Jump to content

User talk:Blanchardb/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weight loss effects of water

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weight loss effects of water. greenrd (talk) 22:57, 13 September 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Uw-incompleteAFD

Something's not formatting right here. Every time I use it, it puts a space before my sig and therefore makes my signature monospaced in a dotty box 

Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

like that. What needs fixing to stop that?

Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I noticed that you attempted to file a deletion discussion but did not complete the process. Please note that, when listing an article for deletion, a discussion page needs to be made for other users to discuss whether to keep or delete the article. This is typically done by following the steps listed here. Note that if you are editing as an unregistered user, you cannot create a discussion page. Please consider registering an account or asking another user to help you complete the process at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion. Thank you. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 03:57, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Fixed it. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 03:58, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Regarding speedy deletion of Belgrave (band)

I'm not clear on why Belgrave's article qualified for speedy deletion. The band got it's start with a nationally recognized musician Sam Roberts, is being produced by an award winning producer Joseph Donovan, is a family member of one of the most famous indie musicians in Montreal Pietro Amato, and has been interviewed and reviewed by third party media sources locally and nationally (Meet you at the Show, Ottawa Sun, CBC Radio 2). Thanks for your time, User:trapper 23:57, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

First of all, our notability guidelines clearly state, in WP:NOTINHERITED, that being "produced by an award winning producer" or being "a family member of one of the most famous indie musicians in Montreal" is just not taken in consideration when deciding whether there should be an article on the band.
Now the notability you've asserted here is that of Sam Roberts, Joseph Donovan, and Pietro Amato. But you haven't shown that Belgrave meets our notability guidelines, that is, you haven't shown that the band warrants an article separate from that on Sam Roberts. Here above, you've stated that the band has been reviewed by national media. Your article gave no indication of this, and gave me no reason to bother checking for that. If you can show sources that attest to the fact the band has been reviewed by the Ottawa Sun and by the CBC (reviewed, not merely mentioned), then you may ask for the article to be restored. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 04:14, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
From what I understand, the connection with Amato, Donovan and Roberts are not necessary to have the article qualify for notability; all is needed, according to WP:BAND, proof that the band "Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works". Would you agree then that the Ottawa Sun and other reviews would qualify the band?User:trapper•User Talk:trapper•- timed 06:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
You have misunderstood. The connections with Amato, Donovan and Roberts are irrelevant to have the subject (not the article itself) qualify for notability. Irrelevant meaning that even if you can prove them beyond the shadow of a doubt, it won't make any difference. The reviews in the Ottawa Sun and others would be enough only if they are non-trivial and verifiable. For that, you need to show at least the date at which the review appeared and the article title. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 16:53, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good. Please review the page at User:Trapper/Belgrave (band) and verify if this meets the said requirements. I will wait for your comments before uploading the article.User:trapper•User Talk:trapper•- timed 13:36, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm curious about one thing: the article lists winning a battle of the bands at Loyola High as a notable achievement. Why so? Is it because some past winners have come all the way from British Columbia just to take part? Is it because the event is cosistently covered by the Toronto Star? You see, what the Wikipedia community calls notable has to have a certain notoriety beyond merely local. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 19:37, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
They didn't win a battle of the bands. It was a children's event where they and Sam Roberts were guests. I included that link because I felt like doing so; it is not relevant to the discussion on notability but is relevant to their musical careers. I'm presuming that that association lead to their partnership with the producer Joseph Donovan. Your condescending tone stung a bit but I'll move on.
Are you saying that the "multiple non-trivial published works" must be from more than two cities as well? I'm trying to do this right so please direct me. Thank you. User:trapper•User Talk:trapper•- timed 22:00, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Of course, the "multiple non-trivial published works" don't have to be from different cities, but they do have to be from different sources. So far you've got the Ottawa Sun, and you're asserting the existence of an interview on CBC. That should do it if you can find a transcript of the CBC interview. (Simply showing something that attests that the interview did take place should be enough.) As for being condescending, that wasn't my intention, however you have to keep in mind that most readers look down on trivia, and that's why we seek to keep it away from Wikipedia articles as much as possible. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 14:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Regarding CBC2: they receive radio play but I don't think they were interviewed and if they were I haven't found a transcript (sorry for insinuating that). I presume the Meet you at the Show and the Midnight Poutine (highly respected) are adequate additions to the purposes of notability. User:trapper•User Talk:trapper•- timed 09:46, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Blanchard is slightly deletion happy.. User_talk:Blanchardb/Archive_11#Request to Stop Using WP:PROD for Substantial Software Articles.. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xilinx ISE.. using Google news as the sole source etc. Electron9 (talk) 12:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Email sent

