Jump to content

User talk:Jeraphine Gryphon/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 10

Aorist

I was reading about Georgian grammar, and got to the article on Aorist. In that article there is a paragraph about Aorist#Hermeneutic implications. I then went to the article on Hermeneutics. Do you think it would be a good idea to add information about the aorist verb form to the article about Hermaneutics, with regard to the difficulties of translating the Greek New Testament into Latin or modern Western languages? I don't really know how to do it, so feel free to do this if and when you want to. I just thought you might be interested in this. CorinneSD (talk) 21:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea what's going on in these articles, I'm sorry. (Maybe you mistook me for someone else.) — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 06:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Request on 01:15:58, 11 May 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by STwardosz


Hi there,

I really don't understand why my article was declined. I submitted an article about a web series called The Insiders. It is hosted by a professor at USC Cinema which is the leading film school in the world--and that is not hyperbole. The guests are all major Hollywood writers, directors, producers, etc. The interviews are about how they broke into the business and their advice to people who aspire to do the same. It can easily be cross-referenced and hotlinked to the pages for the guests most of whom do in fact have lengthy Wikipedia pages and significant credits. So I don't understand how this show does not pass the "notable" test. I also posted reference links from others who have written about the series or the host. Just the interview subjects themselves are extremely notable and in some cases famous. The show is highly educational.

STwardosz (talk) 01:15, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks!

JohnmgKing (talk) 15:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome message!

Hello! Thank you for sending me a welcome wagon, plus the guideline page with all the 'do's and don'ts'. I hope I can make a useful contribution. :-)

All the best, AcademiaNut195 (talk) 08:02, 13 May 2015 (UTC)AcademiaNut195

User:Loveqwertyyou

Should really have been U2, I suppose. I added it anyway... Peridon (talk) 12:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

ANBSAT

The page (ANBSAT) now have an also image. Can you check the page. Thank you.--Gabygabi (talk) 14:47, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

The subject (ANBSAT) has to be notable, that's the problem. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 14:51, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

17:05:55, 14 May 2015 review of submission by 70.62.89.142


please let me know how this can be more notable? It is my first submission 70.62.89.142 (talk) 17:05, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

If a concept is not notable then there's nothing we can do about it. We're just gonna have to wait til it becomes more notable, so maybe later we can have an article about it, but not now.
If you think "Power birding" already is notable then you can show it by providing secondary (independent) sources that talk about that concept. For example links to newspaper articles. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion would do well with some thoughtful consideration

Thanks for providing further information and a bit of orientation for how one might approach using this site. It is, to say the least, very convoluted in terms of accessibility. That is a free bit of consultation for public knowledge. I have, however, found Wikipedia to be a very useful source of information. A better information structure would do a world of good. Peace be with you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tracy Zeletz (talk • contribs) 00:03, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Racy rodriguez (talk • contribs) 05:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Help required for understanding the Submission declined to article: Puneet Mittal

Hi, I had submitted the above mentioned article yesterday. The same has been declined for notable references. Could you help me understand the basic guidelines and other reasons of rejection, so that I can improve my article and submit it for review. Looking forward to your response.

Thanks Komal Lopez (talk) 06:09, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Okay, but give me a little time, I just woke up. I will post on your talk page or on the draft. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 07:35, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Message

Ok. Fine. You have removed the lyrics. Is it okay too to the article I have made? Is it okay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Racy rodriguez (talk • contribs) 11:31, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're asking. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 11:34, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

So typical of the Wiki editors

Ignore everything I said that might have some validity. Again, Wiki is not the fount of all knowledge of the world. And it's dangerous if you editors actually believe this is your mission.

As you said you are volunteers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.7.45.77 (talk) 12:50, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Because nothing you said has any validity, or relevance. What the hell are you talking about? Where did I say that Wikipedia (it's not "Wiki") is the fount of anything? You're clearly a troll and this is the last time I'm entertaining you. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 12:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

no

i'm trying to show the fact not giving false information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krishnachaitan (talk • contribs) 13:50, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

What? — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 13:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Stubs

About 10 seconds too soon in tagging. I will always reference something, but it's easier to do the initial raw translation and then scout for sources to back it up.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Okay but what are you talking about. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 18:42, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay, saw it in my watchlist now. I don't exactly agree with your methods though. Before publishing an article into mainspace people should include the necessary basics, like at least one reference and category. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 18:51, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks also for the welcome

Regards, Simon. Simgrant (talk) 23:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

anatoly utkin

Is it necessary references to be in English ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Temur888 (talk • contribs) 15:04, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

