User talk:MelanieN/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

DYK for Dial (soap)

Carabinieri (talk) 08:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey, you were right! Your hook made the DYK over-5000 hits list for May! Good work! Yoninah (talk) 08:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Black operations

Hi there Melanie,

I was just reading the page on black operations, including the talk page. It seems you once added many examples to the page ... And now they have all been deleted. I find this annoying and frustrating. People have been trying to "improve" that page by deleting it from the start. Argh.

It would be great if you can put back your information. The page needs MORE content, not less.

By the way, I am very impressed with all your original San Diego articles. Very cool! (I'm from San Diego too :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madscribbler (talk • contribs) 18:10, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your note and your kind words. I used to have the Black Operations article on my watchlist and I can see I should have continued to keep an eye on it. I personally thought it was a good idea to list examples, but other people objected, first by watering down the section title with weasel words, then by deleting it entirely without discussion. I'm inclined to simply restore the section and request discussion on the talk page, but I'll have to give it some thought. I also have put it back on my watchlist since I can see it continues to be a vandalism target.
Please feel free to follow, add to and create articles related to San Diego. You might want to join Wikipedia:WikiProject San Diego. --MelanieN (talk) 19:55, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, you convinced me. I have restored and updated the section. If someone wants to delete it, let them get consensus at the talk page, per WP:BRD. --MelanieN (talk) 22:35, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Melanie, I just returned from the talk page and was astonished. I used to be a journalist too (before screenwriting got the better of me). I've been digging up more ammunition for the discussion. Robert --Madscribbler (talk) 20:44, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Richmond Fire Department

Hi, you may want to take another look at Richmond Fire Department as I have began rescuing it and now it has independent sources including some unambiguous in depth coverage of one of the many environmental catastrophes that occur in Richmond and that this department in particular is notorious for dealing with. I have found more sources and will be adding them, thanks for giving it a second look and if you have any input or could help expand, copyedit, or trim the article in any way please be my guest. Thank you. -Troy.LuciferWildCat (talk) 02:38, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, not convinced that this is "significant coverage" about the department - it's just normal news coverage of fires. And it appeared in trivial local papers: The Berkeley Daily Planet (a free weekly paper) and the Richmond Confidential (an online publication produced by students at Cal). BTW you have a contradiction in the article - you list two different names for the fire chief. --MelanieN (talk) 03:04, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Junior Seau memorials, etc

Hi Melanie, and thanks for your input. I'll swing by in the next couple of days and take some additional photos to upload. Most of my interaction with WP and MediaWiki has been as a developer rather than article author, so despite the fact that I've been around a while, I'm still pretty new at this. Gwsuperfan (talk) 18:52, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Unhappy

That article is not original research. This is the first time I have heard mention of wikipedia not allowing "original synthesis" too. You can't say "don't copy" and at the same time say "no original synthesis". All your articles would be deleted for being original synthesis.

This article really does not deserve to be deleted, It is not original research, please see extensive list of previously published references. It contains no original research.

I have so far not found a "synthesis" on this topic, so you could call it original, but that is no reason for it to be deleted, since so many other wikipedia articles are original synthesis. I want to appeal this decision, but I am also prepared to rewrite the article if it will prevent this deletion (it is still developing anyway).

This is my second article that has been accused of original research, and the other page was approved. Its getting annoyingTepi (talk) 18:27, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

RfD - David Schwedel

Thank you for the notification on your RfD for David Schwedel. I appreciate you taking the time to let me know what was going on. Thanks again. --Morning277 (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Help with YouthTrade deletion Page! Referred by Perdion

Hi MelanieN - I am trying to create my first Wiki page for a nonprofit organization. It was deleted and now I am trying to improve it following the Wiki rules and being as unbiased and resourceful as possible. Perdion said you are very friendly and could help, the organization is not currently in San Diego but could be there soon with its growing rate. It's called YouthTrade. They are similar to the Fair Trade movement which I was looking at for a reference. I have it on my user draft page now. I want to include similar blocks that they have that say they may not have citation but it still looks great and professional.

If there is any rescuing you could help with please let me know! I thank you very much!

