press releases or promotion, whatever the source. "All hamburgers are hand-made and our french fries are seasoned with our own blend of seasoning. We are the only hotdog place around that delivers!!!" "Kevin even brought along Bill from New Jersey who has years of experience in the food services industry, so come on in and say hello!" "The price of the meal is $9.99 and comes with a drink." It was advertising, apart from the fact that it appears to be a non-notable business and could be (and was) speedy-deleted as no assertion of notability. Acroterion (talk) 03:51, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Some ass-hole deleted Karl Watsons page....He is the biggest black skater in the Bay Area ....Notability verified

Excuse me ....what about this posting fits criteria for speedy deletion? This Wiki that I have created is legitimate....about a notable person and I have provided references to prove his notability. Also it doesn't violate any copyrights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackmanii88 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Overlooking the personal attack in the section title (and in your edit summary when you posted the material), there was no credible assertion of notability. I read it all, twice, and just checked it again; all I got was that he is a prominent local skater who organizes youth events, eats wild fish, and seems like a decent guy. You need to tell us about his accomplishments as you would expect an encyclopedia article to be written. . I'm open to the possibility that Watson is notable, but the article did not explain how and reads like the obviously copied feature article it is, rather than as an encyclopedic biography. Please read WP:BIO; notability should be more than purely local and should be verifiable through multiple references in major media. There are lots of references to Watson on a Google search, but there are few in reliable Wikipedia-acceptable sources - see WP:RS - and we don't keep bios that aren't reliably sourced. I've run across this problem with snowboarders, who tend not to be covered so much by mainstream media either. I think a credible bio could be created, but sourcing will be a challenge.
The material was directly lifted from a copyrighted source, which quite clearly states at the bottom of the page "Copyright (WUN) Magazine. All Rights Reserved" Please stop posting cut/paste from copyrighted sources. Please note that you also appear to have a conflict of interest and should not be writing on this subject at all, or at least with greater care. Acroterion (talk) 02:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Fontenelle Dam

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:17, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

What the Heck?

Dude, I'm trying to set up a theory of Government and then you come waltzing in with your technicalities. Back off! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theman745 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Please redelete the page. CTJF83 00:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Quick Question

Acroterion, I am planning to edits and create a few pages on American architects and see from your Contributions and User Page that you have considerable experience in that area, besides being an architect. Can you tell me, based on WP preference for using Prose in pages, are pages about currently living architects supposed to be written entirely in prose, or, is it accepted that they can be part prose and part bulleted building lists (i.e., lists of major buildings designed by the architect with city, country, year completed). If there is a particular WP rule that applies to using lists for Architects, I would appreciate knowing about it, because I want to be sure that I am doing this correctly. Thank you in advance for your help. Cheers!DavidSycamore (talk) 16:08, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

It depends on who you ask. For my part, I would want to see a substantial section of prose, followed by a selective list of the architect's most prominent works. I think that works best for mist readers. When it's somebody really prominent or prolific, I'd go with all-prose and a separate "List of buildings designed by Architect X." That's what I did with Frank Pierce Milburn and List of buildings by Frank Pierce Milburn, for instance. The only policy I know of is at WP:Manual_of_Style#Bulleted_and_numbered_lists, but I'm sure there's other material discussing this that I'm not aware of. Acroterion (talk) 16:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Why Deleted?

Hi,

I recently started a page for a new company called ZangZing that was deleted. It's a company that was recently covered in the Wall Street Journal, Techcrunch and other places...

WSJ article - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703509104576329272101144568.html Techcrunch article - http://zan.gy/kmLSMG

Thanks!

Joseph — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ansanelli (talk • contribs) 20:41, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The article was deleted because it made no assertion of notability. The WSJ reference is useful, although it doesn't go into enough depth to be a very useful source, but multiple references of that kind will go a long way to establishing notability. I'd suggest that you work in a user subpage, such as User:Ansanelli/sandbox and develop the article, including a credible assertion of notability backed up by references in third-party media. See WP:WEB, WP:CORP and WP:RS for additional guidance. Acroterion (talk) 21:02, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:58, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I would like to publish an article on wikipedia. I am the author of this article that is already published on my website. What is the procedure concerning the copyright ? This request concern the article "business in Cambodia". My website is www.cambodia-business.com. You can contact me at contact@cambodia-business.com Thanks in advance for your help, Pierre-Francois Santerne — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pfsanterne (talk • contribs) 12:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

While the article was deleted as copyright infringement, the primary issue is not the copyright. The article I deleted was promotional in nature and intention, aimed at business promotion in Cambodia. It was unsourced and contained no significant encyclopedic content. You are welcome to write an encyclopedia article that is appropriately sourced to third-party publications. Wikipedia does not accept advertising or promotion, and is not a free webhost for content that you're hosting on your own website for promotional purposes. Please read WP:RS, WP:V and WP:SPAM, as well as WP:COI, since you appear to have a conflict of interest in this matter. Acroterion (talk) 12:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Will it be deleted?