Hello,

Just to let you know I sent you an email. Thank you.

BR, Salocin123 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salocin123 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, apperently you prefer to discuss issues here and not over the email. So I want to ask you for some more concrete information about the declined status of Yvan Arpa's article. I've added sources but nothing changed. Why is that so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salocin123 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

About discussing stuff on talk pages and not email, that's not just me. Apparently the majority of the regulars at Wikipedia prefer that as well, and many of them do in fact block their email. As for the article, it looks to me like all of your references are from high-end catalogs. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 15:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 September 2010

The Signpost: 27 September 2010

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

Advanced Science and Technology Education Center

Schools are not a speedy, even if it doesn't claim notability. It's better to merge to the school district or just tag them with all sorts of maintaince tags. Thanks Secret account 23:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

The problem, in this case, is that there just isn't any school district. Seems to be a private school to me. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 23:45, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
Here's one that sounds like a redirect: MEF International School Istanbul. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 23:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
It's a high school according to this which consensus shows it can't be deleted. I disagree with the consensus of high schools, but it's there's nothing we could both change about it. Secret account 23:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Cascade Yachts

Hey I added a bunch of references to Cascade Yachts. i'm pretty inexperienced at wiki, so is still probably pretty ugly, but take a look and see if it merits removing the 'general notability' tag. thanks. Tristan da cunha (talk) 17:20, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello...

Hello!

User:FlipsHack (talk) 17:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Timeline of the burrito

Blanchardb , I know this is a strange request. I'm asking for your help to improve Timeline of the burrito because I know you are a responsible editor. I'm not looking for someone to support my attempts to improve this article. The article simply needs attention of more neutral parties prior to its merger with the main burrito article, as it is currently being protected by an individual that does not want to accept any changes. Please feel free to ignore this request if you are not interested. — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 16:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

RDS

FYI, http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101121/22064111957/guy-sues-wikipedia-craigslist-1-billion-because-he-claims-he-found-nudity-both.shtml. -- Mathias Schindler (talk) 14:44, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Huggle

When will you use Huggle again? WAYNEOLAJUWON 03:05, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Nyíregyháza Zoo

Bonjour Blanchardb, I started to translate this article from Hungarian in August but I had to leave it. Meanwhile you put an advert label on it. I'm wondering why, I just gave a direct translation of the original article, but I'm ready to rewrite it if you could tell me how. Ferike333 (talk) 11:09, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

It's written in a tone that you'd expect to find on the zoo's own literature. Sentences such as "The year 1996 brought a breakthrough to the zoo" and "More and more species are given place in the zoo, some of them are real curiosity" have no place in encyclopedic coverage. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 15:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
I see. The first one I would paraphrase to The year 1996 was very important in the zoo's history, and the other one More and more species are given place in the zoo some of which count as a curiosity in Hungary. How about them? Ferike333 (talk) 08:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Actually I'm afraid the Hungarian version was simply typed in from their brochure... I think I'll label it as 'in process' or something. If you happen to know the right template, would you put it there please? I'll make a full translation of the hu. article and then rewrite it in an encyclopedic way. Ferike333 (talk) 09:08, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

Vestex

I just submitted the Vestex article and I believe you promptly tagged it for reasons that do not apply to that article. Yes it is a company, but I am not focusing the article on the company itself. The focus of my article was the research and the technology's clinical importance. I am an infection control practitioner and not an employee of the company. I believe that the tag needs to be removed and it needs to be looked at again by maybe another editor who will take the time to see the clinical and scientific significance of this entry.

