User talk:Niaz/Archive02
AfDs
[edit]Do not reinsert a speedy tag on Hamish McPherson but let the afd continue. Another admin removed it, you put it back, & I am removing it for the second time. DGG (talk) 16:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
DYK
[edit]Hi, take a look at my latest DYK about Bangali River. Regards --Tarif from Bangladesh 18:08, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
alex sass
[edit]you recently left a note condeming me for self publicity. i did not create a wiki page. a journo did. it wasnt even a terribly interesting nor positive one. i do not like publicity about my finances or health and added to your discussion saying "yes delete"... so why the public accusation of self promotion? remember its a global and often career damaging entity you play with.
globalsass@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.35.133.150 (talk) 00:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Star Campus article
[edit]I read your star-campus article on wikipedia. Nice work! Since you have a good repo with Star Campus... is it possible that through them you could request Daily Star to release a handful of images of the key people of Bangladesh to public domain? Even better if they can donate few other historical images and some images of landmarks in Bangladesh. If you can achieve this it would be a HUGE contribution for Wikiproject Bangladesh. Arman (Talk) 06:23, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- Whatever you are doing is highly commendable. No matter whether or not we succeed, it's important that we atleast try. Releasing images to public domain should be very easy. All they need to do is to publish some images on their web-site saying "We are donating / releasing these images to public domain to encourage free interchange of information." They can even think of treating this as a publicity event. You can also try to convince them that if they release low resolution images, those will not be very useful in the print media, so they will have little competitive disadvantage. Also, try to convince them that for lack of proper legal framework in Bangladesh, people are arbitarily using images from Daily star website anyway, this will simply add to the goodwill of the newspaper and allow legally using these images. Lastly you can refer them to Project Gutenberg, to convince them the value of what we are asking. Arman (Talk) 08:06, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- Wow! I really appreciate your effort to make this happen. Unfortunately allowing use of image only on wikipedia is not going to help. Since, wikipedia tries to promote free content, it does not accept materials released for wikipedia only or only academic usage. It can only use images released under Creative commons license or GFDL or public domain images. However, if you want to make the presentation, I will try my best to assist you. Arman (Talk) 09:20, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
(Anesthesia) Pulling Teeth
[edit]The rationale for putting an AfD tag on the article was made clear in the nomination. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 09:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Exactly.
[edit]Who has heard of 1st Coast Records? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gp75motorsports (talk • contribs) 14:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Elimination of user warning
[edit]Hello, why did you revert the user warning I left on that talk page? Cheers, Debivort 18:35, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- I think he did not revert it intentionally. It was mistake.--NAHID 18:42, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- No need to be extremely sorry! I figured it was a mistake, but just wanted to confirm that. Cheers Debivort 19:15, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue I (September 2007)
[edit]The September 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! -- Noetic Sage 19:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Barnstars
[edit]
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
| This is a great pleasure for me to give the first recognition to this very dear person for his great sincerity and devotion, with his ever increasing contributions!! keep it up Bhaia!!SalmanHossain 15:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC) |
List of universities
[edit]Hi Niaz. Nice work on List of universities in Bangladesh. If we can complete the tables for all universities, we have a viable Featured List Candidate in hand. Arman (Talk) 09:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- Up to 4am!!! That's too much man. Do take care of yourself, too. Wikipedia is not running away. Real life comes first. Cheers! Arman (Talk) 11:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- Congrats! It's really a good news. Hope you'll be equally active on Wikipedia when you start your studies abroad. Arman (Talk) 11:34, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
AA's RFA
[edit]Thanks for your your comments! If you need any help with admin tasks, let me know (once I've got used to these new buttons!). → AA (talk) — 13:10, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Kilrush revision 8th October
[edit]Hi Niaz,
Thanks for sorting the picture on Kilrush page (8th October). Is is possible now to close off the large blank space left on the page? I can't figure out how to remove it.