Hi! I would like to create a page called 'Backyard Monsters' It is about a game on the internet. If I create it, will it be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hz.tiang (talk • contribs) 14:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

If it hasn't received coverage in major media, it probably will be deleted. Browser-based games and Internet server-based games are only notable if there are multiple references in reliable sources. You might want to start in a user subpage, such as User:Hz.tiang/sandbox and develop it there until you've got it sourced and referenced. Acroterion (talk) 15:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Concerning the discussion on Paul Revere

I'd hardly say the reverting is blind, the article has suffered much since June 5th. Compare current sections to the article as it was prior to June 5th, and how the article had remained at length prior to. Compare sourcing of the article now to then, and ask yourself how much of it is verifiable. I've added more to the discussion page for the article as well, please read that too Scryer_360 (talk) 16:14, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Then deal with the issues that need to be dealt with rather than throwing out baby and bathwater together. I don't disagree that it needs to be worked over in detail, but reverting back to a previous version simply because of a news event is not what the wiki is about. Removal of unsourced, dubious, NPOV or UNDUE are appropriate at anytime, not just reverting back to some supposedly stable version. Acroterion (talk) 16:38, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Appreciate it. I am out of patience with this person, and was just now trying to figure out how to find someone uninvolved. Antandrus (talk) 00:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Wow, I was going to make the same post about that Nickelbackrules guy. Thanks for taking care of him, he has caused a lot of trouble. Sergecross73 msg me 01:57, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Not worth our time to try and argue; it's pretty much block on sight from now on. Acroterion (talk) 01:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Assignment

Thank you very much for your consideration. I will spend more time on the tutorials for now and try again with a different topic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leightakemoto777 (talk • contribs) 12:05, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

You need to leave me alone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you bother me again, I will permanently block you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiman1717 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

And why are you prepared to do this? Acroterion (talk) 18:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I assume it has to do with the deletion of Kaitlin McClain, which consisted solely of those words. Acroterion (talk) 18:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
That would be my guess!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!MONGO 19:05, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Well played, and keep doing a good job. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiman1717 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

New Scout Generation

Acroterion, you should not have speedied my article New Scout Generation. It's not about an organization, it's about my generation. Just like we have articles on Baby Boomers, Generation X, etc. It does nto qualify for a speedy. Please undelete it. Madison '95 (talk) 02:31, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

It's about a group, thus a candidate for A7, and it appears to be entirely original research and opinion. Do you have any sources that indicate that this group exists, and that it is notable? Acroterion (talk) 02:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes, Strauss & Howe wrote a lot about how conservative this generation is. And I checked out A7, "group" seems to mean club or organization, not generation. Madison '95 (talk) 02:37, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
You need to make a reasonable argument for notability, you need to back it up with multiple references, and you need to avoid opinionating. I'd be happy to place it in a sandbox for you to develop further: User:Madison '95/sandbox. Acroterion (talk) 02:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Acroterion, original research (non-criterion 3 on Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion) is not a reason for speedy feletion, nor is being a neologism (non-criterion 4). A7 refers to a band, club, company, etc. This article is definitely original research (and bad OR at that), but it should be undeleted and put up at AfD (where I'll gladly vote delete :) ). Guideline & Policy Wonk (talk) 03:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree: I didn't delete it as OR, I deleted it as A7 - non-notable group, then userfied it for the editor to develop it if they can. Since you've been lurking this long, you'll know that userfying is kinder and more productive than a deletion debate. I'd also note that it's an advocacy piece and could be G11'd. Acroterion (talk) 03:21, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Your wish is granted: it's at AfD, having been re-created again. No sources at all to connect this to scouting: I remain mystified as to where that came from. If there's a notable group at all, it's Millenials or Generation 9/11, both of which need lots more sources to support notability.Acroterion (talk) 14:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Been using Wikipedia since 2005 and only now created a userpage? That is unusual And then you show up here, out of the blue?--MONGO 03:24, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Did you even read what you just deleted?

I created an article about the death of a teenager in New York that has acted as a significant conduit for bicycling and trafficking laws. However, you deleted it without even looking at it, claiming that "no explanation for its significance" was given. --Arisedrew Rises Again (talk) 16:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I did read it. Please read WP:BLP1E, which I noted in the deletion summary. There is no significance stated concerning this individual. The discussion associated with her death might be notable, but not the person, i.e., "the death of a teenager", but absent any other distinction, the individual should not have an article. You m ay wish to review WP:BLP in genjeral, as it's one of the most critical policies on WP. Acroterion (talk) 16:05, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me