Thank you for your reconsideration S2kelam (talk) 02:48, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Also if you look at my article when compared to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patagonia_(clothing) an article that is obviously deemed "not an advertisement" yet it has far less research and citations than the Vestex article I submitted S2kelam (talk) 03:03, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, or not

Thanks very much for ignoring an {inuse} tag and moving a newly-created article to ambiguous dab while I was till actively editing it.

I have moved it back. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Template:Religious text primary

A TFD has been opened on Template:Religious text primary. The TfD was opened on 2 December; so is due to close in two days time. Notification being sent to all participants in the previous discussion Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_July_30#Template:BibleAsFact. Jheald (talk) 23:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Damian Rogers

Daisyrabbit (talk) 02:41, 20 December 2010 (UTC) Hello,

You have apparently deleted my article on Damian Rogers, a Toronto poet. I have cited additional supporting sources thereby removing what I think were the impediments to its inclusion on Wikipedia. Will you please re-instate the article?

Thanks, daisyrabbitDaisyrabbit (talk) 02:41, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not the one who performed the actual deletion. According to the log, the deleting admin was Bearcat (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), and the actual grounds for deletion was that the article was promotional. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 05:14, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Daisyrabbit (talk) 03:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC) Hello and thanks for responding. I don't see that my post was any more promotional than informational. Damian Rogers is a valid talent. The original complaint was that there were not enough sources cited for her work.

Reconfirmation diff to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe

Hello. This is a message to inform you that your name has been removed from from the list of Wikipedia Signpost subscribers. Do not worry; this is simply a method of reforming the Signpost so that automated bots do not fill up retired users' talk pages with Signpost subscriptions (see discussion here) and to make life easier for the Signpost. If you wish to re-receive subscriptions, please send a reconfirmation edit to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe by signing with

  1. MessageDeliveryBot [you can also use a user talk subpage (like
  2. MessageDeliveryBot, replacing SUBPAGE with the subpage for the delivery), but this won't trigger your "New messages" bar.] Thank you for understanding.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of TeleComNasSprVen (talk) at 05:46, 21 December 2010 (UTC).

The above seems to have been mass-reverted (both the spamlist edit and this msg itself on most talk pages) so there's nothing further you need to do; you'll still get the signpost. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

Dynamedion : 28 December 2010

Removed the offending "Award Winning" term and added citations of the awards. This is not "Advertising" and I am not a German composer.Dziemecki (talk) 18:00, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

WalesHome

Hey there, just to let you know that this article failed WP:A7 as the list of authors asserts significance, rather than notability. I suggest taking the article to AfD or even better, trying to find some sources to establish notability. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 11:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Please re-read WP:A7 before tagging any more articles. It clearly states: An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. - I'm having to decline a lot of the articles you have tagged as significance is indicated. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 12:29, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Answered on your talk page. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 04:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Columbia River Correctional Institution

I reinstated the db-copyvio tag at Columbia River Correctional Institution. The article is an unambiguous, word-for-word copyvio of the DOC website. Before removing a copyvio tag, please try to either run a google search or [control-f] to discover the copyvio. Thanks. Best regards, Cind.amuse 02:02, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

Vandalism warning?

