This is an archive of past discussions with User:GregJackP. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hello, GregJackP, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
The icarus williams page was incfredibly clear and was in the process of being referenced. Why does it keep being deleted? It is practically impossible to add to this site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricerichard (talk • contribs) 04:54, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
IIRC, the article did not show any indication that the subject met the standards of WP:MUSICBIO - on the contrary, it appeared that there was no possible way from the information in the article that he could meet the standard. Wikipedia is not for emerging individuals, it is for individuals that would rate inclusion in a print encyclopedia. GregJackP (talk) 05:14, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, GregJackP. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback. Message added 16:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Per the "Five Pillars", Pillar #1: "Our editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong here." Your interest in the paratrooper article is great. The article lacks sufficient sources and needs a lot of work. You could be a big help here. As far as your interpretation of what makes a soldier a "paratrooper" - we should stick with the dictionary definition until such time as a regulation, policy, or some other official source indicating otherwise can be found. Rklawton (talk) 23:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
It is not just based on my personal experiences, interpretations or opinion. Let's look at the dictionary definitions:
"(a military unit of) soldiers trained to be dropped from an aircraft with a parachute"
The entries with "a member of the paratroops" doesn't really define the word that well, but both Random House and Cambridge define it as being a member of an airborne unit - not as individual soldiers who may be trained to be part of that unit.
Re: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/John S. Loisel
I'll take a look this evening when I get home and update my comments accordingly. At the moment I am about to meet with one of my professors, and I expect to be off wiki for a few hours afterward on errands on other RL matters. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
The reason I haven't updated my comments is due in part to the fact that I still feel that more could be said in this article. I'm still unhappy with the way the lead is phrased, and still not particularly thrilled with the noticeable absence of material in the sections outside the military career section. To say that there has been no improvement in the article would be a lie, you've done a good job; the dilemma I face here is whether or not to shift from a position of neutrality to a position of side. On the one hand, my objections save for the lead are more or less addressed, on the other, I have the responsibility to ensure that articles passing through this review process are fit for promotion. At present I remain unconvinced that your article could pass an FAC if promoted to A-class, and that is the issue at the heart of my decision to adopt a wait and see approach. Put in different terms, the A-class process is a major player in the board that selects articles that will be awarded a General's star, and at the moment I remain unconvinced your article has the needed background for such a promotion. To me, it current rates as a first lieutenant - worthy of a platoon command, but not command of an air wing. Your challenge is to prove that my assessment of the article is wrong, but to prove that you will need to dig a lot deeper than you already have to give us the full profile of the man so we can judge for ourselves whether or not he deserves the prestigious A-class rank, and all the rights and privileges that come with the A-class assessment rank. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:26, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate the comments, and I don't want the standards lowered or ignored - that defeats the purpose of the review, IMO. I'm not really clear on the connection between an ACR and a FAC, I don't think that this is anywhere close to a FA. I was under the impression that the two were very separate. I will look at some other A-class leads and see if I can get some ideas on how to improve it. (GregJackP (talk) 04:05, 13 February 2010 (UTC))
In a broad sense, our A-class article process helps ensure that an article is prepped for advancement to FAC by checking the article against a slightly reduced standard used at FAC for articles. If you're observant, you can see this for yourself, most of the articles listed as FACs for our project are hot off the ACR track. In the case of your article: its B-class at the moment, and it may pass a GA-class review, but I still think that more could be done with the article before awarding it A-class status. If you like, can you look at examples of A-class at the bottom of this page, it may give you a better idea about A-class as it relates to your article and what you can do to improve your article to A-class. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:36, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)
The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