Under what criteria do you remove a completely valid neologism from the encyclopedia after mere minutes have passed? It is in fact a valid and sourceable/attributable word. Hardly vandalism when we have other neologisms in the encyclopedia. -- Avanu (talk) 02:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Valid? The reference was spurious, and the content amounts to nonsense. "A noun, verb, adjective, adverb, or any other part of speech that can be used smurfily to smurf smurfs" belongs at Uncyclopedia, not Wikipedia. The least you could do would be to provide a reference that actually references smurfism/smurfspeak/whatever it is, as opposed to some unrelated reference to Gargamel. Acroterion (talk) 02:19, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Deleted Entry -- Printology

Hello,

I created an entry for Printology in which it was deleted by you for: ‎ (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: spam for Innovex under guise of article)

We are fine with your reasoning, and would like to recreate the page, but without the last paragraph explaining how INNOVEX coined the term.

How would we go about doing this, and where is our original entry so we can use that minus the last paragraph relating it to INNOVEX.

Printology is a trademarked term we often use and would like the definition on Wikipedia so interested customers can search and find out what it means.

Thanks in advance, Alinchitz Alinchitz (talk) 20:02, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

If the term is trademarked to Innovex, I question how you can create an appropriate article. All content must have multiple, neutral, independent sources, so it seems to me that such a trademarked term wold be very unlikely to meet those requirements, and that any article will amount to a thinly-veiled advertisement. Please remember that under Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy, you are strongly discouraged from writing on subjects in which you have a direct interest, or which concern your employers. Acroterion (talk) 20:05, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanx

I've given Karl my sincere and abject apologies, Karl. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:16, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

'Salright; I've nearly blocked half the newpage/username patrollers at one time or another myself. Acroterion (talk) 20:18, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

valleyview middle school nj

why did you deleate it?Jcounterman98 (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2011 (UTC)jcounterman98

Because the article had more to do with you than the school, and because it's not appropriate for children to place information about themselves on Wikipedia, or for that matter, anywhere on the Internet. You needs to be careful about your personal privacy. Acroterion (talk) 16:31, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

World Trade Center

You reverted a non-destructive IP without providing an edit summary. As a general rule, please explain all reverts. I make an exception when I see users doing it with vandalism, but otherwise it reeks of article ownership. I'd appreciate an explanation, because that will help me understand why I shouldn't re-revert it. i kan reed (talk) 19:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I reverted a poorly-worded, uncapitalized interjection. I would agree that an edit summary woulod have been appropriate, but sometimes I fall short. Would you consider that article ownership? Do you think that it's appropriate to put it back just because an edit summary wasn't used, to make a point? Acroterion (talk) 20:02, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Nope, I don't consider that ownership, but without the summary, how was I to tell? i kan reed (talk) 20:05, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Glacier View Dam

Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Power/mation Article

Hello Acroterion,

I would like to know why this article was taken down when it held no opinions and was only informative as to what this company does, history etc.? Is there a way I can put it up so that it will not be taken down?

- Imperatordavus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imperatordavus (talk • contribs) 14:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

It was a direct copy of copyrighted material intended (as corporate websites are) for advertising. Wikipedia doesn't accept advertising, and you are strongly advised to avoid editing on a subject in which you have an obvious conflict of interest. If you wish to write an article about the company, please review WP:COI in detail, and then assemble independent sources that support notability and which provide independent sourcing on the topic. Remember that Wikipedia content is free, meaning it can be adapted and re-used for any purpose, with no control granted to the uploader. As such, it is almost always a bad idea to release a copy of a corporate website into something very close to the public domain. You have a copyright notice on your website for a reason. Why would you give that up? Acroterion (talk) 14:40, 17 June 2011 (UTC)


User 75.42.214.68

This user added some strage stuff tot he article for Congressman Louis Gohmet. Strange even by that honorable gentleman's standard. I deleted it pending a properly formatted cite, but thought I ought to let someone know. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 12:14, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know that it's much stranger than many of his other utterances, but it's not very well presented in any case. Acroterion (talk) 13:29, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Someone is still at it. Editor is now calling himself. Jdblack326 Paul, in Saudi (talk) 03:46, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

malicious edits - Jeff Andrus

I think most people (including Wikipedia guidelines) would agree that well documented corrections about non-controversioal subjects that are reverted time-after-time-after-rtime by the same person are malicious.

Wikipedia itself says:

Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting patent nonsense into a page. Vandalism is prohibited. While editors are encouraged to warn and educate vandals, warnings are by no means necessary for an administrator to block.

Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Edit warring over content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, detrimental but well-intentioned, and vandalizing. Mislabelling good-faith edits as vandalism can be considered harmful.

Upon their discovery, revert clearly vandalizing edits. Then warn the vandalizing editor. Notify administrators of vandalizing users who persist despite warnings, and administrators should intervene to protect content and prevent further disruption by blocking such users from editing. When warranted, accounts whose main or only use is obvious vandalism or other forbidden activity may be blocked even without warning.