Brianna Aloisio (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)Brianna AloisioBrianna Aloisio (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Brianna, and thanks for your note! I'll see if I can help you with your article at User:Brianna Aloisio/DRAFT. (I already took the liberty of adding a references section since it was begging for one.) But before we get into any improvements there, we need to know if the subject, YouthTrade, is qualified to have an article here or not. That's a separate issue from how the article is written. People don't always realize that Wikipedia has standards for what subjects can have an article here. It has to, if it is to keep its credibility as an international encyclopedia. The rule is that a subject here has to be "notable", and that means that it has been written about significantly by third parties - things like newspapers or books. Everything here has to be "sourced" to independent reliable sources, we can't just write based on our own knowledge or the organization's own web page. I assume that's why your article was deleted in the first place - that people thought it didn't have enough third-party coverage. I can't see your original article (because it has been deleted), but I will look at your draft, and I will do some additional research to see if it qualifies. --MelanieN (talk) 23:22, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, a question for you right off the bat: is YouthTrade the same thing as Youth Entrepreneurship and Sustainability, or are they different? --MelanieN (talk) 23:28, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help! YouthTrade is a project, or initiative of YES (Youth Entrepreneurship and Sustainability). The founder of YouthTrade was the president of YES - Poonam Ahluwalia. I can try to find more notable sources from our media write ups definitely and add them in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianna Aloisio (talk • contribs) 14:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, well, that's good news - because between the two names YouthTrade and Youth Entrepreneurship and Sustainability, I think there IS enough independent coverage out there to justify an article. So let's get to work on writing the article, and let's move the discussion to your talk page. --MelanieN (talk) 15:16, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Nathan Buzza

Please review Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Nathan Buzza.  Thanks, Unscintillating (talk) 22:35, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Wonderland

Excellent work!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Cathedral's

Hello MelanieN after seeing the St. Paul's Episcopal Cathedrals article I thought we can try to add to the St. Joseph Cathedral, San Diego. It's a stub right now and needs a lot of work. I wanted to ask if you were interested in helping fix the article? Im having trouble finding information on the cathedral. Also I can't find a free picture of the exterior of the cathedral though I have a picture of the interior. Spongie555 (talk) 09:32, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a look. It certainly qualifies for an article under Wikipedia's criteria. I have put in a request for someone to take a photo. --MelanieN (talk) 14:33, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

See my comments on the talk page. --MelanieN (talk) 15:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Hope you're doing well. I'll be able to take a picture, and will try to do so in the next week or so (don't usually go downtown too often, but I'll make an effort to get the picture). Will let you know when I take a few. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 17:28, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I commented on the talk page. I will start to add information later as Im not a computer right now. Spongie555 (talk) 19:01, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I cant find really much information on the cathedral especially on its history. The website I find are usually travel websites and are not helpful. Spongie555 (talk) 04:32, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Nice picture, though! ;-D --MelanieN (talk) 04:35, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes I found that picture on one of the sources you added. Now we just need some modern pictures now. I uploaded two pictures of the interior to commons but both arn't very good quality hopefully Nehrams could get better ones, First one and second one. Spongie555 (talk) 06:23, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I haven't forgot about this, just still haven't had a chance to go. I went late on a Sunday when I did, and there was still a lot of people going to a service, so I thought I'd come back when there were no people. I'll hopefully try again this week. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:18, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Finally got around to this, had a series of setbacks. The images are available in a category I started on Wikimedia Commons. I also got a picture of the flag in Hillcrest as well. Again, apologies for the delay. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:10, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hey there; as thanks for your great articles, I've granted you the "autopatrolled" userright :). Keep up the good work! Ironholds (talk) 00:04, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

No problem! The articles you've been writing are awesome :). Ironholds (talk) 00:44, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Cookie

Smallman12q has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Smallman12q (talk) 18:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

My view is absolutely extreme

I am EXTREMELY passionate about the fact that the Pink SLime article does not abide by the 5 pillars and its name does not abide by examples given in wp:naming its not NPOV. i believe that all the information regarding the pink slime and news and bad rap it got should all be included. but i also understand that that is ONE pov not NPOV. so call me extreme, but im not picking a side unless that side is NPOV and i will defend that no matter what. Aperseghin (talk) 16:16, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