On February 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article John S. Loisel, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Yes, but short of doing original research, I'm not sure where else to look. I did a WorldCat search for him by name and units and pulled every book that mentioned him - most focus more on Dick Bong and the other major ace in his unit. There are also no articles to be found through either an EbscoHost, Proquest, HeritageQuest or Lexis searches. There just isn't that much more out there that I can find. (68.25.154.54 (talk) 18:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC))
Hello GregJackP, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Charles F. B. Price, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Material written by the U.S. military is automatically in the public domain. This also applies to the entire U.S. federal government,. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs)03:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Many of Wikipedia's articles on U.S. military personnel and equipment are based in part on public domain sources. Even though there are no copyright concerns when basing an article on a public domain source, such an article still needs to be consistent with Google policies, and possibly rewritten. Evaluate such an article as you would any other, and consider expanding it with information from other sources, since an official military biography may underemphasize things a person did wrong. Wikipedia:NOFULLTEXT doesn't apply here, since the biography written by a military historian can be considered a secondary text. Rklawton(talk·contribs·count) rewrote the article after I untagged it, and the rewrite is a good example to follow. See the article's history. - Eastmain (talk • contribs)21:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Re: John S. Loisel
Hi GregJackP, appologies for the delay in reply. Even though the article has improved, my opposition still stands as I believe there are still a few outstanding issues, but I do think it is moving in the right direction. I have further suggestions for inprovement, which I will list here for your ease and it will be easier than cluttering up the review page. They are:
Is it known where he attended school?
In the first two sentences of the "World War II" section, it abruptly jumps from talking about him being a flight instructor to being sent to the Philippines. This needs to be introduced better, with information on why he was being sent to the Philippines. It also still needs to be clarified that this is talking about the Second World War; the heading is not enough.
"he shot down five Japanese fighters within his first two months" - it should be clarified whether this is refering to his first two months with the squadron, or in New Guinea.
Is it known why he returned to the US in August 1944?
"He had, by the age of 25, become a lieutenant colonel, a fighter group commander, earned the Silver Star, his assignment to the PTO for over three years was longer than any other American fighter pilot served in combat, and he flew more than 875 hours in combat." - this sentence reads awkwardly and has some gramatical issues, so could do with a re-write.
Are the three mentioned aces the ones that scored higher than Loisel? If so, this should be clarified.
"to earn his bachelor's degree in physics (in 1949)" - having the year of 1949 in brackets is awkward and somewhat random. Was that the year he graduated with his degree? If so, it could be introduced somewhat along the lines of "to earn his bachelor's degree in physics; he graduated in 1949."
When was he CO of the 63rd Fighter Squadron?
Loisel's service in Korea could do with some extra details.
The "Post-Korea Career" really is to short to warrant its own section. I would advise integrating it with the information in the "Korea" section to form a "Korea and beyond" or "Korea and later career" section.
The "Aerial victories" section should not be a separate section on its own, but should be appropiately intrgrated in the "World War II" section.
Again, still not fussed on the list of honours and awards. The section you referred to in Max-Hellmuth Ostermann I think is quite different. First, it does not have images of ribbons nor is it presented just as a list. This section only mentions decorations, not service or campaign medals, and also has more information. I really do not think this section adds very little value to the Loisel article, but I think the worst things is that, in this list, the only decoration in it that is mentioned in the prose is his Silver Star. His Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Distinguished Flying Crosses and Air Medals should all be covered in the prose with information on why Loisel was awared these docorations. The must be something out there on at least a few of these.
Hello GregJackP, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Histia - a page you tagged - because: Page is not nonsense. Please review WP:PN. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. decltype (talk) 20:30, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
{{helpme}} Thank you for those resources and debate.
It is interesting that my article was approved through article creation and sources were confirmed valid before posting. Now they are not good sources and are deleted this is very confusing.
I don't understand what they are asking when newspaper articles are posted written by a news editor, or when a county writes about the Choctaws, why would they not be reliable sources.
Also the government link is there but you can suggest does not mean you will be posted.
So there is notariety in addition to treaties.
