User talk:Leuko/Archive 6

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Leuko. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

→

Blabbermouth.net

I completely re-wrote it, could you please take another look? M3tal H3ad 13:52, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take a look. Leuko 22:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Linkspam by User:Tesfatsion

Hi. I note your very good work in reverting vandalism and linkspam on the List of social networking websites during its history. I wonder if you would take a look here, and tell me if his edits to countless 'External links' sections in articles is not suspicious. I have reverted his additions to Social network (diff) because they are self-admitting sites of his own making. In researching his additions to other articles, you may notice, as I did, that the text links are tailored to fit his creations - his creations are not necessarily tailored to the subjects. Or that's what I think.

Your considered opinion will decide whether I revert them all outright. I have no objections if you see fit to do this yourself. Best wishes. Ref ^(chew)(do) 22:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the compliment. :-) I've seen your name in the history rooting out spam/nn as well. As far as this editor's edits go, it looks like a definite conflict of interest as she is linking to her own personal web pages, which is "to be avoided" per WP:EL. The massive scale of EL additions without any other edits is rather suspect as well. While not as egregarious as commercial links spam (as the links point to a university hosted site with possibly useful material), still I feel it is inappropriate for someone to add links to their own personal web sites. As such, I have no problem if you revert the EL additions. However, I would suggest reporting it to COI noticeboard or to WikiProject Spam if you would like a wider consensus. Leuko 22:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Lee/Leigh? He/she? How can you tell? As someone who has lived with the former Christian name for 53 years, I can state that either/or spelling goes for male/female in this case, so it's not clear-cut.

Anyway, that's beside the point. Having read up WP:EL, I'm even more convinced that this is spamming, possibly through ignorance of the rules, but spamming nevertheless. I don't think I need any further input, and intend to be bold. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 23:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, you never do know these days, but I thought this picture was pretty convincing evidence. :-) I agree that this is more a case of ignorance than malfeasance, but spam none the less. Thanks for being bold and reverting, I need to go grab some dinner. :-) Leuko 23:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Membership of the Royal College of Physicians

Hi

You recently removed some "linkspam" from Membership of the Royal College of Physicians, I have to disagree. None of these sites are commerical and they all offer the prospective MRCP candidate free practical advice and resources for MRCP.

Your Thoughts please, I would rather discuss than simply revert. 86.138.191.164 23:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I am sorry, but I still feel it is spam. One of the sites had a big "Buy Now" PayPal button, and appeared to be commercial. Another was a blog, and per WP:EL, links to blogs are discouraged. Finally, Wikipedia is not a study guide directory, and articles should be limited to encyclopedic content. Thanks for being will to discuss. Leuko 00:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Ambulance

Hi there,

I don't want to turn this in to an edit war, but i think you have misunderstood the point of htat section under private ambulance. nowhere does it say that ONLY private ambulance provide this service. The point is that in some places they are contracted to only that specific job by the municipality whereas the municipal service provides 'proper' emergency cover. I did try and change the wording to make that more obvious when I reverted it last time, but lacked the time to make a proper job of it. I will put it back again later when i have some time to rewrite it, or do you have further suggestions as to how this could be resolved?

regards Owain.davies 05:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me regarding the edit. The best resolution would of course be to cite a WP:RS with similar wording. I mean I just have never heard of private companies being contracted to only respond to non-emergency 911 calls, i.e. lift assists, band-aid calls, etc. In every system that I've worked in, if you call 911, you get a 911 ambulance (be that municipal or private with a 911 contract) Leuko 22:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

