User talk:Joe Decker/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

WT:AFC/Cardinal Knox Centre

This is freakishly weird: Just before you moved the page, I tried to add an AFC comment alerting the reviewer that the references had been improved and to read the user's talk page. How's that for freakish timing. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

That's pretty great! And it's great to make your acquaintance, I've been seeing a lot of your great work around these parts. --j⚛e decker^talk 03:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I like to do quality work *holds fist up to mouth and blows on it* :). You are one of the ones who does quantity work, which at WP:AFC is what we need right now. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 04:38, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, I like to think I"m just cherry-picking the easy stuff.  ;-) (kidding!) --j⚛e decker^talk 04:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

jean hewes article

Dear Joe- Please help me. Finding information on Jean or written by others about her is nearly impossible. She didn't teach, or publish, and her interview and Bavor's paper are very important in giving us information about her. What other sources do I need? I would like to make her information available-she's a fabulous artist, and I will keep working on it if I have some technical support-this started as a project for a class and I feel very out of my depth in wiki editing. Thank you for taking the time to read my article. SIncerly, Heidi Joffe Hjoffe (talk) 21:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll try and take a look today, I'd hoped there would be signficant coverage in specialist magazines and such. --j⚛e decker^talk 13:36, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Mother_Dr._Delois_Blakely Deletion

Dear Joe,

I'm trying to put her page up and its getting deleted. I got permission from her to use the information from New Future foundation to use the information. Please help me this is the third time it is getting tagged to deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkvaid (talk • contribs) 21:31, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, it looks like Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Queen_Mother_Dr_Blakely&action=edit&redlink=1 this version got tagged for copyright issues, you'd have to talk to RHaworth, another admin here, about the situation--if we identified it as a copy of something you yourself had written, for example, that might be okay. Actually, hold on, when I get a chance tonight I'll reply more, sorry I'm trying to do about twelve things at once here. --j⚛e decker^talk 22:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Cedexis article deleted for copyright infringement - please help

Hi Joe,

I carefully wrote and submitted a Wikipedia listing for Cedexis. You deleted my listing citing copyright violation.

Could you tell me where you find a copyright violation please?

Is there a way you could put the original article I wrote back up? The footnotes took a very long time to enter properly.

Frances

Manncraik (talk) 00:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I can't put it back up; If you drop me an email, I can send you a copy back, but include even a sentence of the stuff copied from press releases and it'll end up being a problem. I thought the tools here would have conveyed my decline message to you, but they don't, here's the long form of it--it's my bad that you didn't get this message.

There are actually two interlocking issues. Some of the text here is still borrowed from corporate press releases, which raises copyright issues--the other, is that a lot of the text is written much like a corporate press release, in an advertising/promotion rather than an encyclopedic tone, e.g., "With Cedexis, companies can comparatively assess worldwide cloud performance and availability for informed vendor selection and making cost-and-performance tradeoffs." which is taken from from http://www.crunchbase.com/company/cedexis#ixzz2ScY3bPKR

There are reliable secondary sources here, although some of them may be warmed-over press releases. After removing those, I'd suggest rewriting the article based on what's left.

References are a hassle, but there's a great tool that makes it a fair bit easier. Check out Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, which includes a nice video showing how to use the RefToolbar, which makes working with references a whole lot easier. I have personally added sources to several thousand unreferenced biographies using that tool, and it is a lifesaver! --j⚛e decker^talk 00:58, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the more detailed information Joe. I'll give it another try. No need to send me the copy, I kept it.

Frances Manncraik (talk) 18:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure! Best of luck! --j⚛e decker^talk 18:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Windhoek Beer

Hi Joe,

Thanks for reviewing my article. It's my first one, so I'm still getting the hang of things. I've edited a few already and it's been fun. I'll make the changes you recommended to the article and resubmit.

Holding thumbs, Dan — Preceding unsigned comment added by SupaDan001 (talk • contribs) 18:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! We have a huge number of policies, and it does take some time to pick them up--in fact, something like 95% of submissions don't pass on their first try. Thanks for helping to try and improve our encyclopedia! --j⚛e decker^talk 18:43, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikidata Phase 2

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikidata Phase 2. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done --j⚛e decker^talk 23:44, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Questions About Sources for Declined Miklós Hagyó Page

Hi, Joe!

First of all, thank you for the encouragement and productive feedback.

You mentioned that two of my sources, the essays by Éva Kádár, were suspect because of their location, which I understand. The original, untranslated versions can be found on a neutral website. Would that be more appropriate?

Also, could you be kind enough to point out any other unsatisfactory sources about the pretrial detention and trial?

Thank you again for your time and your help!

BenSparkWall (talk) 16:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

(This is in regard to Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Hagyó:

I'd have to look through a little more to give you specific advice about specific sites, but I can explain my concerns in a general way.

As I recall the article, this seems an important (as in, "we should have an article about it") topic, it involves a living person, and some of the described events strike me (as someone who doesn't have any knowledge about the subject, so forgive my ignorance) as likely being controversial.

So in general this is the sort of article that gets the most scrutiny.

Original, untranslated articles are actually fine, the main thing we want to see is that they're from a reputable source with an editorial process--so we prefer professional news organizations where possible if they have a reputation, etc. So if you can point at the originals, that'd be great.

While all things being equal we prefer English-language sources, the indication that a source is "reliable" is a higher priority for potentially controversial content than the language it's written in.

Thanks! When you make that change, drop me a note and I'll rereview, as I recall, the article was generally quite well done. --j⚛e decker^talk 23:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Joe! I've made the recommended changes. There is one more question, though. I just noticed that the current title of the potential page is "Articles_for_creation/Hagyó". It is supposed to be "Miklós Hagyó". Can this be changed? Sorry, I'm still new at this...Thanks again for your help! BenSparkWall (talk) 14:51, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately there's already another, separate draft at the full title, so I can't move this one without deleting the other one--but don't worry, the next reviewer will have no difficulty moving it to the correct full title when it's published as an article. Little title adjustments and fixups happen all the time around here, it's not a big deal at all. Have a great day! --j⚛e decker^talk 14:57, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Changing article to stub

Hi Joe

I created the article http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Admiral_Island&action=submit

and sent it for submission. It was declined on account that it is not notable enough. I want to change it to a stub

.

My question is if I want to change it to a stub, must I remove the AFC section at the top that you commented in, or must I keep it and then just resubmit the page for approval?

Thanks

Regards

As for as the decline, the bigger problem was finding a reliable source that mentioned the Island at all.

But you are certainly welcome to change it to a stub and resubmit. A different reviewer might have difficult luck in finding reliable sources that mention the subject. Best of luck! --j⚛e decker^talk 14:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Aahar International Food & Hospitality Fair

Dear Joe, I am Deputy Manager in India Trade Promotion Organisation, under aegis of Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India.

I am fair officer of the said event, Aahar International Food & Hospitality Fair.

I have posted original information, as being fair officer, which is original and true.

Moreover, Food & Hospitality Fair industry is a niche genre with only few notable but prominent names such as Sial Food Fair, Paris and Anuga Food Fair, Germany.

