User talk:NawlinWiki/Archive 90

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

Please sign your comments by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ).

Wondering why your pages were 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).

I'm not sure if I'm doing this right (talking), but you swiftly deleted the Red Durkin page, and I mistakenly have been working on Red durkin not knowing how to re-create the proper page or transfer the content. She is not a "blatant hoax", she is a real and important person who is readily google-able with factual information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexdoesfletcher (talk • contribs) 04:30, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Producer Profile

Hi @NawlinWiki my article about Gabriela Bacher has been deleted. She is a well-known German film producer with a lot of international influence. What can I do create an article which will not be deleted? Thanks a lot! Daniel . --danielgoihl (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:09, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You would need to cite reliable independent sources (see WP:V) to show that Ms. Bacher meets our notability standards (see WP:BIO). NawlinWiki (talk) 13:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dogfight

my page is gone. --Hellapad20201 (talk) 14:58, 2 September 2014 (UTC) umm sorry i miss typed Dogfight 1942. --Hellapad20201 (talk) 15:04, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Centre for Excellence for Looked After Children in Scotland

Hi, I would like to request that the article for Centre for Excellence for Looked After Children in Scotland (CELCIS) be restored. I have no connections to the Centre but understand that it is a noteworthy institution. I would be happy to edit the article, so that any content that is self-promotional is removed from the article. Drchriswilliams (talk) 15:12, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article that I deleted was a cut and paste of the organization's mission statement, written in first person ("Our overarching aim is to improve the outcomes and experiences of children", etc.). It would probably be better if you started a new article from scratch. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 15:17, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I would agree that under these circumstances that the decision to take the content down was correct. I will start another from scratch rather than trying to rework it. Thanks for your help (and sorry if I posted in the wrong place on the page originally!) Drchriswilliams (talk) 15:31, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The new Adobe page initiative

Hey NawlinWiki, Thanks for your interest in this page. I appreciate the advice you dropped on my talk page. As you can see on my userspace here ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bostonscribe/sandbox ) I have solicited help and comments in this direction. In addition, I have contacted directly other editors who gave some great advice along the same line as yours. However, I noticed that the most recent comment on the real Adobe Systems Talk page is around January 2011. Therefore, I have concluded that it may take quite some time before I hear from someone. If there a direct way, someone can merge these two articles (the best of both), I will be most happy. Thanks Bostonscribe (talk) 15:24, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Pingpongo

Hi: I won't be undeleting this, but I note that rather than A11, it should have been A2: as created, it was an import of es:PingPongo, and that has references indicating it's a real game that has been played at events in Latin America and in Norway. I've dropped a note to the editor who created it here telling them to only create articles in English here. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:56, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that - the editor created it again in English, so I've undeleted the earlier versions for the sake of attribution. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore the page "Russ David Wilson"

I don't understand why my page was deleted? There are countless others like it (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_Trammell). I also want to copy the content that I created and now it's gone. Can you please restore it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Russelldwilson (talk • contribs) 20:00, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore the page Vahan Jewelry

Our page Vahan Jewelry was deleted on the grounds that segments of text were copied from the website http://laurays.net/vahan-jewelry.htm and therefore was in conflict with the copyright terms. The truth of the matter is, Lauray's is a retailer of ours and was given permission to use text from the official Wikipedia page in order for them to share the history of Vahan Jewelry. Therefore, in fact it is Laurays, who has copied the text from our Wikipedia page and not the other way around. The reason this has turned into a problem is that we have recently updated the Wikipedia page for Vahan Jewelry with some additional information and resubmitted it as a new article. The owner of the Lauray's website can corroborate this fact. What steps can we take to restore the deleted page, as it seems we missed the opportunity to contest the speedy deletion? CedricDC (talk) 16:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not there is a copyright violation, the deleted article was impermissibly promotional. It talked about the current owner's "true passion" and said "the Calousdian brothers have evolved the brand and successfully perpetuated the family's legacy of making irresistible designer jewelry". We don't allow advertising. See WP:SPAM and WP:NPOV. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:45, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CedricDC I would suggest that you read the policy pages that NawlinWiki has linked to. Your Draft:Vahan Jewelry has the same WP:NOTADVERTISING problems as the article that was deleted. You can fix these before the draft is assessed. If you don't it is highly unlikely that it be moved into article space. MarnetteD|Talk 19:18, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
MarnetteD Thank you for this feedback. We've taken some time to review our article and edit out large portions which were likely to be interpreted as promotional. Would you mind taking a look at this draft to let us know if you feel it is suitable for article space?CedricDC (talk) 18:51, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)Cedric: who is this "we" for whom you speak? --Orange Mike | Talk 01:53, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for removing the legitimate, universally accepted truth of israels and (zionism as a whole) deep seated problems with inherent racism. You're doing a good job defending the indefensible. Nastyaftertaste (talk) 16:39, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We do try to maintain a neutral point of view around here. Included in that is not accepting that something is a "universally accepted truth" just because you (or any other editor) says so. NawlinWiki (talk) 18:43, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Sounds like somebody's caught The Truth™. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:02, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the cleanup, I have a feeling im going to have to invent a "Detect and auto-revert Evlenkis's socks" bot. Amortias (T)(C) 19:06, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And now an IP's popped up User:197.156.77.192. Amortias (T)(C) 19:08, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More revisions that need reverting