This is what user Bbb23 has been doing time-after-time-after-time to this article. What would you call this person's action and how would you address their actions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maddee moo (talk • contribs) 22:09, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Removal of poorly-cited material in biographies is not vandalism. The material you added appeared to be sourced largely to iMDb, which is not accepted on Wikipedia as a reliable source. Removal of such material is not vandalism. Please reconsider your approach to interaction with other editors, and please use the talkpage to discuss article improvement. That's what it's there for. Acroterion (talk) 22:12, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

IMDb isn't the only source I used. It is, however, the source used for film since IMDb is the de facto standard for any information of film. In addition, IMDb actually has paid editors who thoroughly verify any information submitted. But his date of death was sourced to a funeral home. And I still think it was vandalism because this person obviously has some agenda. And I will discuss it on the talk page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maddee moo (talk • contribs) 22:17, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Ice Paradise

As you know You deleted the new page Ice paradise after claiming it was a inaprropriate page. The new micronation Ice paradise is now very real. I am here to imform you that this micronation is real and I have created it and to make it official I have sent an informative letter to every country claiming Antarctica to let them know that I am here now. I would like to put my page on wikipedia so it can be online and not on some other website people don't trust. I would appreciate if you would let me do this Jayson368 (talk) 23:20, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Jayson368

As you know, Wikipedia requires that subjects assert and document notability, and be verifiable by reference to reliable sources. If and when your micronation receives significant coverage in major press outlets, I'm certain someone will write an article on the subject. As Supreme Potentate, you would, of course, have a conflict of interest in the matter and would be discouraged from writing on the subject. Acroterion (talk) 23:36, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Lee Design Group

Just an FYI, the editor left a note for you requesting clarification on the deletion of the article. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:27, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I've left them a note. Acroterion (talk) 12:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject:West Virginia

Hello, I'm Nascar1996. I am trying to revive the project. I see you are one of our members, and wondered if you would like to remain as a member. Your help is appreciated. --Nascar1996 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Sure, happy to help. My work has primarily been in the area of historic properties. I'm willing to to article assessment on any topic; have you identified a particular need, or just a general apathy? Acroterion (talk) 21:57, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
I haven't identified a particular need, but if you know any other editor who edits West Virginia related topics, please ask them to become a member. Thanks. --Nascar1996 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
I'll ask around, and maybe do some article assessment. Acroterion (talk) 22:05, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again. --Nascar1996 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Setting up an informational page

Hello -

I'm trying to setup an information wiki about ElectroCraft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runamuck83 (talk • contribs) 19:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd advise you to read advice on creating your first article. All subjects must satisfy notability guidelines, which in practice requires significant documentation in major independent publications. Advertising is not permitted on Wikipedia, nor is direct copying from outside sources. Acroterion (talk) 19:28, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Revision delete request

Could you please remove this and its subsequent reversion from public view on my user page's revision history. It clearly meets criteria #3 for redaction. Thank you.--JayJasper (talk) 20:18, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. I'll keep an eye on the IP. Acroterion (talk) 20:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you kindly.--JayJasper (talk) 20:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Melchedizek

Hello Acroterion, I attempted to Create the page "The Divine Order of Melchizedek" unfortunatley using the same original material I added to Wikipedia on 06/10/2011. Someone copied my orignal material and used it on their website and now I am unable to use my own original material. If you view my history of contributions you will see this. Not sure what I need to do to get this corrected, please help. Thank you, Hotrodicus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotrodicus (talk • contribs) 03:29, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

That sometimes happens. I will point out that the article lacked context and did not make any assertion of notability at all, a crucial point if it is to be retained. You stated that the order was created in January 2011, which is a rather brief period of existence. Please document that the organization is notable in accordance with WP:NOTE, as no assertion of notability is a speedy deletion criterion as well. I've removed the identical text from the parent article, as it is unsourced and apparently not notable. Please do not replace it. I strongly advise working in your userspace first, at User:Hotrodicus/sandbox; please remember that Wikipedia isn't to be used for promotion of an otherwise non-notable group. Acroterion (talk) 03:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

okay thank you for now re-deleting my orignal post I referred to, you obviously found it. I will provide proof of this order and re-post. Sorry to waste your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotrodicus (talk • contribs) 03:42, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

It is a notable group mentioned in the bible... if you've heard of that? Not trying to promote some group, just the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotrodicus (talk • contribs) 03:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for my fustration, I hope you can understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotrodicus (talk • contribs) 03:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

A group mentioned in the bible was founded in January of this year? Acroterion (talk) 11:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Sue Manteris deletion

I am confused... I entered information on Sue Manteris (who was already listed on the KSNV TV page as a notable former news anchor) last week, and went in today to create a page on her bio and photograph. When I did so, it was deleted because she was "not notable." I notice that several other former newscasters for this NBC affiliate in Las Vegas have their own pages. That is what I was trying to create. I also resourced the lawsuit filed on her behalf in Federal Court with the docket number, but all of this has been deleted.

