User talk:DeeKay64

English rules of thumb

I understand your primary language is German. When writing English pages, it is important to avoid hyphens (-), compound words, and too much capitalization. Those are not as common as they are im Deutsch, and many German speakers make the same mistake. :)

Some examples:

"Clockport" should be "clock port"
"IDE-Interface" should be "IDE interface"
"SD-Flash-Memory-Media" should be "SD flash memory media"
"filebrowser" should be "file browser"

Please see my edits to MMC64 for many examples of these rules, and happy writing!

Notability of 1541ultimate

A tag has been placed on 1541ultimate requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 21:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of 1541ultimate

A tag has been placed on 1541ultimate requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 21:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creation of inappropriate pages

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as 1541 Ultimate, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 21:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding 1541ultimate

You asked what you have to do to improve the article on 1541ultimate. In case you haven't noticed, the concern over which the page was deleted was notability. Which means that the problem is not with the way your article is written, but rather with what it is about. The historical significance of this chip has not been asserted. Therefore, one assumes that an article about it would be of no interest, no matter how well-written.

And please do not bring up the fact that there are other articles on other Commodore peripherials. In Wikipedia, this is argument has no merit whatsoever. We might investigate to see whether these are articles that fell through the cracks, and some or even all of them will end up on deletion row. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 21:58, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I must say that, when it comes to being a speedy deletion candidate, your article was a borderline case. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 22:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted under criterion A7. The fact it was deleted shows that someone else agreed with my assessment. That other person was Cobaltbluetony (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 22:28, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You do have a recourse: deletion review. But given what you wrote in Commodore 64 peripherals about this cartridge, namely, Also within the first half of 2008, the 1541 Ultimate, (...) is supposed to be released, (violation of WP:CRYSTAL per numerous precedents) my guess is that this recourse will do nothing more than tell you that Cobaltbluetony did not apply the A7 criterion properly, and that while your article should have been deleted, this should not have been done under the speedy deletion system. But it might be worth a try. --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 23:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I am not an admin. :-) --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 01:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of 1541ultimate

An article that you have been involved in editing, 1541ultimate, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1541ultimate. Thank you. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 13:26, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from the AFD:

THESE are the TOP THREE issues: Notablility. Notablility. ...and... Notablility. What the cartridge is for is unimportant; you should be focusing on notability, as this alone will fortify the article from constant threats of deletion. By the way, the fact that other non-notable or otherwise inferior articles exist does not arbitrarily mean that we get to keep this one. If you see something wrong, please feel free to fix it. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 12:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added thought: None of us honestly are simply so biased against your article that we are trying to kill it without cause. There must be a reason to keep it, reinforced by the community consensus-supported policies and guidelines. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 12:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Sony_ZEGO_BCU-100.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Sony_ZEGO_BCU-100.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 23:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Per [1], as a self-admitted block-evading alternate account, I have blocked this account. If you continue to evade the block you may be banned form Wikipedia. If you wish to appeal your block then you may do so, but evading it is not acceptable. Also your campaign against Consumer Watchdog is disruptive and tendentious. Edit-warring to include poorly sourced controversial material is a bad idea. Guy (Help!) 21:56, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|1=I have been blocked indefinately without any warning. After some editing back and forth (no revert war, there was only 1 revert in 24 hours!) on the article on Consumer_Watchdog_(USA) User:Jaes called me a sock puppet, complained about me to JzG, who obviously bought it and blocked me indefinately without any warning. I have no idea where these sock puppet accusations come from, and emails to JzG regarding the matter were ignored. It could be because of an incident with the User:Rasterzeileninterrupt on the German Wikipedia, who would not believe that his article of the same name on a programming technique mainly used on the Commodore 64 (Raster interrupt) was pretty much complete BS and screamed "sock puppets!" when many of the german Commodore 64 scene (which I am also an active part of, see here: http://noname.c64.org/csdb/scener/index.php?id=8058 ) showed up to put things right. It seems JzG was in a good mood that day, cause while he was at it, he also deleted my article on a Commodore 64 cartridge, the 1541 Ultimate which has been online for almost two years now, without any discussion whatsoever, simply calling it "advertising". If you look at my edit history you will see that I contributed many good edits and even wrote a few articles and there is no reason at all to believe I am a sock puppet. I am a strong believer in the concept of Wikipedia and use it every day for work and this whole incident really came as quite a shock to me, realizing that one person on a roll can simply kill you and your articles without any discussion or even giving a proper reason}}

In the diff provided by JzG, you admit that you had been banned ... can you provide details of that specific ban, including the username involved? Thanks. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't banned, but blocked for a day or two, see above, the part about "Rasterzeileninterrupt". And NOT because of sock puppetry, but because this guy insisted that his article was good and only needed a few corrections, while half of the german Commodore 64 scene disagreed and told him so - so things got very heated and a little out of hand, from what I remember i got my block because I referred to the Dunning Kruger Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning_kruger_effect ;-) Took us about two weeks until this guy would finally back down and a completely new, correct article was written (which fortunately hasn't changed since, see http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasterzeileninterrupt ) -- DeeKay64 (talk) 15:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Appears to be a misunderstanding. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request handled by: jpgordon^{::==( o )}

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

Articles for deletion nomination of 1541 Ultimate

I have nominated 1541 Ultimate, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1541 Ultimate. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Guy (Help!) 12:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to help you edit this article so that it is not deleted. You have reverted my edits. It seems pretty likely it WILL be deleted again. Teapotgeorge^Talk 14:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but who would ever have an issue with simple specs being posted in a Wikipedia article on hardware? every single article on hardware lists its specs. And what about the specs is "promotional" or "unreferenced"? The main point is that JzG does not have an issue with the article itself, but rather with me, seeing how I was able to reverse both his block and speedy deletion. So it doesn't matter what gets changed, he will always find something. I removed the passage people had issues with, and now he complains about ridiculous phrases like "target group is fairly wide" and "convenience is a dominant factor". Removing the techspecs will most certainly not help. -- DeeKay64 (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The tech specs make it look like an advert to me and the phrases you mention don't sound encyclopedic either...but you're the expert...Teapotgeorge^Talk 14:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I linked the tech specs now, kept the features though, as I think that's important information that the user expects in a wikipedia article. I also changed the bulletpoints about the 1541u II changes to text. -- DeeKay64 (talk) 19:00, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]