User talk:Carlossuarez46/Archive 7

Need info on content deletion

Thanks for working on the entry for Bravo Location Rentals, you have removed as section about some employees certification and I would like to know why? If it's sounds like an advert, it wasn't meant as is and would like to correct it for the other language. Thanks. BruB (talk) 07:30, 24 February 2009

I see that you deleted the entry for 'Hipster Runoff,' an incredibly popular and, yes, "relevent" cultural website, with a lot of traffic and a lot of buzz in the mainstream media. Why was it deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.239.170.17 (talk) 23:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your tip; please give me more info.

Thanks for your comment on my talk page. I make a lot of edits and am not sure exactly which edit you are referring to. Can you let me know which edit you are referring to? And I will be sure to not make the same mistake again. Thanks! --Anthony5429 (talk) 05:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Julianna Raye

I think that there should be an entry on Julianna Raye, a contemporary singer-songwriter who has worked with a number of other eminent people who themselves have WP entries. If the reason that you deleted it back in 2007 was because the article itself was poorly written, I'd be willing to take a stab at writing the first draft of a proper entry. If there is some other reason, please let me know. If there is a way to view the deleted article itself, I haven't been able to figure out how to do that. DanielLevitin (talk) 21:40, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Hello, Carlossuarez46. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at [[1]] regarding Creation of numerous articles that are only stubs for place names. Thank you. Meowy 21:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of malls in Pennsylvania

I don't see what's so unverifiable about this list at all. I've expanded it to include all the malls in Pennsylvania that I know of (I was bored one month so I made a list of every mall in the US, past and pressent). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 21:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, there haven't been any disputes on the other mall lists as to what constitutes a "mall". I still don't see what's unmaintanable about it either. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 21:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for the list, I think that in a case like this, a list can say more than a category can. The list can give details like each mall's size, when it opened/closed, any other historical significance — and things like that can't really be covered in a category. Now, if it were List of malls in Wyoming, it might be different since I know Wyoming only has three. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 14:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scottish family law

this is not like the almost empty geo stubs you quite reasonably frequently complain about-- please see my comments there. I think the proper course is to withdraw and apologize. DGG (talk) 06:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scottish family law

Hello Carlo, you do realise that you are in effect trying to say that articles should never be created as stubs. That is a very silly position to take, and I'll look forward to you being a little bit more thoughtful in future! I'm sure that if you read the deletion policies, it does not say things should be deleted when there is clear potential for them to develop into subjects in their own right. I know you're just trying to do a good job, cleaning up and so on though. But it's a good thing that it wasn't an angry red haired Scottish person that made these articles! Wik idea 10:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is that Albanian property law would be a good stub, because at some point people will want to write an article for it! I agree about Perth weather or Scottish house, but they are not articles that are likely to have a substantial amount of academic literature to put in. I know you see the sense in this. As I said, putting in the stub is valuable because someone will expand on it. Here's what an amazon search brings, eg on Scottish Family Law. You've got a whole country of students learning this stuff. It's valuable, so don't go on wasting time here. There's so many more useless things you could be deleting. :) Wik idea 14:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, Wikidea, the stub being discussed at the AfD was justified because you yourself were actually writing articles on the subject and thus following up--you merely hadn't gotten to this one yet. Actually, we would almost certainly have enough information for Perth weather, and as for Scottish houses: Worldcat shows, on the art and architecture aspect alone, both for great houses and the working classes 86 books--let alone articles. DGG (talk) 15:52, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Response to your comment

First off, it's not a "threat". I'm not trying to coerce you, I'm stating a fact. I'm not threatening to block you because Meowy, a user I have never encountered before, wants you blocked. I said I would block if the article creation in question continued because articles creating thousands of new articles of questionable merit and no way to revert any changes is of questionable legitimacy. It wouldn't matter if this were about random villages of 11 people in the middle of Azerbaijan or a list of celebrities with comb-overs, the issue is that you are essentially making it impossible to turn back your edits, steamrolling your changes. The issue may not be with you, but if a people wished ill will they could just as easily created hundreds of hoax articles and there would be similarly no easy way to keep track of the changes and delete all the pages. Such actions are in violation of the spirit of WP:BRD, as no reasonable reversions can be made if editors disagree with your actions. There are legitimate claims that your edits run afoul of WP:NOT and WP:GNG, and suggestions that when creating articles they should meet the bare standards of notability and of context (which I think is more sensible than essentially abandoning them and telling other editors to fix them because you won't be bothered.) Thanks for complaining about a lack of WP:AGF and then suggesting blocking you is an abuse of my user-rights; glad to see god has shown you and only you the one true path. If there's mediation or arbitration about me, I won't participate, it's a waste of everyone's time. I suggest you be considerate of others and discuss the issue with those who are concerned rather than crying wolf; that's a much more rational and productive method of action. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 22:29, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John Beck (Scammer)

No problems with deletion. The redirect was blanked, so I reverted. I have not done any research on the subject. Guy0307 (talk) 22:22, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User talk:Outsider80

thanks for the tip about the dab project tag, i will keep it in mind on any future dab-page creations or edits. Outsider80^(User0529) (talk) 08:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Archive category

Hi there. Just to say that one of your archives contains a category tag for Christian mythology. Could you perhaps remove it please? I'd do it myself, but it's a bit rude to edit someone else's archives (especially when there's an explicit instruction not to do this). At the moment your archive is listed inappropriately alongside a number of WP articles. Cheers, --PLUMBAGO 14:42, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cell (Dragon Ball)

This redirect isn't working because the admin who locked the page slapped a template onto it, causing this link to become mundane. Can you fix this puzzling circumstance? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That did the trick. Much appreciated ;) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 01:08, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: mediation

I'm not the one that needs to drag you and Meowy to the table. The issue is not creating places, it's you doing it at such a rate that no one can revert you; I've said all this before. That's the issue that needs to be taken care of. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 21:50, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No one should have to spend months digging through anyone's contributions. It's bizarre that it was brought up at AN months afterwards. But if there is a legitimate issue, you should be trying dispute resolution with Meowy, not me. Doing it, even when there is clear controversy, is pointy and disruptive. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 22:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because mediation is a waste of time. I'd rather be improving articles. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 22:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Sorry, I didn't see your last message until I checked the history.) ...It seems I'm not making myself clear. The issue is not the creation of pages for places most people have never heard of (or at least, not to me; as I've said before, I've never encountered Meowy, he could be an amazing troll, that's not the point in this case). During the rather otherwise-pointless noticeboard report a number of others were concerned about the sort of bot-like actions you were taking with these articles, to the point that it would be very hard for one or even a couple of users to find them all and tag them; it's essentially laying the burden of "proving this isn't a hoax/is suitable for inclusion" on others and disrupts the 'pedia. That's the issue here. A far more useful way of proceeding would be either to sort out your baggage with Meowy, or start a thread on AN or wherever is an appropriate venue about your previous actions. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 04:57, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

date of birth missing should be placed in the talk page

Hi. Concerning this edit I would like to inform you that Category:Date of birth missing (living people) and Category:Place of birth missing (living people) should be place in talk pages only. Moreover, please check WP:BLP to see when the addition of the firts category is really necessary. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 00:20, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Faerie's Aire and Death Waltz

Why did you delete this? The only justifiable reason would be violation of copyright in the case that the entire musical piece was posted to wiki. In such a case supplimentary information should have remained uncencored. -Unit335 (talk) 02:04, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete the AFD itself for Faerie's Aire and Death Waltz? - Dandv (talk) 00:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The AFD wasn't deleted, it can be found at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/John_Stump. ff m 23:14, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I appreciate your quick deletion of my userspace request. H₂O Shipper 02:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi Carlos! About this edition, I really don't know how it works, should we be putting this on every short disambiguation entry? Thanks --Againme (talk) 20:44, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right on! Thanks for the explanation.--Againme (talk) 21:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Action Figure Displays

Please reconsider your deletion request for Action Figure Displays. The 2 sources sited are legitimate and more can be found on the Internet in toy collecting communities. If it sounds too much like an advert, then a re-write would be better than deletion.