English sources are preferred on this wiki, but non-English reliable sources are acceptable too. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:06, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

weird section title on Macroom page

Jeraphine, yes, I knew it was weird...I was trying it as a placeholder to get rid of something that didn't sound neutral ('Reviews'), and thank you, yours is much better! I don't know why I didn't come up with that myself, I've seen it on hundreds of other pages, LOL! valereee (talk) 15:48, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Request on 20:33:14, 20 May 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by TCVCJ


I am still not sure about the notability of the articles I would like to have included on Wikipedia! I have a Motorcycle Trail - Back of the Dragon - on a Virginia state highway; a small public park on space created by a cut through a mountain for a highway; a park on a manmade lake which is being considered for a State park; a museum with a Pioneer Park (log cabins and such); an official Virginia Coal Miner's Memorial; an Arts Center; and an historical house center. I have been through your tutorials several times and am still confused about notability and sources/references. If local newspapers and/or pamphlets or brochures do not suffice; what do you use for such articles??


TCVCJ (talk) 20:33, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

That draft of yours has no sources at all, that's the problem. I can't accept a draft with zero sources. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 20:37, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Sometimes we all need to let go

The editor who blames everyone else... Why not send him a kitten? IT will do just as much good Fiddle Faddle 16:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

:p — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 16:38, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For going above and beyond at User talk:Donovan delaney to help a troublesome editor out. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 16:18, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 16:38, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Vampire article revert

I'm a native Bosnian speaker, and there's no word such as lampir; the only word that exists is vampir with v (not l). It is actually BCS word. :) Obsuser (talk) 00:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Please google "lampir" and explain the results to me if that word doesn't exist. It's also included in The Encyclopedia of Vampires, Werewolves, and Other Monsters by Rosemary Guiley. So I'm pretty sure it's not a typo in our article. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 09:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
In modern Bosnian language vampir is used. Here is screenshot taken from Ortography of the Bosnian language (S. Halilović, 1996), where you can see it. I checked lampir on Google, and found out it was the old name for some vampire called Lampir Meho (a lot of Bosnians have never heard of him), so I advise editing the moot paragraph changing note that many of these languages have also borrowed forms such as "vampir/wampir" subsequently from the West; these are distinct from the original local words for the creature into a more explicit sentence. Sorry for hasty editing of the article! --Obsuser (talk) 17:01, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
You might want to bring that up on the article's talk page where others can see it too. I'm not really sure what the problem is or what a better version would be. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 17:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Nicole Crespo O´donoghue(6)light.jpg

Hi File permission problem with File:Nicole Crespo O´donoghue(6)light.jpg I am not sure sure if I chose the wrong copyrights license in the drop down menu. The photo or photos I had intended to use are already on nicolecrespo.com website, does this make them already public domain? and if so what license would you advise me to use. Thanks for your patience and help!Therese — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimbus10 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

@Nimbus10: No nononononono, no no no, you can't just grab pictures from a website and decide what the license is. The images are most likely fully copyrighted unless stated otherwise. That means you can't upload them here and especially not with fake licenses because that constitutes copyright infringement, and we take that very seriously here.
Please don't upload images that you have not created yourself, and if you do then make sure the image has been licensed (by the original copyright owner) with a license that is compatible with Wikipedia. For example anyone could upload this picture of a kitten here because the owner published it under "CC BY 2.0" -- the license is visible/clickable on Flickr under the photo on the right-hand side, the part that says "Some rights reserved". Basically, if you're out looking for photos that can be uploaded here, look around on the original website to see if there's info there about the image's license. If there's no info at all then in most cases you're going to have to assume the image is fully copyrighted ("all rights reserved").
Anyway. Images such as that of the kitten that can be freely used (i.e. shared and modified however anyone wants) go on Wikimedia Commons (we just call it "Commons") -- any image uploaded there can be used from Wikipedia automatically, like usual.
Also we can upload images "locally" here on Wikipedia (like you did) when the images are fully copyrighted but we're legally allowed to use them here anyway -- for example book covers and album covers and such things, and also images of people who are now dead (so it is not possible anymore to make a new freely licensed photo of that person).
But since Nicole Crespo is a living person then we can only allow a freely licensed photo to be used here. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 09:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I explained myself wrong. Nicole Crespo gave me permission to use those photos from her website. Thats why I asked if I could use those photos with her permission. Therese10 15:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimbus10 (talk • contribs)