How do I get the info back on to Wikipedia? If she's notable enough for a mention as a former anchor, why is she not notable enough for her own reference page like the others?

The lawsuit she filed claims ethnic, age and gender bias against the TV station.

Thank you,

Chasm1945 Chasm1945 (talk) 14:56, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

All you did was post her resume, which conveys no assertion of notability at all. All articles must stand on their own, and biographies must be appropriately referenced. As I noted on your talkpage, you are welcome to create an appropriately sourced article that deals with any third-party coverage that might lend notability. Television personalities are not automatically notable, but I believe based on your talkpage note that Ms. Manteris passes that bar: but it must be asserted in the article: a simple resume is not sufficient, particularly when it is unreferenced. I am willing to help you with formatting of references and so forth: I suggest you create a draft in your userspace at User:Chasm1945/sandbox where I can help you with referencing. Acroterion (talk) 15:02, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
A quick search shows a lot of sources: it shouldn't be hard to write a short, referenced framework for a real article with a solid assertion of notability. Please remember that you may not copy material into Wikipedia under most circumstances, and that if you have a picture, you must own the rights; you can't copy images you find on the Internet to Wikipedia. You must wrtie the article in your own words from sources. Acroterion (talk) 15:16, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I have submitted the revision and posted it on the sandbox page. Is this OK? Also, how do I upload a photo of her to accompany the page? Thanks Chasm1945 (talk) 16:15, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

The edits you did look fine. I have a high-quality color photo I uploaded this morning (which may not be there anymore) taken by a pro photog in Boulder City, Nevada named Alan Goya. We have full rights to the photo, and I properly credited him with the photo byline. What resources do you want me to put in the sandbox? I got all of the information from Sue herself.
Thanks Chasm1945 (talk) 16:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
The photograph is still there (you can insert the image by placing [[File:Sue Manteris 6-10-11.png|thumb|right|220px]] at the head of the article), but it might be best to provide confirmation from Mr. Goya that use on Wikipedia projects is acceptable; instructions are at COM:OTRS. As for sourcing, Ms. Manteris is a primary source, and although I'm sure it's all correct, everything must be sourced to secondary sources that have been published. That means news articles, magazines, feature articles, etc. Personal communications are not verifiable, so they can't be used. I assume at some point in her career she's been the subject of a feature article in a newspaper? I see a lot of news sources (that specifically mention her litigation) by Googling. Since you appear to be closely associated with Ms. Manteris, you should review WP:COI for advice on editing under such circumstances. I don't see a problem in this particular case, but there's a lot of information on how to edit constructively when the subject is a personal acquaintance or colleague. Acroterion (talk) 17:07, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Back to Sandbox?

How do I get back to the Sandbox to put the photo in and sources re Sue Manteris? I also confirmed the photog says the photo is in the public domain. How do I attribute that? I have endeavored to ensure that there are nbo conflicts of interest since this is a matter of a Federal lawsuit, and I have stuck to the public allegations. Thanks. Chasm1945 (talk) 18:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Photog permission forthcoming

Thanks for your patience... this is a new experience for me. I have asked the photographer to email to Wikipedia his permission and how he wants his credit line to the email addrss for permission at Wikipedia. I asked him to include the photo file name for connecting the dots. I'm sure I will have more questions once the permission goes through.

Chasm1945 (talk) 18:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

We're happy to help; WP has a fairly steep learning curve, so we all end up knowing more about copyright, copyleft, wikimarkup and a variety of other issues than we expected when we signed up. Acroterion (talk) 18:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

RevDel request

For recent IP edit, that I reverted, at Celebrity sex tape. No encyclopedic value, appears intended as ridicule of a private person, who'd be recognizable to those that know him from the information given. Thank you. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Acroterion (talk) 23:46, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
You can get faster revdeletion by using the dedicated IRC channel: #wikipedia-en-revdel connect --The Σ talkcontribs 23:56, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
True, but not everybody hangs out on IRC. I don't - probably for the same reasons I don't text; the fragmentary threads are too irritating and distracting. Acroterion (talk) 11:57, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Sue Manteris Photo Permission

Hi. The photog emailed his permission and credit line to the WP email permission address late yesterday. I just updated "News Operation" section for KSNV to reflect the final broadcast for Sue. I've added her photo to the Sandbox entry I created and you edited. How do I now post that on the line entry that shows Sue as a former news anchor for KSNV ("Notable Former On-Air Staff" toward the bottom of the station's entry on WP). Can a link be created on her name? (Sophia Choi is an example. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chasm1945 (talk • contribs) 13:24, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

The photog for the Sue Manteris photo has re-submitted his permission, using the WIkipedia form and format, and emailed it back to WP. What do I do now? The photo is on the my Sandbox, and all appears ready to launch. Please advise what my next steps are. Thanks. Chasm1945 (talk) 13:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Go ahead and add it to the article: I left instructions on image formatting in our previous conversation up the page. Do you have three or four good references researched that can back up the biographical information in the article? The lawsuit's easily documented: it's right at the top of a Google search. If you do, you can drop the raw urls at the bottom onf your sandbox page and I'll try to format them for you. Acroterion (talk) 13:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Photo is In.