Therefore, I request you to seriously reconsider the decline, as in my humble view, this is a DESERVED page for wikipedia as it generates business of thousands million dollars and serves to millions of businesses & users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siraj.asif (talk • contribs) 08:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi! If you would add reliable, secondary sources -- things like newspaper articles and magazine articles in reputable publications, that are not press releases, that discuss the Fair in detail, we'd be glad to reconsider, of course. Best of luck! --j⚛e decker^talk 14:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Joe Decker. You have new messages at Nonsenseferret's talk page.
Message added 16:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

_nonsense ferret 16:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Sanjog Rai, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

j⚛e decker^talk 18:34, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Strange bug, that was created by User:87.8.39.102, I was the reviewer. --j⚛e decker^talk 07:09, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Question about creating article for Brig. Gen. John Adams

Hello,

I am seeing that my page for Brig Gen. John Adams was not accepted, on the grounds that it contained copyrighted material. In putting the page together I didn't knowingly use any copyrighted material, so I'm not sure what the problem was. I also see that the page has been deleted. Is there a way to find out what the problem was and hopefully resubmit?

I am quite new to wikipedia and any guidance would be very useful.

Eauner (talk) 16:11, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Glad to try and sort it out. Did you cut and paste, or work fairly directly from this page? http://americansecurityproject.org/consensus/members/brigadier-general-john-adams/ I ask in part because it does happen that material gets copied to and from different places, and sometimes people pull information from Wikipedia and use it elsewhere, so it's always a challenge to track down the most original source of some text. Had that been a US federal government biography, we probably could have used it (at least from a copyright sense), most works of the federal gov't are not copyrighted. --j⚛e decker^talk 16:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

I didn't cut and paste directly from his American Security Project bio, and if I kept some language that wast too similar or if I failed to cite it appropriately then that's my error. I also drew on several other biographies from organizations with which he is associated. Was there any particular section that you felt took too directly from the American Security Project bio? I'd like to resubmit it, with any offending material removed, soon if possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eauner (talk • contribs) 14:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, I've temporarily restored this to check, I grabbed a quote out of the middle of it ("participated in immediate disaster recovery operations at the crash site as well as coordinated international support"), Googled that, and got the same results. I get a different site, but also a direct hit, like [1]. Unfortunately, that's the sort of thing that can get us in trouble, when you contribute material to Wikipedia, you're giving a license for anyone to use that material for any reason--and many copyright holders get kinda upset about people doing that in their name. Now, if we could show that this is from a publication of the US government--we might have an exception--almost all works of the United States federal government are in the public domain, and don't present a problem. But ASP doesn't itself look like an organ of the US gov.

You can see a full "duplicate detector" report on your draft and the page at: User:Joe_Decker/adamsreport, the longest matching section was 61 words. --j⚛e decker^talk 15:18, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the clarification. If I go in and change or remove the wording that popped up in the duplicate detector report, can I go ahead and resubmit? Also, the American Security Project is a DC-based non-profit organization, and it's not clear that they copyright any of the biographies on their website (in case that's relevant). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eauner (talk • contribs) 17:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, if you substantially rewrite 'em, there should be no problem. Written works are copyrighted by default in the United States, however, so it is an actual issue, even for close paraphrasing, and you'll want to read that link. Sorry for the hassle! --j⚛e decker^talk 18:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Bangalore turf club

I had quoted some secondary sources as you recommended but the problem is I am not sure whether it will be considered as a reliable source. Even though Bangalore Races is famous all over India media attention is restricted only to controversies. I want to create a section on that decided will do that later. For that I can get proper sources.Benedictdilton (talk) 07:08, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Not sure about one or two of those, we'll see what the next reviewer has to say, but there is some news coverage [2], and while some of it is about controversies, those can be used to reference a handful of facts, too, and simply including two-three of those references, even if they involve controversies, provides the required evidence of notability that we're looking for as well. There's a couple of articles there about a relocation, for example. Anyway, we should have an article on this subject, and thanks for your efforts! --j⚛e decker^talk 17:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:19, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

 Not done --j⚛e decker^talk 17:26, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	I'm sorry for not providing the right links... I will retrieve more world media information about Mr. Luckett, thank you sir. Tammy pruit (talk) 22:17, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Well thank you, that's very kind! I left a note on your talk page, I hope it's helpful! --j⚛e decker^talk 22:26, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Second Twentieth Battalion

Hello Joe Re your comments....Yes the article contains copyright information but it's my copyright, I wrote the book from which it was taken and have given permission for the Battalion Association to use it on a Wikipedia page and that permission was placed in the article. I don't want to have to rewrite it under those circumstances... Suggestions please Thanks Caroline/SecondTwoNought — Preceding unsigned comment added by Secondtwonought (talk • contribs) 07:02, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Caroline,

There is a process for you licensing your material, but it's very important that you understand the implications of doing so: Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials has that information, and contact information for the folks who can help you through that process. Best of luck! --j⚛e decker^talk 14:43, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

TAFI

Hi, Joe. As discussed at Wikipedia talk:Today's articles for improvement#Failure, TAFI has been removed from the main page. (It might return at some point, with changes to be determined.)
For the time being, task 3 can be stopped. Task 2 might still be useful (as it ensures that the entire main page remains updated), but the decision of whether to continue it certainly rests with you.
I want to thank you again for all of your help.  :) —David Levy 14:33, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

David, I'm really sorry to hear that. I'll take a look at whether task 2 continues to make sense, thanks for the update. --j⚛e decker^talk 14:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

jim kilroy submission

thx for feedback joe, will add those independent citations shortly and then resubmit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mallanos (talk • contribs) 15:36, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Great, thanks! --j⚛e decker^talk 15:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

further move needed on reviewed article

Hi, thanks for reviewing one of my submissions. However, you moved it to Doncram/George Bradshaw House and Joshua Salisbury/George Bradshaw Barn, not a correct mainspace name. I think it (with Talk page that you set up, thanks) should go to George Bradshaw House and Joshua Salisbury/George Bradshaw Barn. Thanks! --doncram 17:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, that wasn't very clever of me.  :) Think I've got it now, let me know if not. Sorry about that! --j⚛e decker^talk 17:52, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kent Michael Nerburn

Dear Joe:

Would you mind taking another look at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kent Michael Nerburn? There were some sources hidden in there; the submitter had written them all up starting with Nerburn's name, even the ones that weren't by him and were reviews. I also found several other reviews, including one from a university historian. I toned down a couple of promotional sentences and found a review that was somewhat negative for balance. While there are still quite a few references to the author's own books on the reference list, they are mainly just to show that the books exist, which I believe is okay. I move the section with external links to the bottom. See what you think. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:40, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

I think you are absolutely right. I got snookered by the wall of what looked like his own refs, but judging even by the work you've put into it already, I'm convinced. Would you be so kind as to do the honors? I'm on a mobile device and won't be able to easily assist until tonight. --Joe Decker (alt) (talk) 20:12, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Idiopathic infantile arterial calcification (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Inhibitor and Iliac

Multimodality (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Signs

THUMPERS (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Pala

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:41, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Heh, I get to DPL the AfC submissions of other editors? Cool! --j⚛e decker^talk 02:56, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

AfC / Networking Strategist

Thanks for the info Joe. I am still working to find good sources to cite the definition of Networking Strategist. Im working with LinkedIn and Facebook to get this title defined by them as well. I'm sure one day I'll be able to cite good sources for this phrase. Thanks --Teddy Burriss 00:09, 20 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TLBurriss (talk • contribs)