Wwfhasbro (talk) 17:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 80 support, 2 oppose, and 1 neutral. I appreciate all the comments I received and will endeavor to justify the trust the community has placed in me. R'n'B (call me Russ) 21:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tunis

Hi, I believe you understand French well? Perhaps you could help translate this core article into English? It will be gradual but any help would be much appreciated given other commitments. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 18:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for your support in the recent overcategorization discussions at CFD. I see you have actually read, and believe we should follow, the guidelines.--Editor2020 (talk) 18:47, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:Bumbumcheekhobo

I was going to block the account, but since it's not a blatant username violation, I'd rather wait to see if the account does any more editing. After that, I'll be able to make a decision. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

heh :) –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:55, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent celebrity deaths

Hi, Can you explain why this is not a desirable edit? I don't get why it was reverted. Thanks, Banyan Tree 08:27, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be darned. Thanks for pointing that out. I've submitted a bugzilla report. - Banyan Tree 22:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Service in Informatics and Analysis

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_in_Informatics_and_Analysis)

I am the author of this page and it is my first Wiki article. I am sorry if I have contravened one of the rules or guidelines, but I have read them and cannot decide which I have one I have transgressed. Can you point me to the problem area(s) so that I can correct them before you delete the article?

I worked for the company between 1976 and 1989 and still meet with a number of its ex-employees. The company no longer exists, so there is no attempt to advertise, merely an attempt to mark a place in history where it existed.

There are several references to the company's existence in documents from one of its customers (British American Tobacco) which have been archived by the University of California - Legacy Tobacco Documents Library. See http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qvd46a99 and view the PDF, it contains a brochure from SIA decribing its services. One can use the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library to find several other references to SIA.

Here are some more references to Service in Informatics and Analysis:

1)The Ethics of Educational Research By Robert G. Burgess Published by Routledge, 1989 ISBN 1850002983, 9781850002987

page 227 has this reference:

... for SIA (Service in Informatics and Analysis) Ltd. From 1984 to 1988 he was a research fellow at the Centre for Educational Sociology (CES), ...

2)Communicating the forecasts: mail and 50 baud to RMDCN Book Medium-Range Weather Prediction Publisher Springer New York DOI 10.1007/b138324 Copyright 2006 ISBN 978-0-387-26928-3 (Print) 978-0-387-26929-0 (Online)

page 214 has this reference

The chosen contractor was Service in Informatics and Analysis. (UK) Ltd (or SIA) who supplied the software, with A/S Regnecentralen of ...

see: http://www.springerlink.com/content/g157366725223017/fulltext.pdf

SIA6600 (talk) 14:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A centralised discussion which may interest you

Hi. You may be interested in a centralised discussion on the subject of "lists of unusual things" to be found here. SP-KP (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Le Mans race track

Hallo, I wonder what this edit is good for? The move by User:The359 is anything but uncontroversial, see talk page. -- Matthead Discuß 21:00, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reed Cowan

I invite you to revisit the article and AfD. I have given the article a bit of a cleanup, finding proper wikilinks, sources, amd importantly, sourcing his Emmy wins and nominations. Though the article still needs work, I hope you'll consider it now worth retaining. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose at Root's RfA

A note - the candidate is not involved in any pending RfArb, that case was back in the summer of 06, almost three years ago. Would you strike that bit? Thanks. — neuro^(talk) 17:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

My RFA passed today at 150/48/6. I wanted to thank you for weighing in on the RFA--I will do everything I can to uphold the policies of this site, and try to make it a better place. All the comments, questions, and in particular the opposes I plan to work on and learn from, so that I can hopefully always do the right thing with the huge trust given to me. rootology (C)(T) 08:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Sinuessa

On February 3, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sinuessa, 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.

Dravecky (talk) 01:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

A redirect works exactly the same way regardless of whether there's a space between "#REDIRECT" and the target article's name or not. Why bother removing spaces from the redirects if it doesn't change the functionality at all? Bearcat (talk) 04:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Cowan

You opined a delete at the AfD for the Reed Cowan article when seeing it as this. The original article went though quite a few changes and had major sourcing addressing notability added after you commented. Unfortunately the final improvements were too late... as the article was deleted only 25 minutes later and before any who thought the original unworthy could comment or respond inre the improved and sourced version. I seek your input in regards the improved and sourced version that was deleted after the improvement. Thank you. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop already with the redirect edits

What's up with all those tweaky changes? Just salting redirects? Dicklyon (talk) 04:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of incivil, thanks for the response. But what about this one? Dicklyon (talk) 04:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't broken, as far as I can tell, like the guy two slots up said as well. Dicklyon (talk) 04:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I rolled it back; still works fine for me; if it doesn't work for you, let's investigate why. Dicklyon (talk) 04:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you slow down and tell us what's going on? You say it was broken, yet when I roll back your change it works fine. What am I missing? We could keep this discussion here. Dicklyon (talk) 05:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, what's up with removing the spaces. Just do a null edit instead, or wait until it happens by itself. Also, cut the rudeness. --Apoc2400 (talk) 12:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

validity (disambiguation)

Why have you deleted the above article Validity (disambiguation)?--User:Philogo|Philogo]] (talk) 13:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009

Please refrain from deleting dab redirects which meet the requirements of Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Links to disambiguation pages. Corn (disambiguation) and Validity (disambiguation) are perfectly fine. Also, enough with the tedious task of making unnecessary edits to redirects in general (such as here) which don't seem to be helping anyone. If you're gonna reply, do so on your talk page (which I've watchlisted). Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you aren't aware that there's a redirect bug that needs manual fixing. If you had read the posts above, or at WP:VPT you'd have learned that. Rather, you decide to make your uncivil post. If you cannot understand something, please ask rather than scream "enough" or "unnecessary" -- see Seagate, Brooklyn for an unfixed example to the problem. I will also leave you a civility warning on your talk page for your meanness. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tried asking, but you didn't answer, and left you unhelpful incivil reply on my talk page instead of above. If you had left an actual answer, someone else could have read it. But as I said, you should stop anyway, and see if the bug can be fixed instead of you tweaking hundreds of redirects into a nonstandard state. Dicklyon (talk) 20:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Et in Arcadia ego

You have deleted Et in Arcadia ego. Do you want to know why it is correct? Hint: think about Arcadia.--Wetman (talk) 09:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was unnecessarily tart, especially under the circumstances. I regret having thought you made the error of moving the article to Et in arcadia ego. I should have realized it couldn't possibly have been you. I get too testy after a long session of cleaning up. My apologies to you. --Wetman (talk) 11:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion that may interest you

The AFD for List of programmes broadcast by 8TV (Malaysia) doesn't seem to have attracted much attention, I know that you have an interest in this kind of thing so perhaps you would care to share your opinion. Benefix (talk) 19:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wurstcamp

Hello, I was looking through the AfD board for the Food & Drink Project and I noticed that you nominated the article Wurstcamp for deletion on 22 January 2009, but did not set up a discussion. I have done so and would like for you to provide a reason why it should deleted, otherwise I will be removing the tag and discussion.

Thanks --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 19:45, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I missed that. It is back up but it should get some extra time for debate, even though it looks to be a delete. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 20:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{afd2}} revert

Not a problem - hopefully someone else can find a way to convince those closing AfDs early to stop. It's becoming ridiculous with debates regularly closed 2 days early. As for closing hoax articles early.....personally if I am positive it's a hoax it gets a Speedy G3 delete regardless of the time the Afd has run for. Happy editing - Peripitus (Talk) 11:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection request

Please unprotect {{UF-hcard-geo}}. None of its sister-templates (e.g. {{UF-hcard-name}}, {{UF-hcard-person}}) are protected, and I often have cause to change them. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:45, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bilateral relations articles

Personally, I'm skeptical about any attempt of imposing a uniform naming scheme. It won't work linguistically. Country names are a grammatically heterogeneous bunch. Some are proper names, some are NPs with definite articles, some are more complex syntactic NPs. Some have conventional and well-known acronym versions (UK, US), some don't. The ones that are formally proper names usually have adjectives, many of the others don't. In some cases, the adjectives are transparently regular, in others not. Some have classicising pseudo-prefix versions (Anglo-, Franco-, Greco-, Italo-, Sino-), others don't. Plus, there is some variance for political reasons: some country names are ambiguous without their syntactic long forms (Congo), some possibly contentiously so (China, Macedonia).

