Jump to content

User talk:Bfigura/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

Break out session

I created: User:Ikip/Discussion about creation of possible Wikiproject:New Users and BLPs which has some really great ideas, including incubating all new BLP articles immediately, many of these ideas are listed on the RFC page. Will these ideas be considered in phase II, if not, how can these ideas be considered? Ikip 16:29, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Rob Tillitz

Bfigura, we've had some indirect discussion about my article, Rob Tillitz, which is of course an article about myself. I've read some of the guidelines--reading all of them is daunting, and a bit confusing as one link leads to another--and believe you are right. I thought I could continue growing my article to the point it would satisfy the significant standards Wiki requires, but have second thoghts now. Think maybe I'm trying to put a square peg into a round hole.

Thus, is it possible for me to suspend my article in order to avoid deletion? Put it on ice till I can marshall up more verifiable facts?

Thanks for your help. Wiki is a wonderful resource. I go to Wikipedia several times every day for answers.

--Rob Tillitz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robalone (talk • contribs) 05:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I just wrote a note to you, and now have no idea how to get to where the answer might be? You said it would be here, but I don't see where my question went, so am not sure where the answer might be?

--Rob Tillitz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robalone (talk • contribs) 05:35, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

First, no, generally AfD's aren't delayed. (But you can always request the article be undeleted if that's the way things go. I think there's info on that at this page. As far as how to prevent deletion: the issue is notability, so if there are stories written about you (and not about others wherein you get mentioned) in major papers (for instance), those would be worth posting. However, the guidelines at WP:AUTHOR are fairly strong, so chances are that you're not notable. (I know I'm not under the guidelines that would be appropriate for me). It's possible that you might have more luck getting an article posted a local wiki (for your city/area), which tend to aim for inclusivity. Hope that helps, -- Bfigura (talk) 05:51, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
      • I have several articles written about just me, but cannot find them in linkable archives. Is there a way to scan these (into Wiki?) and make them links?

Thanks .... Rob Tillitz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robalone (talk • contribs) 16:34, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Generally, no. That sort of thing is problematic for a few reasons. One is copyright issues (Wikipedia will not host or link to copyright violations, which scanned unauthorized copies might be), the other is that it's not really a truly verifiable source (since scanned content is fairly easy to fake). While Wikipedia does occasionally use scanned material, it's usually for art that would otherwise be unavailable (and is old enough that there aren't copyright issues). Best, -- Bfigura (talk) 16:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

---Have not quite had a steady enough finger to push the delete button on my article (not to mention I don't know where that's at, and am not trying to look), but have continued polishing and linking. Screenwrtier/director Ryan McKinney listed my project as his current project/next movie on IMDB, but said the update takes 2-4 weeks before reflected on his IMDB profile page. I realize it all boils down to whether I'm a notable enough author or not. And I'm borderline, moreover on the wrong side the lined border. Thus, I keep chipping away trying to up my rating; in a tug-a-war with the dreaded line. I'll get there, of that there is no doubt. Meantime, thanks again for any advice you have.

        • Had a thought this morning: The problem I have with verifying both my own popularity, as well as the significance of my self-published book(s), is lack of internet links. There are many reviews, events, articles, and interviews that have taken place that I cannot find a solid link to. Not to mention how do I link to things like childhood, and my career as a commercial fisherman...the infinite number of things that happend before internet. My eMail address is on my web site, and my web site is several places within my books, and I get personal eMails regularly, every one ranging from praise to people saying it's the best book they ever read. Here is one typical comment (by Steve N.) that came to my eMail box cause I subcribe to Yelp [1]. Thus, my thought is that a person's elegibility on Wikipedia is actually determined by their popularity on the Internet. Or in other words, Google is really who is in charge of Wiki.