OBceans

Thanks for fixing that. I put it in the infobox, but it wouldn't show up, and instead of figuring out why I fell asleep on the couch. I didn't think information didn't belong, though.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:57, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

%

Go ahead and report me, the styling has never been consistent and I simply attempted to standardize it based on what the MOS allows, and it highly recommends fifteen percent not 15%, 115% not 115 %, etc. In fact earlier in my editing for this article I have worked on ths before uncontroversially.LuciferWildCat (talk) 02:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

blah this is just a % i don't really care if the article goes against the mosLuciferWildCat (talk) 03:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

...very much. Leaky Caldron 15:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 15:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	Great job, this makes things a lot more transparent especially in an article largely written by Chevron's PR people themselves (admittedly) they did attempt to avoid breaking our rules but you have helped even out the inherent bias therein, kudos. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chevron_Richmond_Refinery&diff=prev&oldid=506566378 LuciferWildCat (talk) 20:56, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

David R. Hawkins

I noticed you chimed in on this article:

KEEP-The author does have notability according to wiki policy. The author is a legitimate writer and lecturer with books in 20 languages and a detailed bio on Wikipedia-German Language, http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_R._Hawkins . He has been shown to be notable during multiple forums on Wikipedia. The article has been RESTORED on several occasions. This article has been stripped by primarily one user, who has attempted to have the article deleted on multiple occasions.

Further discussion on talk page and request for deletion page. Personally, I have no interest in the man himself and actually don't care for his ideas but this man is notable in his field. Iconoclast.Horizon (talk) 19:24, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I think that just because Dr. Hawkin's work has been promoted in some areas such as corporate trainings and international circles that people should be made of aware that all of his teachings/works are not all that they are cracked up to be. People turn to Wikipedia for that information more often than not. Iconoclast.Horizon (talk) 00:49, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for your diligent work on Stanford University and related articles. If you want to know me IRL, feel free to add me: facebook.com/andrewguyton. :)

Disavian (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
..Awww.... thanks for the kitten! And thanks for the invite, but I'm not much of a Facebooker. (Funny, isn't it, that nowadays Facebook counts as IRL?) --MelanieN (talk) 13:54, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

P.S. It's clear why you like to work on articles about Georgia Tech, but what sparked your interest in Stanford? --MelanieN (talk) 13:56, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Tuna

Hi MelanieN. Hope you've been well. Leaving San Diego yesterday, I saw a display in the airport about San Diego being a former tuna capital. There's a show about it at the San Diego History Center at Balboa Park until December 31, 2012. You might beat me there. I'll be back in time to see it in December. The display said Americans eat 3.6 pounds per person each year mostly canned, and that tuna is America's "most popular fish". -SusanLesch (talk) 23:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Susan! I remember we have discussed this before and agreed that San Diego's tuna history needs to be in the article somewhere. Time was, not many decades ago, that tuna (both fishing for it and canning it) were major industries here. For that matter, most of the "old money" in Point Loma where I live consists of Portuguese tunaboat owners or their descendants. I'll work on adding something to the article. Do you think it should go under Economy or History? --MelanieN (talk) 01:18, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't know yet (until December when I can see the show). I trust you will add it where it belongs. I just love tuna, that's all. Best wishes. -SusanLesch (talk) 03:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

San Diego as tuna capital check out the photo:San Diego once was 'Tuna Capital of World'Tuna canneries' lasting legacy[1][2][3]. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 07:05, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Y Done - per talk page with a mention under Economy, a paragraph under History, and a larger paragraph at History of San Diego. --MelanieN (talk) 23:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Well done! I went to the show at the SD History Center. The show at the airport was almost just as good. I made only one change to what you added (to credit the Japanese). Your sources and how you used them are excellent. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 21:43, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

In appreciation for the barnstar, I hereby present to you this cookie. May it strengthen you in your future editing. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:26, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Stanford University Libraries

Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 08:02, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