The ill-judged reaction to these problems, originating with a small group of editors obsessed with home-brewed notions of "regularity", was to impose an artificially uniform naming scheme that went straight against the rules of natural English. I consider this scheme (noun–noun compounds) completely unacceptable. The natural wiki way is to return to the natural variaty of whatever solutions local editors found to work and "sound right" in their individual cases, based on those articles that were actually written individually by local editors and not as mechanically mass-produced stubs.

If we want to talk about unifying some, we could talk about getting rid of the classicising prefixes in favour of regular adjectives, where that's a straightforward option (i.e. Italian-Xian rather than Italo-Xian). I have no strong opinion on how to deal with the syntactically complex ones where a proper adjective might not be easily available. The politically complex ones (China, Macedonia, perhaps a few others) should be left for separate consideration. Under no circumstance should we allow these exceptional cases to force us into adopting solutions for the normal ones that are linguistically unnatural. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Truth in Numbers: The Wikipedia Story

Hi,

Can I ask why this page was deleted, considering that it was already a redirect to the current talk for the relative article? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:02, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've now restored this as a redirect to Talk:Truth in Numbers. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 11:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nils Janson

Your nomination doesn't fully explain why you think he fails WP:MUSIC because it addresses just one of the criteria. It leaves out WP:GNG and the other 11 criteria that might apply. Also, if you consider his solo album not notable, then why did you not redirect to the notable band he played in? - Mgm|^(talk) 12:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

please restore

Please restore Talk:New York Route 382.

This is helpful because that's the official name of the road, not New York State Route 382. This needs to be discussed but not right now because it would create confusion as the article is up for awards. After receiving it, then a calm discussion can be made. For now, please restore. Chergles (talk) 16:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you restore it and I could leave a discussion on the future renaming it to New York Route 382? No harm occurs if it is restored. Thank you. Chergles (talk) 18:08, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kougari Oval

No so much a protest as an expansion... care to take another look? Grutness...wha? 00:58, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Place names for cities

Hi Carlossuarez46,

I noticed you created articles for cities and towns using the native alphabet of the country for which the town belongs. I think this articles should use the english language per Wikipedia:Proper_names#Place_names. Thoughts? Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 01:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nils Janson

To clarify: yes, it's not reasonable to expect people to counter all criteria, but mentioning just one while it's quite possible he meets other criteria is not good either. I suggest you look at the 4 most common ones WP:GNG, "2-albums on notable label", charting, and awards. That should take care of the most obvious and easy to find information. (Anyway, you can't properly say it fails music before you checked them all. It's better to say you THINK it fails music because you tried multiple criteria and they all failed) -- Mgm|^(talk) 10:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Thanks for your support in my RfA, which closed with 83 ayes to the right, one no to left and five abstaining users!
Sabre (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NaSTA

In reply to your warning for vandalism, i was trying to fix the redirect, as there is an actual page for NaSTA and rather than going to that page you get redirected to national student televsion. I wasnt aware that i couldnt fix this redirect myself on deletion of the original redirect. So if you can could change that redirect please Xrateddan (talk) 08:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Frost Bros.

I disputed your prod on Frost Bros. I have been able to find plenty of sources which could easily make for a much better article. For some reason, retail articles are usually prone to suckage here on Wikipedia, leaving me to do all the grunt work (kidding). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Thanks for your work on geography of Azerbaijan. Especially for articles on cities, towns and villages. Here is a barnstar [2]! Ateshi-Baghavan 19:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Carlossuarez46. You have new messages at Bongomatic's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deletion - Stonecroft Ministries

I wrote an article on Stonecroft Ministries and researched it completely. Can you kindly explain how it is advertising? The article is completely factual, accurate, and objective with no advertising that I can identify. I am an independant person, not affiliated with this organization. Please advise. Thanks. (MHoudmann (talk) 03:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for your help with the Stonecroft Ministries article. I have made changes according to your advice. Can you give me guidance on where to submit those changes so they can be reviewed? Do I submit the article as new? Thanks. (MHoudmann (talk) 23:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Coup de Vitesse

Resolved

I noticed you added a longcomment to the redirect page "Coup de Vitesse" which became a redirect today because of my merge. I'd like to ask why this is done? I have not seen this on other redirects. Debresser (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed it looked strange. How does that happen? Debresser (talk) 11:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Acherontiscus or however it's spelled

Did you even bother to Google it before trying to get the article deleted? It is indeed a genus of prehistoric amphibian. Do a quick search and you'll find all the cites you need. Abyssal (talk) 02:34, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a helpful approach might be better than simply pressing the "delete" button.

I am finding out there are a lot of folks vying to be the "fastest deleter on Wikipedia"...... might i suggest a more helpful approach for articles that have SOME merit to them? A case in point would be failed redirects - like mine where i tried to redirect "Wisconson glaciation", to the "Ice Age" article. Instead of just pulling the trigger - bang its gone - why not simply fix the redirect and instruct the person involved in how to do it via a short message - would only take a couple of seconds, and would instruct and help rather than discourage and irritate.

Regarding place-name stubs, except in extreme cases - such as the 11 person micro-village mentioned above - these are very useful for Wikipedia users who want to look them up, and can be expanded at any time by anyone. I will probably be creating some of these stubs myself, and i would be quite upset if they were simply deleted instead of left for others (or myself later on) to work on.

Thanks in anticipation of your taking the above, which is meant to be helpful to both you and the Wikipedia community in general, to heart, MayFlowerNorth MayFlowerNorth (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was merely trying to suggest a very "positive", pro-community approach....

Not exactly sure how this "talk" thing works, so i'll reply on your page as well as mine.

I think that in general, anyone who is trying to improve Wikipedia could do it best by being as helpful to others as possible - so as to encourage and assist them to become better editors. The example i gave (which wasn't "bitching", but rather simply an example), was a good case in point. Two people - yourself and the other person who flagged the unsuccessful redirect page for speedy liquidation - spotted my problem but did not offer help, which they could have quite easily and quickly. As a result, i ***still*** do not know how the redirect should have been done (i may be dense, but the page explaining how to do it did not enlighten me much), and the stern, "law and order" attitude i am sensing, is in fact discouraging. I know you mean well, but an increase in empathy and general helpfulness would be a great addition to those good intentions. If someone is honestly and obviously trying to do something constructive, encouragement and help would seem to be the most useful response.

Thanks, Ross, aka MayFlowerNorthMayFlowerNorth (talk) 18:21, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article for deletion - Tim Krieger

Just a quick note to say that I've done a major update on the Tim Kriger article and so you may want to reconsider your vote here as your reason for voting redirect was due to lack of information in the article.Dpmuk (talk) 18:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!!

Thanks a lot for the very useful assistance! I appreciate it a lot - and definitely feel encouraged.

One further question: is there a Q & A forum for aspiring, beginning and puzzled Wikipedia editors to ask question in? If not, how would one be created?

Best Regards, MayFlowerNorth (talk) 19:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, for the very fast reply. I find the Wikipedia "how to" pages to be confusing so i'll be using this function ("interaction" subsection of "Help" for certain!!!