Great, thanks! --j⚛e decker^talk 02:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear Joe

	Dear Joe
	Thanks for your comment on my article titled "Islamic Azad University Khorasgan Branch Isfahan" But my article has observed copyright law. you can see the Notifications marked on top of my article by other admins. Mehrnazar Mehrnazar (talk) 04:22, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Great! It appears you've resubmitted the article, and I'm sure another reviewer will get a chance to check it soon. Thank you!! --j⚛e decker^talk 04:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Bot task request

Hi Joe! Hope you're doing well. Joe's Null Bot (talk · contribs) has been brought up as a possible solution to a category update problem here - if you have a moment could you comment on whether it would be a suitable task for the bot? Thanks — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:46, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I think I could help with that one.  :) --j⚛e decker^talk 16:39, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Deleted article for creation - Chisenhale Gallery

Dear Joe, Please could you explain why you deleted the Article for Creation: Chisenhale Gallery? You cite the reason that it contains copyrighted material but I'm afraid I don't understand what you are referring to here. I am new to Wikipedia and at the moment am entirely mystified. If you could explain in the simplest possible terms I would be extremely grateful. How do I move forward to get this article accepted? Many thanks.--Potato67 (talk) 10:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure, you copied a lot of the text from [3]. (Or, equivalently, other text from the gallery related to that.) The simplest way to work around that is to only contribute to Wikipedia in your own words. Thanks! --j⚛e decker^talk 16:22, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposal at TAFI talk

A discussion that may interest you is occurring at Wikiproject TAFI's talk page at: Proposal: use Theo's Little Bot to automate the schedule and queue. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done --j⚛e decker^talk 16:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Frisner Augustin page: Thanks and a question

Good morning, Joe, and thanks for pointing out three links that went to disambiguation pages. I've fixed them. I'm new to this. I still have permission outstanding for the photo of Mr. Augustin and Jonathan Demme. I know the company has it on their agenda. When will I know they've sent it? Thank you for your careful work.--Lwilcken (talk) 13:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Why thanks! With regard to the photo issue, I'd hope they'd leave you a note, but when OTRS gets the appropriate info and notices (sometimes they get backlogged there at OTRS--it's an entirely volunteer effort), they will definitely also update the Permission section of [[4]]. Hope that helps! --j⚛e decker^talk 16:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Star Furniture's Wiki

Hello Mr. Decker,

My name is Liz and I'm the content manager for Star Furniture. Recently I submitted an article that was apparently turned down for violating copyright. I'm not sure I quite understand why. Every article I gathered and mentioned, I cited and linked. Please let me know what I can do to get this article approved. Thank you so much.

216.110.74.81 (talk) 14:24, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure, some of the content was taken from, even if slightly reworded, from Star press releases, such as [5]. Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing explains in part why that's an issue. Also note that by providing text to Wikipedia you are claiming that you have the legal authority to license it to us, and to whomever may want to use it, for any purpose. Now, in theory, if you are the legal representative for Star Furniture and have the authority to do that, there's a way to communicate who you are and that licensing (see Wikipedia:Donating_copyrighted_materials), but I don't recommend it.

Why? In addition to the copyright issues, press release text usually also fails to have a neutral, encyclopedic tone, and tends to be somewhat promotional. It's difficult to write about yourself or your company while striving for a neutral tone, but if you are involved with Star Wikipedia:Conflict of interest might be of some value. From there, I would start by (a) starting from a clean slate. (b) finding newspaper and magazine coverage of Star that goes into depth about it, and isn't based on press releases (c) writing the article from what those sources say, not using their words, of course.

I'm sorry that we have such a maze of policies! Have a great week! --j⚛e decker^talk 16:01, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

lee foss wikipedia page

hello please could you explain what is copyrighted?? as I typed up the whole article myself... its taking weeks to try get this done really appreciate some help please thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Babbottgrade (talk • contribs) 16:53, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

From your document: "While growing up in Chicago, Lee cut his teeth on the clubs and raves of the late 90’s, experiences that initially sparked his interest in house and disco. However, it was a chance visit to Ibiza back in 2001, that changed his whole approach to music and helped steer his musical destiny for the next decade and beyond. It was in Ibiza that summer that he first became friends with Jamie Jones and the pair formed a tight brotherly bond that quickly blossomed into their highly acclaimed Hot Creations label partnership with Richy Ahmed, and later their Hot Natured band project with Infinity Ink and their worldwide event brand, Paradise."

The same text, with only small modifications appears at [6]. You'll have to click on "see more". This is clearly the artist's boilerplate, and your suggestion that you wrote the Wikipedia submission independently of that, if that's what your suggesting, well, seems a little unlikely. Perhaps I've misunderstood you. --j⚛e decker^talk 17:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Franklin Bechly

Joe, I understand your comment, I have added an important new section, and resubmitted the article for creation. Thank you ! Eyeze (talk) 03:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! --j⚛e decker^talk 04:29, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Revised article

Hello, I have resubmitted an article here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Lockers&oldid=554455235) based on your feedback that the first submission was blank. Will the version with the link above be reviewed again?

Thank you.

NetSquares (talk) 14:54, 21 May 2013 (UTC)Sheree Pell (Net Squares)

You'd need to put the submission template on it again. But hold off for a second, it seems to me that the topic of the article is more or less the topic of Locker (cabinet). Is that right? If so, it's likely that any new review will probably just suggest that you improve that existing article, and I'd hate you to have to wait to hear that for a week or two, better to tell you now and not waste your time.

If you do add material to that existing article, I'd also say there's some issues with the tone of your article near the end. It starts sounding like a "how to" or a manufacturer speaking rather than an encyclopedia. Still, I hope you do keep at it, we really appreciate you wanting to help us build our encyclopedia. Thanks! --j⚛e decker^talk 15:05, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Account merging

I have gotten a message saying that names for certain accounts will be changed with this transition happening on the 27th of May, later this month. I have four Wikipedia accounts. One for the English version, One for the Japanese version, One for the Dutch version and one for Hindi. How can I merge all those together as one? I don't want anything terrible to happen, thus I need to get this taken care, before the transitation begins. So tell me what I can do as soon as possible. Thank you.

BlueMario1016 (talk) 18:11, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey BlueMario, how goes?

The thing about the required name changes, this is kinda new to me, do you have a link or something?

I think the tool you'll want to look into is called Unified login. It's actually a real help if you're working on multiple wikis, and now that I'm doing WikiData stuff too, it's even more of a help.  : There's more information here.

I think you will need to get all your accounts to have the same names first, then try merging them as those pages describe--I had to do this when I became an admin, but I didn't have many accounts at the time, so I haven't been through it.

In terms of changing names on existing accounts (to get them to all be the same before unifying them), at least NL and JP have interwiki links to their equivalents of Wikipedia:Changing username, you might have to ask someone more knowlegable how that's done on the Hindi WP.