American Global University School of Medicine

May I inquire as to why you do not fully investigate/use reliable resources/validate with correct information a topic prior to changing/editing. You send off vandalism messages to others and possibly you should be checking your own edits for vandalism. I am often confused with your attempts at editing. Does Wikipedia approve of your negligence? I had inquired with Wikipedia at one point as to how/why editors like your self receive special permission to mis lead the reader. There response was . . . that they would not condone such irresponsibility . . . . and that their editors use realiable, valid online resources to research information. If this is really the truth, why have you consistently not respected the sites of IMED/FAIMER/ECFMG. Do you really know what the accreditation standards are for off shore medical schools? I believe you may be mistaken in your journey to investigate valid information. Possibly you are relying on accreditation sites who have no jurisdiction over offshore medical schools. A little valid research goes a long way and maybe you will find that the destructive edits you make (which I can only imagine entertains you) should be avoided. Please do your research at the correct sites to decided whether or not your edits/information are correct. I can only hope that you may not realize you are making these mistakes and that when you really find the correct/valid sites to complete your research, you will do the right thing by allowing the correct information the remain. I am going to edit the material back to the correct information under American Global University School of Medicine and see how long it takes you to do your homework and discover the truth. Oh, as I am completing this information, I see right under this text box the term "verifiable" . . . Why don't you try to find verifiable information from the accrediting bodies who have the authority to accredit off shore medical schools and verifiable information under the sites of IMED, or ECFMG, or FAIMER.

The article does indicate the school is listed in FAIMER. Leuko 00:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

World Statesman site

Please share your thoughts with me wheter this site - http://www.worldstatesmen.org - is a WP:RS. Thank you,--Velimir85 17:30, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Seems like someone's personal website, so I wouldn't consider it the most reliable source... Leuko 22:54, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.--Velimir85 17:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

St. Christopher

Good work at Talk:St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine. I avoid that article for the most part, ParalelUni (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was probably the most vile troll I have ever encountered, but I am looking at the editprotected requests. Needless to say most are baseless or designed to inflate the place. Guy (Help!) 20:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for sending you on a wikisearch for buckytubes, but ordinary hair was too thick for what I felt about the anon (and other puppets') intentions. :) DMacks 17:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

:-) No problem - I've heard of buckyballs, just not the tubular variety... Thanks for your help... Leuko 22:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Spamming

Thank you for contacting me regarding my possible spamming of Wikipedia. It was never my intent to spam Wikipedia. In every case I only wanted to provide a website with a more in depth discussion of the subject. (And I will admit that some of them reflected my own research.) Because you have pointed me towards the proper guidelines on the subject I can see where I have probably made some errors. I must admit that most of this came from my inexperience with editing on Wikipedia. I see now that some of my links should have probably been listed as references. I will have to learn how to do that. There are probably other errors as well. Please do not ban me from Wikipedia. I enjoy contributing to the project. I will correct my errors and I will post no more external links unless I am certain that they conform with Wiki’s guidelines and rules. (In fact, I will probably just refrain from doing it at all. It feels bad to be accused of spamming.) Thank you. Capt3808 21:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me, and thank you for agreeing to refrain from adding inappropriate external links into Wikipedia. I see no reason to block you. Please let me know if there is anything I can help you with. Leuko 12:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Kermit Green Peafowl

Sorry, I have been busy and haven't been able to talk about this that much. Kermit is definitely connected to Resolve Sustainable Solutions, which makes food for Peafowl and Pheasants, which are not related, says the site (info from Kermit). Kermit is one of the owners of the company and some obvious in-jokes are Resolution Kibble (Resolution is a username of Kermit in many forums), and Resolve (ThoroughResolve of the MSN Group Pavonine is also Kermit and frequently mentions about Resolve Sustainable Solutions). One of the products is called DragonCake, a reference to the new name that Kermit has given to the Green Peafowl, Dragonbird.

Kermit is busy too, making a new movie about Ancient Egypt.

BTW, Kermit told me that one of the Indian Peafowl I photographed at Taipei Zoo is a Sri Lankan Peafowl Pavo cristatus singhalensis.

Frankyboy5 05:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, we still got the species notion verified by Mennig, who even told me that he is a close friend of Blackwood. It's fairly obvious that everything is verified, just there is no WP:RS.

WPA, and Kermit are very strong-minded about conservation. A few years ago Kermit criticized the WPA harshly for pushing the DNA project of the Green Peafowl, and even thought that the wrong form was introduced to Malaysia. I have gotten confirmation from Mennig that the right birds were introduced birds.

I just really bugs me that they are reliable people BUT nothing but Mennig's paper have been published!!!!!!!!

I'm slowly losing my patience! Frankyboy5 07:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, unfortunately the threshold for inclusion in WP is verifiability and not truth... Thanks for updating me. Leuko 22:18, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

This is the Resolve Sustainable Solutions site [1].