MayFlowerNorth (talk) 19:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basement of Cryptoportica

This redirect was created because the actual article was deleted from Wikipedia (and probably rightly so). I created this redirect so that those people seeking this information will be redirected to my talk page (which contains an exact copy of the article). I don't think that this redirect poses any harm to Wikipedia or its integrity. Jfc12 (talk) 00:46, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of package films

This was deleted by you because of G7, but I don't see how it applies. I'm sure that more than one author contributed to the article, since I definitely remember contributing to it myself. The article was a valuable, well-defined list. It should have been sent to AFD first. What happened? Esn (talk) 02:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you are in fact correct. Sorry for bothering you with this misunderstanding. Esn (talk) 00:46, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No wait, I suspect what actually happened is a certain user moved the article to "list of animated package films". A redirect should perhaps be added, considering that a number of redlinks now go to the deleted page. Esn (talk) 00:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Userification of Dale Dubin

You recently took part in this DRV for Dale Dubin. The deletion was upheld and I asked several other admins to userfy the page and its talk page (since it had some citations that weren't in the article), but I have had several no-responses and one who only gave me the citations. Would you userfy it all so I can work on a better article? Thanks - Draeco (talk) 19:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revised Stonecroft Ministries

Thanks for your help with the Stonecroft Ministries article. I have made changes according to your advice. Can you give me guidance on where to submit those changes so they can be reviewed? Do I submit the article as new? Thanks. (MHoudmann (talk) 20:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Sorry

Sorry I didn't know, I just got to see if trombicula and eutrombicula are the same genus. Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 11:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Leptotrombidium

Hello! Your submission of Leptotrombidium 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 18:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Rfa

Not too tough I'm sure. ;) Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Batuan, Bali

Hi. I see you deleted this. It is a real place, people live there, and there is a painting style named for it. Was the article you deleted one that merely needed work? If there is something to work with, please undelete this; if not, I'll start fresh. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've edited it into a reasonable stub and moved it back to mainspace. I tagged User:Jack Merridew/Batuan, Bali for speedy deletion and it may-well be gone by the time you see this. Terima kasih (thank you). Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:42, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bold for Delphi was deleted.

Hi! I while ago I wrote some text about "Bold for Delphi". Now I saw that it was deleted because no reliable sources. I know there is not much about this framework. I wish I could refer to a big respectable site, to books and magazines.

But I cannot do that. But I work full time with this framework. So I could say I know a lot about it, maybe not an expert. I also know the founder of Bold for Delphi Jan Norden from Sweden. He is also founder of ECO and Capable Objects [3]. Of course I try to be both objective and informative in what I write.

When I talk to other programmers I have realized most people are not aware of MDA and object persistance frameworks. They work as they always do with datasets, tables and SQL and is satisfied with that. But with frameworks like Bold you can increase your productivity a lot, 5 - 10 times. This is not just talk. I have experience of a big project at my work that was simply not possible without Bold.

With this background information I just wonder why this information about Bold not fit in Wikipedia ?

Regards --D98rolb (talk) 20:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SiBEAM

Hi - I noticed your position on SiBEAM. I would propose you give a chance to work through the article. I came into this situation to help out and the article was just deleted without discussion or warning. If the deleting admin had an issue the article was different enough to merit a real AfD. That is all I am saying. I think my trackrecord speaks for the quality of the work I do in these kind of situations |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 22:15, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your request on the DRV page. You can feel free to respond there. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 00:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hazardous Goods Vehicle

I'm pissed that this article was deleted while I was editing it. I came upon this empty article, and was attempting to added content. Some clown added a deletion tag, and I added a hold on notice, which was disregarded. Is that your job here, to swoop in as quickly as possible and delete article before anyone can discuss it?? --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 17:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I filled the hold on tag, why did you delete it. Everything I wrote it lost now, forget it. I do take it personally because a busybody came in a screwed my article. It's gone. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 17:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but you never address my hold on tag. Why was it disregarded? I'll bet that article was tagged and deleted within 15 minutes. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 00:15, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well of course, didn't you read it? --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 00:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC) Then it was deleted before I could save it; which shows how quickly the deletion occurred. Let me say this, I work on articles here for fun and it benefits Wikipedia. Hiding behind rules and regulations doesn't make you right, admin or not. An admin should show more restraint than anyone else. Nevermind the article, let the wiki do without it. I'm done with this. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 00:51, 11 March 2009 (UTC) It was under the original delete notice. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 01:02, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijan cities, towns, villages recat

Hi -- I've finished the recategorization at last, after two months and probably 5,000 edits. However, there are still a bunch of cities, towns, and villages in Baku and Nakhchivan which don't fall into the Rayon categories. How do you think those should be handled? Aelfthrytha (talk) 05:00, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is how I understand it: Baku isn't a rayon. Therefore there is no "blablabla in Baku" category. There are a lot of cities, towns and villages in it, but it's an autonomous city not a rayon. So I don't know how to categorize those. As for Nakhchivan, the settlements there aren't subdivided by rayon, so it's impossible to sort. Also do you see any other oversized categories like that in your travels? I'm looking for something new to chip away at now that I finished this one. Aelfthrytha (talk) 06:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

76.220.95.202

I see you responded to an unblock request from 76.220.95.202, saying "You're not blocked". As a matter of fact, the IP address is blocked as part of the 76.220.0.0/16 range, as you would have discovered by using the "rangeblocks" link. If there's no current range block on an IP address, you will get a "No rangeblocks found" message, and if there is - you will see the relevant block on Special:IPBlockList. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:29, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see a block; so range blocks don't show up when checking for whether an IP is blocked? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. There is a toolserver tool which is linked to in the unblock request (as I said above); rangeblocks never showed up in the block log of IP addresses. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Eavis

Hi, I notice that you recently deleted the Emily Eavis article. I can't see deleted content so I can't remark on whether or not the article made a claim to notability, but I do happen to know that she is notable and there are many reliable sources indicating such (a quick Google search shows this, in any case). I also see that there are a few pages which will now be redlinked. Could you please provide the article in my user space so that I can view the content and improve it, such that notability won't be an issue? Thank you! Maedin\^talk 08:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I appreciate it. Maedin\^talk 19:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leptotrombidium

Hey Carlossuarez...since you seem to be pretty familiar with biology terms, do you know if you could do a quick rewrite of the 2nd paragraph in Leptotrombidium to clarify what it means? I am still concerned that the paragraph is slightly confusing, and that's the only thing holding it back from DYK right now. I contacted Gak, the article creator, but he hasn't taken any action. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 12:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Do not remove information from List of American Muslims as you did. It is considered vandalism. I understand that you are offended by this; if so, don't read it."

Had you taken the time to check the edit history for this article, the only item that I removed from the list (and the only edit I made to that article) was a double-entry (Akon), and that was weeks ago.

Now I'm offended at your baseless accusations that (1) I committed vandalism of the article, (2) that I am offended by the article, and (3) I should not read the article because of your second accusation.

You should be ashamed of yourself for being so unprofessional.

76.165.249.139 (talk) 05:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dave Hall (Ohio state representative)

I agree, my use of the "db-bio" tag was improper in this case. My intention was to point out the copyright violation, based on a precedent on Linda_Bolon article. I think Template:Db-copyvio would have been more appropriate, or may be still is.∏∪βiατεch 18:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain more fully...

I have responded to a comment you left over in the DRV of Yvonne Bradley. My question to you was a sincere one. I honestly would like your opinion, if your can find the time, either there, or on one of our talk pages.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 17:33, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a reply to your analogy about the Royals. Two nights ago a show up here had a segment on its "best story ever" segment, where Alex Trebek, the Jeopardy host, described meeting the Queen, when she visited the Expo 67 in Montreal. There had been some kind of performance, for which he had been the master of ceremonies. After it was finished the Queen and Prince Philip were to meet all the performers. As the MC Trebek was the last person in the receiving line.

He described seeing the Queen look down the line. He said that the Queen never leaves a stage until Prince Philip has caught up to her, so they can leave together. Trebek said that Prince Philip was stalled way back in the middle of the line, chatting with some young Hungarian gymnasts. So the Queen turned to him, and said: "tell me about yourself".

Trebek said they spoke for about "five minutes", and afterwards various people asked him about the length of their extended conversation, and that he was feeling pretty puffed up, and charming, until the next day, when he MC'ed another event attended by the Queen, when she was too meet all the participants, and, for which he was again the last person in the line. As before Prince Philip was slower going through the line, and Trebek thought he and his chum the Queen would have another nice conversation, picking up where they left off the previous day, but -- after seeing that Prince Philip was hung up again, Trebek said she turned to him, and said: "tell me about yourself". Even though they had just spoken the previous day, for long enough that he thought they had made a connection, she clearly had no recollection of the meeting whatsoever.

What this story indicates is that those the Royals meet aren't vetted in any really deep, comprehensive way.

I worked on an Native Reserve a while ago. My boss there was a native, about my age, who told me about her meeting with Prince Charles. When she was a teenager a young Prince Charles, visited the Reserve. And she was one of the people who performed a traditional dance for him, and, by virtue of this dance was introduced to him. She said he told her he would never forget her, FWIW.