Hi. I noticed that you reverted inappropriate edits by Keith0500 to the Stephen Curry article. I noticed that he did the same kind of revision to several other articles on basketball players, including Damian Lilard and Serge Ibaka. Thanks. JonathanCinSF (talk) 20:49, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editor?

Tell me this is not a paid editor, or someone with a conflict of interest. (Search Google for Rachleff and Califano, and you'll see the connection is the Damon Runyon Cancer team.) - 2601:B:BB80:E0:F109:7FA8:471:3F5D (talk) 11:00, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you much for your guidance. We have gone ahead and revised our wording - ensuring that language that may be viewed as promotional in nature has been neutralized. Appreciate your insight! — Preceding unsigned comment added by General Re (talk • contribs) 14:24, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CSOC 2015

You have deleted CSOC 2015 page. There are several articles/pages about academic conferences in Wikipedia. {{OTRS pending}} is pending. There is no reason for deletetion.

The reason was that the page was, more or less verbatim, the flyer publicizing the conference. We don't allow advertising, see WP:SPAM. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:55, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday Publishing

Firstly apologies, I did not read enough of the guidance on publication before creating this page, I believe I should have mentioned that I work for Sunday and manage our online activity. I was looking for something to this effect, but didn't see it. That, however, was my oversight.

In terms of notability, as far as this can be applied to any commercial activity, I guess I would have hoped that this was established in accordance with all of the five bullet points under Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline, largely as demonstrated by the large number of online references from reputable external sources, including professional recognition in the form of awards. Additionally, Sunday has many clients that are featured within Wikipedia, as documented.

This was not an attempt to use Wikipedia for blatantly promotional activity - I tried hard to provide external corroboration for as much of the included information as possible - and if you can suggest how this content might be improved to a level considered satisfactory I'd greatly appreciate it. T1kenobi (talk) 16:06, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First, I don't think the within-industry awards satisfy our notability guidelines, WP:CORP. But more importantly, the article shows why we strongly discourage people from writing about their own company. Wikipedia can't be taken as endorsing statements like "Sunday creates compelling and effective content". See WP:SPAM and WP:NPOV. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:27, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your quick response, much appreciated. I absolutely accept that the statement you mention was a mistake - I had major misgivings about including it (although it also had references) and was not surprised to see it removed (which actually seemed to happen before you reviewed the article, so I'm not sure if it's still pertinent?).

Notability - I was *not* at all suggesting that industry awards were the only means by which the piece met the notability criteria, although I wouldn't have thought it counted for nothing (Oscars, Grammys, etc etc). The 'General notability guideline' is broken down into 5 bullet points, as far as I could see the article could be said to satisfy each of them, to some degree at least - this was the intention of the 19 references included. If you disagree, it would be good to hear why.

I had hoped the breadth of external references, and that fact that little within the article was not qualified by at least one of these, would be deemed acceptable. It would be easy for me to show you much poorer examples (in terms of measure-able notability) of commercial organisations within Wikipedia, I don't imagine this is something that comes as a surprise to you.