I've added the photo and credit lines, and added three references to the biography as sources. However, I keep getting a message saying it needs "references," which I have added. I don't understand this. Thanks. Chasm1945 (talk) 22:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Acroterion. You have new messages at Eric567's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sue Manteris page

Thanks again... will I need to do anything else, or will you post it as a link to her name under former TV news anchors on the KSNV-DT page? Is there a way to include GOYAphotography as the credit for the color portrait of her on that page?Chasm1945 (talk) 15:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

You can move (or copy) the content to article space under the correct title, then link it at KSNV. The best place for photographer's credits is on the description tag for the photograph itself at Wikimedia Commons, where it was uploaded. That way, if it's used somewhere else, the credit goes with it, effectively hyperlinked. Text credits generally aren't used, since the link from the photo source page can do it better. Acroterion (talk) 15:50, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Sue Manteris Info Deleted (Again!)

Dear Chasm1945,


I completed the posting this morning of all the information that had been approved by you, only to get the following email from another editor at Wikipedia. Can you please tell me what I need to do to get this info posted? It has been a long week in terms of editing, referencing, getting permissions etc., only to find some other editor has now chosen to delete the work. Please advise what I need to do to get this info "up there" for good? Here's the latest message:

Chasm1945 (talk) 14:15, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

The Wikipedia page "User talk:Chasm1945" has been changed on 26 June 2011 by MikeWazowski, with the edit summary: Notification: speedy deletion nomination of Sue Manteris. (TW)

See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chasm1945&diff=0&oldid=436145623 for all changes since your last visit. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chasm1945 for the current revision.

To contact the editor, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MikeWazowski

Note that additional changes to the page "User talk:Chasm1945" will not result in any further notifications, until you have logged in and visited the page. 

            Your friendly Wikipedia notification system

More re Sue Manteris Page

I am totally confused now as to what to do. I have complied with everyone's requests re documentation, referencing, citing etc., and getting permissions... who is in charge of this editing process? I have one, Acroterion, saying everything is OK, and another, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MikeWazowski) deleting all the work that has been done. Are both people on the same sheet of music?

What more do I need to do? And please, only ONE person respond so as to not further confuse me. You've got a marvelous tool here which I would like to contribute to (and nothing here is "copyrighted": it is all in the public domain, self-contained, and documented). If I had known it would be this disastrous, I would have never started, but I have invested so much time and effort into this, and jumped through all of these hoops that it would be foolish to give up now.

Thank you once again.Chasm1945 (talk) 20:00, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I didn't give you carte blanche to copy copyrighted material onto a free-content website. If the text exists elsewhere under copyright, it either has to be expressly released under the Creative Commons copyleft via OTRS in the same manner as the photograph, or the text on Wikipedia must be substantially rewritten so as not to infringe on the existing copyright. Since it appears that the text has been published elsewhere under copyright, the simplest thing to do would be to rewrite it so it doesn't infringe. It's not at all hard, and you haven't lost any work. Had you made it plain that you'd directly copied the text, I'd have told you before: there are notices to that effect every time you save: "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." right under the edit window. The content you copied is accompanied by an explicit copyright notice: "Content copyright 2011. MERIT Media Relations. All rights reserved." It is therefore not in the public domain, and may not be used unless the copyright owner releases it, something their corporate counsel is unlikely to recommend. It should therefore be rewritten from the sources you've collected. You are in charge of the editing process, and it is your responsibility to avoid copyright violations. Acroterion (talk) 21:23, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps this might help clarify the situation: everything written by MERIT Media Relations was written by me: I amItalic text Merit Media Relations. That is my company, and I am therefore giving Wikipedia permission to include something I wrote. I am the public relations companyhandling the announcement of the lawsuit, the drafting of Sue Manteris' biography and the producer for the photo shoot, shot bvy Goya Photography. Merit Media Relations is located in las Vegas, Nevada, phone <redacted>... that phone will come directly into my office. Does this help the situation? Chasm1945 (talk) 01:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

You'll need to make the same declaration via OTRS, as was done with the photograph, from an email account associated with that company. No declarations here or via phone are acceptable substitutes per WP policy. See the instructions at WP:DCM, in the section "Granting us permission to copy material already online." I'd strongly advise that you run this past your corporate counsel first: you're giving up rights that you may not wish to relinquish, and since you're a public relations firm (I need not remind you of your conflict of interest problem?), it seems to me a simple task to rewrite the text instead so that it doesn't infringe. It can be trimmed a little bit at the same time and made more encyclopedic in tone. I'm sorry this seems so involved, but it's done with the intention of safeguarding personal and intellectual property rights, and is absolutely necessary to keep the wiki from turning into a copyright lawyer's dream/nightmare. Acroterion (talk) 01:59, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Dylithiumpunk...why delete?

