User talk:Dlyons493/Archive04 1st of June 2006 to 31st of July 2006

Image copyright problem with Image:GuntRiver.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:GuntRiver.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 21:41, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Holley Nethercote Commercial Lawyers

Hi there,

In early May, you listed Holley Nethercote Commercial Lawyers for deletion. Since then, I've made changes pursuant to the Wiki guidelines on notability. I understand that a decision is usually made about the article after 5 days, but it has been about 24 days since I've made the changes following your nomination, and there's been no additions to the discussion. I think that it is clearly good material for Wiki, so can you remove the "this article is being considered for deletion" banner? Thanks, Visitpaul 23:43, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:MinARR512.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:MinARR512.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 23:10, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

As one Bot to another :-) This is a test of uploading public domain images from INSEE. Haven't quite figured out how to get the licence metadata to upload with the image yet! Dlyons493 Talk 23:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:GuntRiverandMountains.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:GuntRiverandMountains.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Terence Ong RfA

You may want to cast that vote again. The first time, you removed all support votes and many oppose votes. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 22:31, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your request concerning Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs with a color word(s) in their names

Hi, I appreciate your point re this list, but it seems to me to be a pity to delete a page into which so much effort has gone (even though that effort might have been more useful elsewhere). So I'm asking editors if they can rethink and factor that in - I appreciate they may well reach the same conclusion even after a rethink :-) Dlyons493 Talk

Hello. Upon reconsidering, as per your request, I stand by my initial assertion that this article (although mildly interesting) is listcruft, i.e. an indiscriminate collection of information. The effort that has gone into it, while laudable, is not a criterion of appropriateness for an encyclopedia. You remain free, of course, to continue this list elsewhere, such as in userspace, on another more appropriate wiki or on your own website. Have a nice weekend, Sandstein 12:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Didn't any of the editors take the time to think about the point of this page? What is its encyclopedic value? I can see a value in trivia pub quiz-type affairs but nothing encyclopedic. I doesn't appear that the article has changed significantly in the last few hours for me to change my opinion. Even if the article was split in to its consistiuent colours, what purpose would those nine daughter pages serve? I don't think that this is encyclopedic in any form. (aeropagitica) (talk) 15:54, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Believe me, I did not nominate this article for AfD willy-nilly. It is a shame to see so much hard work go down the drain, but feeling sorry for editors is not a reason to keep an article that has no encyclopedic merit. Reyk _YO! 23:49, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Melaleuca AfD

You noted some notability concerns for Melaleuca (company) and I have added more notability support for this company. I trust you will recognize that Forbes Magazine and Inc. Magazine are established, reputable, and non-trivial business print publications. Melaleuca, while perhaps attracting some of the well-known problems of multi-level marketing, is a legitimate notable business. Please look at the latest changes to the article and consider changing your comment to "keep". The Crow 16:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Arrondissement of Thiers etc

No problem. I also noticed several redundant sections were added in this article. [1] Probably a bug? Neurillon 17:28, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I looked in your contributions and found the following articles (edited just after Arrondissement of Avranches [2]):

Neurillon 20:45, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Sagar

Hi, I'm recreating this as suggested by American Patriot 1776. Universities are intrinsically notable. Dlyons493 Talk

That's fine. Bear in mind the copyvio comments; the notable status of the institution is not in dispute. (aeropagitica) (talk) 21:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/University of Sagar Hello, nice meeting you. You are most welcome to work on the page at your convenience. I would always seek your assistance, if I start working on the page. --Bhadani 15:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cicero's Pizza

Please reconsider your nomination per the information I have posted at the above page. This resturant meets WP:CORP and as such is "notable". Gateman1997 02:18, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding. To answer your questions in the order you posted them...