Thanks Patrick
(native of Kilrush) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patricu (talk • contribs) 18:54, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
I have been working on the world and regional debate related articles since 2006. I also gathered few debater Wikipedians to improve those articles under a wiki project named WikiProject Debating which is still in developing phase. Anyway, as a part of this project we prepared an article on World Universities Debating Championship ranking which is compiled by Colm Flynn, former Chair, World Universities Debating Council. User JJJ999 and some of his friends (I think) tagged that article for deletion. After having a lively debate it was decided at AfD to merge the World Universities Debating Ranking article with the parent one, i.e. World Universities Debating Championship article. During this debate and also after the merger, User JJJ999 is behaving in an impolite way. Today he removed merged list from main article[1] and again reverted it with some notes directly on the main body of the article[2]. He also commented on the article talk page showing his anger[3] though he didn't sign there and later on SignBot added his signature. It seems that he has a personal problem with Colm Flynn. But, it became impossible to make him understand that Wikipedia is not a ballet field for revenge. It would be really nice if you take initiative to make him understand the fact. Kind regards, -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 07:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- JJJ999 reverted his mistake after 4 minutes[4]. The addition of his commentary to the article[5] was information that could be in the article were it sourced. It was unsourced, so you were correct to remove it. However, it was not necessarily talk page material posted in article space. As for the merger, the merged information should only include sourced information. The merged information deleted by JJJ999 here, was not properly sourced, does not appear to be from a Wikipedia reliable source, and was a personal opinion of Colm Flynn that might be appropriate in the Colm Flynn article, but does not include enough explanation to make it appropriate for the World Universities Debating Championship article. JJJ999 omission of a signature probably was a mistake. -- Jreferee t/c 17:43, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Daily star.JPG
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Daily star.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 43 | 22 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:34, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue II (October 2007)
[edit]The October 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 19:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 44 | 29 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 45 | 5 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 46 | 12 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Invitation
[edit]Niaz bhai. If you have some time, please come and join us at the Wiki Meet Up next Saturday at BdOSN office. I wish you're ok. Keep it up. Regards --Tarif from Bangladesh 09:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- ha, ha, ha. Didn't think you're that far. I've heard Ireland is a beautiful country, so keep rocking while you're there. Its been raining here in Dhaka, probably because of Cyclone Sidr, Channel i is saying, this may be the strongest Cyclone ever in Bangladesh. Regards --Tarif from Bangladesh 13:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Ya, we'll remain safe, but it's really severe. In fact, it is the TOP STORY of BBC's latest world news. Things are really getting scary. --Tarif from Bangladesh 15:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 47 | 19 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
A proposal
[edit]I have a proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bangladesh/Outreach. Please take a look and share your view. Arman (Talk) 01:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 48 | 26 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue III (November 2007)
[edit]The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! Noetic Sage 19:55, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 49 | 3 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
What's my problem
[edit]That's a very simple problem - I'd like to see a bigger better Wikipedia and make my small contributions help that cause. There are no enemies here, Wikipedia is not a battleground. If I didn't ask you first that was principally because - (a) you seem to be largely inactive these days, like Uttam who I didn't contact when discussing the geographic matters he'd understand most as he works mostly for the bpy Wiki; and (b) you seem to largely non-responsive to suggestions outside a narrow band, like Bellayet who I contact only for photographic reasons as he works mostly for the bn Wiki. I had, and still have, no intention to hurt anyone. If I did that I apologize. In fact I had wanted to take on quite a few other userboxes directly created in that userspace, but apparently it's alright to create userboxes in that userspace. I hope you understand. Aditya(talk • contribs) 02:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Aditya, You wrote, (a) you seem to be largely inactive these days. If so, then why didn't you notify the uploader / user, when you tagged number of images (here)? Hope they weren't inactive, were they? And most of the deletion request (no source / other stuffs) were declined by administrators. Tagging images without notifying user is a kind of abused work. Would you please stop engaging these type of behavior? It won't help you at all.