Hello and i am new. I wished to ask why a page I just submitted was deleted. It was my desire to make a page for a term I have been suing for a while in the field of Star trek fan films to facilitate easier means to describe their presentation and faithfullness to the time and period they are emulating in their presentation.

Thank you for consideration...

Robert Simmons ( Robert Simmons100 (talk) 03:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)) Starship Ajax ( In pre-production )

It appears to have appeared in one blog, yields a whole two Google hits (to that blog), and has no currency or use in major media. Please read WP:NOTE and WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not for terms you've coined, nor is it a place to popularize such neologisms. Acroterion (talk) 03:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Revises Sue Mantaris material

Per your suggestion, I have revised the entry on Sue's page. Please let me know if I am OK on this. Thanks.Chasm1945 (talk) 15:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Sue Manteris Update

Thanks... what's the next thing I need to do?Chasm1945 (talk) 18:19, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Check very carefully to see that there's no direct copy or close paraphrase so the copyright bots don't see it and tag for deletion; even a lingering common phrase can be a problem, so read it several times against the Merit bio. Having done that, move it into article space. Assuming you've removed the problems that caused to copyright deletion, it should be fine. The sourcing relies heavily on the Merit page, which really should be sourced to a third-party publication, if you can find something, but I think notability is established and the article is tolerably sourced. Acroterion (talk) 18:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Move into "article space"?

I did one last check on the wording, and I don't see any similarities for the copyright bots to pick up. How do I move it into "article space" from the edit mode? Chasm1945 (talk) 22:04, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

You can either just copy it into to the main encyclopedia space by copy/paste to the proper title, or you can use the "move" function - I'm not sure where it is on the regular interface - mine's a bit customized, but it should be one of the drop-down choices at the top of the viewing (not the editing) screen on you draft page. If it's not there, it's in the column at left. Acroterion (talk) 22:07, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Recreate the Comm100 page

You deleted the Comm100 Page with the reason: article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject.

I think you aren't familar with this category. Comm100's Alexa Traffic Rank now is 3753 (Global). And Daily Reach (Estimated percentage of global internet users who visit a domain) is much higher than that of any businesses in the same categoy, like Live Person and LIVECHAT Software. You can check it at: http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/comm100.com#trafficstats

If visitors' choice cannot indicate the importance of the subject, what else can?

Please re-create the Comm100 page to make Wikipedia more perfect.

Powershelled — Preceding unsigned comment added by Powershelled (talk • contribs) 02:47, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

"Visitors' choice" is not a criterion for notability on Wikipedia. Please read WP:CORP: you'll need a credible assertion of notability, substantiated by non-trivial (as in not a press release or a passing mention) in multiple sources in independent media. Acroterion (talk) 02:52, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I am not very sure about the credible assertions of notability, substantiated by non-trivial in multiple sources in independent media. So I tried to find some sample articles and I found http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIVECHAT_Software.

This article has 7 references:

1. An article on a multimedia platform about "CP sold its entire stake in Livechat Software for nearly zl.2 million on Feb. 1 as part of its strategy of having fewer companies but larger individual transactions." I have Canada Federal Corporation Information on ic.gc.ca in my article. 2. I only found "Your search for GADU.WA returned 0 public company results". 3. An article on the company's own blog 4. A product of the company is listed in another commercial company. I listed the open source product that is listed in the world's larget two open source platforms. 5. What kawasaki recommended is the report of the commercial company. And can this be a reference? 6&7. Partner of MySQL of Red Hat. I listed the partner of Microsoft.

I am confused. Please help.

PowerShelled — Preceding unsigned comment added by Powershelled (talk • contribs) 04:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi, Powershelled. Unfortunately, just because other similar articles exist is not a reason for keeping an article. --The Σ talkcontribs 05:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, my... Thank you for the info, Σ. Hi Acroterion, do you have any suggestion on the credible assertions of notability, substantiated by non-trivial in multiple sources in independent media? Thanks. PowerShelled

None of the sources you listed are sufficient: passing mention isn't enough, blogs are unacceptable as reliable sources, and rankings give no context or basis for any detailed information. What you want are significant articles in places like the Wall Street Journal, Business Week, Financial Times, New York Times, etc that focus specifically on the company, its activities and its character. Publications of lesser stature would be helpful as well, but those are the gold standard for establishing corporate notability. As Σ says, just because other articles are poorly or marginally sourced does not establish a precedent: many organizations try to use Wikipedia for promotion, and some succeed, but all articles must stand on their own, and we must insist on appropriate sourcing. See WP:V, WP:RS, WP:CORP, etc. Acroterion (talk) 11:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Acroterion. I will modify the article and get back to you later. Thanks. Have a nice one. :-) PowerShelled--Powershelled (talk) 02:08, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Ranskin Deletion