@Nimbus10: Okay, this is gonna get a bit complicated. Basically, you saying that you were given permission is not enough. Also, even her saying that she gives permission may not be enough. It's typically the photographer who owns the copyright, and not the person on the picture. The copyright owner has to give the image a free license (that allows modifying and sharing of the image by anyone for any purpose, not just Wikipedia).
I want to give you advice on how to deal with this in the most simple way possible but I'm not really a pro on the copyright permissions topic, so I'm gonna direct you to these pages: Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions and commons:Commons:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS?.
Basically, you're looking to prove that an image has been released under a specific license by the copyright owner. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 16:06, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Back again! Nicole Crespo has the full copyright of the pictures from the photographer and she is going to forward whatever I need to fix the copyright situation and then I shall check in with Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions and commons:Commons:OTRS#Licensing images. thanks (Therese10 22:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimbus10 (talk • contribs)

Discussion

Maybe you could give your opinion here if interested [1] Personally I do not think anything good is going to come from this now. Earl King Jr. (talk) 00:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

archiving

Hi Jeraphine - we seem to have strong opposing preferences for how archiving should be displayed on Talk pages. I really like having the search box and the archive listings in the talk header; you seem to prefer the free-standing archive box. As far as I can see this is purely a preference thing, like WP:ERA or WP:ENGVAR. So - rather than edit warring over this, let's agree to leave that alone and not change whatever is established on a given article. Can you live with that? Jytdog (talk) 12:44, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Not really. The main purpose of doing this is to shorten the general length of the talk page's banners. If I add the {{archives}} box (which is small and floats on the right side, usually in the blank space beside the table of contents) and add the search box and bot info there -- then I can remove those things from the banners. A lot of talk pages have overly long banner sections, that's the problem. I don't see how fixing that is a revertable offense. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 12:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I understand exactly what you are doing and why and I have seen you do this several times. I started this conversation because it seems to be something you intend to keep doing. Please acknowledge that there is no basis in policy or guideline for either of our preferred versions. Jytdog (talk) 12:55, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm waiting to hear what your reasoning is besides "I prefer it". Shortening the banner section is a good reason, what is yours? — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 13:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I find the extra archive box to be clutter. Reasoning is not relevant here - it is purely a matter of what you or I don't like - there is no basis in policy or guideline for it. The precedent for handling that kind of thing is WP:ERA or WP:ENGVAR where you just leave it alone. I had actually been doing the opposite - removing free-standing archive boxes and instead including the searchbox and archive listing in the header. So - let's just both just stop and leave it alone, whatever it is. Jytdog (talk) 13:03, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Jan Verschuren

Hi There! I wrote an article recently and it was deleted I cited as requested non related sourcesbooks published by major publishing houses, newspapers, magazines, peer-reviewed scholarly journals and websites that meet the same requirements as reputable print-based sources. So I don't want to hurt the subjects credibility by having it removed with credibility reasons subject article Carrie Mokadim and if so can you help advise or write on this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jan Verschuren (talk • contribs) 19:28, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

17:39:36, 25 May 2015 review of submission by 76.9.231.204


The article "Back of the Dragon" is for a newly created motorcycle route on an existing state road - it may not be viable as an article, but I need to know that from you if that is the case! I have read your tutorials multiple times and, frankly, am more confused than when I began! How do you verify (reference) such places as what I need to write about? They are all recreational outlets which have their own brochures, etc.; all of them are non-profit and none are listed in Wikipedia! There's the Cedar Bluff Overlook Park, the Historic Crab Orchard Museum and Pioneer Park, Cavitt's Creek Park @ Lake Witten, Appalachian Arts Center and the Sanders House Center - all in Tazewell County Virginia. Are we incorrect in believing this type of entity could be an addition to Wikipedia? Please, Please help! There's no use in doing all the work to submit such articles if they don't meet your criteria for inclusion!!! Frankly, my job depends on being able to do this or having a legitimate reason for not doing so!!!76.9.231.204 (talk) 17:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC) 76.9.231.204 (talk) 17:39, 25 May 2015 (UTC)



Jeraphine, Thank you for taking the time to write back to me before - I only now found the correspondence! As I told you, I am very confused with all of the instructions I have read and am unable to access the two drafts I have put on! I did one on the Cedar Bluff Overlook Park. too, but I can't find it now! On the first one, I did list several newspaper articles as reference - that's all I had - but perhaps I didn't do the punctuation or something correctly and that's what caused it not to appear! I covet your continuing help or a resounding "no" if the articles are not viable ones for publication in Wikipedia! Thanks so much!76.9.231.204 (talk) 17:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC) 76.9.231.204 (talk) 17:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't have time right now to get into this, but I think you'll find your stuff here: Special:Contributions/TCVCJ. Just make sure you log in and all your contributions will be there. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 18:27, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I'm going to withdraw myself from the article reviewing process; please feel free to copy your questions to here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 18:38, 25 May 2015 (UTC)



