User talk:Gidonb/Archive 2014

Good to see you active on WP...

Hi Gidon, and please stay in touch! All the best, IZAK (talk) 08:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Izak! I appreciate this. Maybe we can still meet in New York or Chicago one day! gidonb (talk) 11:42, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Q-go

Hi. In performing the merge of Q-go into RightNow Technologies, did you notice the post-AfD discussion at Talk:Q-go#Notability? Thanks. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 11:54, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I had missed that one. Feel free to restore the article if you deem appropriate. We have boiled it down to one paragraph in the other article, which would in any case remain relevant. If you are going to use the references, please consider adding them also to this paragraph. gidonb (talk) 12:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK. I'd meant to take it to WP:DRV sooner but for a number of reasons didn't do so, and you got to the merge before I got there! Cheers. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 17:50, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm happy that you care about these articles! gidonb (talk) 22:39, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Koninklijke Nederlandsche Zeil- & Roeivereeniging

Hi, What is the reason to trim the information down. I based the setup to that of the sister club New York Yacht Club?NED33 (talk) 12:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These were copyedits. I had to change some text in order for it to be consistent with the main text, internally consistent, and not to appear cluttered. After your question I did even more editing and research and, judging by your positive response, I believe you were happy with the results. I appreciate the work you do for Wikipedia, had already noticed it, and had already rewarded it with a barnstar. Another approach, next to leaving messages, is to assume good faith, try to understand the reasoning behind the edits, and continue to improve the article. Best, gidonb (talk) 22:37, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, There were two editors after the creation of the article. It was some confusing for me who did whit and why. I't all clear now. Thanks,NED33 (talk) 22:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for a very special editor

		The Editor's Barnstar
		for your help breaking a new user into Wikipedia Katrinpark (talk) 16:06, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Katrinpark! gidonb (talk) 16:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template: Textile designers

Hi - I am sure you had very good reasons for your edits to Template:Textile designers but I'm afraid I couldn't understand why, and have reverted the edits. The date ranges, although seemingly random and arbitrary (mid-20th century would mean 1925-1975 to me, but focusing on 1930-1969), at least seem to have some rationale, but the addition of Naoki Sakai, who appears never to have designed textiles, was a strange one that, with all respect, made all your edits appear suspicious. I see that you're a long standing Wikipedian so I'm sure there are good reasons here and would like to know them. Mabalu (talk) 22:07, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SORRY, just realised Naoki Sakai was already on the list, but moved by you. Please disregard that bit. I would like to know more about the dating reasoning though - personaly, I prefer the fluidity/open ended nature of "mid" to defining it by specific years. Now to see just who else shouldn't be on that template. Mabalu (talk) 22:13, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with your edits although checking yourself first is always better than apologizing later. Years were by equal split and thus do not need huge mathematical skills, but also not strictly needed. I added only in open lines for illustration, you prefer without, all approaches can be justified. gidonb (talk) 23:47, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of opera houses

Hi - Thanks again for your nice Barnstar. I'm writing re: the List of opera houses article on which you've done some great work! As I took a look today, those interminable lists of names upon names in one long line bothers me and so I tried, with the Italian section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_opera_houses#Italy to find a way of making it look a bit better.

Therefore, what do you think about this as an example, where there are lots and lots of opera houses? All the best, Viva-Verdi (talk) 17:05, 28 April 2014 (UTC), a Brit in Santa Fe, New Mexico[reply]

PS: a bit later in the morning and I've got somewhat carried away when I decided to see how the pix would work alongside these cols. So far, Asia looks fine. Sometimes pix can only be aligned with a single entry where no cols disturb placement. so far, so good. Shall not go any further than Europe though till I get your thoughts.... Viva-Verdi (talk) 18:13, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A bit later.... Well, I got carried away today wanting to see how it would all work out with the photos and all....!! Overall, the photos match up pretty well, though I did have to substitute some vertical ones for horizontals (e.g Royal Opera House, Covent Garden; Liceu in Barcelona). Viva-Verdi (talk) 20:04, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the compliment! I only reviewed the geographical organization. Maybe moved a picture or two to get everything in line after making some changes. Still it's nice when your work gets appreciated. You, on the other hand, really did a lot of work on this list! It looks extremely invested!!! Your Barnstar is now even better earned! ;-) Best, gidonb (talk) 21:24, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CONCACAF

To those in Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, anything below Mexico is Central America. That's why in CONCACAF they distinguish between them. FIFA recognizes them as distinct regions as well. This is a FIFA tournament. Take it up on the talk pages for the articles or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football‎‎. Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is a FIFA tournament but also a Wikipedia article. Therefor we should follow the Wikipedia rules. You took ownership of the article and kept reverting me. That is most unfortunate. Edit warring is not my style, so I let it be. gidonb (talk) 11:40, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fall Braun

Thanks for the article about Fall Braun - very interesting!