Hi, I have noticed that you have deleted a very very important page, 'Ranskin' Please undelete it because it means a lot to some people. The word has to get through to people about 'Ranskin' pleeeeeaaasssssssssseeeeeee. Thanks,

) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.177.2.212 (talk) 08:45, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia isn't a place for you to promote words you've made up or hoax religions. Acroterion (talk) 11:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Sue Manteris Page

I moved the page onto the main section for KSNV last night. This morning, it is still visible... does that mean we're good to go? Or will I suddenly get a message saying it has been deleted? I would like to send the page to others for their reading, but am afraid to in that it might be deleted. Please advise... thanks for all your help and patience in my newness to WP. Chasm1945 (talk) 12:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Generally it will be flagged immediately if it's a copyright problem, and I don't see it as a candidate for speedy deletion. It might be a candidate for a deletion debate, but I doubt it. You can certainly send the link to people: I don't think you're going to jinx it. Glad to help. While we discourage PR firms from editing on behalf of their clients, it's not completely impossible, with some care and understanding of the WP ecosystem. Just remember that now that you've released it into the wild, so to speak, it's hard to control. Still, correction of obvious untruths (as opposed to sourced, but unfavorable material that is not undue weight) and modest updates are always appropriate. Acroterion (talk) 14:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Discussion Page.

OK... understand. Thanks! Chasm1945 (talk) 14:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks very much for your swift AIV action. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 15:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Alpabetical Order?

I noticed that Sue Manteris' name has been added to the "Las Vegas TV anchors" and "Americans of Indian descent" pages. However, in each case, her entry is placed in the "S" file for Sue, rather than for Manteris in the "M" file. Can this be switched by me or yourself? Thanks, Chasm1945 (talk) 16:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I added a defaultsort tag, which I should have done when I added the categories: thanks for noticing and letting me know. Acroterion (talk) 16:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Auto Order.

No problema... thanks again for all your patient help!Chasm1945 (talk) 17:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Ranskin

Please undelete this page, it's actually a religion and it's extremely o'f'fensive that you deleted it and are calling it a hoax. please and thank'you'. Alice Skinner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.22.23.9 (talk) 23:25, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Ranskin

This page has been deleted, and our followers are unsure why. This is very offensive and we would like this page back. No its not a 'Hoax' as you called it, it is real to us. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elizaostler (talk • contribs) 23:32, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm certain that you'll therefore be able to prove its existence and notability by reference to multiple references in major media in accordance with Wikipedia policy per WP:V and WP:RS. Should you not be able to do so, I'll remind you that Wikipedia isn't a place to publish things you've made up, and you'll understand that our feelings are hurt when you try to introduce falsehoods. Acroterion (talk) 00:27, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Restore page about VOZAX

File:Http:///www.vozax.com/photos/images/logo.jpg


VOZAX is online photo sharing service with flash slide show creator application ,developed by me . i am 17 years old student from Pakistan. This type of website developed first time in pakistan so it is very important locally.

Please restore its introduction page. Regards, Mehran Fida email :admin@vozax.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.39.3.183 (talk) 05:16, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Has this website received significant coverage in national Pakistani or international newspapers? Please review WP:WEB and WP:CORP for notability guidelines on web and corporate articles. You are welcome to develop the article in a sandbox in your account's userspace, where you can add the appropriate references, but you must make a crediblea ssertion of notability in the article for it to remain on Wikipedia. Acroterion (talk) 11:18, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Talk:French Foreign Legion

I am in an odd little dispute. In the article cited above (well in the main article) another editor insists that Legion and Legionnaire are always capitalized. I beg to differ and the two of us asked the other editors on the page to help us decide. It has been over a week. Although both the other editor agree this is a big deal, nobody else has bothered to comment. (Which, I suppose helps put our dispute in proper perspective.) How ought we to proceed to decide this (probably minor) issue? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 09:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I guess my question would be: sez who? An analogous case would the U.S. Army Rangers, who are, in general capitalized, but I don't know of any particular authority on the subject apart from the Army, and we all know how strange milspeak can be sometimes, with their Warfighters and such. Blech. I'd go with whatever usage seems to be prevalent in English-language literature on the subject, whatever that is. Acroterion (talk) 17:57, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
The other editor and I are working on it in an absolute festival of Wiki-Love, a very nice fellow he is. We will figure it out. Or perhaps we will say heck with it. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 03:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Acroterion/Archive_Q2_2011&oldid=1151012713"