I needed "reliable resources" - [1]

References

  1. ^ RoadRunner Magazine Touring & Travel ll-4-12 ribbon cutting; Bluefield Daily Telegraph 8-5-14 picture by Eric DiNova "Lined Up;" bdtonline June 16, 2014 "Memorial Ride Concludes."~~~~

TCVCJ (talk) 20:47, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Tag dating

You might very well be right[2] but I'm wondering if you know of any policy that informs this. -- Kendrick7talk 14:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Do you know of any policy that says it's ok to re-date tags? I think not. The dates serve a purpose. For example if you see that an article has been marked as potentially unnotable and also unreferenced since like 2006 then you can use that information to help you assess the situation -- like, look, this article has been marked for so long, it doesn't look like it's getting fixed, maybe it's time for an AfD. Okay, issues other than notability don't necessarily imply that deletion may be due, but still, it's useful to know how long the problem has existed or how long the tag has been there. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm, thanks, I've gotten this feedback before recently, but then I obviously only get in these discussions with people who put back old tags to begin with. My blood generally only gets hot on the topic when I'm surfing the web and happen to get linked over to our humble domain (yay!) but then there are two paragraphs worth of warnings from a perhaps even a decade ago that we're incompetent to speak on a given subject and are in no hurry to fix anything (boo!). It's not a vendetta or anything; 95% of the time no one says a peep. But, blah blah. Some day I'll bang out an user essay on my thoughts, but not on the tail end of a 3 day weekend; I will keep your points in my mind, because you do raise good ones, and will you posted too. -- 03:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject TAFI

Hello, Jeraphine Gryphon. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's articles for improvement. Feel free to nominate an article for improvement at the project's Nominated articles page. Also feel free to contribute to !voting for new weekly selections at the project's talk page. If interested in joining, please add your name to the list of members. --Bananasoldier (talk) 05:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey thanks, I'll think about it. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 08:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Law school Transparency Undisclosed Off-Wiki Co-ordinated Paid Editing

Thanks for looking into this.

You can see some of what happened here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Off-wikipedia_coordination_and_undisclosed_payments_to_an_unknown_number_of_Wikipedia_editors as well as at the editorial assistance noticeboard.

Or take a look at the thread on top-law-schools.com where LST coordinated this plan and see for yourself. http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=232618&p=7846901&hilit=wikipedia+california+nevada#p7846901 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unemployed Northeastern (talk • contribs) 13:46, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks, I found the RSN discussion and it seems like the discussion is happening as it should. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 13:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Just added some more details on what's been going on. It's shocking.Unemployed Northeastern (talk) 14:59, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
There is an insane amount of text there. You should be aware of the "too long; didn't read" effect this kind of thing can have on neutral editors. Maybe in the future you could put all the evidence and links somewhere in your userspace and then just provide a link to that page when you post on talk pages. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:11, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Just want to discuss the TLS "coordination." (Disclosure: I am LST's executive director.) A TLS user created a thread to add LST data to law school pages. My understanding is that this was in response to law schools providing misleading employment rates. As one user on the thread said (paraphrasing), "before TLS did this, every law school page was an advertisement." For example, a school might claim 95% employed when that 95% includes part-time, short-term, non-professional, school-funded jobs. This is actually one of the main services LST has provided the legal profession since our founding: that used to be common practice and we largely eliminated the practice through changing accreditation rules and shifting disclosure norms.
Once I saw the thread, I made a few suggestions in the thread for the sake of consistency. I also made 10-15 mentions of Law School Transparency linkable to Law School Transparency. In that case, I thought I was helping the encyclopedia, but due to my conflict I do not think I should have been the one to do it even if it was otherwise okay. I also offered to write a piece of code to help the people get the numbers correct so they didn't have to copy and paste multiple times. Perhaps that was also inappropriate, but it was motivated merely by wanting to get the numbers correct; I had noticed a few people making mistakes. As for the raffle, LST played no role in that. It was solely the idea of, and paid for by, a person who believed LST's data were appropriate. I believe three $10 gift cards were given away, although there were dozens of pre-law students giving their time to making the law school Wikipedia pages more informative. Kyle McEntee (talk) 16:09, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay please don't bring this stuff to my talk page, I have nothing to do with this. And if you feel what you're saying here is important then you should post it wherever this discussion is going on right now, i.e. not on my talk page. I don't mean to sound all cold but I don't want Unemployed Northeastern-style text walls to be posted here because I'm not planning on looking into this issue any further. (Because it's a complicated issue and not obvious spamming or whatever.) — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 16:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Zeitgeist (film series)