Kermit is a person who uses multiple user accounts in certain places, like here in Wikipedia (3 known accounts). He sometimes does this because he lost his password or just as a backup and sometimes switches between the two accounts.

Kermit has been featured in such sites as Feathersite. His writting in there and many aviculture forums are both comprehensive and informative. All of the research had been gathered by himself over the last 20 years. He has even been quoted on the Red Data Book for suggesting the Yunnan Peafowl are different and that Green Peafowl are monogamous. He was the first to actually suggested that the Imperial Pheasant was a hybrid not a species, but it took years for the findings to actually be announced to a larger scientific community. The superspecies complex hypothesis may be the same thing. It has not been spread to a larger scientific community at all bit may in a few years from now. Frankyboy5 01:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Rachel Treichler

An editor has nominated Rachel Treichler, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Treichler and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. --GreenJoe 03:52, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well done

I was getting a headache looking at the mess of Exteranl Links in Little Rock, Arkansas. I think your solution was excellent : ) Doc Tropics 00:48, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, you know things are out of control when you need multiple columns of EL's... :roll: I've responded on the article's talk page regarding re-adding a limited number of encyclopedic links. Leuko 00:52, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

President Bush

Yes. I do believe it should not be reverted. It does not fit wikipedia standards it is incorrect and badly written. I am looking forward to your response and hoping you agree. --Tweetsabird 04:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

How does it not fit WP standards? As for it being incorrect, it has been referenced with WP:RS. Leuko 04:10, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Active Interest Media

I was trying hard to make sure this article wasn't delete (I am in no way affiliated with the company, I just think that with the apparent size of the company there should be an article.) What would it take to make it an aceptable article? Redian (Talk) 12:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, first would be not to have spammy phrases such as "Active Interest Media is actively seeking further acquistions of leading consumer media properties in niche enthusiast markets" in the article. The second would be to cite reliable sources to indicate the companies notability according to WP:CORP inclusion criteria. Leuko 18:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

List of social networking websites

Thanks for your help just now. 3RR was not an option for me. Thanks again. Ref ^(chew)(do) 20:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Glad to help :-) Leuko 20:45, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

New page deletion

Hi Leuko,

Whoops, please don't delete as yet and I will adjust the content, still a bit of learning to go through with Wikipedia articles. The copy was sent to me by another staff member so will change as requested and review your guidelines.

We did base it on articles for other law firms in New Zealand which seemed quite similar.

Regards, Sgeditor 22:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but please see WP:COI on why writing about your own company is considered to be bad practice. Also see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Leuko 23:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

User deleting warnings

Hi there. You just restored warnings on User talk:ChrisPUT that he deleted. Users can delete their warnings -- it is assumed to indicate their having read them (although archiving is preferred). I am restoring it to his recent edit. Please contact me if you have any questions. Cheers! Flyguy649^talk_contribs 23:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure of the consensus on this issue - I was of the opinion that warnings had to stay or be visibly archived. Otherwise what is {{uw-tpv}} for? Leuko 23:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

It's at WP:USER#Removal_of_warnings. I still often revert IPs, though -- but I'm trying to get into the habit of viewing the history before warning. And I user {{uw-tpv}} for vandalising others' talk pages. I agree though that there is some controversy on the issue. Cheers! Flyguy649^talk_contribs 23:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Last warning exceeded

You gave last warning in User talk:59.167.252.202#May 2007. Warning exceeded. (SEWilco 05:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC))

Thanks for letting me know. Unfortunately, I was no longer online, and the IP seems to have stopped now. In the future, when a vandal exceeds a final warning, please post a report to WP:AIV, so that the vandal is blocked and vandalism is prevented. Thanks. Leuko 21:47, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Overton Loyd

Hi. Would you take a look at Overton Loyd and consider removing the {{Notability}} that you placed on it? Also, so I know in the future, is it considered okay for an editor who has improved an article to remove the template himself? For example, would it be out of line if I removed it from Overton Loyd? Thanks! — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 17:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for improving the article - the subject appears more notable now. If you improve an article, you may remove the template yourself, but I suggest contacting the editor who left the tag out of Wikiettiquite. Otherwise, there may be some disagreement over the continued need for the tag, and it may reappear. Thanks again, Leuko 22:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

SourceRadio

Known1414 05:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC) I'm not sure why you are flagging this page. What is wrong with it content wise?