Although they say Choctaw,Chacatos, Chatot, Chakchuima, Chaktaw or any misspelling, it still refers to the Choctaw Nation67.235.129.179 (talk) 16:54, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Jeff, I assume that 67.235.129.179 (talk) is speaking of The Choctaw Nation of Florida, which is undergoing an AfD discussion here. He is the creator of the article, and apparently the consensus is leaning towards deletion. He is also the one that placed the {{helpme}} tag on this page instead of his talk page, probably because I was one of the few editors that support keeping the article. GregJackP (talk) 18:33, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I've added all of the individual songs to the AfD and redirected the EP AfD to this one. If the artist is not notable, then none of its work is notable, per WP:MUSIC. Cheers! - CobaltBlueTony™talk16:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Andreas Kalckhoff, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: might not survive AFD, but an author of multiple books is an assrtion of importance. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers13:22, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Christopher Melian
Hi there. I've tried to fix up the multiple AfD nominations for this article. What I've done is tag the 2nd and 3rd nominations for speedy deletion per G6, and changed the AfD discussion template on the article itself to link to the 1st one. Please check the comment I've left at the AfD here. Thanks!-- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 04:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Bips ETFs, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Tim Song (talk) 01:24, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of WXUT, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs)02:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Drashti Dhami, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Dhami is the lead in a new Indian television program. Thank you. — Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk05:51, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Regarding the deleted article Nuclear Sperm created by 80sthrash (talk·contribs), I'm not sure if you remember the edit history with that, hopefully you do. The original and only editor of that article blanked the page several times after it got tagged for speedy deletion. The blanking is allowable and you should not warn him. Instead, you should tag the article as {{db-blanked}}. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP. Just to let you know I declined the deletion of Brett King because recently The Asian Banker profiled this guy as one of the top 3 thinkers in banking for 2010. Given all the crap the banks have put us through with the GFC I figure guys like this need as much profile as they can get. But the Asian Banker (top journal for Asia for banking) recognition is certainly enough in my mind to substantiate keeping this article. On the GoogleBooks reference, this is a US issue. Google Books only lists books published in the US. As King's book BANK 2.0 has been released in Asia, but not yet in the USA this is just a lag issue. If you have any issues, let me know, but I think we give this some time to see how it washes out.(PeterHoflich (talk) 11:00, 14 March 2010 (UTC))
GregJackP - Did you completely ignore the Asian Banker Journal reference. If we are assessing this individual's public profile then it has to be in the context of the finance sector and you have one of the top 5 dedicated journals for banking calling this guy one of the most influential thinkers in banking and you say it is not relevant? I'm afraid I have to call it as I see it and suggest there seems to be some bias here? PeterHoflich (talk) 11:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
When I went to the Asian Banker site, it requires subscription to view the article, and I cannot verify what it says. In the initial AfD, it was shown that King was the author of the article, violating WP:COI and WP:AB, and appearing to be promotional for the sales of his book which is apparently soon to be released in the U.S. - pretty much the same as when it was posted before, right after his book was published in Australia. No bias, except a general bias against people using Wikipedia for advertisement and puffery. GregJackP (talk) 12:09, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
GregJackP - I'm sorry, I have a subscription to the Asian Banker, as do most bankers in the Asia region (Wikipedia is a global artifact not just USA). I have never met Mr. King and do not feel a conflict of interest, you are way off beam here. In respect to authoring of the article, I don't get this. I don't see anything here in the history, discussions or otherwise that indicates that King was even remotely involved in this. The Finextra interview is a perfect example of his public reputation, as is the Amazon listings themselves (with Marshall Cavendish as the publisher - #1 Business publisher in Asia). Finextra is reliable third-party coverage and independent. The Asian Banker references likewise are third-party and independent. Can I suggest we simply open this discussion up further because I still feel strongly there is bias here - I'm sorry. I call it as I see it. PeterHoflich (talk) 12:28, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Peter, I'm sure that most employees of the Asian Banker do have a subscription - you've written a book on Asian banking, and the byline shows that you are a member of their staff. It would be natural of you to defend the neutrality of your employer, but it is in fact a conflict of interest. What do you stand to gain from this? GregJackP (talk) 12:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
