User talk:NawlinWiki/Archive 60

This talk page is archived every month (if I remember). The older pages are indexed at User talk:NawlinWiki/Archives.

Please sign your comments with four tildes (~).

Wondering why your article was speedily deleted? Check this list first.

Do you want to move a page that I've move-protected? Discuss the move first on the article's talk page. If there's a consensus for the move, let me know and I'll unlock the page.

Please add all comments at the bottom of the page (or I may not be able to find them).

Rick Smith deleted

I would like to know why Rick Smith's page was deleted. I am NOT using the page for promotion or advertising, it is simply a biography of his business. Please let me know what I need to delete out of his page to be able to post it without deletion.

TiffanyPerkins (talk) 21:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC) TiffanyPerkins[reply]

I note that every article TiffanyPerkins has created contains promotional puffery here and there. All have been deleted for that reason. It seems evident that this is a PR person writing articles for clients. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:45, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it looks like you're here to write laudatory articles about sports agents. Each article includes language like "unique and innovative approach", "invaluable to clients", or "brings a unique perspective". Wikipedia is not a means for you to help these agents win more clients. See WP:SPAM and WP:NPOV. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:58, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why :(

on your page you said your open to being slapped with trout and then you give me a warning for it!

Bobynboy (talk) 16:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm open to it if there's a good reason. Giving you a warning for making a personal attack on another user is not a good reason for a trouting. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Belanger Deletion

I had two independent references, one a highly acclaimed national new's paper's web-site and the other a local publication, creating an article about a politician who has ran a campaign in both a federal and a provincial election. The same politician, is noted in other wikipedia pages, as a candidate in the 2011 ontario provincial election.

Did I not create the page reference properly - you deleted it, REALLY quickly. Almost as if you didn't look at my references.

This was the first page I have ever written or tried to create. Please advise, if I did something incorrectly. Freeslave84 (talk) 15:01, 8 October 2011 (UTC)Freeslave84[reply]

He has been cited on [[1]] Wikipedia page, as well as others, as part of the leaders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freeslave84 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia itself is not a reliable source to show that someone is notable - you could have added Mr. Belanger to the Ontario Party page yourself. You need to find independent sources (see WP:V) to show his notability per WP:BIO. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:36, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, "member at large" of a provincial minor party doesn't satisfy WP:BIO. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - - - I know, not alone, it doesn't. But I had more material. You're being ignorant. Freeslave84 (talk) 17:38, 10 October 2011 (UTC)Freeslave84[reply]
  - forgive me, I'm new to Wikipedia - I thought that as an admin, you could look at the source of a wikipedia page somehow, to see that I did not add a reference to him myself. Freeslave84 (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)Freeslave84[reply]
  - FACT: Matthew Belanger meets the notability criteria for politicians, because #3 escapes to the general notability [[2]] Freeslave84 (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)Freeslave84[reply]
  - FACT: Matthew Belanger meets the General Notability guidelines, the two independent references I provided (Globe and Mail, and Oshawa Local News Paper, did an interview of him. Freeslave84 (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)Freeslave84[reply]
  - OPINION: It appears to me, the article on Matthew Belanger, should have been flagged as "unclear: deletion should be the last resort.", where deletion - not "quickly deleted".Freeslave84 (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)Freeslave84[reply]
  - QUESTION: This other Libertarian candidate, Jeffrey McLarty, has had more news coverage than Matthew. Google News him, notice the different sources: [[3]]. Would he count as notable?Freeslave84 (talk) 16:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)Freeslave84[reply]

- The two news articles aren't *about* Mr. Belanger - they merely include him in lists of candidates. If merely being a candidate doesn't confer notability, then an article that merely says "he was a candidate" doesn't show notability. NawlinWiki (talk) 03:59, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - you've just proven, you didn't even visit the links I referenced. There was a 578 word interview, on just him. It wasn't just a list.
  - You, are in the wrong on this. I think your speedy deletion was an atrocious abuse of power. Who can appeal this speedy deletion with? Freeslave84 (talk) 17:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)Freeslave84[reply]
    - You want Wikipedia:Deletion review. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