Hello, you reverted an edit I made to an entry on Latin Dance. However, I've never edited (or indeed looked at) the entry on Latin Dance. You have the wrong IP address, since I'm the only one in this house that uses the internet. --88.109.8.239 (talk) 17:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

The warning was issued two and a half years ago, so I don't think any intelligent administrator will take it in consideration. Sometimes Internet providers change your IP address without warning you, and some even assign you a new address every time you log in. Those that give you a fixed IP address for a home connection are few and far between. If I were you, I wouldn't worry about it. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 23:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
This is indeed your IP, but it doesn't mean it's you. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 23:47, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

Speedy deletion declined: Oliver Laws

Hello Blanchardb. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Oliver Laws, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Sources provided are enough for A7. Take to AfD if required. Thank you. GedUK  22:05, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

New to this.

the Buddhism Research Institute is a school, exempted from your deletion under the cause stated. please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miao Victory (talk • contribs) 03:16, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

It might very well be, but please keep in mind that if the Institute has not received coverage in reliable third-party references such as major news sources, scholarly papers, etc., the article on it will not survive a deletion discussion. So your priority should be to show that such coverage already exists. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 03:22, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

The following are not reliable sources?

Time Warner Cable local news - http://capitalregion.ynn.com/content/top_stories/519730/amsterdam-residents-vote-on-two-proposals/ CBS Local News 6 - http://www.cbs6albany.com/news/says-1278830-power-solar.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miao Victory (talk • contribs) 04:39, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

They only mention the Research Centre trivially. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 22:18, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Dede sapi

I've tagged it as attack based on the Google translation and a Facebook page for Dede Sapi being in existence. It's vandalism anyway, whatever. Peridon (talk) 12:17, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Hellfire, it's gone already! Peridon (talk) 12:17, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

Really?

This isn't a challenge or a threat, just curiosity. I had my hat handed to me back in October for too easily tagging articles for speedy deletion and I thought that I had since come to a better understanding of that subject until I came onto this nomination removal. Would you consider telling me what you found to be an assertion of importance or significance in that article at that time? Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 22:17, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

If you look at the infobox, the band's name there isn't a redlink. It links to an article on the Spanish Wikipedia about said band, and that article does meet our standards of notability, although I am not sure about the standards of the Spanish Wikipedia. Anyway, more information about this person can be found in the Spanish Wikipedia article, which we could translate. I just haven't gotten around to that. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 01:55, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
OK, I see. Many thanks for the explanation, I just didn't get it. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 14:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Talk:List of YouTube personalities#RfC: The criteria for inclusion on List of YouTube personalities

Hi Blanchardb. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of YouTube celebrities (4th nomination), your input is sought at Talk:List of YouTube personalities#RfC: The criteria for inclusion on List of YouTube personalities. There are disputes over who should be and who shouldn't be included in the list. Cunard (talk) 23:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

Nomination of Theresa M. Kelly for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Theresa M. Kelly is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theresa M. Kelly until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shannon Rose Talk 17:17, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

CSD change

Hey, you put an insufficent CSD on Macrimedia. The page is written in Italian, so I believe although it may appear to be whatever CSD you put it under, it should be put under CSD A2 and then Admins here or on Italian Wikipedia should figure it out. --Sushiflinger (Goldblattster) (talk!) 16:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I didn't check whether it exists on the Italian Wikipedia. I did check the machine translation, however, and it was a clear A7 regardless of what language it's written in. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 16:16, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Keep in mind that foreign-language Wikipedias have their own criteria and procedures regarding speedy deletion, and just because an article is not speedable in the Italian Wikipedia doesn't mean it is not speedable here in the English. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 16:27, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