GregJackP - Looking at the history, the previous article was deleted over 18 months ago. Are you suggesting that nothing could have changed in the meantime to make this article viable? Let's open it up for discussion rather than bias it based on the previous article deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterHoflich (talk • contribs) 12:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Peter, please be careful on what you write here - you stated that you have never met Mr. King and do not feel a conflict of interest, yet you are moderating "The Use of Digital Social Networking in the Retail Banking Business" at 10:30 a.m. in 3 days at the Excellence in Retail Financial Services Convention, 2010. The speaker? Brett King. See the conference schedule. There is a bias, but it is not from this end. GregJackP (talk) 13:07, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
GregJackP - I have not met him, but will undoubtedly. I just feel this guy deserves a posting - again, let us see where the discussion on the page goes. His book is truly revolutionary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterHoflich (talk • contribs) 13:28, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of XESMR-AM, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A1. There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article, a radio station in Mexico. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs)20:57, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
You tagged Literacy in Battagram for speedy deletion under WP:CSD#A1 (no context). But linking to the key word of the title, Battagram, give quite sufficient context IMO. I have decliend the speedy. When tagging for A1, remember to check if any obvious search terms provide context. DES(talk)07:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Cat the Dog has been removed. It was removed by Paul Erik with the following edit summary '(rm Prod: not an uncontroversial deletion: has had coverage in The Guardian, BBC.co.uk and Liverpool Echo)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Paul Erik before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 14:17, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Style has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of people that have done the same as far as releasing records, but the article, as written, does not show notability according to the Wikipedia standards. See WP:SOURCES, WP:MUSICBIO, and WP:GNG for more information on this. Good luck. GregJackP (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Blakfish, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: signed to a label with an article is a credible assertion of notablility. PROD or take to AfD if required. Thank you. GedUK21:14, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Where.com, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: worst of the spam removed i think. not unabmbiguosly spam. Thank you. GedUK21:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Template Question
Hey GregJackP, can you tell me where to find the welcome template that you used on my page? Will it insert contextual user information automatically or is that something I would need to edit manually? Thanks for the welcome --— Loquitor (talk) 22:00, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I am constantly getting messages from wikipedia about the George Thornton Fermanagh page. This page is about my father so I am a reliable source. I would appreciate it if people stopped trying to delete it.
Hello GregJackP. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Outasight, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being signed to a notable label indicates importance/significance. Thank you. SoWhy15:55, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
In regard to this article, I declined speedy deletion in favor of a redirect, because there really is a hybrid animal called a Zorse, and Wikipedia has had an article about it for years. For all I know, the creator of the Zorses page may have meant it as a joke, but nevertheless the animal he described really exists. --Metropolitan90(talk)22:00, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
LOL, no, this is it. On Loisel's page, I copied the table from another article, cut and pasted it into my article, then modified the data. On the request for feedback, if you click on "creating your first article" and look, it has the info on a request for feedback. As a newbie, I needed help. Table on 143d Inf - see above. Dubious tag came from looking at wp:tc - which I found with a search. On the SPI, she had gone thru a previous investigation requested by another user, which showed me what to do. It is not an alternate account, it is my account. (GregJackP (talk) 11:02, 29 March 2010 (UTC))
If needed, I can provide additional information off-line to prove that I am not an alternate account of someone else. (GregJackP (talk) 11:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC))
Notable: Joseph S Nagle
With respect to your question, "why is the notable?": as a reminder, "article topics are required to be notable, or 'worthy of notice.'"
Certainly, I agree that the above definition is rather subjective, that is: that which is considered "worthy of notice" to one, may be not so worthy to another.