I just thought I'd drop a note about the linking of countries. For some time there has been a general consensus, although not clearly explained in the WP:Overlinking text that common words, country names, and similar oft-used words shouldn't be wikilinked. It may be in this case that it's good to keep the links. I thought I'd send a note in the off-chance you didn't know about that.--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:25, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I fixed previous linking. Even had a bracket bot comment here. gidonb (talk) 11:27, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Multiverse

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

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Multiverse (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mz7 (talk) 15:42, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, would you kindly take a look and see why is it that Miss Multiverse is once again put for delete, i have read the wikipedia policies and the article meets the policies and it also states that once an article is approved by an administrator it cannot put for delete again. Jose Cuello (talk) 06:29, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed this edit, and thought I'd point out that the reference does not support a claim that the pageant is "supported by the Dominican Ministry of Tourism". It's just a mention, reading like a press release, of a letter from Linda Gausachs, the CEO of Miss Multiverse, thanking everyone "who has made the event possible", and then listing a Mariam Matthias from the Ministry of Tourism (who has apparently helped coordinate some events during the pageant) as one of those they want to thank, along with a list of hotels and others. In other words a standard thank you letter from Miss Multiverse, and no proof of them being officially supported by the Ministry of Tourism. Or in WP-lingo a primary surce and not a reliable secondary source. Thomas.W ^talk 11:44, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't gotten to that part yet, I only changed a reference into the Wikipedia style. If you detect problems in articles, I suggest that you fix them in these articles, rather than discussing them on talk pages of individual users, who have no history with the problem you raise. It's so much more constructive behavior. gidonb (talk) 11:59, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would normally do that, but since I !voted delete in the AfD it might be a bit sensitive if I start removing the few sources there are, and we've seen enough disruption on the AfD as it is. It does surprise me though that you didn't check the sources when rewriting the article, or before !voting "keep" on the AfD. Thomas.W ^talk 12:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the sources before, when I personally rewrote the entire article. The AFD was started while I was on a week-long vacation in the mountains. I saw it but had very limited internet access. Also, I did not vote, I expressed my opinion in a discussion. I cleaned this article myself of all PR. Something may have been introduced in the meantime. If you see PR you can remove it, just like anyone else. I edited a Belgian source that excludes any reference to the DR Ministry of Tourism. When you detect problems, please correct them. Please do not create false impressions on third persons talk pages that they had anything to do with PR or that anything was wrong with their edits, including misleading titles and links. Now you have the cheek to continue your insinuations. Please stop these. It does not create a pleasant environment at Wikipedia among volunteers! gidonb (talk) 13:04, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I did not appreciate your edit summary that claims that your translation "undermines claims made at AfD", since it doesn't. I suggest you try to translate the entire article, if you do you'll find that it's about a woman and her daughter participating in a beauty pageant for mothers and daughters in Paris, with her previous participation in Miss Multiverse mentioned only in passing (a brief mention that doesn't establish any notability for Miss Multiverse). Which is exactly what I wrote at AfD. So I suggest you check your facts better the next time, before making snide remarks in edit summaries. Thomas.W ^talk 20:17, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Gidon, Is there a way to contest this deletion? you and i know this was motivated and pushed by Thomas whom took it as his pride and forgot its all about the article. Also the salting maybe we can have it moved to incubation or a stub Jose Cuello (talk) 17:02, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jose, the relevant procedure would be WP:DRV. You never know at Wikipedia, but I was surprised that the article was taken out. Articles with so much significant coverage in third party publications should not be deleted, but there is no security that WP policies will be carefully applied in AfDs. gidonb (talk) 19:15, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jose, apart from a Deletion Review, have you considered blowing new live into Wikipedia:WikiProject Beauty Pageants? It would be great if we could have that revived! gidonb (talk) 13:08, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, i would definitely 100% love to contribute fully with pageantry, It might sound absurd but i have seen with my own eyes how important this is for women and the positive impact it has on their lives whether it is Miss Multiverse, Universe, International or any other. I believe we have to create some kind of authority with a knowledge board of members that can defend this topic. As i see wikipedia works based on groups that corroborate and support each-other i found a tool on wikipedia where i was able to see what this Thomas contributed to in the past and noticed how two others from the ones that voted delete where involved as well, meaning he invited them over to re-enforce his vote and opinion. I think its best to not call their attention to much so they dont come and mess with us, but do in fact create our own army of supporters. I will start by building up my wikipeia profile and learning more how to use this Jose Cuello (talk) 20:03, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sheeesh. You invited me to the AfD, Jose, by posting on my talk page about it, asking me to take a look at the article and see why it was put up for deletion. Which I did, based on Wikipedia policies. So the AfD was all about Wikipedia policies, not about personal opinions, as can be clearly seen in the AfD by anyone who knows about Wikipedia policies (a group that, based on what was posted on the AfD, clearly includes neither you, Jose, nor Gidonb). Thomas.W ^talk 08:09, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jose, the Wikiproject members are asked for their attention and expert opinion on subjects within their domain. Hence you can implement your idea by reviving the relevant Wikiproject. Of course, these are not the only opinions that matter. gidonb (talk) 14:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi gidonb I visited the beauty pageant Wikipedia:WikiProject Beauty Pageants and put it to semi active, as i see there is allot to do, this i don´t mind at all, but i have allot of learning to do before i am able to make significant contribution and with this i mean the codes and tags required, this wikipedia is a science of its own. but how do i know i will not work for hours, weeks and months only to have someone following my trail and deleting my work for their amusement? Jose Cuello (talk) 03:24, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jose, sounds wonderful! I have had some bad experiences at Wikipedia in the past, although it's been a while. I used to be more active in editing heavy disputed subject matters and in addressing vandalism. You certainly get much more heat when you get into such areas. Since, I've become too busy outside Wikipedia and mostly do my daily chores at WP. My experience is that stalkers, edit warriors, deceivers, rude folks, and the like eventually get caught and removed from WP and that good articles do get restored. I outlived all my stalkers on Wikipedia by remaining patient. As a rule I wouldn't say that beauty contests are heavily disputed. This was an exceptional situation. Mostly you meet great folks at Wikipedia. For example, from "our" AfD, DGG is sensitive to people and quality. Folks like DGG hopefully set better examples of how interaction, reviews, and discussion summaries should be. gidonb (talk) 16:53, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