SEO Analyzt

I'm not trying to get you to overturn your speedy rejection here, as once a speedy is contested, regular deletion process is necessary, but I do want to explain myself better about why it was nominated. The article was created by a user with the same name. Moreover, the language included was formatted as a poem or song lyrics, implying nonsense or at least clearly non-article material regardless of language. I think the speedy nom was legitimate. i kan reed (talk) 18:34, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll support whatever happens, and though I won't endorse your PROD just yet, I won't contest it either. Please keep in mind that at WP:PNT we have several tools at our disposal to determine whether an article is worth the trouble of translating, and where no translator can be found in a timely fashion, the material ends up being deleted anyway. I, too, was unable to identify the language: both Indonesian and Malay gave me sketchy translations, which leads me to believe we're dealing with either poorly written material in either one of these languages, or with another language of the same family which Google doesn't yet recognize. --- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 18:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
At PNT we believe that this is actually some transliterated language from the Indian sub-continent which would be the explanation for Google translation failing with the text. Google translation may recognize Hindi or Urdu but not when it's written in Latin letters. That aside, the article does in fact look like a poem and the author wrote a comment in fluent English on their user page, so hmm... De728631 (talk) 19:44, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
P.S. while I wrote this it seems the article had been deleted. De728631 (talk) 19:45, 22 April 2011 (UTC) Not deleted, recreated at Seo Analyzt. De728631 (talk) 19:46, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Speed Deletion for Shear Thickening

Hello. My students are developing an article on shear thickening fluids. [[1]] Since it will take several weeks, they are keeping the working draft in a subpage of the userpage of one of their team members. The article won't be posted until I have vetted it. Please let me know (on this page is fine) if we need to change this procedure. Thanks! Hagen76 (talk) 16:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

Chris Julian (speedway rider)‎

BLP prod is not appropriate here as the article is about an individual who is dead. I have therefore removed the tag. If you still wish the article to be deleted, add a regular prod or take it to AFD. Thanks. --Anthem of joy (talk) 10:22, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

Mountain Youth Center in North Carolina

Why did you change it to a redirect page? I'm reverting, if you can give me a decent reason to leave it as is. Ncboy2010 (talk) 01:23, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:SCHOOL, elementary schools are normally not worthy of separate Wikipedia articles. Unless you can show that this school does meet our general notability guidelines, if you revert the redirect, I might send the article to Articles for Deletion for a discussion. If the discussion's outcome is to delete, that means you'll lose even the redirect. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 01:26, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

templates

Sorry about that, it looked like vandalism to me.--1966batfan (talk) 21:40, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Stuttering Foundation of America

Blanchardb- First of all, thanks for your attentiveness to this article. I am wondering why it was reverted to the previous version, when my edit included relevant references and removal of incorrect information. Please let me know what I can do to meet the needs of this page and have the templates removed. Thanks, Eric — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bivings (talk • contribs) 15:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

WikiProject New page

As you may know, the project is inactive, but I just joined. I thought that we should verify that each member is active. If you want to keep being in this wikiproject, please write "# {{user|Blanchardb/Archive 12}}" here; if you do not do it before 19:17, 11 June 2011 (UTC), you will be removed from the list. All the users that were removed will be put onto this page. Thank you,

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

Sea Island at Night

Err... While you PRODed the page I simultaneously speedeed it not knowing of your prod. My question: Which 1 do we keep? Speedy or Prod? —Abhishek Talk to me 04:28, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Both. If the speedy gets rejected, then the prod remains. That happens quite often, by the way, so don't worry about it. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 04:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Ok thanks. —Abhishek Talk to me 04:32, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: BIOPAT

Hello Blanchardb. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of BIOPAT, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 23:48, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the version you saw was quite different than the one I tagged. There are still concerns about notability, but none that warrant a speedy deletion anymore. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 01:25, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. Logan Talk Contributions 02:26, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

Speedy deletion declined

Hi, I declined your speedy deletion request for Hyehwa High School. It did not appear to be spam to me. LadyofShalott 03:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

Rocky (album)‎

Hello, please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mrpemdasrescue. Nothing about a new album on the band's website, and this hoaxer specialises in articles about films and albums. Thanks, Gurt Posh (talk) 19:13, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Then the article will be eligible for a G5 speedy (banned user) once the sockpuppetry is confirmed and the user blocked. The very fact you're asking me to check into the band's website is enough for me to regard the G3 criterion as inapplicable. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 19:21, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