--NAHID 07:52, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I hope your three day long blitz of tagging every article and image I worked on or uploaded helped you alright. Sigh... look who's commenting on behaviors. Aditya(talk • contribs) 09:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Does not make any sense. My tagging isn't for particular editor. Since you Own all of your articles and images, you're judging it in that way. And that apparently makes your comment like hoax. After all, we want to see a bigger better Wikipedia, right.--NAHID 09:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Really? Check what you were doing on the Wikipedia between 00:49, 11 December 2007 and 00:49, 11 December 2007. No particular editor, eh? Over a 100 edits and nearly all are to pages that I edited. Funnily, none were edited by anyone but you (therefore Recent Change Patrolling don't apply). Hoax indeed. Cheers. Aditya(talk • contribs) 11:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Over a 100 edits and nearly all are to pages that I edited. Funnily, none were edited by anyone but you - You should remember this motto of WP - "The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". I thought you know this basic concept, but I was wrong. Nobody owns the articles they contribute to. To answer your rest of comments, please check WP:OWN again. Because your comments (seems like, I edited, so I own them all) still conveys with OWN. --NAHID 14:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- (inserted in the middle) Yeah sure. You started responding 6 minutes after the edit you mentioned in the thread. And you went on tagging articles and images as diverse as Christian Commission for Development in Bangladesh and Jayne Mansfield films and DVD covers of Jazmin, a pornographic actor. You couldn't have come to them as part of your recent change patrolling, for they were not edited before you did in the recent past (like the few intervening edits you made that immediately followed a recent edit). You couldn't have come to them through the Bangladesh Wikiproject or the Bangladesh category. The only way you could do that was through the page User:Aditya Kabir/My contributions.
- I don't own these articles, but I don't own a thick skull either. What's the use of repeating the same line, dear? Is it helping you much? And, oh, by the way, evidently the uploader didn't need any notification from me (he actually tagged a dozen of images uploaded by me first, before getting around to getting his images right). Besides, that - And most of the deletion request (no source / other stuffs) were declined by administrators - seems like a bit of fabrication. Did that really happen after the edit you mention? Aditya(talk • contribs) 15:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I think, we should be more tolerant with each other. We are working here together for the last few years and I am quite sure (you support me or not) we have created a bond between us. I have seen people in Bengali WP working like a family but in English WP we failed, with some rare exceptions, such as Nahid. Whenever, I was in need of any support, I found him beside me. I also received brother-like behavior from Arman Bhaia and AA. If we can convert this bond to a community, it will work for the betterment of WP. It's not like we are very far from it, we are there, just an initiative is needed. Arman Bhaia has already taken few steps and I think we should help him by participating actively in those activity instead of involving in text-war with each other. So, can we close this chapter right here? I hope you won't disagree :-). Cheers. - Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 12:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. But, what do you actually propose to build that family? Aditya(talk • contribs) 15:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Arman Bhaia has already taken few steps. I have also seen some constructive discussions between you two where you people figured out few core issues about promoting WikiProject Bangladesh. I like the concept and believe that this can be the first stair to build our Wikipedia family. By the way, the term family doesn't mean that we won't criticize each other, but at the same time we'll encourage and help members of our family so that we can prepare a better Wikipedia, or at least some well-cited and resourceful Bangladesh related articles. Cheers. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 15:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmmmm, good idea! Let's disagree, but let's collaborate. I like that part. And, yes, wikiproject collaborations are the best to begin with and fight about. I remember quite a few collaboration proposals (geographic standards, statistical update, education, liberation war, article requests...) lying about. Do we get to those now? Aditya(talk • contribs) 16:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Right now, Wikipedia Competition on Wiki-Project Bangladesh might be the best possible opportunity for us to come closer, at least virtually. By the way, just a quick question - who is this Jazmin, I mean how did you get know about her?. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 11:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry that I didn't notice this post earlier. Here are my responses: (1) The Wikipedia Competition is a very good idea, but it still can't beat the opportunity presented by you (as well as me) getting our hands dirty, working on articles. Unless we are ready to make articles, there is no collaboration happening. And, failing that there is no family. (2) If you want to know who is this Jazmin, go to the article (even if you read the leade, the first paragraphy or the intro section, it would know). (3) How I got to know about her is simple - by chance, like everything else I wrote on (I do work on Pornography related articles here). (4) Well, I think, we should be more tolerant with each other (quoting you, of course) as whenever I am in need of borderline stalking, I am still finding him beside me (not exactly quoting you, of course). (5) Aren't you going to edit articles soon? Thanks, Happy New Year. Aditya(talk • contribs) 00:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hopefully I can start working on WP very soon. You know, getting an internet connection at home is so disgusting here! ISP ppl continuously ask for documents like passport, id card, proof of address, bank statement bla bla bla ... and finally I got to manage all of them. So, you'll see me editing WP very soon. This time I am planning to start working on a broader spectrum, may be on the articles related to our Liberation War. Let's see... . Wishing you once again a warm Happy New Year. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 16:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Beshi josh! I was about to ask if you would be interested in working on the Liberation War articles. Tarif is already getting ready to work on them. I have worked a bit on them so far, but would like to get more involved with such editors like you and Tarif (I am sure Arman would be there, too). Cheers. Aditya(talk • contribs) 17:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hopefully I can start working on WP very soon. You know, getting an internet connection at home is so disgusting here! ISP ppl continuously ask for documents like passport, id card, proof of address, bank statement bla bla bla ... and finally I got to manage all of them. So, you'll see me editing WP very soon. This time I am planning to start working on a broader spectrum, may be on the articles related to our Liberation War. Let's see... . Wishing you once again a warm Happy New Year. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 16:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry that I didn't notice this post earlier. Here are my responses: (1) The Wikipedia Competition is a very good idea, but it still can't beat the opportunity presented by you (as well as me) getting our hands dirty, working on articles. Unless we are ready to make articles, there is no collaboration happening. And, failing that there is no family. (2) If you want to know who is this Jazmin, go to the article (even if you read the leade, the first paragraphy or the intro section, it would know). (3) How I got to know about her is simple - by chance, like everything else I wrote on (I do work on Pornography related articles here). (4) Well, I think, we should be more tolerant with each other (quoting you, of course) as whenever I am in need of borderline stalking, I am still finding him beside me (not exactly quoting you, of course). (5) Aren't you going to edit articles soon? Thanks, Happy New Year. Aditya(talk • contribs) 00:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
- Right now, Wikipedia Competition on Wiki-Project Bangladesh might be the best possible opportunity for us to come closer, at least virtually. By the way, just a quick question - who is this Jazmin, I mean how did you get know about her?. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 11:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmmmm, good idea! Let's disagree, but let's collaborate. I like that part. And, yes, wikiproject collaborations are the best to begin with and fight about. I remember quite a few collaboration proposals (geographic standards, statistical update, education, liberation war, article requests...) lying about. Do we get to those now? Aditya(talk • contribs) 16:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Arman Bhaia has already taken few steps. I have also seen some constructive discussions between you two where you people figured out few core issues about promoting WikiProject Bangladesh. I like the concept and believe that this can be the first stair to build our Wikipedia family. By the way, the term family doesn't mean that we won't criticize each other, but at the same time we'll encourage and help members of our family so that we can prepare a better Wikipedia, or at least some well-cited and resourceful Bangladesh related articles. Cheers. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 15:38, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. But, what do you actually propose to build that family? Aditya(talk • contribs) 15:18, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Nice work at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Let's really stand beside one another (in the name of truth and mutual respect) to build a family. Cheers. Aditya(talk • contribs) 18:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
The WikiProject Universities Newsletter: Issue IV (December 2007)
[edit]The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Universities newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you for your continued support of WikiProject Universities! —Noetic Sage 23:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Happy New Year
[edit]
Happy New year, brother. Some people celebrate it cheerfully and some painfully. But we still hope A Cheerful New Day will come. --NAHID 15:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- too much pain, just too much. Happy New Year. --Tarif from Bangladesh (talk) 16:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Happy New Year
[edit]Hi Niaz: Happy New Year and welcome back. Arman (Talk) 01:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank You!