That help at all? --j⚛e decker^talk 22:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

What about this, Joe? Can this be used to merge the four Wikipedia accounts that I have? --BlueMario1016 (talk) 15:22, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Certainly any of them that are named BlueMario1016. I don't know which are your other accounts. I think if you have one that has a different name, you'll want to rename those to BlueMario1016, and then use the tool, but as I understand it, that should work great. I still haven't heard anything about the thing that triggered this, the message you got, if you could point me at it I might be able to make more sense of it. --j⚛e decker^talk 02:53, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

On the top of the screen, there's a message that displays: "Some accounts will soon be renamed due to a technical change. Read more." All four of those Wikipedia accounts that I have, for each lingual site are all named BlueMario1016 (The English, Japanese, Dutch and Hindi Wikipedias). If I can somehow merge all those to that, will it work then? And I can somehow make some worldwide identity where I can use one account to log on to all Wikimedia-related sites? --BlueMario1016 (talk) 12:26, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

If they all have the same name, then that should work well as near as I can understand it. And at least once this is done nobody will be able to take BlueMario1016 on any other wiki. Pity it's such a hassle. --j⚛e decker^talk 16:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

All four of those accounts are also connected with the same email address that I have, so I'm guessing it shall work. But on your recommendation, do you possibly think that can work easily? --BlueMario1016 (talk) 20:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, the main thing is that they're all named BlueMario1016, as I understand it, if that's true, it should "just work". --j⚛e decker^talk 14:14, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

No, Nothing yet. I am still nervous. :( --BlueMario1016 (talk) 16:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough--it probably won't hurt, but if you want to talk to someone who has more experience with all the ins and outs of username stuff, I think User talk:Beeblebrox might have more clue than myself, or you could post a note at WT:CHU. You may also find that you don't really need to do anything, if all your account names are the same, and nobody else has taken your username anywhere else, it may be that this gets done automatically. Still, I hate to sound like I'm sure of anything when it's not an area I've personally worked a lot in, y'know? --j⚛e decker^talk 20:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Sentence case

Hi Joe,

I've seen a couple of AFCs you've processed recently, and I wanted to encourage you to move them to the proper capitalization, which uses sentence case, not Title Case, when you are moving them to the main namespace. If you do it all at once, it will save us a page move later. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:11, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, will try and keep that in mind a bit more consistenly. --j⚛e decker^talk 04:29, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Not a big deal, but I know you like to have things done well.

I'm glad that you're helping at AFC. It could use another dozen people like you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

That's kind! I'm still making a lot of simple mistakes as I get the hang of this place. I'll probably need a few more reminders of this or that along the way, that's just the way this stuff goes.  :) It's great to be working here with y'all. --j⚛e decker^talk 00:46, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Lack of material at Hetch Hetchy Reservoir

Material about Hetch Hetchy is split between Hetch Hetchy Valley, O'Shaughnessy Dam, and Hetch Hetchy Reservoir. See an old (2004!) discussion about the split at Talk:Hetch Hetchy Valley#Definition of Hetch Hetchy Valley. —hike395 (talk) 00:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll take a look when I get a chance tonight, thanks. Didn't realize there was a previous consensus on that division. --j⚛e decker^talk 00:34, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm. I'm not quite sure what the geographic scope of the lease is, which makes this more confusing. It sounds like the content I added should be in only one place, the general smell I get, without thinking about it too hard, is that the lease payment usually crops up in discussions of the controversy about the dam, and that that placement feels natural. The reservoir not so much. But what would you suggest--you've been working on those articles a lot longer than I have, and I fully trust your judgment in arranging/rewriting/shifting/moving/deleting anything I've added, it's a wiki after all.  :) --j⚛e decker^talk 00:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

It seems that over the last 9 years, Hetch Hetchy Valley and O'Shaughnessy Dam have drifted to be close to one another. Over the last few years, I've become a Mergist, so now my impulse is to merge Hetch Hetchy Valley, O'Shaughnessy Dam, and Hetch Hetchy Reservoir all together into a better article. I'm sure this would cause a fight between WP:WikiProject Reservoirs and WP:WikiProject Dams. ツ Failing that, the lease makes sense in the dam article. —hike395 (talk) 02:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd support a merge of all three or at least the res. and the dam, I think a lot of the material about the history and controversy involves both of those two. I'm more "whatever" about merging in the valley, it's all good by me. --j⚛e decker^talk 02:30, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done --- created new Hetch Hetchy. It's WP:BRD, let's see if people scream. —hike395 (talk) 04:46, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

You're a WikiData wonk: how the heck do I get rid of [7] to make only one entity at [8] ? —hike395 (talk) 05:04, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah. You remove the EN entry at '727, add it back in at '130, and then request deletion of '727 at [9]. There's a gadget I have that lets me file deletion requests from WD more easily, it's linked from the top of that page I just linked. An explanation of "item empty, merged to '727" will be sufficient. --j⚛e decker^talk 06:57, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, that looks nice. --j⚛e decker^talk 21:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done --j⚛e decker^talk 17:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Article Declined

Joe,

Thank you very much for your input on my recent article submission. Considering the overwhelming amount of information for a new user like myself, you did a great job of explaining the notability criteria. I've made changes based on your suggestions and resubmitted the article. I guess i'll find out if I properly understood the criteria after the next review.

I have one minor problem with the process: In the "Review waiting" message at the bottom of the article it states that you can continue to improve your article, but in the automated message at the bottom of the text box where the actual edits are made the following message appears: "...Until then, please don't change anything in this text box and press "Save page". -->"

I attempted to make minor changes to my article after resubmitting based on the first message, and it appeared that my reference numbers merged with your note. I'm not sure how to fix that.

Again, thanks for your input MayorMike1966 (talk) 14:56, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi... I'm not seeing a problem, did you get that fixed, or am I missing what is concerning you? Glad to try and help... --j⚛e decker^talk 17:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see the problem. You're using a different referencing system. If you could change references to be in "ref tags":

<ref> then your ref here </ref>

...they'd get a uniform reference count. The ref-based referencing system is baroque, I'm sorry, but the easiest way to use it is to read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, which includes a nice video showing how to use the RefToolbar, which makes working with references a whole lot easier.--j⚛e decker^talk 21:42, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hanns and Rudolf

Hi Joe I made changes to Hanns and Rudolf, hopefully it looks good to you now. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poetstone (talk • contribs) 17:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Looks like I arrived late, and your draft in mainspace got deleted by another admin. Sorry about the timing, you might ask that admin for his/her suggestions. --j⚛e decker^talk 20:13, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Swaybe/FAM149A

Dear Joe: I see that you did a history merge on the article User:Swaybe/FAM149A. However, it appears that there is another copy of the article in mainspace, although this one is still submitted for review and has been edited. Can we just make the same change to the mainspace article and then delete this one? —Anne Delong (talk) 04:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I think I can't entirely delete the Swaybe copy, the mainspace one was a cut-paste move, but doesn't have Swaybe's contributions in the history nor was he/she the person who did the cut/paste. So the license attribution would be badly broken. A history merge appears beyond hope, both underwent parallel development. What WP:HISTMERGE suggests is simply redirecting User:Swaybe (which I've moved, as I should have, to WT:AFC) to the new article, which leaves the old history under the redirect, and making a note at Talk:FAM149A. I've also moved that old version of our way to Talk:FAM149A/OldVersion, so it should be almost as good as deleted now, but still available if you want to apply some small improvements from one to the other. --j⚛e decker^talk 04:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

afc

There seem to be significant uncited OR and opinion in sections 3 & 5 of Environmental issues in Southern Africa. I'm not sure I would have accepted it from AfC yet. I will do some fixing (I'm a little tired, so it will be more in the way of cutting than rewriting) DGG ( talk ) 05:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC) .