China

Your edit summary for this edit to Anno Domini is not accurate. People's Republic of China is not a disambiguation page, it is a redirect to China. Also, it appears you are making a number of this kind of edit. Be aware that the Wikipedia: Bot policy states "Note that high-speed semi-automated processes may effectively be considered bots in some cases, even if performed by an account used by a human editor. If in doubt, check." If that statement applies to your edits, you should seek approval from the bot approval group. Jc3s5h (talk) 13:46, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but you wrote regrettable nonsense. I used no bot whatsoever. I only modified the wiki in several articles to the official Wikipedia name. If you are uncomfortable with that name, please discuss it at the relevant talk page. gidonb (talk) 19:52, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Solar power by country

Hi Gidonb, a month ago I posted a comment about your changes in the article Solar power by country. It's no big deal, however, a section "Middle East" would be helpful, especially when linking to such section from other articles. So let me know if that conflicts too much with wikipedia's internal consistency in your view. Besides that, I'm perfectly happy. Cheers, -- Rfassbind (talk) 12:04, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Like Latin America, the Middle East is not a continent but an INTERcontinental region. If you insert it among the continents, you will seriously mess up our geographic organization. gidonb (talk) 01:39, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar

Thanks very much for the barnstar, much appreciated! — Cirt (talk) 17:48, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, fully deserved as well! I liked that you checked the next edit. I also do that sometimes! :-) gidonb (talk) 17:50, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AIESEC

Hey man, thanks for the help with the changes to the AIESEC page! I'm planning on adding a few more this week when I have time. Do you have plans for writing in the "blank" decades? Also, out of curiosity, are you an AIESECer?

Cheers! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevethespaniard (talk • contribs) 08:58, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neither, I was just making my rounds. I usually do not invite others to write but a bit of iterim history could really benefit to the quality of the article. Thank you for your positive feedback after my edits! gidonb (talk) 11:52, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for helping out with the article then. I'm still new at editing wikipedia articles so I'm glad for the help. I started editing it because I'm a past leader in AIESEC and I noticed that there was a lot of inaccurate or outdated information. Regarding the interim history, I know more about AIESEC's history than almost anyone, and there isn't really a lot to say about those time periods, other than the organization grew. The core of the organization has not changed a lot; it has just become more modernized.. There are couple interesting stories, but there aren't any solid sources, except for historical annual reports that have not been digitized. What would you suggest be done? Thanks! Stevethespaniard (talk) 14:39, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]