User talk:Akradecki/archive/archive 2

	Archives
	1

Welcome to my talk page! Feel free to leave comments, critiques, etc., below. Unless you specifically request that I answer on your talk page, I'll be answering here, as I prefer to keep as much of the conversation in one place as possible. Thanks! Akradecki 04:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vx Rangers

Oops! That's what happens if articles are submitted to all three deletion processes at once. Closed now. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Punisher 2

We've cleaned up the article, and would appreciate your reviewing it regarding it's AfD nom, and perhaps reversing your vote, as did all other initial 'delete' votes. Thank you for taking the time to review. ThuranX 21:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and changed. Akradecki 21:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. ThuranX 01:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userfying

Please use the "move" function to userfy autobiographies. Doing so by cut and paste violates copyright (no page history, no author attribution). Thank you, Kusma (討論) 09:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe a page is a mistaken userpage and the author's userpage is a redlink, just move it to the main userpage. If the page just reads like a self-promotional vanity bio and is by a user with no other contributions, just tag it {{db-bio}} - we don't need lots of userpages for people with no other contributions. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 08:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Akradecki 15:17, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chilwell School move

Hi,

Please could you rename and move the Chilwell Comprehensive School page to Chilwell School. (The school was officially renamed last year.)

Sorry to bother you with this, but I have been a user for less than 4 days and therefore can't move the page myself. Cheers Tom H 17:02, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tom, no bother at all, glad to do it. Move has been done! Akradecki 00:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! :) Tom H 08:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tasklist

Hi, thanks for checking. The tasklist is for AWB-assisted migration to specs templates for aircraft articles. Merges should not affect this at all. I used to be a firefighter/EMT but moved on to another medical profession since then. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 05:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFF

Why did you tag rangefinderforum.com for deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Camerabuff (talk • contribs)

Because it does not appear to be notable enough to meet the criteria of WP:WEB. Please remember, this is an encyclopedia, not a general directory of internet resources. Inclusion in an encyclopedia requires a certain level of notability. Akradecki 22:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you on the recreates

Thanks for telling me, you saved me a google (yahoo, msn, ect.) search or two! Really appreciated! —— Eagle (ask me for help) 05:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Scott

Hi Akradecki. I think you did the right thing. I deleted Kevin Scott and hopefully it won't be recreated. Cheers. :) --Fang Aili ^talk 13:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your constant helpfulness!! Akradecki 14:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

=) You're welcome! --Fang Aili ^talk 17:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your image question

Alan,

Thanks for your question. The short answer is that their Wikipedia-specific license is not sufficient, and only the Wikipedia Foundation can sign a license agreement on behalf of Wikipedia (and they won't do so). But here's a longer, and hopefully more satisfactory, answer.

If Wikipedia receives permission to use an image, then we can legally use it without fear of a lawsuit. But Wikipedia chooses not to use such images, since we endeavor to provide a "free" encyclopedia which is entirely licensed under the GFDL. The fact that Wikipedia is licensed under the GFDL means that a reuser (like these sites) can copy any or all of Wikipedia's content and repost it on their own web site. So long as their site is licensed under the GFDL, they don't have to ask for Wikipedia's or anyone else's permission. If Wikipedia used images that are only licensed to Wikipedia, then the reusers couldn't use those images, and Wikipedia couldn't call itself "completely free". (For the same reason, Wikipedia won't use images that are free for only non-commercial or educational websites to use, even though Wikipedia is non-commercial and educational. Some reusers may not be, after all.)

But (and here's the silver lining), the English-language Wikipedia does allow images used under a fair use rationalle. The fact that N-G has offered to license its images to Wikipedia for free can be used as supportive statements in the rationalle. So you could upload these images, use a {{Non-free fair use in}} or {{promo}} tag, and include a rationalle that says something like the following:

The use of this image on Wikipedia is held to be a fair use of the image, since:
* The image is promotional in nature. (Its value is based on its dissemination, not its scarcity.)
* The use of the image is not expected to decrease the value of the copyright.
* Wikipedia is not competing with the copyright holder.
* The copyright holder has expressly offered to allow Wikipedia to use the image at no charge.
* The image is being used in an educational, not-for-profit encyclopedia.

And remember to include the source. I would think that would be fine. All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 16:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flygprestanda AB

Hi there! Do you happen to know more information about Flygprestanda AB? It's tagged with few incoming links, and I was hoping you might be able to fix it. Could you take a look if you get the chance? --HappyCamper 12:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HC! These folks are one of dozens of airline support companies, and really aren't notable. They provide a number of computerized flight planning services. I can expand the article, if you think it should be kept, but in reality, it doesn't meet WP:CORP at all. Let me know... Akradecki 16:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe edit some other articles first then :-) I don't really know much about the industry. --HappyCamper 21:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I got out of that segment of the industry a couple of years ago...providing support services is a cut throat business, since there are so many players. Much happier now playing with a single helicopter! Akradecki 22:12, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Kaiser

Yep, as you might have suspected, someone tagged the article as a copyvio without listing it at WP:CP. Luckily, there's a bot that finds these and lists them, so Peter Kaiser was listed on August 31. By a rule, they have to be listed for 7 days before anyone can take action, so you've got 1 more day to wait. Tomorrow, I'll replace the current tagged article with your rewrite.