Again, I can only reiterate that the intention was to provide a source a reliable information. Believe it or not, it is something that is sought out as the name Sunday features on many of the works produced for clients.

Keen to hear what else could be required? T1kenobi (talk) 19:30, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* Hey there, I was wondering if you'd had time to consider my response? I hoped that I had covered the reasons why I felt the submission satisifed the criteria for notability. Having looked again at the text (at the point at which you deleted it), it seems like it was fairly descriptive, sticking to largely independently verifiable statements of fact. T1kenobi (talk) 10:41, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback...please?

Don't know if you're ignoring this, or just haven't spotted my attempts to get your attention?

I'm trying to find out if/why you feel the notability criteria have not been met - if you wish to refresh your memory the article is in my sandbox. As far as I can see it's factual and fits Wikipedia's notability criteria. Thanks.T1kenobi (talk) 09:08, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. I really still don't see the notability per WP:CORP. If you want to pursue this further, try Wikipedia:Deletion review. NawlinWiki (talk) 13:42, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will have a look - thanks T1kenobi (talk) 14:18, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review

I did as you suggested, I hope I did it right (the instructions seemed tricky to follow)

Deletion review for Sunday Publishing

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sunday Publishing. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. T1kenobi (talk) 14:38, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DCH oversight

An IP has now placed some of the material on Jimbo's talk. [1] Meters (talk) 22:19, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion of Page Green Earth Landscaping and Nursery

Yesterday you nominated this page for speedy deletion stating that it is not significant as an encyclopaedic content. But I would like to bring to your notice that Green Earth is the only Green Company in the region and has been working towards protecting the local people from various factors including pollution, poverty, educational degradation and political instability. This company has begun construction of 80000 sq ft Biodiversity park. It will be first of its kind in the area which will educate people about the flora and fauna of the region. There has been no such initiative since last 65 years. This is the reason I want to create a page to provide information about the company and its work. There are 3100 people which are associated with this project and are voluntarily helping to reach out to the people outside our sphere of influence. In order to accomplish this other people need to know the basis of this revolutionary work and there is no other place better than Wikipedia to share this knowledge. This company is also related to many of my recent edits and new pages related to temples, forts and clans in the surrounding area. I would like to see a page dedicated to such a work. Please make sure that this page is accepted as it will provide a common link to all the people and places in the area of its influence. By denying its presence on Wiki, you will deny 3100 people from coming forward for a better future. Abhishek Pujari (talk) 04:53, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We don't keep articles based on whether you, or I, think the subject is important. We rely on coverage by reliable independent sources. Otherwise, we're just making our own value judgments. Also, Wikipedia is not a place to publicize your project. See WP:NOTADVERTISING. NawlinWiki (talk) 12:30, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page removal

I noticed you removed a section from my talk page [2] though I don't recall seeing you in any of the related discussions, and that you used "popups" to do so. Was this action suggested by popups, and if so, what were you told by it about the section? Wnt (talk) 12:40, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Claudius Gele

On Friday I created an article on Claudius Gele, which was on the list of requested articles in the "Food, drink and nutrition" section. Apparently he had invented Puff pastry, but further research showed that the guy's name was actually Claude Lorrain (aka Claude Gellée), and the source got the name mixed up. Just wanted to clarify that up. By the way, I removed the request from Wikipedia:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment since it was not needed for the wiki. Hopefully I'll check my sources next time. FordDixon (talk) 14:25, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Thefreedomskool

I think an indef block was overkill here. User:MusikAnimal would have drilled me a new hole for such a long block. Perhaps a 30-day or six-month block would be warranted. Just my two cents. Bearian (talk) 22:34, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I feel we're digressing here, but since you brought it up, my criticism of your administrative actions is related to how you treat IPs (dynamic in particular) as accounts, as IPs may represent multiple users. Here an indefinite block is fine. You have a single-purpose account with two days of activity, a user that clearly shown they do not know how to work in a collaborative environment. I may have alternatively blocked only until the AfD is closed (as this appears to be what sparked the disruption), but based on their behaviour I'd guess this would continue to be a problem – especially if the result was delete. A long block would not be warranted with an IP as it may affect other users, not the one you're trying to block. That is not the case when dealing with accounts – they represent a single user. If they are so inclined they can make an unblock request, as they were notified by the {{uw-block}} and associated templates, which you should be using Bearian, in accordance with WP:FRIENDLYBLOCKS and as outlined at WP:NAS/B. — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of The Rob Kaufman Show