Ingenious literary gems in Don Quijote de la Mancha

Hi Blanchardb. It's OK by me, whatever you consider to be best. You may have noticed that I moved the relevant information from the new article into the main article of Don Quixote. I posted the same contribution to es.Wikipedia and -- to my surprise -- it was deleted. I posted two messages to the forum in Centro Virtual Cervantes (http://cvc.cervantes.es/foros/default.asp?vforo=13) and I also sent an email to Rubén Gallo (<gallo@princeton.edu>), professor of Spanish literature at Princeton University; I am waiting for replies. Saludos desde México. Cheers, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wkboonec (talk • contribs) 16:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

Akshardham (New Jersey)

What is the exact procedure for Articles for Deletion not under G7? The last post on the discussion was made by me on the 11th. You had removed the tag due to 2 recent IP edits (both of which were biased edits and borderline vandalism). Thank you The World 21:21, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Okay, that's not what I saw, but then, I didn't spend a lot of time evaluating the pertinence of the IPs' edits, given that they were still part of the article when it was nominated for deletion. Actually, those edits were closer to spam than vandalism.
You might want to use a proposed deletion. The way it works is that you put a proposed deletion tag on which you state the reason why you want the article deleted, and if no one objects within 7 days the article gets deleted. Simple as that. And if someone objects, then the article can go to Articles for deletion, where your article went, for a discussion. In some cases that might speed up the deletion process if the article is clearly undeserving and no speedy deletion criteria apply. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 21:46, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

iMAR, Sept. 03 2011

Hi, iMAR is a leader in certain markets and therefore fulfills the criteria. WE didn't add thise to avoid advertiding impression. How to continue? We can add the technolgy milestones. Waiting for your advice.

Why my page is deleted without any backup and comment - or where I can find it for update?

Best regards Edgar v. Hinüber, Edgar v. Hinüber (talk) 18:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC) --Edgar v. Hinüber (talk) 20:34, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

The page is no longer accessible, but if I remember correctly, the language used in it was indeed what I'd expect to see in the company's own literature, and that is by itself problematic. Adding "technology milestones" would only compound the problem. What I suggest is that you make a first draft built only from reliable sources not affiliated in any way with the company. By that, I mean the kind of sources where you can't ask for any changes to be made without involving your attorney in the process.
Given that you seem to be affiliated with the company, you are inherently in a conflict of interest when editing an article about it. Given that you deny the promotional nature of the language in the article you submitted even though it was blatant, it would be best if you just wait for someone else to start the article. Someone who never got any suggestion from you, either directly or indirectly. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 23:58, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the hints. But what is the difference in language to other companies in Wikipedia? Take e.g. Atlas Elektronik. Your explanation would be highly appreciated. I think, others can add their thoughts to the article, but the base of an artikle should have a solid foundation. So please propose how to change the content to fulfill your criteria. Thanks in advance, Best regards, EvH, --Edgar v. Hinüber (talk) 10:18, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

By its very nature, Wikipedia will have lots of stuff that will pass through the cracks, but that's no reason to widen said cracks. Someone saw your comment to me before I did and marked the article for deletion. I won't object. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 00:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

Speedy deletion speed

Please don't tag articles for speedy deletion within 1 minute of their creation, except maybe in cases of copy-vios or attack pages, like you did with Cemetery Rapist. For all we know, the editor who made the article intended to add more information to the article, but, after seeing it was going to immediately be deleted, gave up, disheartened. WP:NPP says recommends no less than 15 minutes after the last edit; personally, I never tag anything as A7 less than a few hours after the last edit. Speedy deletion is already fast enough; no harm comes in leaving a non-notable article up on Wikipedia for a few hours, and the damage done to new contributors through over-hasty deletion tagging is very real. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:07, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Greenqloud

l am not affiliated with this company nor am l paid in any way. The information is factual. Iceland does, in fact, have specific advantages over other countries in hosting. l created this page based on research conducted on the internet about this company and Iceland's hosting services in general. In light of the actual advantages that Iceland has with web hosting, l'd like to know what kind of information or what tone of voice would make this article not "sound like an advertisement".