I tagged it because it did not assert any notability coming close to WP:WEB notability criteria. Leuko 00:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

COI Templates.

Hi, I'm sending you a message because of your involvement with the Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_18#Template:COI_and_Template:COI2 discussion. The result of the TfD was no-consensus, but there was a significant expressed consensus for editing the templates to bring them into line with good practice. Unfortunately this has not happened, and the templates have been left pretty much in the state they were before the TfD. Would you like to assist in bringing these templates in line with good practice? --Barberio 16:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Sure I'll help as I think the templates are useful. However, I am not quite sure what you mean by good practice. Can you elaborate? Thanks. Leuko 00:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Harrison High School (Georgia)

I imagine you were battling the ip editor and accidentally reverted my cleanup. Keep up the great work! --Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 01:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Oops, my select/highlight went to far down. Sorry, and thanks for fixing it. Keep up the good work yourself. :-) Leuko 02:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

stop

sir please stop i am working hard on these schools i go to cobb county schools so i know what i am doing! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.217.1.37 (talk • contribs).

Obviously, multiple editors disagree with your additions. Please use the articles' talk page to gain consensus for your edits instead of obstinately reverting in an edit war. Thank you. Leuko 02:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. We've had a few edit skirmishes, too. While you might know plenty about the schools, you don't seem to know enough about Wikipedia policy.

Originally, Leuko, I popped in to thank you for your edits/revert here. I've been working on that page and even removals of unnecessary information are appreciated. Thanks! - Boss1000 04:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Ryan

Hello,

Please be advised that the version of "Jeff Ryan" you are reverting back to is a vandalized version of the page. Please allow the "Diepauldie" version stay.

-Jeff Ryan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Diepauldie (talk • contribs).

I was reverting the fact that the WP:AfD notice was being removed from the page. I've also gone back in the page history to remove the vandalism. Leuko 04:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello again,

That's fine, but if you could please allow the version that existed prior to the valdalism to stay it would be appreciated (current version). I will gladly leave the deletion notice up until you feel it can be removed. Thanks again.

-Jeff Ryan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Diepauldie (talk • contribs).

A couple of things:

The deletion notice stays up for 5 days, until the WP:AfD debate to decide whether the article gets deleted or not ends.
Per WP:BLP, information in biographies must be cited from reliable sources per the Verifiability policy. That is why I removed much of the content that could not be verified.
Per WP:TRIV, trivia sections are generally not appropriate for encyclopedia articles.
Per WP:EL, links to personal MySpace pages should be avoided.
Please also see WP:COI and WP:Autobiography on why editors should avoid writing about themselves.

Thanks, Leuko 04:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, well if you're going to adhere to those rules, you should delete the "Roscoe Browning" portion of my name since it is not part of my name. This can be verified thru the citations. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Diepauldie (talk • contribs).

Well, they are not my rules, they are official Wikipedia policy. I'll make that edit for you as requested. Leuko 05:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Zachariah Anani

On that page I placed a bit inside of the talk discussion of the page about why I believe that the criticism by Quiggin may be wrong. I thought that I placed some useful information into that talk on why I believe that the criticism is wrong but do not see it now. Any ideas? (also, I am not an expert in the field so who am I to complain about professional criticism even if it is wrong.) 71.167.241.191 14:34, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The only thing I removed from that article was, "Please read discussion for questions about the above." Not only does it not make much sense, it is really not a statement that is appropriate for an encyclopedia... Leuko 01:30, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Paramedic

I note that you removed the section on clinical governance as being uncited - by that token you should have removed the whole paragraph as there is no more verifiable evidence presented for paramedics being supervised by physicians. In the UK, a paramedic is an independent clinician, with their own clinical judgement - not working under the jurisdiction of a doctor. I will restore that part of the paragraph (probably reworded a bit), and i'll have to look for a citation. Owain.davies 13:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I removed it? I thought I just added a {{cn}} to it... In any case, thank you for offering to find a reference for WP:V before re-adding it. Thanks, Leuko 16:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Where the top is

edit It's at the other end. ☺ Uncle G 09:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :-) That's actually an automated addition by NewPageWatcher, so you can report the bug to User:Martinp23... Though AfD's used to be added to the bottom. When the change? Leuko 11:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#New noms to top or bottom? Uncle G 14:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, a recent change of consensus. Thanks for letting me know! :-) Leuko 00:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

