User talk:Bearian/ArchivesApr2009

Re: Habari

tell me something then - where did i go wrong in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Habari (2nd nomination)? where did the inclusion proponents go right? i've had the afd subject to a deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 March 23 and am still just as clueless. where did i go wrong and where did the inclusion proponents go right?

you say "[I] have lately taken to nominating things [I] just do not like". you're right. i don't like the fact that the arguments i presented in habari's 2nd nomination were just tossed aside like garbage in favor of arguments that, from where i'm standing, seem like the real garbage. what's the point of coming up with cogent arguments if on a whim they can be tossed aside like rubbish? so, with my 3rd and 4th nominations of habari, i didn't present cogent arguments. and those got tossed aside as well.

i know, i know - there is no cabal, but from where i'm standing, it seems like habari has a cabal supporting them, all the same. cogent arguments won't get it deleted and neither non-cogent arguments, so, really, what's the point? it's as though it's all been decided in advance and the whole afd process is just a formality to reenforce those predecided outcomes. Misterdiscreet (talk) 01:25, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

so much for trying to figure anything out. it really does raise the question, though - if WP:NOTAVOTE is ignored when convenient what other policies are ignored when convenient? for example, WP:N. it's just as i've been saying - the outcome of an afd depends not on how badly wikipedia policies are being violated but rather on the disposition of the closing admin. as such, it appears to me that the only real reason to cite policy in justifying an afd is to continue the charade that policy matters Misterdiscreet (talk) 15:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Libby Booth

I am very new to wikipedia as well and hope I am doing this correctly.

A few weeks ago you helped to approve the deletion of an article I wrote on a local artist named Libby Booth.

Not only did this article take me a very long time to write (as I said, I am new to this), but I was quite annoyed that it was removed so quickly by simply "googling" her name to see if she is a notable artist.

Perhaps I am naive about how this sight works, and perhaps I need to explain my own credentials in writing this.

I am a history professor who has lived in the Central Michigan area for nearly 25 years. Booth is by far the best artist I have ever seen in all of this time, and in terms of her local notability, she is considered the top artist of the Michigan tri-city area and is hopefully going to be known nationally quite soon.

While her name may not produce many google hits, this is NO WAY reflects how popular or well known she is in this area.

Outside of publishing books, I have published over 20 professional encyclopedia articles and am well aware of who should or should not have documentation about their careers and life.

This whole evaluation and deleting process seems rather haphazard (perhaps it is not and I am naive about this format), but I would appreciate it if you could possibly remove this article from its current deleted status.

I would really like to contribute more to this site in the future, but this initial experience is leaving me very frustrated.

Any advice or comments?

Sincerely, Dr. Joel A. Lewis

Department of History Saginaw Valley State University —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redgramsci (talk • contribs) 04:31, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mobileye Page on wiki has been deleted

Dear Administrator, Yesterday I opened a page for Mobileye Vision Technologies, I would like to see the page restored as I am planning to work on it by including history/facts, pics, etc on the company like other pages in Wiki for exmaple: GM's page. I am Mobileye's Marketing Manager. What can I do to see the page restored? Thank you very much for your help NicolasMarketing Manager (talk) 05:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@n1m0$!ty

You mean to tell me you'd rather let a very blatant hoax slog through afd for five days? I've found nothing that says you can't speedy something at afd. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 02:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article contained blatantly false claims that the band had charted, and some of the other claims (two members dying in as many months) were so outlandish as for me to apply "blatant misinformation". I don't know why my G3 tags so often get contested. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 02:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Message on my talk page from you

Please elaborate on this, because it is rather vague. What are you referring to? Please reply on my talk page. -- Scjessey (talk) 00:55, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thank you for the clarification :) -- Scjessey (talk) 01:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ferris Beuller's Day Off in popular culture merge discussion

Informing everyone who participated in the AFD for Ferris Beuller's Day Off in popular culture that a merge discussion is now underway concerning the same material. Please share your comments here Dream Focus 04:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed a link

I fixed a link in your support vote; you had an uppercase F in RfB. It now goes to the proper section of the page. I hope you don't mind my editing your vote like that. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 16:15, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks

My RFA passed today at 61/5/4. Thanks for participating in my RFA. I appreciate all the comments I received and will endeavor to justify the trust the WP community has placed in me. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 21:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Huang

Hi, I saw your note at User talk:Helenhuang. I would try starting an article, but I'm not likely to have a chance to get to it for a while. I noted some potential sources if you were thinking of giving it a start: [1]. TJRC (talk) 00:23, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article Rescue Squadron

RE: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australia–Luxembourg relations you may also consider a {{rescue}} template on the page.