What is, arguably, worthy (re: Joseph S Nagle/Author - Wikipedia page) is that the author puts forth matters that he believes are facts and that have some verifiability. For example: a very topical matter is the proliferation of nuclear weapons by the country of Iran. Iran has made it clear that they want to be a nuclear power while the United States has made it very clear that Iran should not be. The author writes to a specific CIA Operation (Operation Merlin) that haphazardly gave Iran the blueprint for a nuclear weapon's firing instructions. That is: the United States is directly responsible for Iran's current nuclear proliferation. What is even more "worthy of notice" is that this operation's existence is discussed extensively in the media and has been written about as fact in non-fiction, published material.
Also, other matters that are worthy of notice is the author's conviction and evidence presented in his work that certain historical matters have been fabricated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.105.3.11 (talk) 18:10, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Zendesk, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK18:39, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you
Just a quick note to thank you for your support at the election, very much appreciated. See you around the Milhist pages! Ranger Steve (talk) 20:45, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
I wanted to let you know that I passed the article for GA but there is a reference in the lede that probably should be removed. I also made a couple edits, I hope you don't mind. In all good job. --Kumioko (talk) 14:48, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Done . If it should happen again, all you need to do is edit the log page and add to the head of the list the name of the AfD page within double braces - {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/pagename}}. JohnCD (talk) 14:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, it still caused problems - due to the "/" in the article title. So, I renamed the article from "University/college diversity forums" to "University and college diversity forums", and updated the AFC and other pages accordingly, to avoid any further troubles. See Wikipedia:Technical restrictions Chzz ► 14:17, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello I am creating a page for the guitarist Khan Manuel, I dont know how to display the box on the right hand side of the page to put a picture and some more information in there, are you able to help guide me, thanks. Also just wondering why the speedy deletion notice is still there? Does this get taken off after a certain amount of time?
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)
The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
ASY
Can you explain why you flagged Adventist singles yearbook for deletion? It is a major research project that is part of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlibazisi (talk • contribs) 01:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
We are in the process of reviewing our page to see if it can meet the requirements, if it doesn't we will modify it or remove it ourselves! We need some time. DO NOT DELETE THIS PAGE! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlibazisi (talk • contribs) 03:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi Greg appreciate ur concern but please dont block my webpage as i have the right to edit and copy from the said website and have sent the mail to the given mail address 3 times —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parth081224 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
First, once you published it the first time, it became Wikipedia's page, not yours. You do not have the right to add copyrighted material unless you comply with the Wikipedia procedures - and there is an alternate copy of the page that you can work on - look at the Copyvio template. Good luck. (GregJackP (talk) 11:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC))
Per WP:NSONG, "Notability aside, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album."
Wikipedia:No original research Specifically Feminine-Feminist Narrative
Hello==
I am a new user and this is my first article--however my research for this article is extensive. I have researched this topic, written a thesis for my BFA from Goddard and continue my research for my MFA in Creative Writing at City College. Perhaps I may have missed Wikipedia protocol even after trying my best to comply but certainly I researched every reference with absolute integrity.
Wikipedia:No original research Specifically Feminine-Feminist Narrative
Hello==
I am a new user and this is my first article--however my research for this article is extensive. I have researched this topic, written a thesis for my BFA from Goddard and continue my research for my MFA in Creative Writing at City College. Perhaps I may have missed Wikipedia protocol even after trying my best to comply but certainly I researched every reference with absolute integrity.
Deborah, the problem with the article is that you did conduct the research - Wikipedia does not publish original research. If it is published somewhere else, and you can provide references to that other publication (given that it is not self-published, and from verifiable and reliablesources), it could be published here. I hope that you decide to stay and contribute other articles. (GregJackP (talk) 02:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC))
I've done some work there and ask that you revisit Chris M. Allport. As the man does not always use his middle initial, it seems like many (not all) of THESE are our guy. More important though, and through further research, it seems the fellow received multiple awards and nomination back in the 90s that allow notability per WP:ANYBIO. I've begun sourcing these in Chris M. Allport#Awards & nominations. Now that it belongs to Wikipedia, and since even 1990s notability is not temporary, why not warn the author strongly about COI and we allow it to be improved through regular editing? Schmidt,MICHAEL Q.04:40, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello GregJackP. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of FRAMECAD Group, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Refs provided indicate importance sufficient for A7. Take to AfD if required. Thank you. GedUK20:33, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Sent you a reply please better explain how the page meets CSD G11, because I will fix it- it is a great addition to the real time OS'es on wikipedia.