I think you are too cynical. Most people like the Royals, are thrilled to see them, if they get to actually speak with them, it is a big reward. And since the Royals, even the rebellious ones, are well-behaved on ceremonial occasions, and everyone else is on their best behaviour, there is great social pressure on observers who resent inherited privilege, to conform, be on their best behaviour, and keep their critical comments to themselves. Additionally, when an outlier crops up, and a random joe is recorded saying something rude, it doesn't fit with how the press wants to report the story.

A couple of decades ago I read an account by an Canadian journalist, a cynic when he wrote the account, about his meeting with Prince Philip, when he was young and innocent. The Royal Yacht Brittania had brought the Royals to Canada. Our journalist was then in the Canadian Armed Forces, and he and some of his chums had some leave, and were in the general vicinity of the Britannia, or they had gone to take a look at her, when a bored and lonely Prince Philip saw them, and gave them an impromptu invitation to come aboard for a drink. the article was about was how Prince Philip is covered. When reporters comment about him at all, they are apt so say something about his "wit". What this guy said was that Prince Philip was what we would now call "socially challenged", and has a store of jokes that are in questionable taste, which he was apt to repeat at inappropriate times. He said that the MSM covered up for him, and didn't cover his embarrassing bad taste in jokes, and his embarrassingly bad judgment in when to repeat them -- just as no one covered JFK infidelities -- well known to the press at the time. I know it is hard to reconcile this with the reputation of Britain's tabloid press. I don't know how to explain this, other than (1) maybe, in the decades since he met Philip, he had wised up, and exercised better taste, or (2) the press still covered for him for some reason. But, if you particularly look for it, you will still see reporters commenting on PP's "wit", which I think suggests he is still embarrassing telling dirty jokes.

But, to return to Yvonne Bradley, I continue to think your analogy with those who meet the Royals isn't really applicable.

My old boss, who once met Prince Charles, is not notable.

Prince Charles's old school chum, who attended the privileged private school then lost his fortune, and ended up in the homeless shelter -- arguably he would be notable, if the reporters had followed up on the conversation, reported when they were school chums, and how he went broke.

If Alex Trebek had quit show business following Expo 67, his meeting with the Queen would not make him notable.

But none of these people met with a public figure, who issued a press statement following the meeting. Geo Swan (talk) 18:58, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why be a deletionist?

Why go around nominating articles for deletion as soon as they are made? It's very discouraging. Look, some of us are learning and for some of us the learning curb comes very slowly. We don't always create articles in the "right" way. We just do it the best we can and hope that those who know better can and will improve on it. Wikipedia is supposed to be a collaborative effort is it not?

I don't care much for deletionism. Its very discouraging. Why not give an article half a chance. Maybe you could put an article on your watch list and notify the creator of the article and say, "Ok, I see you're trying to start an article about ABC. Your article needs some work (which you undoubtably are aware of) so let me help you out. Here are some of the first things you need to do to avoid being nominated for deletion (ie. establish notability, site references etc) and here are some ways to go about that (could be as simple as a link to the article, but it might be more helpful to try to just state the essence of what you are saying in more human terms) and here are some ways that you can find some other users to help you develop your article. Now, I know that those resources are all here somewhere, and maybe you don't think you should have to hold anyone's hand (and maybe you don't, but you don't have to hack and slash either), but not everyone knows all the policies and guidelines, where to find them or sometimes even that they exist. Everyone here is at a different level of knowlege. It doesn't encourage anyone to learn more and become a better user if their articles are just constantly deleted. Rather it engenders discouragement and bitterness. So even if you're going to be a deletionist, maybe it would be possible to be a kinder, gentler deletionist, or at least direct users to someone with a bit more patience than you.

The article that you nominated of mine for deletion was a list of lakes in michigan. However, this comment is more general in nature, because it seems like someone always wants to delete everything I start. Like I said, I know I have a lot to learn, but that doesn't mean that I don't have something to contribute. amyanda (talk) 00:10, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- With respect, a response to your reply has been added to my user page. amyanda (talk) 04:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

============

Hi Carlos. Teridian is a leading supplier of electric power meter ICs. They're in many of the new power meters in the U.S. (G.E., Elster, Landis & Gyr) Even in the recession, Teridian is growing by double digits. This makes them an unusual semiconductor company. Ray Van De Walker (talk) 04:43, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Leptotrombidium

On 15 March, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Leptotrombidium, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for nominating, PeterSymonds (talk) 20:29, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Ad

I notice you changed from oppose to neutral at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Thumperward 2 on the basis of my neutral; upon further thought, I've switched to oppose. Not saying you should do likewise, but thought you ought to know. DGG (talk) 23:19, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a new category for SURVIVORS of the Holocaust

Hi Carlos: Regarding the two CfDs at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 March 12#Category:Holocaust victims and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 March 12#Category:Nazi concentration camp victims, while I agree that the categories need to be sharpened, but if they are going to become categories about people who DIED only in Category:People who died in The Holocaust and Category:People who died in Nazi concentration camps respectively, then in all fairness and following good logic and historiography, following that reasoning, there should now therefore be two categories. ONE for those who DIED and one for those survivors who LIVED such as Category:Holocaust victims who survived and Category:Survivors of Nazi concentration camps that would allow for that. I am positive you will agree and kindly take a look at the two above CfD discussions again and note that that should be so, that both those who died and those who survived and lived, and who were/are of course notable, such as Elie Wiesel; Joel Teitelbaum; Yekusiel Yehudah Halberstam and many others that I know as being important to Jewish history, and there are many others like this from many other groups. It would be a great shame and travesty if those names were expunged only "because" they survived and escaped the fate the Nazis had wanted for them by having lived and not died in the Holocaust and/or the death and concentration camps. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 06:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pete Eyre

Any objections to boldly merging this article into Bureaucrash? The discussion hardly seems necessary for such an open-and-shut case. Regards, Skomorokh 23:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop

If you will not desist in removing tagging work from people who are patrolling short pages, you will be blocked. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

? 'short pages'...? like article stubs (WP:Stub), or something else? Apologies for any offense. Please, hopefully you can enlighten me so this does not cause you any further difficulty. Cander0000 (talk) 04:51, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've done it again. This is your final warning: This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to Dream Girls. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing.

Unmarking marked patrolled pages is vandalism. Stop! Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:15, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tx for commenting... The message seems templated. Perhaps I'm wrong. If you can explain further what issue you are speaking of, perhaps we can work together towards a solution. The only contribution I made to that page was to categorize it once upon a time... and then remove some comments in the article unrelated to the topic (potentially someone testing some markup, etc.) Good fun! Cander0000 (talk) 04:35, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fremont High School (Indiana)

Darn. Fast work. I was myself making a comment at the AfD when I found (EC) to my posting. Thanks for the closure, as it reflects consideration to all the editors who improved the article in the last couple days. However, how might one address the issue of the article being tagged for AfD within mere hours of its creation, specially in light of how easy is was to be improved? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:18, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for killing the Dominico talk page.

I was not at all sure whether it was correct to speedy-flag it. I'll try to remember the "dependent on another page that it is deleted" code as well.sinneed (talk) 02:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have found evidence of improper use of Wikipedia to promote a non-notable music company

Hi Carlos

Recently you correctly deleted an article about a musician called "Dale Olivier" for blatant copyright infringement. I have just found an article written by him improperly using Wikipedia to promote his goods & services. His company "Matchbox Recordings" is a music promotions company which he has listed in both the "List of Record Labels" category and the "List of Independent UK Record Labels" category. His company is not a record label as he charges clients directly for his digital music distribution services. The name of his company also infringes on another genuine record label called "Matchbox Records".

The wikipedia article for Matchbox Recordings can be found here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matchbox_Recordings

It does not verify any of its references, nor has any of the artists who have hired this company received any notable radio airplay or have they charted in the UK. Upon this lack of criteria the "Matchbox Recordings" company does not appear to qualify for an article within Wikipedia.

The website for the "Matchbox Recordings" company which indicates that is not a bona fide record in that all of its services are for hire :

www.matchboxrecordings.co.uk

This is the website for the real record label that is called "Matchbox Records" whose name is technically being infringed upon by Dale Olivier's music promotion company :

http://www.matchboxrecords.com/

Thank you for reading this.