"DNA Tribes" request review of undeletion

Per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/DNA_Tribes, the Wikipedia article for the DNA Tribes was deleted. However, the Wikipedia entries for several other prominent DNA ancestry testing firms (such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Tree_DNA and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeneTree) were not similarly deleted. In addition to commercial testing, DNA Tribes is distinguished from competitors by publishing extensive analysis of world genetic structure (http://dnatribes.com/library.html). This deletion should be opened to further discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.105.116 (talk) 16:25, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I'm afraid I am not the right person to talk to. I was merely one of the people who made a comment at the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DNA Tribes. That discussion was closed and the article deleted by an administrator, who evaluated the discussion and determined that the consensus was to delete. If you want to discuss the deletion of the article, or ask that the discussion be reopened, you should ask that administrator at User talk:Crisco 1492. Feel free to ask me if you have any questions, but I am not an administrator and I have no power to do anything about your article. --MelanieN (talk) 17:07, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Beverly Hills, again

For reasons explained at Talk:Beverly_Hills,_California#Premature_close, I've opened a new RM request/discussion at Talk:Beverly Hills,_California#Requested move. You're receiving this notice because you participated in the last one. --Born2cycle (talk) 23:36, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

"Lord of Studley" hoax

I see from this that you are interested in suppressing this hoax. It popped up today in an article which I have deleted, see User talk:Stnmrtn. This is a new SPA - I wonder if it is a sock. (Having written that much I did some more searching). The history of the deleted article Ruben Canelo is odd: it was created, messy but not a hoax, by Stadleyrc (talk), and then the silly title added by Rbncnl (talk). As soon as the article is deleted, up pops Stnmrtin. I think I shall raise an SPI tomorrow - do you have any more background? Regards, JohnCD (talk)

Thanks for the note. I think you have found out as much as I know. The deleted article Ruben Canelo had a very lurid history of deletions and recreations, such that I had suggested salting it; I don't know if that was done. It might be worth salting the title you have just deleted, and any other variants. It seems there is a very determined individual behind this hoax and I agree with you that the new SPI should be investigated. --MelanieN (talk) 23:32, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

FYI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Stadleyrc. JohnCD (talk) 11:02, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Further FYI: Commons:User talk:INeverCry#Another rename request. JohnCD (talk) 13:32, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

La Playa

Thanks for the barnstar! It inspired me to write a new article: La Playa Trail. Check it out and feel free to add! Dohn joe (talk) 23:30, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

CO SH 82 DYK nomination

Actually, whenever I've submitted a late nom in the past with an excuse like that, it has been accepted, largely because of my track record at DYK. I'd rather keep working and make sure there's a quality article to link to (I'm beginning to think that we ought to expand the nom period to 30 days rather than 5 ... that made sense back when standards were lower and we had the much more disorganized and random way of reviewing that we got rid of) than submit something subpar. Would it be alright with you if I asked on WT:DYK for another review from a more experienced reviewer, if you can't do this in good conscience? Daniel Case (talk) 21:38, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I came on too strong. Actually, I think, the real rule that needs to be changed is the deadline for submissions. It seems to me that's what this proposal is really getting at. Five days made sense back when I first started submitting DYKs, in 2005. Back then we weren't even required to reference articles, there was no minimum length requirement (other than that it not be marked as a stub). The amount of total submissions was such that a whole queue could be all or mostly reviewed without separate pages. Really, I think the deadline was imposed just so we wouldn't get overwhelmed.

But now, do we really need it? The system is much more efficient, and more to the point we have more than enough hooks or potential hooks to not need to worry anymore about running out (it seems strange now to think we once did).

And it takes longer (or should) to create a quality article from scratch or expand a stub than it used to. And even if someone does, is it fair to ask them to rush it when they'll then have to wait a week or so at least just for someone to review it, much less for it to finally make the Main Page (In the old days, my nom would genuinely have missed the boat. This is probably my biggest reason for being casual about the deadline).