*Rob Tillitz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robalone (talk • contribs) 00:15, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

No, notability isn't the same as popularity. (Having a bunch of google hits doesn't mean anything if they're not reliable sources). And generally speaking, any sort of user-generated content isn't considered reliable (which excludes things like imdb, yelp, digg, reddit, most blogs and many others). -- Bfigura (talk) 16:58, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

For kind words on my talkpage. I have replied to Hutch there. The nofollow template only stops Google counting the page in its statistics - to block access to a site it needs to be on the spam blacklist. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 14:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Watcom Assembler

Hi, Bfigura. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JWASM, a discussion in which you participated, was closed as redirect to Open Watcom Assembler. Open Watcom Assembler has now been nominated for deletion due to notability concerns. If you would like to participate in the discussion, please comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Watcom Assembler. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

thanks

thank you for your suggestions. Okip (formerly Ikip) 18:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Criminal creology

I was thinking the same myself - the editor has not responded to any talk page messages. Notability looks iffy at best. So I would support an Afd. – ukexpat (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. (Although I see you already noticed). -- Bfigura (talk) 19:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010

Reclaiming futures

Hi - thanks for your comments/attention in re: the entries for individual Reclaiming Futures sites. I have a question about sourcing/notability. Most of these sites did have individual media coverage of their work, but most of it is old enough that it can no longer be retrieved from the original source, though it is archived on the Reclaiming Futures site (I assume links to there would be considered self-promotion). If I had the publication title, date, section/page number of each article, would that be an adequate citation, even without a live URL? Benjamin22010 (talk) 00:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

URL's are nice, but they're not necessary. But I'm still not sure why each of the sites would need an article (unless each one has actually gotten a fair amount of non-trivial coverage in local media - which didn't seem to be the case when I looked at the articles). Best, -- Bfigura (talk) 23:35, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 March 2010

Marker degradation

Thanks for fleshing out the article, something I haven't touched for 3 years! I'll see if I can find the entire route. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 13:34, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

BLP sticky template

Hi Bfigura/Archive 9! If there is any consensus at at all, it is that the entire discussion has become a tangled confusion, and as a result both proponents and opponents of the issues under discussion are abandoning ship. None of us want this. Your work on the template is valuable, even though it is stil possible that consensus might not be reached in favour of its use. However, In an attempt to keep the policy discussion on an even track, some users have decided to create a special workshop page for the development of the template at WT:BLP PROD TPL. It is designed keep the quite different major aspects of the BLP issue separate off the policy discussion and talk page, and help to move this whole debate towards a decision some kind or another. The page is well linked in a way that watchers will still find their way to it, the policy comments have been kept intact on the main talk page, and the main contributors to all sides of the the discussion are being informed. Cheers. --Kudpung (talk) 22:05, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 March 2010

NYC Wikipedia Meetup Sunday, March 21

New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday March 21st, Columbia University area
Last: 11/15/2009
This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wikipedia Day NYC, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia at the Library and Lights Camera Wiki, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects, for example User:ScienceApologist will present on "climate change, alternative medicine, UFOs and Transcendental Meditation" (see the November meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back. And if the weather is good, we'll have a star party with the telescopes on the roof of Pupin Hall!

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

BLP sticky prod

Hi Bfigura/Archive 9 ! The template workshop has now split off most of the long threads purely on policy to a new discussion page so that policy can be established while technical development of the template can continue in its own space. When the template functions are finalised, the policy bits can be merged into them. If you intend to continue to contribute your ideas to the development of the template or its policy of use, and we hope you will, please consider either adding your name to the list of workshop members, or joining in with the policy discussions on the new page. --Kudpung (talk) 06:37, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 March 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 March 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 29 March 2010

Sticky prods

Hi. You participated earlier in the sticky prod workshop. The sticky prods are now in use, but there are still a few points of contention.

There are now a few proposals on the table to conclude the process.

I'm not sure whether you've participated recently. But I encourage your input, whatever it might be. Thanks. Maurreen (talk) 16:18, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 April 2010

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010

File:Hydroxyethylmethacrylate.png

I think that's structurally incorrect. Should be "the 2-hydroxyethyl ester of methacrylic acid", parsed as the name "(Hydroxyethyl)methacrylate" follows normal "ethyl acetate" format for esters, not "2-hydroxyethyl attached to methyl of methacrylate". Following the CAS# gives me CA Index Name of "2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2-hydroxyethyl ester". It also agrees with the "Systematic formula: C(CH3)COOCH2CH2OH" note in the older revisions of the page. DMacks (talk) 19:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

That's possible: I just had chemdraw make me the structure from the name. Once I'm a bit less busy in RL, I'll look into it more and make a revised figure if necessary (unless you'd like to beat me to it). -- Bfigura (talk) 15:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010

Wiki-Conference NYC (2nd annual)

Our 2nd annual Wiki-Conference NYC has been confirmed for the weekend of August 28-29 at New York University.