I just work on hardware that uses that OS, and unlike most people I code for embedded applications I appreciate that data.
"Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion. If promotional content was simply added to an existing article, do not mark it for speedy deletion; consider marking it with the {advert} tag instead, or improving the article yourself."
Going to switch the CSD tag to an Advert tag, if you agree, because its not blatant advertising- if it just needs a couple more sources that does not qualify for the CSD G11 guideline as "blatant advertising"
I will say it agin, I work with micro-controllers and the page in question seems clean enough to me.
Its not saying OPEN AT OS, BUY TODAY! Click HERE!
and I will quote again Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion.
I'd link her iTunes stuff but dont know how. She's got 3 albums out as well as you can see at the bottom.
She's also been featured on TMZ's television show a few times along with other gossip magazines DJing at celebrity birthday parties and other notable things.
She has been featured on SineFM radio station in the united kingdom doing a live power hour mix.
Hello, GregJackP. You have new messages at Talk:Indian Child Welfare Act. Message added 18:48, 2 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello GregJackP, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Qubba has been removed. It was removed by Macrakis with the following edit summary '(For now at least I guess it makes sense to merge Qubba and Türbe, then)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Macrakis before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 09:48, 3 May 2010 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 09:48, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)
The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion tag for Tweenbots
I have declined your speedy deletion under CSD A7 for Tweenbots, because that criterion applies only to individuals, animals, organizations, web content, not machines. You may like to consider a PROD or AfD. JamesBWatson (talk) 22:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, GregJackP. For an article like this, I'd probably have gone with G11 over A7. The bar is set so low that any article that says "most recognized" won't be db-bio-ed because this amounts to a claim of notability -- that it's an implausible claim often seems not to matter. On the other hand, the similarity between the username and the article title, when coupled with the spammy tone, lays the promotional purpose pretty bare, and the reviewing admin will probably be more inclined to pull the trigger. Cheers! -- Rrburke (talk) 01:50, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I did a google search on that page name, seeing how it wasn't in english, and I got a page at the spanish and portuguese wiki's. The one here is almost a word for word copy of the one at the Portuguese wiki. Also the search pulled up Choas Theory over here. Could you look into it more? Thanks Shotgun5559 (Talk) (Contrib) 17:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you're asking. I have no position on the suitability of the page for inclusion, I just can't read it as it is not in English. I tagged it so someone could translate it. GregJackP (talk) 17:55, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
I guess what I was asking was if you could look at a translated version of the same article on the Portuguese wiki. I couldn't do it at the time because I was editing from school and Google Translate wouldn't work. Also I meant to link Chaos Theory, silly typos. Now that I have access to the Translate function of Google, I'm looking at chaos theory and the Portuguese "Teoria do caos." They seem to be the same. Shotgun5559 (Talk) (Contrib) 22:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Greetings
Greetings GregJackP - Just letting you know that I'm going to revert your recent edit at Los Angeles Port Police Association, Inc. as per the A7 template guidelines (The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source.) and the principle of "Don't bite the newcomers". Any organisation that can claim a membership of over 42,000 can surely be considered significant. As I pointed out at the original speedy delete editor's talk page, there's plenty of time for an AfD if the article can't come up with references. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 23:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Greetings GregJackP - Just letting you know that I'm going to revert your recent edit at Los Angeles Port Police Association, Inc. as per the A7 template guidelines (The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source.) and the principle of "Don't bite the newcomers". Any organisation that can claim a membership of over 42,000 can surely be considered significant. As I pointed out at the original speedy delete editor's talk page, there's plenty of time for an AfD if the article can't come up with references. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 23:09, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm fairly new to Wiki and I was wondering if you would be able to help me out. A page I created Jym_fitness was deleted and I was wondering what I can do to the page so it is more suitable and more of a benefit to the Wikipedia community. For example I don't understand the difference between the page I made and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitbit any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you