Since you recently edited the article and the talk page, and moderated discussion is in progress at the dispute resolution noticeboard, I will add you to the list of parties unless you object. You are not required to participate, but participation may improve the article or defuse the hostility. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:08, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Request on 17:55:54, 27 May 2015 for assistance on AfC submission by Thirunagari


Hello Jeraphine, My article about T.Krishna is based on a newspaper publication and IMDB information. T.Krishna is my father and all the content I published is valid. Can you help me publish this information on wikipedia? Thank you. Venu. Thirunagari (talk) 17:55, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

You need to actually put those sources into the draft as references. The draft was declined because it has no references. The link at the end goes to the general homepage of IMDB which is not helpful at all. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 18:02, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Your help desk question

I don't know if this is where to ask, but try WP:VPT.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:57, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

edits

What im trying to tell you guys is that this Page is necessary for deletion kindly check the reason I gave for its removal, secondly i was told to remove this request from the article and make it in its talk page. Sammy.joseph (talk) 08:30, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

You posted a welcome message and a warnings message, copied from your own talk page, into the talk page of Diyar-e-Dil. It doesn't make any sense to do that so I reverted it, twice. If you want to post there then please write a new message instead of copypasting a welcome message. It has nothing to do with the article. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 08:34, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Template message

Information icon Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism. However, one or more edits you labeled as vandalism, such as the edit at User talk:68.172.41.107, are not considered vandalism under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage, and mislabeling edits as vandalism can discourage editors. Please read Wikipedia:NOTVAND for more information on what is and is not considered vandalism. Thank you. Prhartcom (talk) 15:24, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm aware of how we define vandalism here, thanks. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:25, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Spaming.

Jeraphine,

I recently received a message from you in regards to Spamming on Wikipedia.

I am new to all this and it was not my intention to spam the site, but to only add content where I believe it to be relevant and of value to the reader.

That said I can see you point and why you might believe I was spamming.

I have updated the Android TV, as it is a device and relevant to that category. If you remove my device you will have to remove all the others.

On the other pages the line is a little more blurry. To ensure there is no misunderstanding between us, I have not updated them.

Derek.

DerekEnderby (talk) 10:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

No, I don't "have to" remove other things because I'm removing your spam, it doesn't work that way. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 13:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

There are a few articles on the Web talking about our technology. Here is one from May 22nd that mentions how OgleBox will support Sling. This is a real device just like the others mentioned in the article, and not Spam. http://androidcommunity.com/slingtv-now-available-on-android-tv-offers-50-off-nexus-player-20150522/. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DerekEnderby (talk • contribs) 05:43, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't say that it's not real. But simply existing or being briefly mentioned somewhere isn't good enough. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:13, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

There are several mentions on the Web. How many do you need? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DerekEnderby (talk • contribs) 03:40, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Re: Wiki Loves Pride

Sorry if you felt the invitation to participate in Wiki Loves Pride was inappropriate. Even the main page of the WikiProject says, "We are also interested in the ways that age and ageing intersect with other ways of experiencing identity, including race, gender, sexuality, class, language, and dis/ability. Our goal is to expand the presence of these topics on Wikipedia." I think some project members might be interested, but if you feel otherwise, I understand. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:59, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

One problem is that it's a new/small WikiProject and there's almost nothing going on in their talk page, posting that huge banner there seemed inappropriate and undue (and irrelevant but I can see the relevance now). — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:02, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

untitled

Hello Jeraphine Gryphon,

Thanks to have your attention here. But I already edited this article to avoid external linking, promotional content etc whatever existed on article. Please help where I am going wrong. Isn't that reliable source which I have used for reference. Kindly reply.

--Varunnegi.singh (talk) 06:31, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't remember what you're talking about and I can't check because the page is deleted. It was deleted because the person did not seem notable (the article did not "...indicate how or why the subject is important or significant"), and I also left you a notice about your apparent "conflict of interest" because it seems that you wrote that article about yourself. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 07:38, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jeraphine_Gryphon/Archive_5&oldid=1141143130"