Ellesmelle (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

It comes across as an advert, extolling the virtues of "green" web hosting. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 08:54, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

The editor exudes cynicism and prejudice over the possibility of businesses addressing social and ecological problems. The editor should, instead, speak on the article's discussion page and comment that there is only positive information on the page. Sometimes there is only positive information because nothing is actually wrong/ negative about a subject. Just because there are companies out there which exploit green marketing does not mean that all companies addressing ecological problems are not conscientious/ representing themselves in a false manner. Zealous fault-finding is actually a display of bias.

Wikipedia has plenty of spam and viral advertising which are not marked/ reviewed with the vigour that contributors without apparent social clout on the site receive. It is defamation. Ellesmelle (talk) 17:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Anything about the virtues (or lack thereof) of "green" web hosting should go in an article about green web hosting in general. In an article about a specific company, it is quite simply off-topic, since the virtues of green web hosting will not go away should the company go belly up. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 20:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

ABAS Software

Hello Blanchardb, you asked me to sign my posts.... but where exactly??? I am trying to enhance my article, hope it's getting better from the point of not being an advertisment and finding reliable sources. But if you have tips I would be happy to hear about them.... Sawa123 (talk) 08:26, 9 September 2011 (UTC)sawa123Sawa123 (talk) 08:26, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Dear Blanchardb, I have already asked you one question about the signature. I am still not sure about this. But what I am concerned about now is that I am still enhancing my article, but while I am doing that another user is marking it for deletion. Could you please help me with dealing with that. Thank you very much. Sawa123 (talk) 09:30, 9 September 2011 (UTC)sawa123Sawa123 (talk) 09:30, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I didn't ask you to sign your posts, though I believe it's a good idea that you do. Some robot did that. See User:Sinebot. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 21:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
As for how to save the article from deletion, you should, in your mind, restart your article from scratch using only information found in references not affiliated in any way with ABAS. What I'm talking about here is the kind of reference over whose contents (and over whose very existence!) ABAS has absolutely zero control. This would ensure that the article is talking about a company that has already established itself as a significant player in its domain, and not some startup trying to make up for a lack of notoriety by using Wikipedia as a free web host. If that can't be done, then I'm afraid that means Wikipedia can't have an article on that company for the time being. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 21:26, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

Thanks for the note

When seeing a mass nomination of 20 or 40 or 60 articles, I cringe. So a nomination of just 12 articles was not too much a problem to research, and was addressable. I appreciate the note and will cut and paste my delete or keep rationales. Thanks for the heads-up. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 18:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I know the author received warnings and invitations to the various help pages... but do you think it would be useful to encourage hin to study the one-stop-shop of WP:PRIMER? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:04, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I would think so. He was blocked for going too fast in the wrong direction, not for vandalism. As a matter of fact, I'm not sure he even took time to read the warnings on his talk page about AfD tag removals before continuing his work. Note also that he never attempted to undo a tag reinsertion. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 19:15, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
Wow. I had a similar situation recently and when I took the issue to ANI they were quite forgiving of a more blatant and continued removal after repeated warnings. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:36, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Also, Blanchard, thanks for splitting up the AfD. I appreciate the work. Moogwrench (talk) 01:19, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

My bad on Dar ul Iftah

I'm trying to figure out how I missed that it was on the page it redirected to - sorry about that. Inks.LWC (talk) 00:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem. That's what WP:TROUT is here for. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 00:45, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

Speed of light

You have just added {{coi}} to this article with no explanation and no corresponding talk page section. Please create and link a talk page section explaining your concern. --Mirokado (talk) 00:56, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Uh, yeah, I tried to undo myself. I tagged the wrong article. Sorry about that. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 00:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Worst part is, I lost track of the article I was trying to tag. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 01:00, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Bad luck! (Another editor sorted the coi out.) --Mirokado (talk) 01:17, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for helping me always, Blanchardb.

expect you kind hearted towards my article with my entire respect for you and your family. God bless you Godissupreme (talk) 16:14, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