[edit]Hi Bhaia, How's life out there?? I was lost for a while because of the Semester Final and Eid and all. Now i'm back and really looking forward to working on something solid on wiki. i really appreciate the initiative of unearthing the young potentials of Bangladesh but i'm confused too. I was wondering you could help me choosing from Organizer/Competitor!! Big Deal!! Anyways... let me know when you'll be available on the net. i'm terribly out of work and really need something to do..... please get me some directions!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SalmanHossain (talk • contribs) 15:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Let's Collaborate on Sunderbans and Cox's Bazar
[edit]Hello! Please note Sunderbans and Cox's Bazar have been selected as the current WikiProject Bangladesh collaboration topics. As you may be aware that these two are currently candidates for natural wonders of the world, it is extremely important to ensure that the Wikipedia articles on these topics make a clear and complete reflection of these topics. Any contribution that you can make to these topics is very welcome. Arman (Talk) 03:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Reply
[edit]That would be good idea. Separate activity page on WikiProject Bangladesh can easily catch the user attention and that might be convenient for us to improve those articles.--NAHID 15:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I have created a page - New7Wonders of Nature Nominees from Bangladesh - to start a collaboration between Bangladeshi Wikipedians to work on three articles: Cox's Bazar, Sunderbans and Ganges River. Please visit the page and try to contribute as much as you can. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 18:37, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi
[edit]All I did to the KCL article was move a few pictures about, I moved reference to the daughter of the sultan of brunei from the selected notable alumni section which is just intended to be a selected handful of most notable alumnus, to the wider kcl notable alumni section, and i removed from the trivia section a quote about king's being "hot for 2008" (I am currently in the process of trying to dismantle the trivia section all together as this was part of the reason for the article being denied good article status). Hope this clears things up and appologies for not including edit summaries. --Jamesmh2006 19:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you
[edit]Thank you Bhaia for your advice. Tanvir che (talk) 06:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Stonerich studio
[edit]Hello Niaz
I wrote an article about a company called Stonerich studio. I do not work for them, i created everything myself with their permission. Why is it up for deletion? There are no sources since its my own writing, I would lke to keep the article, it is not advertising anything, it just talks about the studio and the artist, there are other similiar pages up here. Please explain the problem so I can fix it.
Romeo R. Smithen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stonerichstudio (talk • contribs) 15:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
article EICASLAB
[edit]Dear Sir,
I have seen now your comments about the article EICASLAB that I inserted this afternoon. I will immediately add in the article citations and references from reliable sources.
Best regards Gabriella Caporaletti —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caporaletti (talk • contribs) 18:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
References for The Soul of the Rhino
[edit]Hi Niaz,
I have added a reference for the quote from NPR in the first paragraph of my article, The Soul of the Rhino.
Is that sufficient to remove the "primarysources" block?