Hello, Bearian. You have been invited to join the Article Rescue Squadron, a collaborative effort to rescue articles from deletion if they can be improved through regular editing. For more information, please visit the project page, where you can >> join << and help rescue articles tagged for deletion and rescue. Ikip (talk) 11:36, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from user talk:Ikip:

Thanks for the invite. Bearian (talk) 14:01, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome, hope you consider it. Have a great week. See you in Afds in the future. Ikip (talk) 14:03, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron

Articles tagged for deletion and rescue
Category Articles tagged for deletion and rescue not found

Hi, Bearian, welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying and rescuing articles that have been tagged for deletion. Every day hundreds of articles are deleted, many rightfully so. But many concern notable subjects and are poorly written, ergo fixable and should not be deleted. We try to help these articles quickly improve and address the concerns of why they are proposed for deletion. This covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated!

If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you.

And once again - Welcome! Ikip (talk) 14:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome, I am excited to see another admin join us. Please let me know if you ever need any assistance in referencing an article that is at the risk of deletion in the future. Best wishes. Ikip (talk) 14:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Stem cell laws

Hello! Your submission of Stem cell laws at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 13:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Thankspam

Thanks to everyone who took the time and trouble to take part in my RfA whether support, oppose or neutral. All comments are valued and will be considered carefully in the coming weeks. Feel free to add more advice on my talk page if you think I need it. SpinningSpark 00:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In case you're wondering, the image is a smiley, just a little more aesthetic, but not as serious as the Mona Lisa

afd close per WP:SNOW

Hi please close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Miller (sportscaster) per WP:SNOW. 8 votes for keep and only 1 for delete (besides nominators) in over 24 hours. TomCat4680 (talk) 16:19, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for closing it. I'm glad you taught me about WP:HEY too. That's exactly what happened on the Jim Brandstatter afd.TomCat4680 (talk) 17:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a fresh piece of fried chicken! Pieces of fried chicken promote WikiLove and hopefully this piece has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot piece, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of fried chicken by adding {{subst:GiveChicken}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Although I'm reluctant to open any old wounds here, I don't believe this AfD followed process. I'm not sure why you closed it with the comment "Discussion was open for 5 days", when AfDs now run for 7 full days. Would you mind relisting this AfD? Also, I have some concerns about the canvassing, so I would appreciate it if you could place the appropriate warning notice on the AFD itself. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 19:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

afd close per WP:SNOW (another one)

Hi please close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Brandstatter too, same reason, no naysayers. TomCat4680 (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Casas

Hello Bearian. Can you look here, please? --Vejvančický (talk) 09:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reminder

this is just a reminder to respond to my inquiries at User talk:Bearian#Re: Habari. it's difficult how to know how to properly conduct afds on wikipedia when those telling you that you're not conducting them correctly refuse to elaborate. thanks Misterdiscreet (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for your response. with regard to your "3 nominations in 6 months" comment... those three nominations were all me and the last two were, i believe, closed improperly, as well. they were closed because there were "no serious reason offered for nominating this article for deletion". i offered serious reasons in the first of three keep nominations and was overruled due to bullshit arguments. then, in the deletion review of that afd, DGG says "after non-arguments are deleted". what the hell is a non-argument? in my book, a non-argument is one that wantonly ignores wikipedia policy. the keep justifications in the first afd wantonly ignored wikipedia policy and so in my last two afd's, i did the same - i wantonly ignored wikipedia policy. but when i do it, the afd is speedily closed and admins, like you, issue me warnings. yet when keep proponents do it for habari, they're patted on the back and told "good job".

you're right when you said habari's not going to be deleted any time soon - there's no way it can be deleted when the wikipedia admin cabal has decided it is worthy of inclusion, wikipedia policy be damned along with anyone who tries to argue. so, really, i'm still left to wonder what of any of it is for. from my vantage point, all afd's are predecided without regard for wikipedia policy and if you happen to be on the losing end of an argument with a predetermined conclusion.. well, it sucks to be you.

i mean, seriously, why should i be expected to play by the rules when, clearly, no one else does? Misterdiscreet (talk) 17:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Stem cell laws

On April 24, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stem cell laws, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 01:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion input

Hello You voted to keep St. Elmo's Fire (song) because it was a "huuuge hit in the 1980s" (I'm pretty sure you're thinking of "St. Elmo's Fire (Man in Motion)".) Can you please explain further at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Elmo's Fire (song)? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NYCD

Just so you know. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 11:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Coaching

I saw that you were listed in the Coaches for reconfirmation section of the admin coaching status page. Could you please update your status, and if you are still interested, drop me a note on my talk page? Thanks, Genius 101^Guestbook 13:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_active_drive-in_theaters close request

Can you close the above afd per WP:SNOW and WP:HEY? The consensus seems to be keep and people are just arguing in circles now. It has been open for 7 days. TomCat4680 (talk) 19:12, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bilateral AfD

how can you assume good faith about the article creator who was blocked for excessive stub creation Groubani (talk · contribs) then created a sockpuppet to continue the obsessive creation? LibStar (talk) 00:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WQA Discussion

Hi there. This is just a courtesy notice to let you know that I have mentioned an edit of yours at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:LibStar. Any input you have would be welcome. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 14:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]