Maybe I'll write this up and propose it soon. Daniel Case (talk) 01:32, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

No, don't apologize. I was basically asking for a privilege that you have every reason for not being aware of; in other words I was sort of pulling rank. As a result I decided to contribute to that discussion thread about extending the deadline that you mentioned, and will continue to advocate for an extension of the deadline if the outcome is to keep it the way it is. Daniel Case (talk) 14:36, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

E-health point: you can close as keep

Since nobody else has commented after 18 days, and since we agree, I think it would be fine for you to close it as keep, and take out the tag. There seems to be an Afd backlog, and admins seem busy elsewhere; no point in bothering with meaningless bureaucracy. Also, thanks for changing your mind, always a difficult thing. Churn and change (talk) 17:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

DYK for La Playa Trail

Yngvadottir (talk) 00:02, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Rough Draft Brewing Co Deletion

Hey, I think you were a bit quick to send the Rough Draft Brewing Company page to a redirect. It had a strong mention in today's Union Tribune newspaper. Which I was trying to add at the same time as the page was sent to a redirect. Would you please be so kind as to put it back to the way it was? Or if you'd prefer I can request an undelete. Thanks for your consideration. (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.136.232.243 (talk)

You have already requested an undelete, from the closing administrator, and he told you the closure would stand. I actually thought "redirect" was generous, since I had earlier been arguing for "delete". Your additional source is not enough to make this one-year-old brewery notable, and you should not go ahead and remove the redirect as you did, since that was the result of a discussion. Things work by consensus here, and we have to abide by the consensus even if we don't agree with it.

When you feel a discussion was closed improperly, your first recourse is to talk to the closing administrator. Sometimes they will reopen the article if they feel there is a good reason. If they don't, your second and final recourse is WP:Deletion review. If you decide to do that, be sure to read the instructions first, and take a look at some current discussions so you can get a feel for it.

I can tell you have a strong interest in this brewery (in fact you might want read WP:COI to make sure you don't have a conflict of interest), and please don't take its removal personally. There is always the chance it will be restored in a year or two after it has gotten more coverage, or won an award or two (and that means a MAJOR award, like the Great American Beer Festival, not a dime-a-dozen local award). --MelanieN (talk) 03:53, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

P.S. You might also consider registering with Wikipedia so that you will have a consistent username. It's not required, but it's free and it doesn't commit you to anything. And it makes it a lot clearer to the rest of us who we are talking to. It's confusing when several different anonymous addresses are being used, and we can't tell if it's the same person or different people. (In this case it's pretty clear that both of them are you.) --MelanieN (talk) 03:59, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Your comments

Hi Melanie!

Please consider a renaming of the category, as I suggested. Your comments apply to only the original name.

Also, it's best not to begin sentences with "I appreciate that you feel strongly about ..." because it's a distraction. Please respond to the points raised, which shows respect directly. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:59, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I think your renaming suggestion was "Wikipedians working towards a uniform enforcement of civility", wasn't it? I will not comment one way or the other at the discussion - I have made my point there. But personally I feel that the renamed category would also be an "inappropriate user category" as defined at WP:User categories. It's still trying to protest or make a point, and IMO it is still divisive, with its implication that "the rest of you AREN'T interested in a uniform enforcement of civility." --MelanieN (talk) 23:19, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Balboa Park

Glad to see an article was started on the topic. Feel free to merge whatever information was collected, I'll just be happy to see that it was used. I thought I was going to have more time to work with developing the Balboa Park articles, but my editing on here unfortunately is very minimal. I'll mostly be dealing with image uploads and minor fixes for the time being. Keep up the good work on the San Diego related articles! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:32, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I've forgotten what the requirements are, but you may be able to submit the article as a DYK if it meets the length requirements when you move it to mainspace. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:34, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Let others speak

Melanie, your 42 comments at the RFC are as many as the total of the next three editors (14 each)! Slow down. Just because B2C is even worse is no reason for you to also dominate the conversation. Thanks for your input, but let's see what else we get. Dicklyon (talk) 03:36, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