- Regardless of if I am right or wrong, you've made my first wikipedia experience, a horrible one, by clearly not reading everything I've written/referenced related to an extremly speedy deletion. You act as if the facts I present, are independent and not cumulative. So, in your mind, if you can dismiss one of them, the rest must be dismisable as well. Freeslave84 (talk) 17:46, 10 October 2011 (UTC)Freeslave84[reply]

If you were telling the truth, we might listen to you. The reference you gave included an article in which Belanger was briefly interviewed, along with a half-dozen other candidates. That does not meet your false description, "a 578 word interview, on just him". So, all you could offer was that he was covered briefly in a single article. That does not meet our standards of notability for politicians. I would say the same if this were an NDP, a Tory or a Grit. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

lock this one for good

idiots from same forum named are self promoting and advertising themself through en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BetaArchive

their wiki "article" is garbage they post smallest amount of worth info, and the rest is their website statistics and server speed/configuration info

and their talk page is constantly being edited (read removed) by same members of that forum to hide the truthful facts for shutting them down on wikipedia

higher staff intervention is needed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Day2Die (talk • contribs) 20:59, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article is up for deletion at WP:AFD - we will let the discussion play out there. NawlinWiki (talk) 03:57, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RevDel request

~~Please RevDel this per CFRD #2, borderline #3. Thanks! —KuyaBriBri^Talk 19:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)~~[reply]

Edgar181 (talk · contribs) took care of it; please disregard. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 19:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dividend policy ‎

Hi, I am still editing the article, also please tell me what are the issues? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikita.agarwal (talk • contribs) 19:00, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the article to Dividend policy, and she probably saved a section after that. I've dropped a note on her talk page. utcursch | talk 19:03, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

yes...that did happen :(

but i am still editing it and will provide all relevant references by the end, sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikita.agarwal (talk • contribs) 19:05, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Growlers

Copyright violation too, see http://thegrowlers.com/about

Please review these blocks

There was a bug in MediaWiki 1.18 that caused blocks made via the API to have talk page access disabled when it should have been enabled. This also affected scripts such as User:Animum/easyblock.js. Please review the following blocks to make sure that you really intended talk page access to be disabled, and reblock if necessary.

23x00 (talk · block log · block user) by NawlinWiki at 2011-10-13T20:25:18Z, expires infinity: [[WP:Long term abuse|Long term abuse]]: [[User:Tile join]]

If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to post at User talk:Anomie#Allowusertalk issue. Thanks! Anomie ⚔ 02:09, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thai titles

Hi NawlinWiki. Could you take a look at this discussion and comment? Thanks. 28bytes (talk) 19:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galveston Pirate SC

I closed this as "delete" back in March but an editor has asked for a Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 October 14. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:25, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Semiprotected on svwp

Just to let you know, I've semiprotected your user and talk page on svwp. GameOn (talk) 09:18, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! NawlinWiki (talk) 12:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page on deleted article

Just fyi, a talk page ([4]; wikilinks show up as a redlink) appears to be still up, even though you've already deleted the article Becky owen itself. You can probably pop over and delete it whenever you get a chance; I've tagged it for speedy deletion per G8. No rush, you seem to be busy; good job and keep fighting the good fight! Writ Keeper (talk) 17:28, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ginger or Mary Ann? (Gilligan's Island)

1962monroe has now re-created their article that you re-directed to Gilligan's Island. Shearonink (talk) 20:49, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Another article question

Would you be willing to protect China Anne McClain? There has been a large amount of vandalism over these past days, thanks. SwisterTwister talk 21:37, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Semi'd for 10 days, thanks. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Underearners Anonymous article

I'm impressed that you chucked my article so quickly! But Underearners Anonymous is a real organization that has been written about by THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, etc. If you can restore my article, I can add these sources. Promise. Please advise via email to edw@panix.com, if possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eweinber (talk • contribs) 21:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful People (Non-profit)

Your PROD on Beautiful People (Non-profit) has been contested by the author of heh article. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

REC Caucasus page

Hello, I am the representative of REC Caucasus (http://rec-caucasus.org/) and we are highly motivated for our article to appear on Wikipedia, as it would useful for readers. But I have found that the article with the same headline and information was previously deleted, so I would be grateful to know the reasons to avoid any inconvenience this time.