You deleted The Rob Kaufman Show page despite it clearly having multiple independent and reliable journalistic sources explaining why it is notable and deserving of an article. The page was nominated for deletion a while ago and it was overturned by an administrator. It was decided that it WAS NOTABLE. But you have deleted it at random, with no ability/time for any editors to protest on the talk page. That is very sneaky. Rawisrob (talk) 19:00, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. The only sources listed that actually mentioned Rob Kaufman were press releases. Because the Kaufman show is Internet-only, and had no coverage from reliable independent sources, it qualified for speedy deletion under category a7, web content with no credible assertion of notability. NawlinWiki (talk) 03:03, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move

Hi, NawlinWiki! I noticed that the page "Max and Ruby" was protected by you so that only admins can move it, but the show's logo and copyright spells it with an ampersand (&) and not the word "and" - could you either move it to "Max & Ruby" or unprotect it? Thanks, Momsandy (talk) 21:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't do it. Momsandy is disruptively moving articles all over the place. Ampersands and exclamation marks are not part of copyright law (trademark, maybe ... but we don't care about trademark) the panda ₯’ 21:11, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It does look like Nickelodeon uses the &, so I did this particular move. No opinion on the others, and if it is a big enough deal to discuss on the Max & Ruby talk page, please do that and I will move it back if that is the consensus. Note that the move protection had nothing to do with this dispute. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:36, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mark Balmer for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mark Balmer is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Balmer until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
(Just thought I would let you know since you PRODed the article back in 2011.) Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 20:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for following through. I am not sure what happened. I thought I blocked the account. Wikipedia is getting blocked in China a lot now and I guess it didn't save. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Peliculasgratis

Thanks for following through. I am not sure what happened. I thought I blocked the account. Wikipedia is getting blocked in China a lot now and I guess it didn't save. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A page I put up for deletion that oddly everyone who has replied seem to have just joined Wikipedia

Okay sending this to you sense I saw you were on recently, but this one Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ChnLove, notice all these keeps from people who have never been on Wikipedia until now? I would do a sock puppet report but not sure if that is the case or not. Its just odd. Wgolf (talk) 16:19, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and do a report at WP:SPI - I would say there's a good chance those are all socks of the article creator. I'm not a checkuser or I'd do it myself. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 17:57, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

-Done go check Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cracy111. Wgolf (talk) 18:50, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request at REFUND

Do you mind taking a look at this request? We seem to be running in circles arguing with the editor about this and I'd like to have your input. My guess is that the A7 was appropriate (and further, that the page will be deleted via AfD were it to be restored), but I'd prefer to have your input there just to bypass the required rigmarole at DRV should they raise the issue there without contacting you first. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 23:42, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks. NawlinWiki (talk) 01:36, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Queen of the Universe

Dear NawlinWiki,

Would you please restore the two articles recently deleted, Queen of the Universe and Ivette Saucedo? These were deleted under A7 and they do make a credible claim toward significance, but I would like to work on them over this next week to see if they can be improved and better referenced. Thank you. LaLaFoote (talk) 19:06, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For the reasons I already stated at the WP:REFUND page, I won't restore the articles to main space at this time. If you would like to work on the articles, though, I would be happy to move the contents of the deleted articles to your userspace for that purpose. If you then can find independent references to show notability, I am sure it will not be a problem to move the drafts from your userspace back to article space. Let me know if you would like to follow this procedure. NawlinWiki (talk) 01:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, yes please, let's try that. Thank you. LaLaFoote (talk) 02:44, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done, the texts are now in your userspace at User:LaLaFoote/Queen of the Universe and User:LaLaFoote/Ivette Saucedo. NawlinWiki (talk) 12:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Genender

come on man stop deletion! --Goccie (talk) 15:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No indication in the article that Ms. Genender was notable per our standards at WP:BIO. Also, please see Wikipedia is not a memorial site. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:46, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NIKSUN, Inc.