I believe you, I'm fading a bit myself, but I can also put my eyes on it in the morning, see if I can restore/clean up anything else. Thanks for the note! --j⚛e decker^talk 05:37, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Asymmetric-Advertising article

Hi Joe,

I recently submitted an article on the topic of Asymmetric-Advertising, it's a new and quite important topic in the industry of marketing, advertising and public relations. However, apart from the undocumented colloquial use of the term/concept and confidential inter-industry documents like SWOT, PESTLE reports (perhaps I can obtain one) there are only a handful of sources, one being IMDb. I realize IMDb is considered a potentially unreliable source, however they do have a strict review and fact checking department, similar to Wikipedia.

Could the article be posted with a disclaimer perhaps? While I continue to search for reliable sources on the topic.

Thanks, talk soon and take care.

TVType (talk) 21:14, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Nah, no disclaimers. We're not really a publisher of original research, or well, we try not to be. Obviously, we don't always live up to our policies, but we try. But I am optimistic that you may be able to find sources that discuss the term. If it's really a new term, I should warn you that our policy on "neologisms" tends to be a bit harsh (it's at WP:NEO), but take a look for additional sources, I see some possible hints of coverage doing a Google Books search, so I suspect there's hope that appropriate sources exist. Thanks for your understanding. --j⚛e decker^talk 21:24, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, Joe Decker

For the article My Family Tree can you please improve it please. I'm just asking. Please reply on my talk page. I love it if you do because I'm horrible with refereneces —Preceding undated comment added 21:47, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll try and give you some help improving it, but I'll need some help from you, too! What we need to have an article like that are references that establish notability.. the pollicy pages are WP:GNG and WP:42, but there's an overwhelming amount of explanation there. A simpler way to put it is this: What we need here are newspaper articles, magazine aticles, that talk about "My Family Tree" in detail. Now, I don't know the subject, and you apparently do, so maybe you can help me help the article by telling me where I can find some of those? --j⚛e decker^talk 21:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Emergency shutdown button

Hey Joe, why doesn't this bot's page have an emergency shutdown button like the others (an image with a link to block to bot)? Not that one is needed right now, but I would like to see one "just in case" your bot tries to take over the world. Technical 13 (talk) 12:44, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it down the road--mostly I thought it was overkill. In theory the bot shouldn't be able to "edit" at all, and the shutoff processing might end up eating as much in the way of resources as the actual purging. But I kinda like big red shiny shutoff buttons, so ... *shrug* --j⚛e decker^talk 14:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback}} mabdul 14:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Uhm sorry, didn't recognized that you already answered. mabdul 14:23, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries, I just woke up (I'm in California time right now) ... thanks for the note! --j⚛e decker^talk 14:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on RfC on a DYK

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. (I am actually a human person, not a program, so I don't know how to tell if this message exceeds your requested limit for this sort of thing; if it does, sorry.) Herostratus (talk) 03:28, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

 Not done tmd;dr (too much drama; didn't read) --j⚛e decker^talk 16:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Editing restrictions

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Editing restrictions. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, Joe Decker, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Strike Σagle 09:29, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

afc G13

As we start using this I'm interested to know how you are selecting articles for this. As you know, I hope to screen for rescuable articles & at least partially rescue them, and it's much easier if people follow a pattern. Myself, what I'm doing is going through the oldest of them first. DGG ( talk ) 19:56, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure! I'm working from User:Joe_Decker/BLP and User:Joe_Decker/Promotional. How 'bout I work from the top down on BLP, then promotional? --j⚛e decker^talk 20:14, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

By the way, I made those lists with this tool, which is kind of cool. If I can be of any assistance, let me know. Thanks! --j⚛e decker^talk 20:19, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

CATSCAN looks interesting, thanks for reminding me about it; I'll give it a try. But I do not understand one aspect of your tables: for example, withWikipedia talk:Articles for creation/How to earn money online, your table give a last change date of 20130504... , Is this may 5, 2013--but I do not see this reflected in the article history. I see that for both groups you're working with the most recent month that's over a year old first; I had rather hoped that people would deal with the oldest. Within a group so I can go in the order you suggest. I'll try to keep ahead of you, because it's much easier to scan when I don't have to undelete first. I doubt I will rescue many, of course. I'll be very pleased to get 5%. DGG ( talk ) 23:51, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

That date column bothered me too, all being marked May 5, as near as I was able to tell, the CATSCAN date column is an error. The article histories match what I asked CATSCAN to give me, that column doesn't. I included a "last edited before 20121122". I have spent some time looking and I've convinced myself that the "last edited before" restriction is being correctly honored in creating the list. It's a puzzle to me why it's displayed wrong.

Ordering of CATSCAN results: CATSCAN doesn't give me a sort-by-last-changed option, these results are (by default) sorted by "article id", which is highly correlated with creation date. I think you'll find the older AfCs are mostly early on the lists, the newest ones are largely at the end.

Would you prefer that I start with all the 12-month-olds (for any reason) before moving to any of the 6-month olds? Or some other ordering? I'm really not stuck on one answer or the other, and am happy to work with you for an ordering you think would be preferable. --j⚛e decker^talk 04:56, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm trying to figure out what should be preferred, by trying to do a little work in all possible areas, and seeing what other people are doing, trying something different every day. My feeling is that if the emphasis is on trying to delete hopeless AfCs, we should work with the oldest first, because a/the ed. is much less likely to be around to finish them b/anything worth including is much more likely to have been already included -- and many of the AfCs there are duplicated of articles in mainspace--articles which sometimes need to be deleted--which is an even higher priority c/there are fewer per month, so it feels like rapid progress. What I think is important is that people go in the same direction--any direction, so others can work in synch.

The advantage of going from the top is that a higher percentage will be rescuable, if that's what one wants to do. For me, what I want to do is to tun ahead of people in whatever direction, not stopping to do anything but pull out the possible ones that interest me. I scanned the popups for about 300 today, opening maybe 50 of them to examine. I rescued 4 that took a moderate amount of work, and marked another 5 or 6 that will take more work. But I ignored ones that would have taken too much work, or that were in fields that didn't interest me, or which I didn't think were particularly notable or otherwise worth the trouble. If I had infinite time and interest, I could probably have found at least 30 or 40.

The way I have been finding them is at Category:AfC_submissions_by_date/01_September_2008 and the later pages (see supercats at the bottom) , and go forward from there--the earlier dates were for articles made under a previous version of AfC, where the stuff not used was archived. The links to talk pages are accepted articles, the one to WT space, ones not accepted. But your spreadsheet is equally good, and as you did, lets it be selected by various parameters I think you're right about the date sequence, which is close enough--this is not something we need be precise about. BTW, Did you by any chance run the query on May 5? DGG ( talk ) 05:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Nah, I did the reports yesterday (the 26th in my time zone). Sounds like you're okay with my working from those lists, so for now I'll start as I said I would from the BLP list--the thing I like about it is that I've got something I think reliable double-checking the "not edited in six months" test, I'm a little worried that if I worked from the other list, that so many of them would be long-stale that I might miss a rare one that had gotten updated more recently. --j⚛e decker^talk 14:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

(Quite separately, and what I was doing until G13 came along, was starting with today, and go back, deleting until the 6 months only the ones that fall into speedy, which will be a great many, correcting errors in reviewing, & trying to remind the good-faith editors what to do, while persuading the good-faith eds of hopeless articles to withdraw them.)