TravelersTable.com

Hi. It already has an article - I replied to the editor on his talk page, also informing him I've tagged "his" article for speedy. If you take a look, you may agree with me. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 00:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for letting me know. I never looked, I just assumed it was a redlink or EL that was summarily removed. And yup, I agree the article is a perfect CSD candidate. Leuko 00:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

No probs - thanks for your usual diligence on the List. Best wishes. Ref ^(chew)(do) 00:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem, thank you as well. :-) Leuko 00:57, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Tagging of Halogen Software

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Halogen Software. I do not think that Halogen Software fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because the previous AfD cited lack of references and an advertising tone (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halogen Software). The current version has added multiple additional references and IMO significantly improved the tone -- I don't think it is "substantially similar" which is the standard for deleting reposted content. Also it has been edited by multiple editors since the recreation. If you think this should still go, I suggest that a new AfD is the way. I request that you consider not re-tagging Halogen Software for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES ^(talk) 19:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

You keep deleting my entries, but I'm trying to add thorough industry info

I'm trying to write information about companies in the industry. They are comparable to any of the ones that you already have featured. To suggest that the information is insignificant would require that you delete every page of every company in the industry. The content is very similar in nature. It is not spam. On the contrary, if you give me enough time, I can add more profiles of the major companies in the industry. You have information about professional wrestlers. Clearly, you can handle exposing people to key corporate entities in the spotlight. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.237.77.164 (talk • contribs).

Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for why your argument that other articles on other companies are present in WP is not valid. Also, all you need to do is provide WP:RS to indicate the company's notability to satisfy the WP:CORP company inclusion criteria and the article won't be deleted. Otherwise, it will be deleted as non-notable spam. Thanks. Leuko 17:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Infield Parking

Hi Leuko,

You left a note against the entry in the subject saying "still no WP:RS to indicate notabilty...". I wanted to try and understand which bits concern you as regards accuracy/notability. I guess I'm confused/concerned as to who decides what a "reliable source" is. The reason I query this is there are at least two sources in that article which I cannot believe are not considered reliable:

1. NASCAR Scene Daily - This is an absolutely reputable and long-standing sports news publication, focussing on the specific scene about which the website is based - see http://www.scenedaily.com/about/scene.html - established in 1977, Scene Daily is "the nation's largest weekly publication devoted exclusively to NASCAR and its top three touring series" - I'm not sure how this can not be a considered reliable, and if it is not, what are the grounds? Please could you elaborate?

2. Mashable.com - The article referenced is written by Pete Cashmore, the founder of Mashable.com - Pete is a well respected and very widely read technology journalist whose blog, Mashable.com, is widely considered to be *the* Social Networking Blog - it's not just a title he uses. It really is the most popular social networking blog, so I struggle to see how a review by him of the website could be considered not reliable.

Maybe I'm getting this notability thing all wrong, but think what you like of the other sources - a few of them I know to be reputable, but can understand an independent reviewer's reticence - a few I cannot vouch for - the above two sources are, IMHO, irrefutably reputable, so your re-application of the "notability" label confuses me somewhat.

Look forward to your response. :-)

Thanks,

Greg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg.harvey (talk • contribs)