What utter nonsense. There is no fixed size to talk pages. There is no line where everyone has to wait their turn to speak on a talk page. A lot of discussion can and does happen in parallel. Sure, once in a while there is an edit conflict, but that's no big deal. How much any one person speaks has no bearing on how much any others can speak. Unless they choose to be affected by it. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I find discussions more effective when they air a range of views, rather than having one editor repeatedly stating his point and telling everyone who disagrees that they didn't answer him. I think MelanieN fell into the trap of trying to answer you everywhere you demanded it, when ignoring you would have been more appropriate. But that's just my opinion. Dicklyon (talk) 01:01, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

That's a different argument, and a more valid one. --Born2cycle (talk) 01:52, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Juan Vargas

Done! Thanks for letting me know. I fixed Vargas, but I think the problem must have been caused by some edit to the template itself – as you can see, Fiona Ma and John Pérez's infoboxes have the same problem. I left a note at Template talk:Infobox officeholder about the issue. Thanks again for the tip. Delaywaves • talk 21:46, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Some falafel for you!

please see and correct my article. KERALA ROCKS! 00:23, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

from User:Harishrawat11

Sibichen K Mathew

Re. the request for review of an article on Sibichen K Mathew by User:Harishrawat11, I had spent much time and effort on editing an article[4] on the same subject following a suggestion from User:Kudpung[5] but he proved to be a disruptive editor who persisted in adding unsourced content and peacocking the article, and removing maintenance tags despite many warnings, including on sockpuppetry. So much so, that the article had to be semi-protected. I got so exasperated after awhile I left off actively monitoring the page.

Harish Rawat's ID suddenly cropped up on my watchlist as AfD nominator for a number of BLPs (13 at last count) [6], almost all of them of Indian bureaucrats, and on frivolous grounds. I saw several complaints both on his talk page and on the relevant Afd talk pages. From what I can make out, the trigger for this behavior has been the inevitable deletion of his article on Sibichen K Mathew ( a mid-level Indian bureaucrat, one of over 4,000 odd civil servants in the rank of Joint Secretary in the Indian civil services) via AfD for non-notability.[7] He has now asked you to help him out with resurrecting the article, and I felt I should let you know what happened the last time around. Cheers Sesamevoila (talk) 07:38, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I could tell there was some backstory here and I was planning to start investigating it over the weekend. This is good to know. I will take an unbiased look at the current version of the article and see where it stands on its merits. --MelanieN (talk) 14:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	thak you for analyzing the article.but i am disappointed,as many undeserving officers who are of lower rank,stature pay than sibichen and not having established notabiliy have articles on your international wikpedia.:p Harishrawat11 (talk) 00:45, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

CONFUSED

melanie, i have been searching wikipedia for the last 2 years.i have come across tivial articles about some mall in COIMBATORE,some unkown bus stand,low level apparatchiks and some useless facts.when an editor after working hard,puts an article about a notable person then it is deleted.wHY IS IT SO.CANT NEW EDITORS DO ANYTHING.THE PERSON IS NOTABLE AND I WILL GET YOU MORE REFERENCES. AT LEAST YOU WERE KIND ENOUGH TO ANALYSE MY ARTICLE AND GIVE ME A CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK.THE OTHER EDITORS JUST WANTED TO QUICKLY DELETE IT.Wikipedia is just a pain in the ass.(Harishrawat11 (talk) 01:08, 10 November 2012 (UTC))

HI

hi melanie, i am harish peridon told me that you can help me with one of my articles.can you please help me. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Harishrawat11/DRAFT

Editor Assistance Request

Hi, An admin (Peridon) suggested that you could help me and advise me in my edits.

I started my account with Wiki back in Januraury. My edits were sparse and mostly "noobish." I didn't really start editing until around Septemberish. I have encountered a problem. It seems that in my naivety I got caught up in one article alone, La Luz del Mundo, and thus this situation came about described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fordx12#Need_advice_from_Administrators

I have, before the situation that made me request assistance, made beginning attempts to branch out to other threads. Now the described situation is making me uncomfortable. As a safety, and to prevent myself from being a disruptive editor of any kind, I would like for someone to help me edit, especially the La Luz del Mundo article. By that I mean telling me if I am making a mistake, or if my proposed or past edit violates WP:NPOV or if a source is reliable etc...