Thanks, the reviewing errors are... frequent. (And I'm sure I've made a few myself.) There's room for a lot more careful reviewing and feedback in the AfC process, but I suspect that will take more people being interested in reviewing to manage, I think the quality problem can't be solved without also solving the quantity problem. --j⚛e decker^talk 14:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

And here we find, the first president of Guatemala. (it was unsourced and marked as a blanked BLP vio for that.) *headdesk* --j⚛e decker^talk 14:41, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Also recovered: Georgina Harding and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Frederick J. Brown. --j⚛e decker^talk 16:33, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

And finally, for today (I'm going to go get some work done), a few notes:

1. In order to prevent any errors on my part, can you move (preferably without redirect) any that you are planning to recover? I'll check histories and such each time, but if I try and pull and article up and get a red link, there'll be no chance I'll wrongly tag it out of tunnel vision. (You might be already doing this.)
2. I got as far on the BLP list as Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Salman Alhowaish. However, there were about eight articles that I just passed on making any judgment at all about, or missed accidentally, or what have you, so I made a smaller list User:Joe Decker/SecondLook of things you might want to look at yourself, some of the things look like they might be recoverable, but might also require more work to put right. --j⚛e decker^talk 17:02, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I do move the ones I save, and if I'm going to make them a redirect I do it then and there. If I can't finish it at the time, I put an underconstruction tag on it. But I also have a long list of at least 200 academic bios or related still in AfC that I spotted earlier that I need to work on, and I'm doing it as fast as I can, but as you can see, there are so many places to work. that It will probably take me half a year or a year The only reason I haven't moved them to mainspace is there is one key problem which takes time: checking for copyvio. At least 1/3 of of the academic bios or college articles I specialize in are in fact copyvios, & I am not going to move a potential copyvio to mainspace until I can check the obvious places or , often easier, rewrite the article enough that any copyvio will be removed. If any do get deleted though, no harm is done, for as an admin I will simply undelete them when I am prepared to work on them. My list is kept as Safari bookmarks, and I will try to get them into some form that is shareable in the next few days.

I will look at your dubious list tomorrow. That's a good idea, and I will probably do similar. (My current way of doing similar is to do as I do at NPP or CSd , and skip the ones I'm not sure of). DGG ( talk ) 04:48, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks--no rush on the Second Look list-- I'll get back to it, at this rate, around 2016 or 2017. Feel free to check off stuff there, or leave notes there. And thank you! --j⚛e decker^talk 15:39, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/David_Hoffmeister&action=edit&redlink=1

Thank you for keeping Wikipedia to a high standard!! I hope you can help me sort something out. I tried to submit this letter yesterday, but I think I did it in the wrong place. If you did receive both, I apologize for the redundancy.

What I want to learn is how to reference something that has been deemed "fair use" by the publisher? My article was deleted due to "copyright infringement." I went to the publisher for permission before posting. The permissions office (@ Penguin Books) deemed the use of the quote in this context as "fair use,"requiring only an accurate referencing and verbatim use of the quote. Both guidelines have been followed precisely!

The director of Penguin Publisher's Permissions Office, Jeffery Corrick, suggested submitting to you the email I received from his assistant, Sarah Laskin, informing me of their "fair use" determination regarding this quote. It is pasted in below. Her direct telephone number is 212-366-2069. Her address, fax, and email address are included in her email signature below.

Please let me know what the next steps are to getting my article approved and firmly established in your system as "fair use." Naturally, we do not want to repeat these steps if the article gets screened again at a later date!!!

This is the link (I think) to my (deleted) article David Hoffmeister link: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/David_Hoffmeister&action=edit&redlink=1

Below is the email I received on May 16, from Sarah Laskin (representing Jeffery Corrick) at the Penguin Permissions Office. She is available by telephone to confirm their determination of fair use, and I also have the longer string of communications with her available if that is helpful:

Dear Ms. Abelson, The nature of your request is such that we would consider this fair use and as such, no formal permission is necessary. It is understood that the material will be used verbatim, without any alterations to the original text. It is also understood that the material will not be used as a chapter heading, caption, or set apart in any manner, in which case reapplication will be necessary giving full publishing information. Please be sure to credit title, author, and publisher: LIVING WITH MIRACLES by D. Patrick Miller, copyright (c) 2011 by D. Patrick Miller. Published by Jeremy P. Tarcher, an imprint of Penguin Group (USA) Inc.

Sincerely,
Jeffery Corrick

Permissions Manager

Sarah Laskin on behalf of Jeffery Corrick 

Sarah Laskin Permissions Assistant | Penguin Group (USA) 375 Hudson Street | New York, NY 10014 Fax: (212) 366-2943 | sarah.laskin@us.penguingroup.com www.us.penguingroup.com/permissions

Thanks for your help Joe! If you have any other pointers that would help me to streamline this process I would appreciate hearing them as well. Thanks again, Tera Abelson Abelsont (talk) 21:09, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Tera, you're going to need to send that information to the address listed at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials, I can't handle that directly, but our volunteer response team (a.k.a. "OTRS") folks should be able to give you a hand with dotting the i's and crossing the t's on copyright permissions stuff. Sorry for the extra step! --j⚛e decker^talk 21:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC) (That is permissions-en@wikimedia.org -- if you've done that already, they'll get back to you. Thanks!) --j⚛e decker^talk 21:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

If I happened to be the volunteer at OTRS who received this, I would reject it, because it is giving only permission to be used, unchanged on Wikipedia. This is insufficient. Our licensing requirement is CC-ATT-SA , which mean we can place no limitation on reuse, or abridgment, or how it is to be used within WP or elsewhere, with only attribution being required. and that the material remain as free.

Looking at the deleted material, I think it would be enormously easier to rewrite it than to try to explain to a publisher the nature of the required permission. It does fall under fair use in the sense of US law, but our requirements are stricter, and we would never copy so large a section of material under fair use.

But in any case, the material is unsuitable. It is not written in an objective style, but in the style of a press release or tribute to him. Nor are almost any of the references from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online' they all seem connected with him or his movement. What would help most is references to his work in forming intentional communities, which probably does have appropriate independent sources that would establish his notability. DGG ( talk ) 04:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Article "The TerraMar Project" declined

Hi Joe!

I created a page called The TerraMar Project (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Rakswami/The_TerraMar_Project), and was told that I didn't have relevant sources/press coverage for it to be published. I went back and found significant press coverage for it, and added the links, and resubmitted it for publishing. But the log now says the page has been deleted - "The submission has not been accepted because it included copyrighted information, which is not permitted on Wikipedia."

I'm trying to get this page published on behalf of the organisation. Could you please help? Did the entire article violate copyright laws or was it only certain sections? If yes, how and which sections? Also is there any way I can recover the text of my article so when I do fix it, I don't have to start from scratch.

Thanks. Rakswami (talk) 09:00, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Rakswami.

Sources: First, let me apologize, our policies and such are many and confusing, and it's atrocious that we don't find a way to provide better guidance for new editors before they begin trying to create an article. So, if you're frustrated, I understand why.