While the first reference may be somewhat reliable, the second is not. Blogs, as self-published sources, are all inherently non-reliable. The other sources are all pretty much press releases and the like. The WP:WEB notability inclusion criteria require multiple reliable sources, which the article does not have yet, IMHO. The article also seems to be written like an advertisement, and may be deleteable on that front. Leuko 16:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I read this discussion because Leuko edited "Virtual Community" and I like to see whom I'm co-editing with. FWIW, I never heard of "mashable.com" -- and I've been in the social networking world for 40 years. It may be a nice blog, but it is not "the social networking blog" -- even though that is it's subtitle. Doubt that anything is, but I'd pick danah boyd's blog if I had to. I had a look, and it does seem to be a broad, useful NPOV summary of the commercial side of social networking sites. As reliable-seeming as a newsletter would be. So thanks for calling it to my attention. Bellagio99 14:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Interesting - I am relatively new to the SN world - I got involved a shade under a year ago, coming from a background of media mining/text mining and Mashable is the only blog that everyone I've come across (until now!) knows of. Indeed, it is considered a reliable source all over Wikipedia as noted below. :) Greg.harvey 14:27, 27 June 2007 (GMT)

FC Bayern Munich Taskforce

Would you like to join a FC Bayern Munich Taskforce at WikiProject Munich? Kingjeff 20:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I didn't see the task force on the page, but I'll help out where I can... Leuko 05:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The sign up page is here. The main page is here. I haven't done anything yet with the main page. Kingjeff 14:15, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I've started on the main page. Many of the Bayern Munich players have very little in their articles. Kingjeff 20:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Gerpok and FUPEI in List of social networking websites

Hi, Leuko. Just a quick note to point out that there was only one new redlink added to the List today. The above two entries were previously considered acceptable SN websites, with their own articles, until yesterday - it appears that both articles have been deleted, causing the redlinks to appear. Although this does not affect anything, I thought you would like to be aware. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 19:53, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Discrimination against osteopathic medicine

Hi! Could you add your thoughts on the POV of the Talk:Discrimination against osteopathic medicine and your suggestions? Thanks. Osteopathic !Freak ^talk 01:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Infield Parking reply

Thanks for the reply. I take your point about advertising - since re-reading I realised you're right and it reads too commercially in places. My apologies! I'm too close to it, I guess! Re-written for your review and any feedback gratefully received.

I'm glad you agree Scene Daily is a reliable source, indeed, it is used as a source here: NEXTEL Cup (trophy), but your stance on Mashable is at odds with Wikipedia as a whole. Mashable.com is cited as a source in many Wikipedia articles - here are the first five when I searched, all citing Mashable, which have been permitted without question:

I hope you will review your decision regarding sources, in light of the treatment of these sources in other articles, by other editors, and I also hope I have now cleared up all of the "flags" against this article so it can stick:

Reliable sources cited
Advertising style of writing withdrawn/edited

Look forward to your response.

Thanks!

Sorry for the delay, been busy, I'll take another look at it, but a quick scan and I am not really convinced yet. WP:ININ. Leuko 01:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Regarding St. Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine

Hello, I'm a representative of St. Christopher Iba Mar Drop College of Medicine. I would like to be granted access to the Wikipedia in order to update it thoroughly and with detail. In order to verify my relationship with St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine, I can upload a text file with a word you give to me on www.stchris.edu and www.scimd.com since they are both in the possession of the school now. Please contact me as possible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SCIMD (talk • contribs).

Well, a couple of things. Since this is Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, you do not need to prove your relationship to the school to anyone in order to edit. You can not edit the article because it is protected, and your account must be at least 4 days old before you can edit. However, I would caution you that editing articles about entities that you have a business relationship with or other conflict of interest is strongly discouraged per WP:COI. Please familiarize yourself with WP's policies. Thanks, and let me know if you have any questions. Leuko 01:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Shared Interest

Dear Leuko

As you probably can see, I'm a new editor on Wikipedia. I'm unable to understand why you think the section on Why Fair Trade? is a soapbox. My intention is to explain the point of the Society's existence in a neutral, factual manner. I would be most grateful if you could be more specific about your objection. Thanks for your guidance. Simem007 22:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Sorry, maybe I am mistaken, but the way I read it, it sounds like an extolation of the virtues of fair trade. Seemed like WP:OR soapboxing, contrary to WP:NPOV. Maybe we can discuss it on the article's talk page to get a greater consensus of editors, but I would suggest citing reliable sources when covering the mission of the organization in a neutral way. Much less likely to be deleted then. Hope this helped, and let me know if I can be of further assistance. Leuko 01:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Pownce