Regards

MS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Musicspecialist (talk • contribs) 05:23, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Neftchala listed at RfD

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Talk:Neftchala. Since you had some involvement with the Talk:Neftchala redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Andre Engels (talk) 11:06, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, Carlossuarez. I read that you are familiar with classical arguments in Spanish and Italian. I am new to wikipedia and I'd like to write about, but I have a problem: my husband -for reasons that I believe are not fair- is not allowed to post and I am afraid that our same IP can create me problems. Can I use the same computer at home? Muchas gracias. --Mrs.Maria (talk) 14:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias por la respuesta. Eso significa que puedo escribir sin problemas en wikipedia, usando el modem de mi casa (que esta bajo el nombre de mi marido)? Thanks.--Mrs.Maria (talk) 23:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I am using the modem of my home and all seems without problems. My husband (user:brunodam) was forced to withdraw by a group of nationalistic Croats who obtained later to ban him in a tricky way. Please read his farewell: [4]. These Croats attacked many other Italians and that is why I am afraid to be banned if I use the same IP of my husband. But I see that now all is OK with this post. Gracias.--Mrs.Maria (talk) 23:42, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Umm...

Wow. 2 thinks of no apparent notability. I am speedying it. α§ʈάt̪íňέ-210 ^{discovered elements ∞ what am I?} 12:37, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New World Symphony

I just wanted to let you know that I fixed the redirect to the New World Symphony. The redirect was recently vandalized (blanked by an IP) and you restored the old disambiguation page by mistake. That page has not been in use since the primary meaning was redirected in 2006. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 13:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you change my user talk?

Hey you don't have the right to change user talks. You have the right to change public articles but user talks belong to users. You are a mean person. Give me a sensible reason why you are changing user talks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolsprings (talk • contribs) 17:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not attacking you

I'm not attacking you and you are the one attacking and being mean to me. Stop that. That's not nice of you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolsprings (talk • contribs) 17:53, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok

Sorry, I posted that when I was mad at someone at school.

If you'd like, I'll file an WP:RfC. I think that it has no significance, and the user who created that article has had many other articles speedied that are just like it. at-210 ^{discovered elements ∞ what am I?} 20:32, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1745 in Norway

I give up, but I don't see:

Why to keep the article
Why I would be community banned or blocked because of following the steps in Wikipedia:Dispute Resolution

If you could explain this, It would be great. at-210 ^{discovered elements ∞ what am I?} 18:31, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ashnak

Hello. You've created an article Ashnak, but I've one question to it. Are you sure that population of this village in 2008 was 2,347!? The thing is that at the 2001 the population of this village was only 1,226. It seems to me that the population at the 2008 was not 2,347, but 1,347. If it's able, check it please. With the best regards, user of ru.wikipedia Ліонкінг (talk) 20:46, 21 March 2009 (UTC) Thank You for answer. Ліонкінг (talk) 21:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sylvia Royce

I was going into the article on Sylvia Royce to make some updates and found that it had been deleted. It stated that the article had been deleted at the author's request, but I was wondering if there is a way for it to be reinstated. Sylviaroyce (talk) 14:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: RfA

Thanks! –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 17:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if you were going to reply to me as well? If not, no biggie, was just curious. GlassCobra 20:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DRV

I have opened a DRV on the wrangler categories, on which you opined. Occuli (talk) 02:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim Article

In response to your personal message to me saying I should not read the article which you edited and protected to fit your personal views.

No problem, thanks for attacking my entire religion. I thought some one such as yourself should have half a brain to realize the difference between the severity of murder and eating pork. I just don't understand why there is not a Christian article like this one, and how you have the authority to block out anyone else's opinion on the subject so you can just keep it your way. You completely the above users arguments and just go with your ignorant way by abusing your power on this article. Also, how is it vandalism if I am just trying to make this article more logical and I am sure I know more about what a Muslim is than you do.-Danialcs —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danialcs32 (talk • contribs) 02:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: you said: Your message was rude and a disservice to your cause. I know many Muslims, and a comment like yours would never be made by any true Muslim. You insult Islam. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I insult Islam? I am pretty sure I am a true Muslim but then again I think you don't know what a Muslim is. In your case terrorists are more Muslim than myself. Also, does my comment have anything to do specifically with Islam? you question my faith with no clear evidence and just use at as a shield to hide your lack of intelligence on the subject. You have no clear argument in this statement because you know you can't make one. Like the other users that have commented on your page here, a lot of us can conclude that you are just very mean and rude in general, never mind just ignorant. Anyways though, have fun administrating wikipedia just the way you are, congratulations you get to edit any article on wikipedia the way you want without anyone messing with it how cool must that be. No point arguing online with some one hard headed as yourself.

in response to your last comment Good sir I am done talking with you, you seem to have no actual interest in the real subject, I will consult another Admin in this case.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Danialcs32 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bookmarklet for Infobox lake

Hi. I noticed you created a series of stubs on lakes. I thought you might be interested in the bookmarklet to add {{Infobox lake}} to the articles. It's at Template:Infobox_lake/Bookmarklet. -- User:Docu

Villages with names like Koljunak

This one is bugging me. All villages deserve an article? Balmaclellan (pop. 500) does for sure. I played there as a child, so I put that into Wikipedia: nice place. I could not find anything on Koljunak, but for some reason Gölgelikonak seemed like it could be a Turkish equivalent. I started an article, but I think it is too far south. Kumbulak (pop. 20) is closer to Armenia, but obviously not the same place. I started an article anyway. Karabulak has the same sort of name structure, but seems to be a common name. The English Wikipedia lists Karabulaks in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Ingushetia, Chelyabinsk Oblast and two in Armenia. The Turkish Wikipedia gives two more entries for Karabulak, both in Turkey, and Live Search has another, near the Armenian border. Karabulak may be the Turkic equivalent of Smithville. It strikes me that maybe we could save a lot of time by getting someone to build a tool that would scrape http://www.fallingrain.com and make a basic entry for all the registered places in the world. Any thoughts? Aymatth2 (talk) 02:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I don't have the language skills to track this down. Three different languages/alphabets! The name seems to be something like: K-vowel-L-vowel(s)-N-vowel-K where K could also be KH or G or GH. Koliunakh, Gul Junak ... far too many combinations. I think I have to leave it to the author to find the place, or it just gets scrubbed. I am guessing that by "West Armenia" he means eastern Turkey - another source of drama. I'm going to leave it - other more interesting topics. As for the bot concept, it looks as though the Turkish Wikipedia has used a bot to make entries for all places in Turkey. I suppose in the English version it is best to avoid areas in dispute. But I think a bot could handle duplicate names. One possibility is to make a sort of disambiguation page like Oda, Ghana holding the GEOnet information, and leave it to other editors to make individual pages. Thanks anyway, Aymatth2 (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do I detect frustration or even despair? I think you are absolutely right in creating geo-stubs, even if it is tough to trace down even the basic facts. My guess is that a lot of people would not consider starting an article, but if they see one about a place they know, which is missing obvious (to them) facts, they may well be inspired to expand the article. You have sown the seed. But I am lazy and will probably continue to play with easy and uncontroversial subjects. Lately I have been following a sequence that began with a gorge in Mali, panned out to the broader geology of the region, panned in again to mining in southern Ghana, and may keep wandering from subject to related subject for quite a while before I get thrown onto another track by an AfD article. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:53, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Total Access Statistics

Added reply to your deletion endorsement. Don't understand how any software product could be included in Wikipedia if references to it from peer reviewed scientific journals from reputable sources, and independent product reviews over many years are considered insufficient. DataAnalyzer (talk) 22:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Spaniards in the Holocaust

Hey, would you be good enough to take another look at the CFD for Category:Spaniards in the Holocaust. I think you may reconsider your view in light of the new comment I added. Cgingold (talk) 23:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Probable Deletion of Richard Bachman