Our primary bar for inclusion here (there are a few exceptions, but for TerraMar, this would be the key) is our "general notability guideline". A short version of it can be read at WP:42, but basically it asks that all articles be referenced to, and written from, multiple "reliable" secondary sources, independent of the subject, that talk about it in depth. I put reliable in quotes because it too has some policy around it, WP:IRS explains the general principles, but in practice it generally works out to magazine articles, newspaper articles, books--but not ones which are self-published, reprinted press releases, and only from publishers that have an actual editorial process. This excludes most blogs.

Our goal in having these policies is not to be exclusionary, it's to try and work toward encyclopedia articles which are verifiable (that is, whose accuracy can be checked by the reader by simply checking the sources), and neutral, that is, neither unduly flattering nor critical. Organizations and people have an incredibly difficult time writing neutrally about themselves, and this is part of why we insist on independent sources.

Copyright: I did not attempt to dig out every place where the article had been copied from another source, there were sections copied or very closely worded from the project's web site. Even if those copyright issues could worked around (in isolation, they can if the organization wants to license the text for anyone to use for any purpose), that generally turns out to be a wasted effort because organizations (understandably!) tend to write in a non-encyclopedic way about themselves. It is simplest to simply write about the organization in one's own words, and quite difficult to do otherwise given our various policies.

Because you're working for or with the project (which sounds very cool, btw), you will want to read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide as well. Sorry to be such a bucket of cold water (no pun intended), and I hope this provides some context. Best regards, --j⚛e decker^talk 16:04, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Oleg Firer article

Dear Joe, You have recently deleted a pending article for Oleg Firer stating violation of copyright, I would like to ask for your guidance, since I am staff writer and marketing director for Oleg Firer and are a creator of content that you pointed to, please let me know what I need to do to confirm this, as Mr. Firer will gladly sign off on whatever is needed as well.

Thanks, Jacob — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paymentguru (talk • contribs) 16:12, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jacob,

Sure. Entering text into Wikipedia, even what I'm writing right now, licenses the text for use by anyone, for any purpose, you can read this just above teh "Save page" button, where it says, in part, "you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL."

Essentially, anything that is claimed as copyrighted somewhere else probably isn't safe for contribution elsewhere, unless the clear legal copyright owner makes a specific license to do so. There's a mechanism for that, but I tend to recommend against it, since the copied text is almost always unsuitable for final use in Wikipedia in any case. Nearly every "about us" or "about me" or product page that gets copied into Wikipedia also fails the requirement that the text have a neutral, encyclopedic wording and point of view. So what happens a fair bit is that we find a copyvio, someone goes through the procedure of getting their lawyer to send the right identification in, the text goes back in, and boom, it's out again for a different reason.

My strong recommendation is that you simply rewrite anything you write in your own words from scratch and without reference to your company's text, since even close paraphrasing can be a problem.

You should also read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. I hope this helps, sorry to be such a bucket of cold water! --j⚛e decker^talk 18:23, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

deleted page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kehinde Kamson

Hi ,

My page was deleted for the following reasons : 00:51, 21 May 2013 Joe Decker (talk | contribs) deleted page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kehinde Kamson (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement)

Please point me to where 1 will be able to provide evidence that i am the copyright owner and am also willing to sign away the copyright to Wikipedia. I believe that the content is really appropriate for an encyclopedia

Regards Diran — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diranmabo (talk • contribs) 18:00, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure! Instructions and an email address are at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. You will want to work on the wording some whether or not it's restored, it's not really encyclopedic (a little personal, a little too much putting statements about someone's feelings in Wikipedia's voice as well, but unlikely the vast majority of cases I see, it's not pervasively promotional or anything. I seem to recall that there was also an issue that the article needed more in the way of reliable, third-party sourcing to meet our WP:42 guideline. --j⚛e decker^talk 18:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Article Declined

Hi Joe, thanks for being so open to giving feedback on articles! I recently created a page for Fixtures Living (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Fixtures_Living) after a project I did with the company that was marked as possible advertising. Can you let me know what elements are flagged as advertising that I can revisit and improve on? Excited to learn the process and contribute more. Thanks very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maria Meeuwisse (talk • contribs) 21:45, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure, although there's an accumulation of different things. I think part of why it comes across that way is focus--we strive for a neutral, encyclopedic tone, which is going to end up focusing on what other sources--outside, independent and reliable ones say about the company rather than what it says about itself. A lot of the material here is from the company directly or indirectly (mission, manifesto, culture). Not that company culture isn't important, when it's documented in outside sources, it's just not very neutral to take much of the company's self-description of it.

Phrases like 'a place where consumers would be inspired to "dream about, play with and choose products for better living" aren't particularly neutral either, we would prefer descriptive, objective phrases of the products the company offers.

Awards are fine, and it's great you've sourced them. I can't speak to the relative importance of each one, but I don't have any problem with that section.

Phrases like "The transaction is expected to accelerate the growth of the retail concept, as it begins its aggressive expansion across the country" are both a bit promotional (is it aggressive? who says so?) but also pretty opaque to a typical reader.

Finally, some of the sourcing is problematic, stuff like [10] appears to be a press release. Review WP:IRS for a better understanding of our sourcing requirements.

I do think there's a good chance we can have an article on FD, and I apologize that our requirements are so opaque, particularly to new editors. Have a great week! --j⚛e decker^talk 00:15, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Silent Voices

sorry, wrong talkback page! I apologize!Heavvymetalqueen (talk) 22:11, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries, it looks like you've taken care of my wording concern very well, thank you! The other reviewer will probably be able to give you a better answer than I can about his concerns, but in general, we tend to be fussy about wanting a multiple sources that talk about the band that are reliable according to WP:IRS. That page there might give you some background into what the other reviewer was looking for. Hope it's helpful, best of luck! --j⚛e decker^talk 22:49, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

NPOV Noticeboard

Hi Joe I wanted to let you know I responded to a query you posted on the NPOV noticeboard: [11]. Let me know if I can be of further use. Looks like you had done a lot of work on the article already, I can probably find more sources if you think it would be useful. --Luke Warmwater101 (talk) 23:08, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Mostly I wanted someone looking over my own shoulder--I'm not familiar with the event, and the article, as I originally arrived at it. Statements like "Verified footage of Bangladeshi security forces firing into unarmed crowds of people" sourced to what I guessed (again, not knowing much) as an activist organization concerned me. I cleaned up what I could within the limits of my time and knowledge of the subject, but figured another pair of eyes looking at it for anything obviously problematic might be a good idea given the newsiness and severity of the event. Thanks for taking a look! --j⚛e decker^talk 23:15, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

I will take another look, there definitely may be issues with sources that may not be reliable, and it is also possible that some of the reliable sources have not been represented correctly, though I won't know until I have checked them.--Luke Warmwater101 (talk) 11:17, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Please delete User:Tbhotch

Hi, please delete User:Tbhotch, because it may editing without complain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.178.16 (talk) 08:12, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm? I'm sorry, are you asking me to delete the user page, or block the user? Why? ---Joe Decker (alt) (talk) 14:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Damn Kids

Hi Joe Decker,

I have created a page for the artist "Damn Kids", and 3 times now the article has been declined. Can you please be specific as to what I am missing? I have a feeling it is the sources, but the are legitimate as far as I can tell.