Thank you,
Netnoise (talk) 19:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 2nd and 7th, 2008.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 1 | 2 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 2 | 7 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
AfD nominations
[edit]Hello Niaz. Over the last couple of days you have nominated several articles for deletion, including Yvon Pouliquen, Iļja Vestermans, Raydon, Palestina, United States Virgin Islands, Calabash, United States Virgin Islands and Nadir, United States Virgin Islands, all of which clearly meet the various criteria for inclusion. I suggest that you need to have a read of various policies before nominating any more articles, as at the moment you are just creating unnecessary work. Thanks, пﮟოьεԻ 57 14:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- I would like to second that suggestion. You made 13 nominations in under 20 minutes seemingly without much thought or researching of the subjects. Your deletion rationale, “Non-notable,” is inadequate in that one should be able to understand the reasoning behind a nomination. I specifically suggest that you read WP:N, WP:DEL and WP:AFD before making any additional nominations. Respectfully —Travistalk 14:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion. Well, Virgin Island related those articles do not cite anything and they are all single line articles. It is pretty difficult to understand whether they are really notable or not. I checked newly created articles and tagged only those that I felt non-notable, such as article on a village, on a pharmacy chain or so on. Nominating article for deletion doesn't imply deletion of an article. If respective author can provide concrete and sustainable arguments, those article won't be deleted. So I don't think it will hamper the sprite of Wikipedia. Thanks once again. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 15:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- I showed my arguments on the respective deletion debate pages. By the way, it is possible to nominate 40 such (without having a single reference) articles in 20 min, I just nominated 13, moreover using tools. We should concentrate on WP policies and try to follow them before creating any article. Cheers. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 15:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- With all due respect, ”Non-notable” is not an argument. A proper argument for deletion includes a demonstration of your reasoning. For example, “Non-notable - fails WP:BIO. I was unable to find any WP:V verifiable references for this person.” Contrary to your argument below, it is a nominator’s responsibility to at least attempt to determine whether the subject is notable. The lack of references in an article, in itself, isn’t proof of non-notability. —Travistalk 16:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- With all due respect, ”Non-notable” is not an argument. A proper argument for deletion includes a demonstration of your reasoning. For example, “Non-notable - fails WP:BIO. I was unable to find any WP:V verifiable references for this person.” Contrary to your argument below, it is a nominator’s responsibility to at least attempt to determine whether the subject is notable. The lack of references in an article, in itself, isn’t proof of non-notability. —Travistalk 16:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- I showed my arguments on the respective deletion debate pages. By the way, it is possible to nominate 40 such (without having a single reference) articles in 20 min, I just nominated 13, moreover using tools. We should concentrate on WP policies and try to follow them before creating any article. Cheers. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 15:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion. Well, Virgin Island related those articles do not cite anything and they are all single line articles. It is pretty difficult to understand whether they are really notable or not. I checked newly created articles and tagged only those that I felt non-notable, such as article on a village, on a pharmacy chain or so on. Nominating article for deletion doesn't imply deletion of an article. If respective author can provide concrete and sustainable arguments, those article won't be deleted. So I don't think it will hamper the sprite of Wikipedia. Thanks once again. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 15:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Witthaya Hloagune, Iļja Vestermans, Kruidvat and others not listed above also meet notability criteria. You have to read out Notability criteria for each article before you nominate it. Also, you need to do some research first; run the topic through Google or Google News or check the sources on the page. You then need to explain in detail why a page is not notable in it's AfD. I'm not a "go tell daddy" type of person, but I may be forced to go to the Administrators Noticeboards if you keep making nominations of articles that easily meet our established consensus guidelines.--CastAStone//₵₳$↑₳₴₮ʘ№€ 15:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- You can't! You know why? It's not my responsibility to identify the notability. It's author's responsibility. WP:V says Wikipedia is verifiability not truth. Please go and do some research on them first rather making random search on Google. Cheers. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 15:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- I just thought I'd pop by and concur with the general consensus. AfD is not an appropriate place to challenge for article improvement on subjects that clearly meet notability. Obviously sourcing the articles is preferable to having them not sourced, but it's a misuse of AfD. matt91486 (talk) 17:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Niaz, you are a good and respected editor, but you've said two things that I strongly think should be clarified before we have further situations similar to today and yesterday. The first is that "Nominating article for deletion doesn't imply deletion of an article". Well, I think if you nominate an article for deletion then (except under unusual circumstances) that clearly indicates that you think an article should be deleted. Especially when you just put "non notable". I think that nom for deletion with the stated reason "non notable" means you are of the opinion that the article should be deleted because the subject lacks notability. Doesn't it? Or am I missing something here?