Hi. Regarding the above inclusion in the List of social networking websites. I have no doubt that it qualifies as a social networking website, which is why you re-added it I suppose. What I cannot accept is that it is notable, having only been launched less than one month ago, and admitting to "unknown" usercount. The article does attempt to assert notability; however, the facts seem to prove against it actually being a notable social networking website. I would like your thoughts before I remove it once again. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 18:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Bump! because I really would like to get shot of it. :) Ref ^(chew)(do) 15:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I had the page open, but somehow forgot to reply. The article does assert some notability, so not a CSD candidate, but do I think it is notable yet? No, not really, even though it has a couple of mentions/references. The article has been through a recent WP:DRV that suggested re-listing at WP:AFD, which I don't think was followed through on. Maybe this would be a route to take. Leuko 22:15, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Not me! See User talk:ElKevbo#Pownce for why. Best wishes. Ref ^(chew)(do) 22:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

MCAT

Hi Leuko, I've seen you edit (or at least protect from vandalism) the MCAT page often. I recently added a history section to the article and would love your feedback regarding it. Did I add too much info/details? I got all the info from a secondary source, which is cited in the first paragraph. I look forward to hearing from you. BlueAg09 (Talk) 03:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, it was actually very interesting to read. I don't think it is too much, and it is definitely encyclopedic content. I've moved the citation up to make it more clear that it pertains to the entire section, and I've added the WP:PMID for easier access to full-text. Thanks for your contribution! Leuko 02:01, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Students Association of the Faculty of Arts

Thank you for putting this up on AFD. I hadn't had a chance yet to get to it after the failed speedy. --GreenJoe 01:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I gave it some time to develop with a {{notability}} tag, but I think the SD criteria were met - I really didn't see any assertion or indication of notability. Leuko 03:11, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Help with a listing

Dear Leuko,

I posted a listing and you wrote to me with a message saying it appears to be promotional for our company. I'm trying to list our company name to a record on Wikipedia and it is not my intent to make it promotional but more historical - I have changed and sumbmitted the following entry - can you be so kind as to help and advise me on what you see wrong with this? I would very much appreciate it. InsuranceWiki 21:34, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see WP:SPAM and WP:COI. If you have any further questions on why promotional material about your company is not appropriate for an encyclopedia, please let me know. Leuko 06:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Article Deletion

Dear Leuko,

You deleted an article I wrote called Experience Project with speedy deletion because of notability. I'm happy to provide references (the site has been covered in CNET, Wired, Stanford Daily, Planet.nl, Genbeta, Download Squad, Webware, Chicago Tribune, and more), but please restore the article-- it took me a very long time to write it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephine2007 (talk • contribs)

Sorry, but I did not delete the article, and can not restore it. You will have to contact User:Marasmusine, who was the administrator who deleted the article. Sorry, and good luck with the article. Leuko 23:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

resistance was futile

"Does that mean you are withdrawing the nomination?"

It meant that resistance was futile. Spa toss 16:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

QQ

Hi Leukos,

I don't understand what you were talking about. QQ is internally linked. I followed the same format as all the other entries on that page. The wiki QQ page is out of date, ref: http://www.danah.org/papers/worksinprogress/SNSHistory.html "The Chinese QQ instant messaging service immediately became the largest social network site worldwide when it implemented SNS features (McLeod, 2006)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shalmanese (talk • contribs)

Hi, sorry, but the wikipedia article just mentions that it is an IM client, therefore I removed it from the list of social networking websites, because it is not a social networking website. Leuko 04:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I noticed that your edits were impressive and so I've decided to award you this Original barnstar! Wikidudeman ^(talk) 22:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Help Request

Leuko - I posted an article at the request of my employer. The article is Eastern Municipal Water District. You tagged it stating it could be a COI as well as needing more references. Can you please tell me, specifically, what parts are a problem? Also, could you help me to improve this article? I've tried comparing it to our parent company Metropolitan Water District and can't see the difference. Thank you. Emwd.len.hughes 18:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I have deleted the tag. The tag is valueless without proper comment being made by the editor placing the tag. Leuko, please by all means re-tag but provide an explanation for doing so on the talk page. We ain't psychic! :-)

While articles created by closely associated editors are not always desirable, this seems to be a perfectly well-written article, nobody is making any wild claims for/against the company. There appears to be no vested interest being paraded here and use of COI on this occasion seems a) overkill and b) to be forgetting WP:AGF I have myself edited articles that I am closely connected with (my village's entry, for example) and no doubt you have done the same. It is common for us all to be drawn to subjects close to us in various ways: we can't tag 'em all COI.