There's still plenty of time to join a panel, or to propose a lightning talk or an open space session. Register for the Wiki-Conference here. And sign up here for on-wiki notification. All are invited!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 15:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 August 2010

The Signpost: 16 August 2010

The Signpost: 23 August 2010

The Signpost: 30 August 2010

The Signpost: 6 September 2010

The Signpost: 13 September 2010

The Signpost: 20 September 2010

The Signpost: 27 September 2010

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

Wikipedia NYC Meetup Sat Oct 16

New York City Meetup


Next: Saturday October 16th, Jefferson Market Library in Lower Manhattan
Last: 05/22/2010
This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, review the recent Wiki-Conference NYC 2010, plan for the next stages of projects like Wikipedia Ambassador Program and Wikipedia Academy, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the May meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:00, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

Remember the Global Economics class project?

It's up for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Global Economics. I'm notifying people who particpated on the talk pages there. Voceditenore (talk) 17:40, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

Membership of the Counter-Vandalism Unit

As you may know, the Counter-Vandalism unit is inactive. So for reviving the WikiProject, we will need to sort out the members. So if you are active, please put your username at the bottom of the list at Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit#Sort out the members.

You are receiving this message as a current member of the CVU.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Counter-Vandalism Unit at 00:09, 30 October 2011 (UTC).

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Bfigura. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:09, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 18:51, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

(help) on Rothenberg Venture page

Hello Bifigura,

Thank you for your suggestions. I went through, linked the page to other wikipedia pages and other pages to it. I also declared my COI on my profile to help keep everything clean and honest. I birthed the article, but want to remain as hands off as possible. How can I suggest other editors to look at it, make sure it remains neutral? And, yes, my account is my own--no one else will be using it. Thanks!

([[User:JoeWadlington|JoeWadlington]]&#124[[User talk:JoeWadlington|t]] )([[User:JoeWadlington|COI]]) (talk) 22:18, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

About Abantia notability issues

I have created the Abantia article because of my interest in renewable energy. Specifically I have found to be notable their Termosolar Borges power plant. About Abantia coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources, I am not sure what is needed. Google returns 107'000 results and it looks like all are of Abantia or it's subsidiaries. Sure, Abantia is not as notable (and big) as Abengoa. Anyway, should we delete the article ? --Robertiki (talk) 19:49, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

The power plant would indeed appear to be notable. But the Abantia article needs some improvement in order to suggest why the company is notable. (I.e., it has XX GW of installed base, YY employees, etc). Also, it wouldn't hurt if better references could be found - the ones cited were pretty minimal. (The longest reference, the renewables made in spain one, is only two paragraphs long). Best, -- Bfigura (talk) 03:20, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
In fact, the company has yet to make a name internationally. Perhaps for now it should be placed in the spanish wiki ? --Robertiki (talk) 21:34, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
It could probably be kept here, even foreign language references would be helpful. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 23:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

fyi

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Young (longevity claims researcher) (2nd nomination) EEng (talk) 01:49, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

fyi

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Young (longevity claims researcher) (2nd nomination) EEng (talk) 01:49, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bfigura. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Bfigura. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hi Bfigura. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

  • Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
  • If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. signed, Rosguill talk 23:38, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Fast Buds Seeds - speedy deletion

Hello, I understand what you're saying but there are other Wikipedia pages for seedbanks with basically the same information as Fas Bud's wiki page. Fast Buds works on improving and keeping autoflowering genetics alive so that's why I think the page shouldn't be deleted. I'm still working on the page and I can delete or edit everything that doesn't follow wikipedia's guidelines.Enzoschillaci (talk) 08:02, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bfigura/Archive_9&oldid=1141622957"