I am not really protesting this, more informing you. I saw the page where you listed Richard Bachman (ice hockey) for questionable deletion. Bachman is listed as a goalie for the Dallas Stars, where he is expected to take over the starting positions. I do not feel that you have enough knowledge of this particular sport to make a decision like this. He is currently the starting goalie for Colorado College. If you would like me to fill you in on how the NCAA and the NHL work together I will, otherwise I feel that this deletion is unfair; On a side note, today Bachman turned pro and is expected to back up Marty Turco Next season. I think this merrits encyclopedic information.keystoneridin! (talk) 04:48, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV dispute

Hi, there is an ongoing discussion at the list of renamed cities in Azerbaijan over the usage of Azeri alphabet. Feel free to join. brand спойт 09:59, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cibuyo

Thank you for speedy closing the AfD with "Keep" on this populated place. --Rosiestep (talk) 18:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:New Hopewell

page 350 of [5] and page 129 of [6] show a tie to the linked Hopewell. --H8erade (talk) 21:16, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4 famous flowers of China

i had found this poorly written stub and expanded it. i was unaware of the process for PROD, as i usually go to AFD to comment, and there was no comments started. i thought that it was just too soon and that some comments would begin shortly. i added references, rewrote it, and found what i believe to be the proper english phrase for this motif: flowers of the seasons. im not sure if you noticed the rewrite, though i had started a discussion page for the article, but no comments on the deletion page. i think this is a valid subject for an article. the 4 flowers is one of a number of ubiquitous motifs in chinese culture, as i indicated. i provide some more links for you to examine:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Czx6-wYu6MoC&pg=PA55&lpg=PA55&dq=%22flowers+of+the+seasons%22+china&source=bl&ots=k1ZzKF4UIz&sig=CUMDazdKMqvQOEnSEXIylJfNtKg&hl=en&ei=TjPSSev3H5vWlQes4pSWBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA55,M1

http://www.npm.gov.tw/english/exh92/summer/flower9208/main.html#

http://www.gotheborg.com/index1.htm?http://gotheborg.info/qa/seasonscup.shtml

i will be happy to add these links to the article if its revived. i think i went overboard in linking to wikipedia articles on notable chinese painters. none of those articles are explicitly linking the artists to this motif, so i will gladly remove them. there is an interesting parallel set of plants, which has an article as you will see. oddly enough, there is a bamboo orchid plant, which links the 2, but thats definitely original research on my part. i wouldnt take up your time unless i thought we need to be diligent in documenting notable phenomena that were of primary importance in pre-internet times, ubiquitous, and from nonwestern cultures, esp. important ones like China. i look forward to your decision and thoughts. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Civiliztion One

There is no vandalizing. You can't have an article about one aspect of Megalithic geometry without having the general article about Megalithic geometry (which has just been deleted), just like you cannot have an article about one of the 7 dwarves without having an article about the seven dwarves or, rather, about Snow White. --Little sawyer (talk) 19:56, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: Your Message

Hi Carlossuarez46, I've left a response to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 20:01, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another reply on my talk page Marek.69 ^talk 20:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hopewell, South Carolina

I was just curious why you named the southeastern Hopewell for Williamsburg County, not Georgetown County. Is it because W County is listed first by the GNIS? Nyttend (talk) 04:17, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dab page wording

Hi, I notice that you've changed several dab pages (Chroscin, for example) from the format: "X may refer to the following places in Poland: - X1; - X2..." to "X may refer to: - X1, Poland; - X2, Poland..." Is there some philosophy behind this? I find the first version more reader-friendly.--Kotniski (talk) 07:32, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mini cow

Take a look at the subject before assuming that the rules are applicable. Sometimes blanking leaves room for people to create a separate, complete article that is good for the encyclopedia. In this case, mini cow to Dexter was a ridiculous redirect. It's like sending small dog to Yorkshire Terrier. Steven Walling (talk) 06:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Political family categories

Hey Carlos, I just happened to check my watchlist and noticed that several categories I created were nominated for deletion. The categories in question were for American political families. While no consensus was reached and the categories were spared, I would have liked to have been messaged to be alerted of the discussion so I could have weighed in. The purpose of the political family categories was to connect all articles that pertain to respective families. These were relatively new, but a good example of such a category is Category:Mason family. It's a little more robust, perhaps to your liking.--Caponer (talk) 13:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos, thank you for your response. I definitely concur that templates give the article much more context for why it belongs, but why can't we have our cake (templates) and eat it (categories), too? :) --Caponer (talk) 22:14, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Carlossuarez46. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_April_5.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RfA Questions

Hi Carlos, thanks for your questions at my RfA. Sorry it's taken me so long to reply, I've had things taking up my time in the (surprisingly sunny) real world. I've now answered the first three parts, I hope to get to the last one in a few hours; it'll certainly be done by midnight UTC at the latest. Best, – Toon ^(talk) 16:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Alexandre Étienne Choron

Hello! Your submission of Alexandre Étienne Choron 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! Shubinator (talk) 02:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

my talk p.

Would you please look at recent attacks on my talk p. [7] and earlier from the same source and do the appropriate. DGG (talk) 21:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see Chillum already blocked. so there's nothing to do more. DGG (talk) 21:25, 10 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) 21:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Alexandre Étienne Choron

On April 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alexandre Étienne Choron, 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.

Shubinator (talk) 02:55, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

25th Anniversary of WrestleMania

Why have you moved this? Consensus shows that the move should not have been made. This will inevitably create a revert war. D.M.N. (talk) 16:14, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you move it back, because as proved with the link above consensus is for the page being at WrestleMania XXV. D.M.N. (talk) 16:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did that, and that failed. I'm moving it back as consensus clearly shows that the opposes for the move outweigh the supports. D.M.N. (talk) 16:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Hollington

Right thanks for that notification, I swear that there were no links pointing to those nonexistent articles before. Regards, FM [ talk to me | show contributions ] 16:28, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool stuff!

I noticed those little stubs you've been doing about those Butte County townsites. Very cool! I have to admit that I've never heard of any of them, but that doesn't make them any less interesting. I did a couple of SoCal desert townsite articles, namely Earp, California, Vidal Junction, California and Rice, California, so I can relate to what you're doing. Keep it up! :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hear, hear. I remember deleting similar articles early in my administrative "career" which belonged to an established user who had every intention of fixing them later. Hoo boy, did the trout leave a mark on the side of my face that day! There are quite a few similar townsites and railroad sidings in the Mojave and Colorado deserts, especially along old US 66. Not all of them have articles, but they should IMO. If you really want to laugh, I remember either creating or expanding the article about North Shore, California only to have it tagged as a speedy for being a non-existent place! Funny thing, since I've been there before. No one told me I was standing in a non-existent town...! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:50, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do try (blush). In fact, I was all but certain that my recent entry for the Billups Neon Crossing Signal would be tagged since I only had one really good print reference. So far, so good. In any event, I may check on the existence (or non-existence) of some of these places and maybe do a bit more writing myself. Thanks for the unintentional inspiration. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:58, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reservoirs

To my knowledge, we've never before placed flooded townsites on these templates: Ohio sites were never added, while Indiana ones that I mistakenly added to the template were removed later. Nyttend (talk) 11:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, since you knew that they were flooded townsites, why didn't you place a note to that effect on these articles? Frankly, they're so short that they're not really very informative; it would be better if you would give these articles more data than just county and altitude. Nyttend (talk) 11:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is, couldn't you add something about its coords in the actual text, and check to see whether your communities have post offices? I maintain a group of statewide lists of redlinked communities with post offices, so it shouldn't be that hard to add the post offices at least. Nyttend (talk) 16:41, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your thoughts

Thanks for your participation in my recent Request for adminship. Hopefully I will lay your concerns to rest by not getting particularly involved in deletion activities, at least until I learn more about the process and how to handle it properly; I did outline some situations in which I would feel more comfortable with deleting an article. Otherwise, I plan to continue as I always have, just with the ability to assist others. Happy editing! BOZ (talk) 13:02, 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 21:34, 16 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

A deletion review discussion you may wish to contribute to.