Thank you in advance,

REC Caucasus — Preceding unsigned comment added by REC Caucasus (talk • contribs) 07:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk-page stalker) You should not be editing about your employers, nor should you have a username that gives the impression the account is shared. —Jeremy v^_^v ^{Components:V S M} 15:31, 24 October 2011 (UTC)#[reply]

Philip Virgo page rejected from 23 Sep 16.49

Hi, You were right - the information submitted on 23 Sep did not establish notability. I didn't submit it but as an IT journalist I followed Philip Virgo over 25 years and can vouch that he is long term influential in UK politics of Information Technology, widely respected by politicans and civil servants and shapes UK government thinking on IT. Thast's why I independently have completely rewritten what was submitted to you in September, and added references that weren't there to show notability. But what's the best way of getting it to you to review? Best regards Surrey2011 (talk) 19:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Post the draft in your userspace (at User:Surrey2011/Philip Virgo), let me know when you've done that, and I'll take a look. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 19:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

=== Thank you NawlinWiki - it's in my userspace now === -Surrey2011 (talk)

I think the article probably now shows notability - it should be written more as an encyclopedia article rather than an official biography, though - more prose, less bullet points. Also, the opening sentence is too promotional: "For over 30 years he has been a leading thinker, influencer and campaigner and, since 2007, blogger [1] helping shape IT and Comms policy and awareness by all UK political parties to improve UK public service delivery". See WP:NPOV. Try rewriting it to reflect a neutral point of view, and ask me again. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 19:30, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

=== Thanks NawlinWiki - this is most helpful - I'll spend a bit of time on this and get it back in a day or two when it's ready. Again - many thanks === Surrey2011 (talk) 19:46, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SKATTERBRANE

This was re-created. Do you want to send it to AfD, or should we delete it and salt it? The newbie asserts notability by way of Premier Guitar. Bearian (talk) 00:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Second Front (Digital Performance Group) page deletion

Hello,

The page Second Front (Digital Performance Group), that you deleted was created for a University assignment that was due to be assessed on Tuesday 1st and Wednesday 2nd of November 2011. We didn't get any warning that the page was going to be deleted, never mind being put up for 'Speedy deletion'. Can I please ask that the page deletion be reconsidered until after Wednesday 2nd of November? After this date, we do not have any problem if the page gets deleted again. --TimoWardX21 (talk) 18:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a working encyclopedia, so we can't hold articles just because they are class assignments. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:26, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a "working encyclopedia", surely accurate articles about different subjects should be welcome. Why not tell us what we did wrong so we can make the appropiate changes? Because at the moment we are at a loss about what we did wrong with the ariticle and we would greatly appriciate you telling us so we can edit rather than having the page lost altogether. --RuthyRainbow (talk) 11:45, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An article would need to show that the group in question is notable (see WP:ORG) by citing reliable independent sources, see WP:V. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Maybe we can make some progress now. --RuthyRainbow (talk) 08:37, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

kitten for you!

Bobynboy (talk) 19:57, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Collapse Board deleted

I'm sorry, can you explain why a legitimate music publication Collapse Board was deleted? I've checked your list, and it doesn't seem to match your criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:05, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article didn't indicate how the site met the notability criteria of WP:WEB, and didn't cite any external sources to show notability, see WP:V. NawlinWiki (talk) 05:07, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

== So therefore if I re-create a draft page later for consideration, providing it meets WP:WEB then you may reconsider the deletion?

Yes, please re-create in your userspace as a draft, at User:Dbmurray/Collapse Board, and let me know when you want me to look at it. I think, however, you might just want to insert a sentence about Collapse Board in the Everett True article, and then have Collapse Board redirect there. NawlinWiki (talk) 14:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Altena

Category:Altena, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 05:24, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]