Dear NawlinWiki:

Could you please restore the page NIKSUN, Inc.? You deleted it once, and after I re-published it with an extreme lack, I'm sorry, a complete deletion, of what you deemed to be "advertisement" on the original post. The page went from 7 paragraphs of content to a simple 3 or 4. It seems as if this stripping down and omission does not meet what you feel is Wikipedia's requirements. I'm unsure as to why, because, as stated before, any persuasive verbiage that could be perceived as advertisement was deleted.

Please restore NIKSUN, Inc. I've gone beyond the tide of frustration and have moved into considering reporting you to Wikipedia authorities after reviewing your colorful talk page.

Lcd46086 (talk) 21:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC) LCD46086[reply]

Well, you started off politely, and six lines later, you're threatening me. Regardless, I've now looked at all of your contributions, and you seem to be contributing to Wikipedia for the sole purpose of posting articles that talk about how wonderful NIKSUN, its founder, and its products are. Most of the citations are to NIKSUN's own PR releases. I've deleted everything as promotional -- it's not enough for you to have taken out the word "revolutionary." If you want to pursue this further, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:25, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nawlin:

So essentially, you want different citations in support of content? Let's be clear - what you may view as promotional is not. I may be fresh to Wikipedia, but I am certainly not new to writing, encyclopedia formatting, content and the tone that comes along with it.

The next time that you delete something that I post onto Wikipedia, I'd prefer for you to provide exact references to the content that you flag. This way you can explicitly show me what you perceive I promote as "wonderful", rather than actual facts. If you're willing to give some of your time in doing so, I can actually do an editing process - something that is entirely skipped over when you delete my posts. Thank you.

Lcd46086 (talk) 18:15, 24 September 2014 (UTC)LCD46086[reply]

It's not *just* the different citations. I'll give some examples, but the point is that the whole tone of each article is laudatory and promotional.
- NIKSUN: "Catering to the network needs of" [its customers]; "find solutions to the issues"
- Parag Pruthi: "invented the groundbreaking, NetDetector, which changed the... industry"; "Widely accepted as a leading innovator"; "A passionate public speaker"
- NetVCR: "single, full-functioning appliance"; "NetVCR integrates management functions for visibility"; "indexes full packets in the NIKSUN Knowledge Warehouse".

I also think that if you're going to take this any further (see Wikipedia:Deletion review), you should disclose whether you work for NIKSUN or its PR agency. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ZPE Systems company page

Hi Nawlin - I made a page about my company ZPE Systems. We've been around since 2013 and have crafted a new software appliance that no one else has verifiably created in similar fashion, to date. I don't think the format is what's wrong - it's based on a similar company in our industry. Is the lack of "notability" the main cause of deletion? Please advise. We have been covered in the technology press already so am wondering what else is missing. Thank you for your help. Zpeken (talk) 01:33, 25 September 2014 (UTC) -Ken[reply]

Hi Nawlin, haven't heard from you. We've been covered by independent technology writers as a new upstart in the quickly virtualizing IT asset management space at least a couple of times. How notable do our references need to be? We're in one industry blog, one industry website, not Forbes yet - we're a startup. Please advise. Thank you in advance! Zpeken (talk) 00:25, 4 October 2014 (UTC) -Ken[reply]

Curtis Princewill (OluwaCurtis) page

Please i tried publishing a page about a person, you deleted it and i hope you give me reasons for the delete. I am not promoting the person in question. Please restore it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tokswab (talk • contribs) 16:59, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/OluwaCurtis/Archive. Sockpuppet blocked. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit filter

Hello. IIRC you added an edit filter a while ago to deal with the "Brian Thompson-vandal", which seems to work well, since I've seen a few incarnations of that vandal get blocked by you, so could you fix a similar filter for the name "Liam Irving"? It's being added to multiple articles by some kid in BC, Canada (judging by some IPs they used before starting to use throw-away accounts). The vandal has been blocked indefinitely multiple times, including as users Funkyfresh1984, Fancypants53 and Quack53, just to mention a few. They're currently active as Flamingo96 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (sample diffs: [3], [4]), and I'm fed up with reverting and reporting them. Thomas.W ^talk 17:30, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

help to create article about techtuba

hi NawlinWiki, can you help me out to create techtuba article? I tried it but delete this page. --Gucci84 (talk) 10:05, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deleted because it contained promotional language like "Techtuba is one of the best and excellent tech support brand, providing support to small businesses and consumers. Techtuba with a growing ability has proven its standard of services". Aside from this, the article did not indicate that the company was notable per our standards at WP:CORP, by citing reliable independent sources per WP:V. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion of Guest-tek

Greetings NawlinWiki,

My article on Guest-tek was marked for speedy deletion earlier this month for (A7: Article about a company, corporation or organization, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

Since then I have resubmitted, having added a sentence about the impact of Guest-tek's acquisition of rival iBAHN on current customers and about their innovative product myAway TV. Once again this was marked for deletion.