I have an interest in religion, in religious movements. I would like to edit pages relating to churches, such as Jehovah's Witnesses. This church is one of my interests as well. I would like to also visit various pages. I still would like to edit the LLDM article since I have invested a lot of research and read various sources and so on. But I want to do that in a "good" way. And for that, in light of accusations and disputes, I feel that I need an independent voice in my ear, so to speak. Would you care to assist me in that regard? Many thanks for your time. Fordx12 (talk) 15:57, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

HI again. I shared your concerns about the POV issues with La Luz del Mundo article. When mentioning the history section's amount of detail, another editor seems to think that you meant that it was a problem that large portions of it came from one source (A dissertation. However I have begun reciting that source to a published book by the Historian who wrote the dissertation). Here is the editor's comment. Could you clarify what you meant? I apologize for this, I don't mean to drag you in. Just clarify what you meant. Fordx12 (talk) 22:17, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not going to get into it any further; I didn't analyze the sources. I just thought there was too much detail in the "history" section, and way, WAY too much detail in the "Worship" section. Those three paragraphs should probably be reduced to one. A Wikipedia article should not get specific about when the services are and how long they last and how many people attend each service; in fact I have deleted detailed service information from other church articles as promotional. --MelanieN (talk) 23:25, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Feedback

Hello Melanie

I have been refereed to you by another user. I was wondering if you could look at my page and give me any sort of feedback on what should be changed and added to it so I can make it go "live". If you could help me out, it would be greatly appreciated! My page is currently User:neheliski/sandbox. Thank you! Neheliski (talk) 23:49, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

To Heli and back

I've launched it at Northern Escape Heli-skiing, which may not be correct. I don't remember putting the hyphen in. If Ashlee isn't happy, I'll move it to the right version. Peridon (talk) 19:00, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

WP:Articles_for_deletion/Tangiers_International

Hi Melanie, thanks for your comments on this page. I respect your views but I would like to point out that that there is likely to be sockpuppet involvement and/or paid COI editing here. I added some more material on this page. Please let me know if you'd like further information. Logical Cowboy (talk) 06:59, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I think I will leave it as "weak keep" since there are some Reliable Sources, and notability is the question - not the author or their motivation. I do notice, in taking a second look, that one of the other sources is a Wiki mirror and I will remove it. --MelanieN (talk) 15:22, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Cmach7

Thanks for the link. We may have to do an indefinite block at some point because of WP:CIR, the way things are going - I personally don't like doing those sort of blocks, but sometimes they are sadly necessary. --Rschen7754 01:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Noticeboard

I also mentioned a specific noticeboard at WT:MED. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Clarifications

I do not support violating Wikipedia guidelines and policies. I became an "Online Ambassador/Campus Ambassador" to mitigate these issues. And WP:Bite and WP:Civil apply to everyone. You're welcome. I understand your frustration though, it's why I am involved. Feel free to communicate constructively with me at User talk:Biosthmors/Intro Neuro. Biosthmors (talk) 21:03, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I just didn't want to burden the WP:MED folks if there was a better place for the discussion. Biosthmors (talk) 03:24, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Kalyanasundaram

Hi you updated this page, I'm a bit confused on the details - in particular you say he was appointed to a role in 2006 of an organisation that ceased activities in the 1950s? I think none of the details on this page have ever really added up.--4letheia (talk) 10:16, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Good catch. I will delete that if I can't find more about it. And I will see if I can find more about the organization he supposedly founded. Normally The Hindu is considered a Reliable Source, but maybe they are just believing and printing what he tells them.--MelanieN (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