By the way, your rewritten article is excellent. Thanks for writing it! All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 17:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much! Didn't realize it was 7 days...great way to learn patience! Akradecki 18:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Looks like he's already been blocked. Let me know if you need anything else. Cheers! --Fang Aili ^talk 22:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it keeps getting vandalized I can protect it for you. Cheers. --Fang Aili ^talk 16:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the header help

I don't believe I've done an article deletion nom before, so I missed that last step. Thanks! -- Tenebrae 19:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate articles

Hi. Thanks for listing the duplicate of Service club as a candidate for speedy deletion. With suplicate articles, the best thing to do is to make one of them into a redirect page pointing to the other: see WP:R for more info. Any user can do this, not just administrators. Regards, The Land 19:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've done this in the past; in this case, with a title that's just a plural, it didn't seem like it was a needed redirect. Akradecki 20:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leoncavallo

Thanks for your help with the Leoncavallo thing. I didn't think that nominating the article for deletion would cause such a riot! By the way, my reply to his statement about Galileo was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. I didn't think he'd start flaming me about it. Although it does seem somewhat appropriate that after all the rubbish that's been posted by these people that they can then get their facts wrong about Galileo.

I'm a member of the Formula 1 WikiProject, and these guys have been putting their so-called team into our articles for months. As soon as the info is removed, it always seems to promptly be re-inserted. I'll be glad when we can finally get shot of this article, but I have no doubt that it will reappear. Readro 09:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GCPC

I'm not sure this page is suitable for speedy deletion. I may be wrong; please feel free to point me at policies, but I think a prod would be more appropriate. Thanks. —Xyrael / 17:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mirza Nasir Ahmad - this too 8) —Xyrael / 17:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Point take with GCPC. As for Mirza Nasir Ahmad, there is almost no biographical info there, and what is there is already on the community's page, so it is completely redundant, so I thought speedy was justified. However, as per your suggestion, I'll prod it. Akradecki 17:27, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*Nod*, thank you. —Xyrael / 18:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your CSD tag at Distributed Content Development

Please see my comments at Talk:Distributed Content Development. BigNate37_(T) 17:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, that was actually British spelling, not a typo. Just thought I'd let you know, it doesn't matter either way. BigNate37_(T) 22:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar

It was a quite unexpected but much appreciated gift in the middle of reverting a banned user's contributions. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 21:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome. I'm not an admin, so I'm not involved in such things at your level, but I am involved in a disputed and continually vandalized AfD, so I know how frustration levels can rise! Keep up the good work! Akradecki 21:45, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Wow, that AfD has reached the realm of the Completely Ridiculous. However after all the talk was moved to the discussion page, it looks like a pretty clear Delete. The original author can't request deletion if s/he is not the only editor (I believe). I think this debate is going to lead to a delete anyway though, so just wait another 2 days for the AfD to close. Let me know if it's been sitting around unclosed for a while and I can do it. Cheers. --Fang Aili ^talk 20:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Compulink

Just FYI, you might take a look at the page history for Compulink. The reason given for the original speedy by Computerjoe (the one that was removed) was "Ad", hence my comment after his post. Dipics 20:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boston baseball teams

My opinion is that they should all be deleted as nonnotable (amateur sports teams are generally nonnotable) -- either reprod them all or do a group AFD. Thanks, NawlinWiki 18:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask why they are considered non-notable? They are a member of a notable amateur league (BMBL) in the Boston area. Just asking for clarification. Ubergenius 14:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, only the very highest ranks of amateur athletics are considered notable. These articles didn't claim notability, had no information on any major awards, world or national rankings, they were simply listings of members of local amateur baseball teams. Akradecki 23:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a quick related, but not directly on topic, question: This league, the BMBL, runs a notable charity event each year, called the 100 Inning Game, to raise money for Curt's Pitch for ALS. Each year, either Curt Schilling or his wife, Ronda Schilling, makes an appearance at this event, and it usually garners a lot of media attention, and next year will be altering the format somewhat to try for the world record for a regulation baseball game. Is this notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article if supported with proper citation? Ubergenius 19:36, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would think it is borderline. Citations are definitely a plus, though. Ask yourself what I always ask myself when I go to write an article: Is this subject really worthy of an encyclopedia article that someone is going to use in research in a year, five years, ten years? If so, have at it. It might be worth asking NawlinWiki, who's an admin and who can give an even more "official" answer. Akradecki 19:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! When put the way you mentioned, I would say "possibly", as it is notable and may be mentioned in research about ALS and the fight of it, but as you say, "borderline." I am trying to contribute to wikipedia as often as I can, and I may get carried away. I will create the article, and ask NawlinWiki to look at it for me and see if it is worthy of existance. Thanks again! Ubergenius 16:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you familiar with how to create a sandbox on your user page? I will often write drafts on mine, then have other folks review it before posting it to the main space. Makes it easy, because in a user sandbox environment, no one is ever going to AfD or prod it while you're in the middle of writing. If you're not familiar, let me know. Akradecki 20:10, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not... I'm not especially new to Wikipedia, but I am new to doing regular edits and creating articles (in the past I would only make casual and occasional edits to things I saw). Do I just create template pages in my user page? -- Ubergenius 13:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, on your user page, go to the edit mode, then make a link that looks like this: [[/sandbox]], then save the page. You'll now have a red link. Click on it and begin creating. When you save that page, the link will be blue, and you can rename it whatever you want. Happy editing, and let me know if you need any more help. Akradecki 15:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD is not about the votes