Emwd.len.hughes is also presented with an impossible situation: being told not to remove the tag without resolving the issue... except that you present no issue except his closeness to the company. The only resolution would be to delete the article! I repeat: Emwd.len.hughes shows no sign of writing a puff piece, unless you can point to something in the article that suggests otherwise, so AGF comes into play.

So, I put the ball in your court, reversing the situation: please do not re-tag this article unless you can resolve the problem of where a demonstrable instance of COI actually lies. Of course, I can just check his facts (easily done), blank the page and paste 'em in again under my name (no COI here!) which would resolve the problem but is, I am sure you will agree, absurd.

Kind regards Vacant Stare 20:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Update: have moved this to the article's talk page where it should have been discussed in the first place. Probably best if we comment there from now on, allowing third parties to add their 2 cents. Vacant Stare 21:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. Just FYI, accusing someone of not WP:AGF is not AGF as well. I will respond to the comments made regarding the article on its talk page. Leuko 00:48, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Incorrect Image

Hello. I recently uploaded an image, which was not fair use. I want to change it, and I uploaded a new version of the file. However, the article is not using the correct image. Image is here Thank you. --Jimbo Herndan 00:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, what is the article? Leuko 01:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Nm, figured it out, and I believe I fixed it. Most likely just a caching delay. Leuko 01:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

author of spigit page - need to understand how this is not relevant and what you need to make this relevant

Can you help me understand what is nor necessarily standard here? This would be really helpful. Article is spigit.

Thanks, jojo123450

The website must meet the WP:WEB notability inclusion criteria to have an article in Wikipedia. I don't believe it does. The best thing to do is to cite reliable source coverage of the website in mainstream media. If you have any more questions, let me know. Leuko 00:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

As the author of a page, spigit, can I add links to the page as reference sources, or does this need to be discussed on the talk page?

Thanks,

jojo123450

You are allowed to add references to your article, but you are not allowed to spam your link into multiple WP articles. See WP:SPAM and WP:EL. Thanks. Leuko 02:08, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Hersfold ^(t/a/c) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for the revert. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Leuko 03:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Are you seriously going to edit war over this?

I can't quote the relevant criteria as part of the in-line discussion due to its formatting, so I'm leaving it at the bottom. Italia^vivi 16:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Then link to it, please. I think everyone participating in AfD's have read WP:WEB once or twice. Leuko 16:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry you intend on edit warring due to something so simple as quoting criteria. I doubt those participating in this AFD have read WP:WEB, especially not the ones who followed me there from unrelated disputes. Please cease reverting, thanks. Italia^vivi 16:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Then the closing admin will disregard arguments not based on the applicable policies and guidelines, such as WP:WEB. I am sure the closing admin knows what WP:WEB says, so there is no need for it. Please cease reverting, thank you. Leuko 16:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Please correct your false accusation that I "copied the entire text of WP:WEB into an AfD." I copied the three notability criteria, nothing more. Also, please do not edit the content of my comments. Italia^vivi 17:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I never edited the content of your comments, please correct your false accusation. Leuko 17:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

It was cautionary advice; I have incorporated my remark into my comments, do not move it to the Talk page as you have done with other text. Now please correct your false accusation of my "copying the entire text of WP:WEB into an AfD," thanks. Italia^vivi 17:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Please see my comments on the article's talk page, where all further conversation should take place. Thanks. Leuko 19:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Your note

Hi Leuko, I am currently under some serious pressure IRL, but I'll take a look and try to help once I'm freer. Thanks, Crum375 15:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, reply at your talk. Leuko 15:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

regarding kell high school

i shall find references then. i do however see that i put a name after this particular person's offense and i would be glad to not include that for that particular piece of information isn't important to Kell.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Connormcmenamin (talk • contribs) 21:34, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

It would still be unverifiable, so you would need to WP:CITE a reliable source before including it. Leuko 22:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)