Hi. I've listed two deleted articles at Wikipedia:Deletion_review, following the discussion on "lists of unusual things" which took place earlier in the year. As a contributor to that discussion, you might be interested in expressing an opinion on whether the two deleted articles should be restored. SP-KP (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lucas Valieri

I didn't believe that redirecting an article with nothing but plot summary and no citations to a list where he was mentioned was removal of information. Please rethink your edit, as the rest of the minor characters are presented only in that list. Them From Space 18:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As Kingpin13 pointed out, I hadn't properly redirected the article. I'll do so now, if you still have any problems with that feel free to contact me. Them From Space 18:54, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note on RFA

I'm not sure if you've noted the "response" under General Comments on my RfA. I had to finally break the silence on that one. If you have a moment, feel free to have a look. Thanks in advance. You're always welcome to let me know what it does take to gain your trust. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oversight requests

Please do not leave requests of for usage of the Oversight tool on public messageboards such as the incidents noticeboard. For more info on how to correctly make Oversight requests, see Wikipedia:Oversight. Thank you. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 01:36, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do apologise, I sent this message to the wrong person. I saw the thread on the incidents noticeboard, and when removing the thread in the edit window, looked for the first signature I could see in the thread, which was yours, marking the incident as resolved. I'll send the message to the right person now. --Deskana, Champion of the Frozen Wastes 12:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Zaremba (musician)

The article was a stub, but it already had a reference and, and this is the important bit, it was about him hosting a popular show on MTV for several years. That is notability beyond membership in a band. It would be helpful to read an article before deleting it. K8 fan (talk) 03:48, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, you are exactly the sort of editor who makes Wikipedia an unpleasant place. Now, I know you're going to delete this because, like most bullies, can't stand criticism. K8 fan (talk) 03:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has now been listed at DRV. Stifle (talk) 08:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Numerous Geraint Watkins redirection and deletion issues

Is there an editor who could take a look at this situation--such as the Diddy Wah Diddy (Geraint Watkins song), since my recommendation for deletion wouldn't have the same degree of credibility. I am concerned that Watkins has set things up to involve the largest possible redirection effects to his main page, where even his own notability could be questioned. The reason I am suggesting that an editor look at this is because someone may have seen this redirection strategy before and be familiar with the most effective approach to countering it quickly.

Dreadarthur (talk) 22:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many, many thanks for taking the time to frame this issue. I have expressed my strong support for deleting the numerous redirect pages set up and so identified by you.

Dreadarthur (talk) 03:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome!

Dude, great idea about turning that ref into a template. I'm talking about {{California's Geographic Names}}. I use that ref a lot and never considered that idea. I've always copied and pasted the cite book template. Brilliant! Killiondude (talk) 23:27, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Barnstar

		100,000 Edits
		I, Bugboy52.4, award you for reaching 100,000 edits according to the List of Wikipedians by number of edits generated 11:45 pm, 24 February 2009. Keep up the good work!________________________________________________________________

DYK for Camperdown Country Park

On 27 April, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Camperdown Country Park, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 08:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HUWIB (refactor)

Hello, I am a member of Harvard Undergraduate Women in Business and recently created a wikipage you removed due to copyright infringement. HUWIB has the rights to the information I posted on the website, so is there anyway to replace the page? Thank you ~Katie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksierks (talk • contribs) 04:37, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Former settlements in California?

Hello. Just noticed the new pages you made for several former settlements in California. Is there something historical about them that makes them notable? Regards, ~Pesco^{So say•we all} 06:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I read those pages, good info. I would definately agree that these guidelines apply to places with population or geographic landmarks. I'm not so sure this would apply to places that no longer exist that are otherwise non-notable. ~Pesco^{So say•we all} 06:31, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote you not knowing any of the backstory. I see your points, but honestly they're getting lost in the brusque manner of your presentation. Also, please don't be so assured of any outcome if I were to raise the issue, and please don't preemptively accuse me of WP:POINT just because I might happen to disagree with your interpretations. Even though the names of these towns may be in your database, creating a page for every non-notable settlement that died over a century ago just doesn't make sense to me. ~Pesco^{So say•we all} 07:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't appreciate being called "uncivil" because I took issue with your comments & interpretations. All I know is that from the link to WP:INHERENT that you provided, I looked at the following possible criterea for these articles: Items with de facto notability: Populated places (Cities, Towns, Suburbs, Villages, Neighborhoods within large cities) and Geographic features (Bodies of water, Mountain ranges, Structures, Bridges and tunnels of a certain size). Where does an otherwise non-notable abandoned settlement fall in? I don't think it does. I'm going to part ways with you here and wish you luck. In the future, could you possibly: 1) Reconsider your continued creation of ~~basically pointless~~ pages [of questionable worth] just because you can, and 2) Take a more polite tone with people; it will make things easier on everybody. ~Pesco^{So say•we all} 21:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I should have said something like "of questionable worth" instead of "pointless". So what is their use? ~Pesco^{So say•we all} 21:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there is other historical information to add like the kind you mention, that would be great. I can see the point if the type of info you mentioned is there. If there is no other info than location and year established/disestablished, seems like the type of thing that would be in a list. I put new pages in my personal sandbox until I think there's enough content & sources to justify the article, but that's me. I'm not trying to shake things up. If consensus has agreed on something, then so be it. You're dedicating a lot of time and effort to improve the project, and I applaud you for that. Take care. ~Pesco^{So say•we all} 22:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason he has stopped using infoboxes too and in doing so piling up the work for editors later to get them up to half decent status. Why don't you create some articles where there is proper population data and some basics? Is there likely to be much web info about small settlements that died out 100 years ago. What makes these notable on a world scale? Do they all have historical significance related to gold mining? WHat percentage of editors would you say are Californian gold mining historians and will be willing to expand them all up to a decent status? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a list of former settlements would be more suitable? As long as the unincorporated community articles can be expanded as they exist in the present. I do however have concern about having hundreds of ghost towns in a small area with little info, and what the future of the stubs may be. The inherent notability is for existing populated settlements that are currently populated as far as I'm aware. I agree with you that most places are notable in principle but it does seem to me you are unwilling to expand many articles yourself and are thinking a little too postively that there will be hoards of people coming along and expanding them. Why don't you concentrate on starting geo articles on municipalities and communes like myself on places in the developing world where population and area data is available on the web and there is at least some web content to expand them by anybody? Wikipedia is not a database or the geo names server or directory which lists every settlement. I've googled several of the ghost towns and there is nothing at all, I'm not saying that everything that ever existed is mentioned on the web but the gold mining historians who are going to research in the library and write articles on tiny towns and villages that existed centuries ago can't be that great, you'll be lucky if many of them ever get expanded up to a decent level. Most of the articles on major communities and towns across America have barely been expanded since Rambot, I would be willing to bet that in two years time most of them will still be the same. So does creating short stubs about villages that once existed centuries ago really help wikipedia in the long term? Maybe a few of them but these are usually the ones where there is much mention in history. It can be a little frustrating to have a big template full of villages and everyone is one line long with no information other than where it was. Why not creating lists and then when those historians come along they can expand one into an article if they have real info. I just think its best to stick with what can be expanded on the web at present. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 20:33, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For instance Jonesville, California stands a good chance of being expanded by anybody on the web, Dredge, California however is questionable as I find no hits. I am well aware that a great deal of information is yet to be put on the web but if you think about it how many editors are going to go researching each one outside the web? Maybe a handful of editors if we are lucky. Maybe though if you mentioned them in the history of the article on the town which now stands in its place this might be a better solution? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 20:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mm I see your reaoning, I also have an ideology to have a decent article on any town or village in the world but I learned pretty quickly that it was a utopian ideal and it isn't a reality, at least not in the short term. We'll gradually improve our content over time and go where the information flows. Sure the encyclopediac I am I'd love to see hundreds of great articles delving into the historic of mining towns and such but is it really likely many of them will be expanded fully? There are some highly interesting former Indian settlements I know existed but is every single place mentioned worthy of note? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 20:51, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Diamondville, California is much better, thats what I mean. I know it is a tough call between wanting to start every one and starting them more slowly but adding more but if you can try to add something this will be better, even if you don't to the existing ones. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 22:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Diamondville, California for what I mean about infoboxes. Can you copy that to the articles which have coordinates?. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 10:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DRV for Category:Knuckleball pitchers

The close of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 April 17#Category:Knuckleball pitchers, in which you participated, is now under discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009 April 28#Category:Knuckleball pitchers. Alansohn (talk) 04:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]