1. I got 19,000 hits when searching "Cicero's Pizza" on Google.
2. Yes the more enthusiastic hits would refer to the older one, specifically their first location in relation to Apple because that was the era in which Apple patronized them. However there is direct continuity and history for that connection to the current resturant as I touch on in #3.
3. The 3rd location is verifiably a re opening of the original two locations from information on both the resturant itself, their website (their company symbol is Nuzio Cicero the founder) and the article I linked to on the VFD from the San Jose Mercury News (one of if not the most reputable news source in Northern California) [6]. It was reopened by the original owner's son-in-law, grandson and daughter.
4. The city search voting system would seem to be something they would have to answer. However citysearch is by no means a small website and I'm sure such information is obtainable. However they are not the only independent site to review the establishment.
5. WP:CORP is by no means policy that is true. However I wouldn't characterize it as a "rough" guideline either. To become an officially sanctioned guideline it does have to have a definitive structure and broad support, which this one obviously does as it is an old and well developed guideline.

I look forward to your consideration of the matter. Gateman1997 03:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

El-Gouna

As you can imagine, I won't be heart-broken either way either. It's true that this one is a bit tricky because it's not one hotel but more like a full small city. In any case, I've recently been trying to cleanup all the spam in the hotel articles and I have just proposed WP:HOTELS so I might have a slight bias against anything of that sort. Cheers. Pascal.Tesson 19:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Augean stables? No... I believe Sisyphus is the word you were looking for... :-) Pascal.Tesson 23:04, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tip of the day project update

Just trying to get things better organized around there. Toward that end, I've created a task list template for the project. If all the contributors to the project placed it on their user page, we could all keep in touch more easily (with announcements, alerts, etc.). It, and the latest announcements can be found at:

totd task list template

--Go for it! 17:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: University of Sagar

By the way, if you want to help whip-up a replacement stub for Gauhati University, which is in the same boat, that'd be great. ×Meegs 05:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As well as Assam University, which I deleted just now as the 5th repost of the same copyvio text. I'll block if he posts copyrighted text anyhwhere one more time. Kimchi.sg 06:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trevor K Grant

I notice you voted to keep this article. Do you actually have any evidence that any of his books exist, or are you voting to keep for the humour value? DJ Clayworth 18:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kharja

Thank you for suggesting the proceeding. As for wihch is the correct page to be the final name for the article, I finally think that the best would be Kharja. Kharjah (component of muwashshah) is bad for two reasons: the former, that the Kharja is not only a component of a Muwashshah, as I explained in talk:Kharjah (component of muwashshah). The latter id that the original word in arab doesn´t contain a final H, but an A, what can be transcripted wrongly because that final A is a tá marbuta, written very similar to an h, but with two points on it. I first thought that Jarcha was the solution, but I hadn´t thought about the most common trancription in English: Kharja. See you!--Garcilaso 08:38, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kitty May Ellis

Hey, thanks for the note. I was beginning to feel more than a little down. --Deathphoenix ʕ 18:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA thanks

Hello Dlyons493/Archive04 1st of June 2006 to 31st of July 2006, and thank you for your support at my Request for Adminship, which succeeded with an overwhelming final count of (105/2/0). I was very pleased with the outpouring of kind words from the community that has now entrusted me with these tools, from the classroom, the lesson in human psychology and the international resource known as Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Please feel free to leave me plenty of requests, monitor my actions (through the admin desk on my userpage) and, if you find yourself in the mood, listen to some of what I do in real life. In any case, keep up the great work and have a fabulous day. Grand master ka 06:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA thanks

Hello Dlyons493/Archive04 1st of June 2006 to 31st of July 2006, and thank you for your support at my Request for Adminship, which succeeded with an overwhelming final count of (105/2/0). I was very pleased with the outpouring of kind words from the community that has now entrusted me with these tools, from the classroom, the lesson in human psychology and the international resource known as Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Please feel free to leave me plenty of requests, monitor my actions (through the admin desk on my userpage) and, if you find yourself in the mood, listen to some of what I do in real life. In any case, keep up the great work and have a fabulous day. Grand master ka 06:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFM-Request

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Kittie May Ellis, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. 11:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Laurel Kenner

Hi,

This is not copied from moneycentral.com, if you compare the two pieces, you will see that they are quite different. Also what is written here is different from yesterdays version.