Please do not refactor any more AFD discussions in this way. Uncle G 12:58, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paranjape Prakash Vishvanath

Hi, I noticed that you tagged Paranjape Prakash Vishvanath for speedy deletion. Thanks for your contributions, and I'm sure you had a good reason for doing this, but I'd like to point out that Vishvanath is a member of the Lok Sabha of India. This would be like putting the article on Bill Thomas, or maybe Barbara Boxer, up for speedy deletion. I've removed the tags and cleaned the article up a bit, just letting you know. --- Deville (Talk) 21:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I tagged the article for speedy, it consisted on a photo and an external link, that's all. No text, no explanation, no claim to notability, therefore "empty" was an appropriate tag for an entry that consists only of external links. Akradecki 23:45, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it did have the Lok Sabha infobox, but, yes, I agree, there wasn't any text written in the body of the article, and it was in pretty bad shape. Also, in retrospect, I can see how that infobox isn't really clear about what it is asserting. It's all good, I fixed it up instead. I just wanted to let you know since you put the tag on it in the first place. --- Deville (Talk) 18:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...I definitely appreciate the communication. In retrospect, I should have added my reasoning to the talk page. Still learning! Akradecki 22:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

X-38 Crew Return Vehicle

I see you moved Crew Return Vehicle to X-38 Crew Return Vehicle. Are you sure that's a good idea? I've already shown you on the article talk page that when a X-designation is used for the development project and not for the final aircraft the article on wikipedia is named after the final name: see again the Lockheed Martin X-35 redirect to F-35 Lightning II. Additionally, the aircraft is more popular as Crew Return Vehicle, returning more results on Google (http://www.google.com/search?q=Crew%20Return%20Vehicle returns 8,080,000 while http://www.google.com/search?q=X-38 returns 5,000,000), so unless you have some valid arguments to keep X-38 Crew Return Vehicle it is my opinion that the article should be moved to Crew Return Vehicle, but I'd like to hear your points before proceeding. // Duccio (write me) 14:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

It is almost always standard to have the aircraft model in the title. Because the program was cancelled, it will never become like the X-35/F-35 - that one's the exception, and we shouldn't be makeing a standard based on that. By far, the X-planes always have the model number in the article title. Some examples:

Want more? See the majority listed in:

Note that in the template, it's listed as "NASA X-38". Maybe that's a better option? Akradecki 16:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: please post any further talk on this at Talk:X-38 Crew Return Vehicle#X-38 Crew Return Vehicle for consensus purposes. Akradecki 18:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OR is not the same as WP:V

Hi I saw your comment on the GPS article of which you removed the OR label because of sufficient citations. Had you read the Talk page you would have seen that that was not the issue: the position that the section advanced was in disagreement with what the cited sources advanced. I just thought it might be useful for you to see an example of the subtle differences between "NOR" and "V". Happy editing! :-) Harald88 22:01, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the correction! Akradecki 00:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stattman articles/sockpuppets

I've indefinitely blocked all three Stattman accounts and protected all the Stattman articles. Thanks, and let's hope this one is put to bed. NawlinWiki 15:53, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update - he had actually created up to User:Stattman6 and had already used Stattman4 to recreate one of the articles under a new name. All blocked now. NawlinWiki 15:59, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol

Hi! I'm doing new page patrol with you today and I wanted to remind you that in addition to tagging articles for speedy deletion, you should also leave a message on the creator's talk page explaining why. A list of templated warnings appropriate for this can be found at WP:TT. (Remember: don't bite the newcomers!) Keep up the good work! -- Merope ^Talk 17:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roger that! Akradecki 17:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doin' something right?

I must be...my user page was vandalized for the first time! Akradecki 19:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PROD and Mythic Russia

Just a reminder: you should never add a WP:PROD tag back to any article from which it is removed. PROD is meant for uncontroversial deletions, and if someone removes the tag, the deletion is by definition controversial. Mango juice^talk 16:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know I erred in putting it back the first time, that's why the second time, I sent it to AfD. I notice that the AfD has been closed as delete, but the article is still up. Akradecki 17:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archives
1