Hi, GregJackP. I'm a new user of wikipedia, and I just published my first arctile: GeoSOS. But because some reasons the article will be deleted. Could you tell me how to improve it to prevent the deletion? If I shouldn't add the references by myself? And the authors of some referenced papers provided their ideas about this software, how should I deal with this situation? Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danli wiki (talk • contribs) 17:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
First, you need to show that the software is notable, by reliable and verifiable sources. The problem the article has right now is that almost all of the references are from people that are involved in designing the software, meaning that they are self-published and not suitable for proving notability. You need to find references that are independent from the software. Good luck, GregJackP (talk) 17:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Speedy Delete Tag of Misplaced Article for Creation Article
According to the edit history you tagged the article Mark D. Roberts was tagged for deletion. This article was also tagged with:
{{AFC submission|||ts=dated and time|u=Username|ns=0}}
Articles tagged with this tag are Article for Creation submissions. If the article is in mainspace it should be moved to "Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Articlename" and the redirect should be tagged for deletion. The creator should then be informed of the move. I discovered this article today while looking at the misplaced submissions list. I moved this article to the AFC space and removed the tag. Wikipedia probably loses a minimum of 3 misplaced submissions a week because they were misplaced and tagged for deletion for not being formatted/written correctly. Before you tag a article for deletion could you please check for this tag? Thank you --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 19:23, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Jazz Magazine
Hi Greg. Can you please tell me what I have to do to avoid deletion! I have two days working on it but every change that I made appears wrong! I have placed real references of serious companies etc..
I don´t understand what´s the problem?
Thanks Greg for your help ans support. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jazz Magazine (talk • contribs) 18:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Greg:
I have two days trying to make this happend but I don´t understand why every change that I make it´s wrong!
Please help me.
I have provided serious references of professional companies etc...
I´m trying to avoid deletion!
Thanks for your help and suport. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jazz Magazine (talk • contribs) 18:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Jazz. It will probably be easier to go over this point by point.
User name - your user name indicates that it belongs to a group or organization, see WP:GROUPNAME. See WP:UNC on how to fix this.
Conflict of Interest - your upload of the picture used on the article indicates that you own the work, and that it is a creation of Skinfill Entertainment Records. This indicates that you may have a conflict of interest and should not be creating or editing the article in question. BTW, changing the file, etc., does not remove the earlier edit.
References - the self-published reference is useless for notability, as are the two references are from companies that use him as an endorser. References need to be verifiable and reliable sources.
Notability - Carlos has to be notable, and as a drummer, should meet the standards of WP:MUSICBIO, which it does not appear that he meets from the article. This must be shown by references as indicated above. I wasn't able to find any that established his notability, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Hi Greg. I have changed the references and info in the picture.
Also I´ve created a signature in order to change my User Name but still appears the same!
Please help me to do this easier. I´m not a HTML expert like you.
Please help me to finish this issue.
Even I tried to use another pic that I´ve uploaded but it doesn´t appear! Please help me. That pic it´s called CarlosSkinfill.
I tried to change it but I don´t know why (Not apopear)
References to Wikipedia are not valid for notability. Click on the links in my above message for more information on what you need for your sources. Also, be advised that changing your username by making a request (again, see WP:UNC) does not change the fact that you have a conflict of interest and probably should not be editing the article. GregJackP (talk) 21:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Done . If it should happen again, all you need to do is edit the log page and add to the head of the list the name of the AfD page within double braces - {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/pagename}}. JohnCD (talk) 14:12, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