As this is my first Wikipedia article, I would be most grateful if you could provide some guidance on possible ways to edit my article and what potential info. could be added to satisfy the A7 requirement and have my article published.

Thank you very much.

Both versions of the article were promotional in nature, see WP:SPAM. Also, all of the sources cited were either Guest-tek's own website, or PR releases by Guest-tek on other sites. We require notability to be shown by *independent* sources, see WP:V. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WriterFella```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by WriterFella (talk • contribs) 21:25, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Scrumpchescakebigbootyjudie

You probably want to pick up User:Scrumpchescakebigbootyjudie too. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:34, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help Understanding FLIPNOUT deletion

Hi I'm trying to post my first Wiki article and I seem to have run into some issues in spite of my efforts. I received the following notification

21:49, 26 September 2014 NawlinWiki (talk | contribs) deleted page FLIPnOUT (A7: No explanation of significance (real person/animal/organization/web content/organized event): G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)

If I remove the blurb about the owner's information will this pass muster? I'm having trouble understanding which parts are being interpreted as advertorial. How can I address this issue? I double checked the guidelines before I posted, perhaps I misunderstood a thing or two. A similar business (linked below) also has a page with similar content and seems to be approved. Can you please help me gain some insights into what needs to be done?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_Zone

Bweiser86 (talk) 22:08, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)The article was deleted because there was no explanation of the significance of the subject, which even without the advertising tone would have been sufficient reason for speedy deletion. Sky Zone does not "have a page"; there is an article about Sky Zone, which has not yet been deleted. Do you understand the distinctions being drawn here? --Orange Mike | Talk 00:22, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the promotional content, the Flipnout article did not indicate how that business met our notability standards (see WP:CORP) as shown by reliable independent sources (WP:V). The Sky Zone article cited multiple independent sources. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:49, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Leafit????

I am curious as to why you deleted my wikipage of Leafit???? The page is not about a website so to speak it, I was creating a wiki page about the company itself and what it is, I planned on working on the wiki-post/page in my free time to further explain about the Company. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChristianS22 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article did not indicate that the company is notable per our standards at WP:CORP, and did not cite any reliable independent sources per WP:V. Also, it read like an ad for the company, see WP:SPAM. NawlinWiki (talk) 02:34, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Clam Sentinel

I am sure being a little bit rude but maybe I am reading the Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#A7 wrong, which says No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events) so it doesn't apply to software at all. I contested the deletion of the page but the page was bulldozed without responding to my notes. Very disappointing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siavoshkc (talk • contribs) 14:38, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of ARANZ Geo Ltd

Hi, could you please explain why this page was deleted? What was the main problem? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leapfrog3d (talk • contribs) 21:29, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because (1) the article was written in a promotional tone, with glowing adjectives about the company, its people, and its products, see WP:SPAM and WP:NPOV; (2) the article did not cite reliable independent sources (see WP:V - the company's own website is not an independent source) to show that the company meets our notability guidelines, WP:CORP. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Gurnow page

None of the Michael Gurnow page can be verified. It was all sourced with primary references (why it was listed for removal). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maldoror2 (talk • contribs) 15:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That still doesn't mean that you blank the page and replace it with "Michael Gurnow is poof." See WP:POINT. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:00, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Gurnow and The Edward Snowden Affair Wikis

check the histories, I was the creator of both pages and I violated wiki policy of primary source documentation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maldoror2 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. In the future, the way you ask for deletion of an article where you were the only writer is to tag it {{db-g7}}. Also, when you post on a talk page, please sign your post with four tildes, like this ~~~~. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 16:05, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for deleting The Snowden Affair wiki