"Quote of the Day"

I've declined your request as the article is far from short, and does establish some sort of context. I have absolutely no objection to a different category being tried, and an trying to think of one myself... Probably needs a prod. Peridon (talk) 19:16, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

It's probably a copyvio, but I haven't found it... Peridon (talk) 19:21, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Anyway, I've sent it directly to AfD, hoping for a WP:SNOW delete. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 19:23, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Blanchardb. You have new messages at VQuakr's talk page.
Message added 03:32, 5 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

VQuakr (talk) 03:32, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

About European Institute of Purchasing Management - thank you

Hi Blanchardb!

  • 17:33, 4 October 2011‎ Blanchardb (talk | contribs)‎ (991 bytes) (Declining speedy. Not unambiguously promotional, but problems remain. Please send to AfD if you disagree.) (undo)

Ooops! I was obviously too quick on the WP:G11 button. Watchlisted, and lets see how it works out. Thanks again.--Shirt58 (talk) 11:32, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

For your comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/زوجة الأب. very useful. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:50, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trust Me, I'm Dr. Ozzy

Just a note that I have considered your note to the closing admin and have relisted this AFD despite 2 deletes and no keeps. Let's see if its release brings a visit from the "source fairy". --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

Survey for new page patrollers

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Blanchardb/Archive 12! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 11:45, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

NPP

Hey. I have always checked new pages via filters but never "patrolled" via NPP much until a few days ago. I noticed that you're patrolling pages sometimes at one per 12 seconds. How do you pull that off? OlYeller21Talktome 21:50, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Basically, the ones you that require no action on the part of the patroller are the ones that will allow you to go that fast (or seemingly so, since the preparatory work doesn't get logged anywhere). When I take a look at Special:NewPages, I quickly browse the list to see which entries are more likely to require immediate action. Usually, it takes me about a minute or two to deal with an obvious delete, and, when I tag a page, I fetch my edit summary from a Windows-maintained list of recently used edit summaries, so I only need to type the first few letters. (The beauty of it is that I can custom-make an edit summary at any moment, though that takes a bit longer.) Obvious keeps take a lot less time since they require no action, and since they're dealt with dead last what gets logged is me checking 5 pages per minute. In some cases, I will just click on a page so I can mark it as partrolled without even looking at it: having seen similar pages mass-produced by the same editor is enough to tell me that we're dealing with a valid stub.
In short, since I patrol obvious keeps after I've dealt with the obvious deletes, I'm doing something the logs aren't saying anything about, so the "one patrolled page per 12 seconds" isn't really accurate. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 22:15, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Ah, OK. That makes sense. I've been going from the back and I think a lot of the articles have been viewed but not marked patrolled because they're a little ambiguous as far as what action should be taken. It's taking me about 4 minutes per page so the idea of going faster made me think you had a mod or something that was making it easier.
Keep up the good work! OlYeller21Talktome 00:03, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

Changing article status

Hi. I'm just letting you know that I have declined the CSD on Nickie Lum Shapira which was also previously CSD tagged by another editor. G12: After checking the dup detector, there really is not much that is copied, and what is could be edited out. G11: Yes , it's very spammy, use of first name throughout, has no personal background, and reads like a potted CV. However, it does make some substantial claims to notability. I've BLPPRODed the article, tagged it for issues, and placed an explanation on its talk page. You might wish to use the dup detector to edit the minor copyvios out, but that's entirely up to you, I value your experience in these matters. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:16, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I did use the dup detector. IMO, there was enough copied and paraphrased to make this a G12, though I admit it was a borderline case. Keep in mind that paraphrases that are too close to the original do qualify as copyvios. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 01:48, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Funny - none of us think exactly alike! I had a big 98% copyvio CSD declined yesterday by another admin which I did feel was completely unsalvageable - perhaps that's why I was cautious with yours. Oh well... let's just keep up the good work  :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:10, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Blanchardb/Archive_12&oldid=1089761090"