I have added yet another source stating proof that Damn Kids will be playing a big Electrnic Music Festival in Toronto along-side notable big names such as Tiesto, Porter Robinson, & more.

Can you tell me exactly what I need to get this article published? It has already been a month now, and I feel as if I'm going in circles.

Please let me know in detail what else I need, or at least what is wrong with my article.

Thank you.Thisisprovoke (talk) 22:45, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry it's been so difficult. We need multiple sources, at least two or three, that are reliable *and* secondary *and* cover the subject in detail. Reliable is probably the hardest of those three to get a handle on--the simple answer is that a source that Wikipedia considers reliable about a music act is going to often be a newspaper or magazine, something that has a formal editorial process. This isn't going to include anything that simply reprints press releases, nor the original press release, or Facebook or Soundcloud page More or less, get some deep coverage in the papers, in print music publications (most of them have some sort of editorial process, or a very well-respected on-line music publication that. While our music notability guidelines give a bunch of other options ( Wikipedia:NMUSIC#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles ), it's extremely rare that someone meets one of those other options, like having a Grammy or an album on a national chart, without having gotten some signficant coverage in a couple publications.

There is another good resource for new editors here which I'd recommend you checking out for a second opinion, it's at Wikipedia:Teahouse. Take a look, drop 'em a note, etc. Hope this helps! --j⚛e decker^talk 02:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed response, you've been the most helpful moderator so far. I will continue to find more editorial sources, and add them to the resources list for "Damn Kids". Hopefully the next mod will approve this article finally. Cheers.Thisisprovoke (talk) 17:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Best of luck! --j⚛e decker^talk 17:46, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey again Joe Decker,

I cant seem to tell if my article is pending review once again. I can't find the link that sends it off for review. Where is the link again? Thanks in advance. Thisisprovoke (talk) 20:06, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it is, is this the right draft? Just add {{subst:submit}} to the top of it, and you should see the big yellow pending sign, which is how you'll know it's pending. It should also have something like "Pending AfC submissions" in the categories at the bottom. --j⚛e decker^talk 20:16, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

How do I resubmit an article?

Hi Joe,

Thank you for reviewing my article on the Kirkpatrick Model: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Kirkpatrick_Model I've made a few changes to incorporate stronger references, and I'd like for the article to be reviewed again. I didn't know if saving those changes, which I've done, would automatically put it back in the submission queue, or if there's something else I need to do. I didn't see a resubmit button.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WkKirkpatrick (talk • contribs) 14:53, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Resubmission is just like submission, you just add {{subst:submit}} to the article. Best of luck! --j⚛e decker^talk 15:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Article Copyright

Hi Joe,

Wondering what part of my submission for a "Jumio" page had copyright issues: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jumio&action=edit&redlink=1

Thanks

Neuma101 (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2013 (UTC) Nikki

The text was a close paraphrase of the "About Jumio" section of [12]. --j⚛e decker^talk 19:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Kenneth Cobonpue

My apologies for the edit conflict I was just deleting some unreferenced content whilst you were adding the copy vio note at the same time. I'll leave it to you.Theroadislong (talk) 21:55, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries at all! Amusing coincidence, though. I tagged it to leave for others to sort out, I'm slowly and painfully working through a list of several thousand stale "promotionally tagged AfC submissions, about 50% of which are copyvios. I'm starting to realize, as I did here, that I need to check whether someone eventually got that text through into a main space article of the same name. I wish we had better automated support for cv detection! Hard problem, though. --j⚛e decker^talk 22:00, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

It's kinda sad when you can mark 500 pages for speedy deletion in 3 days for articles that have been sitting in plain view untouched for six months, and you know there's ten times as many problems ahead of you as behind. --j⚛e decker^talk 22:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Bot

Hey! Just thought I should let you know your new bot task has been speeded. Alse please see my change here which I think might be a nice idea! Of course if you don't like it just revert it! :) ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 22:44, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, that's funny, I'd changed the column after you edited it and not noticed it, after some thought, I think you found the right wording. I'd totally missed you'd added the column, too. It's definitely an improvement, the numbers vary a lot for the empty category thing, it looks like, but just giving folks some idea of which tasks are actually more likely to be "signficant" is I think quite helpful. Thanks! --j⚛e decker^talk 23:15, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Hehe, also could you please check back to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Remove_bot_flag_from_inactive_bots ? :) ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 09:24, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

But of course!  :) --j⚛e decker^talk 15:10, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

 Not done, appears resolved. --j⚛e decker^talk 04:28, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Andrei Arshavin

I just noticed we had a semi-prot clash at the same minute at Andrei Arshavin. Just so you know. -- Alexf^(talk) 16:20, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed too, reverted myself. 14d is fine. If I've mucked anything else up, feel free to make it right with my approval. --j⚛e decker^talk 16:22, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

NP. -- Alexf^(talk) 16:26, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! --j⚛e decker^talk 16:27, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Zep Inc. submission

Joe,

I wanted to understand how to get a page started for Zep Inc. Zep Inc. is a 76-year old company that most recently went public in 2007 on the NYSE under the ticker ZEP. It's market cap is presently $375 million. I am the VP of Investor Relations and Communications for Zep and made an effort to remove language like "leading" and "market-leader" to make the article as factual as possible. As the writer of the content on Zep Inc.'s Webpage and investor material, from which the article was built - I am the copywrite owner. How do I properly cite that so we can get the page up and running.

Feel free to check my credentials on the Zep Inc. website on any of the recent press releases: http://www.zepinc.com/investors/press-releases/default.aspx, and/or email or phone me to verify.

Thank you for your help.

DonDondelaria (talk) 17:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I won't return the text to you, because as it was largely taken from [13] or similar corporate copyrighted text, it creates copyright issues. And as the text is promotional, and non-encyclopedic, it would have had to be rewritten in any case. Still, if you believe that you have the legal authority to license that text to *anyone* for *any purpose* so long as attribution is maintained (note the "irrevocably agree to release your contribution" just above the "Save Page" button), you're welcome to purse that through OTRS at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials--the folks listed there would have to verify your identity, that's not something I'm permitted to do in this role. And I really recommend starting from scratch--that process will take you time and effort, and in the vast majority of cases, in my experience, will leave you right back where you are today a week or two down the road.

The question of whether we can/should have an article on the subject is a separate one from the copyright issue. I would guess that it is very likely, just from Zep being an NYSE listed company, that there are sufficient, reliable secondary sources for the company to pass WP:CORP. So I'm with you on the "yes, we should", or at least that's my assumption.

Thank you for identifying yourself as a representative of the company. You will want to read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. It is very difficult, particularly when writing about oneself or one's company, to avoid using promotionally-spun, non-encyclopedic language. But at the same time, I understand that you wish to have your company represented. Tip: If you do pursue rewriting the article, I'd suggest reading and understanding the requirements for sourcing at WP:CORP, and then building the article by summarizing (without copying) from the arm's length, independent sources that policy requires. I find that focusing on the aspects of a subject (whether a company or a person) that are covered in significant third-party sources generally results in a more neutral article. Best of luck! --j⚛e decker^talk 17:36, 30 May 2013 (UTC)