Some facts are however sourced from the moneycentral profile and from dailyspeculations.com

Swism 16:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hello,

bandwidth fluctuated, i just posted my comment however the page did not registed my edit and blanketed partially the page.... fyi 58.69.18.238 16:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

again, you better check you talk page before you make assumptions 58.69.18.238 16:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the correction 58.69.18.238 16:09, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article Andrew Hageman

Hello
On the Article Andrew Hageman you voted Delete claiming he Has only played U21's

He is currently part of the First Team, he has not played any games because he is injured, he plays in 2 weeks.
He's starting a two-year first team contract this season. He's a professional player with a professional contract.[7] The article initialy didn't make that 100% clear, it is now stated it more explicitly. A first team player in the Irish equivelent of the premiership is notable enough.
Thanks
Trade2tradewell 09:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We are in the middle of the season [8]

Andrew is recovering from his injury and is expected to play again in 2 weeks time.[9]

Trade2tradewell 09:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

24 July

Picked up my first wiki stalker.

[[Image:Stop_hand.svg|left|30px]] This is your '''last warning'''. The next time you [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalize]] a page, you ''will'' be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing Wikipedia.  --[[User:Railer 893|Railer 893]] 17:14, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Dr. Green

Who is this aforementioned individual? How persistent are they? It may be a simple matter I could deal with, or it may require more attention. Depending on the nature and severity of the situation, you might also try Wikipedia:Requests for investigation, Wikipedia:Requests for comment or Wikipedia:Mediation cabal. Grand master ka 17:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh... They were blocked indefinitely two minutes before you got to me. Grand master ka 17:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vic Nieder

Hi, I just completely rewrote the article this morning, and I see you are still calling it a copyright violation. Could you please elaborate/provide examples, and I will gladly change the offending pieces. Daviegold 09:57, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll change that right away, kinda strangely written line anyhow... Daviegold 12:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just made that change and cleaned up the english a bit. I think its fairly clean. Left the links to Gintansu and Steven Wisdom for now. Will pull them if their pages come down. Daviegold 12:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shoryuken.com

You recently ran this article through AfD and it was deleted. I can't entirely support that course of action because a related article (Daigo Umehara) survived my own AfD attempt (and I believe this was before the SRK article showed up). Daigo's primary source of fane is through fighting game tournaments financed by SRK. If that article could be re-written to better fit the Wikipedia standards, would you stand in the way of a deletion review? Danny Lilithborne 04:27, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Has your problem been taken care of? My computer died on me and I still haven't gotten it fixed, so I haven't been here much lately. Grand master ka 02:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"La Zone" saved

The Boulevard de la Zone article has just been removed from the "speedy deletion" list. Thanks for the heads-up for that. I suggest you get a leash for your Wiki-dogger : ) THEPROMENADER 19:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if you want to save that article (again) from deletion, you'd best change your deletion-page comment to a keep. Cheers. THEPROMENADER 14:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Decidedly you have a couple delete-happy 'contributors' on your tail - the red-tagged contributor has done nothing but nominate for deletion. This looks suspect IMHO. Unlike some others here, I can only vote once... THEPROMENADER 13:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, out of the fire. I'll take a photo or two next time I'm down there and post them. In the meantime, any additional info would help the article greatly - now that it has our full attention. thepromenader 11:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

What is a walled garden effect? Trade2tradewell

Rod Summers

Thanks for the correction, but please give us some time with the Rod Summers article. Erasing text without seeing where it's heading--including referneces (when references had been requested) is not at all fair. In addition, I question your glib "not a significant mail artist." How do you know? Where are your sources? Are you a significant mail artist? I'm new to this Wiki thing (still doing tutorials and feeling my way through) and I would like us all to be gentlemen here. Or at least that's what I thought we were supposed to be. Thanks very much, Jesse Glass.

Temple Beth Or

I can see why adding those things would make the article more interesting, but I don't think that should be REQUIRED. There are other temple articles on Wikipedia that have little to no information but still stand, such as Temple Beth Am.