There was also an International Refugees Organisation, but it dissolved in 2002.[8] You're right that very little of this bio holds up. Too bad the discussion was closed before this could be brought out. --MelanieN (talk) 15:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, I've been quite wary of the whole thing since I saw the Facebook campaign to promote him together with a number to phone to 'find out more' about this charity. I think I might try to tidy the talk page a bit to highlight the issues. Much appreciated for your input, I felt like the only cynic for a while there. --4letheia (talk) 15:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Do you think we should ask the closing admin to reopen the deletion discussion? Or wait until things are hashed out on the talk page first? --MelanieN (talk) 19:13, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I queried the result and he just said that everyone voted to keep it as they felt there was sufficient sources to be notable, so it was kept. I feel it would add a lot more weight if we tidy up the talk page first before requesting it to be reopened. Not sure why I care so much about this one!? I think I should broaden my interests a bit :) --4letheia (talk) 19:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I hear you. It's just that dogged pursuit of Truth, Justice, and the American Way. Or something. --MelanieN (talk) 19:40, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I would agree, but I'm Scottish ;) --4letheia (talk) 19:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I've now tidied the talk page to the best of my abilities and I shall now go and lie down in a darkened room. Thanks again for your support, much appreciated :) --4letheia (talk) 20:34, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm notifying the people who commented at the AfD. My hunch is that we will wind up keeping the page, but without the wild claims. --MelanieN (talk) 20:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

The alleged Bill Clinton meeting is just the cherry on the icing on the cake of all previous claims made :)) what fun --4letheia (talk) 20:40, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

That one does kind of push me over the edge - it's so EASILY disprovable. (Did you notice that the newsletter you found seems to be from a Rotary club? Rotary also gave him the only award we can verify.) Despite my initial comment on the talk page, I am getting closer to renominating this article myself, based on the fact that almost nothing about this man is verified and there is so much mythologizing. (Maybe better me than you, since you nominated it last time.) But I want to wait a few days and see what kind of reaction we get on the talk page. --MelanieN (talk) 02:04, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Here have a kitten for restoring my faith in wikipedia, I was ready to give up and go do something more useful, but I think I might well hang around for a bit now and uncover some more scams - thanks, I think :)

4letheia (talk) 01:28, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Awww.... thanks. (LOL about "thanks, I think".) Definitely keep on uncovering scams. What drew your attention to this one? --MelanieN (talk) 15:26, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

A contact shared the claims on Facebook - when they send me these ridiculous myths is like poking an angry bear with a stick. I definitely owe you one for helping me sort this out, do let me know if there are ever any tough articles/research you need a hand with, I'm interested in just about every subject. Many thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4letheia (talk • contribs) 17:53, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm saving a copy of the talk page - so that if the article gets recreated in the future, I'll still have access to all that research. --MelanieN (talk) 20:03, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Some research is more like opening pandora's box, I find myself in original research territory which isn't wikipediaable or even public forumable - kinda wish I hadn't. Hmmm. --4letheia (talk) 01:08, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Do appreciate your kind observations on my talk page. Just noticed them. It was indeed a pleasure to research or assist with the Afd for article Kalyanasundaram. I do try and keep tabs on Afds for India. Do feel to ask me for assistance on articles. And thanks for your efforts on the Kalyanasundaram article too. regards Arunram (talk) 04:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

User talk:4letheia

replied :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4letheia (talk • contribs) 22:18, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

John Lawrence Goheen

Hi. This was a long time ago, but in this edit, among other changes, you added the following sentence to John Lawrence Goheen: "His collection of manuscripts, photographs, and correspondence, along with Jim Corbett’s and his biographical material, is in the United States". Can you disambiguate Jim Corbett? Cheers! bd2412 T 20:30, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. The reference was to Jim Corbett (hunter), who was probably a relative of his wife, but I wound up deleting it from the sentence since it seemed kind of irrelevant. --MelanieN (talk) 01:11, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Munzee

Hi,

I wrote a new article about a world wide played scavenger hunt game called Munzee. Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hanky27/sandbox

Would you please be so kind and review it so it can be rescued frome deletion?

Any hints what I should change or make better?

Thanks for your help

Regards 17:59, 27 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanky27 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your greetings on my sandbox talk page. I already have written an article about the Munzee game for the German Wikipedia, where it has been accepted without problems. No I'm trying to write the same article for the English Wikipedia. However, it has been deleted immediately. Now I want to find out what I have to change or to make better.

Regards Hanky27 (talk) 18:36, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I reworked the article and added citazions. It is now here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Munzee What do you think about it now?

Regards Hanky27 (talk) 15:38, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5