The second is where you say "It's not my responsibility to identify the notability. It's author's responsibility". Well, to be fair, I think it is your responsibility. Otherwise you'll end up with another pile of snowball keeps like we've had this afternoon.
Plus, obviously, the deletion decisions are made on Wiki policies, as should be the nominations. Therefore, logically, if like today and yesterday you nominate because an article's subject is "non notable", you have to look at the various standards (WP:N, WP:DEL and WP:AFD, as mentioned above) and then do a little checking to see if the subject is notable or not.
I know you have had a flurry of mails today and I wondered and wondered whether to add to them, but in the end I think that this should be made clear. Many thanks. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)- Yes, you are right. Yesterday I received so many messages and gone mad about whom to write first! Anyway, let me answer those points that you mentioned in your post.
- Last year I had few very bad experiences due to AfD. I tagged some non-notable articles and eventually some of them got deleted, some didn't. Respective authors took it as an attack to them and from nowhere they started tagging those articles where I participate frequently. I tried to make them understand that tagging for AfD doesn't mean that I am attacking someone, or some particular article. Besides, there is nothing to just get mad. AfD doesn't imply deletion of that article. If this article really deserves to be here, just show your arguments and citations. Tag will be removed. Yesterday I just felt same feeling when authors from different articles started sending me message regarding AfD issue and replied with this comment to make them understand that nothing to be worried! Even you may notice that in some articles I voted to keep them even though I added them for AfD.
- This point is an interesting one. CastAStone advised me to go for a Google search in the web and Google News. He intended to say that from those search I would get proper references. Wow! That's really cool. 100% agreed that Google news would be a nice third party reference. But my question is, if those references are there - why don't you add them in the reference section? You are working here based on those references, you are also mentioning their existence, but you are not adding them! Don't you think it's funny? I am a Bangladeshi Wikipedian living in Dublin. It's quite hard for me to know about a footballer who is less popular in the world context though he is very popular in his own country. Those references will guide me to know him. But, they are not in the article, rather they are in the mind of the active author who is working on that article! Daily thousands of fake articles are created on WP. Task becomes extremely lengthy if we (who are working to monitor such articles) need to go through Google search, even sometime with the help of Google Language. If respective author just added those references in the article, I would not tag them and he didn't need to come and debate. Instead of two days Text War, we might give users a better Wikipedia. Interestingly, due to this AfD issue, respective authors added reliable citations in those articles, whereas in some cases article didn't have a single one!
- Last but not the least, whatever I did, I did it for the betterment of Wikipedia and it wasn't an intentional attack to some particular articles or authors. During this Text War I met some really nice Wikipedians, including you. At the end of the day, that is my biggest achievement. Wishing you a happy weekend. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 19:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, you are right. Yesterday I received so many messages and gone mad about whom to write first! Anyway, let me answer those points that you mentioned in your post.
- Niaz, you are a good and respected editor, but you've said two things that I strongly think should be clarified before we have further situations similar to today and yesterday. The first is that "Nominating article for deletion doesn't imply deletion of an article". Well, I think if you nominate an article for deletion then (except under unusual circumstances) that clearly indicates that you think an article should be deleted. Especially when you just put "non notable". I think that nom for deletion with the stated reason "non notable" means you are of the opinion that the article should be deleted because the subject lacks notability. Doesn't it? Or am I missing something here?
- I just thought I'd pop by and concur with the general consensus. AfD is not an appropriate place to challenge for article improvement on subjects that clearly meet notability. Obviously sourcing the articles is preferable to having them not sourced, but it's a misuse of AfD. matt91486 (talk) 17:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]Thanks for the warm welcome and info. Pankovits (talk) 15:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
AfD of Witthaya Hloagune
[edit]Hi, just wanted to remind you that, when you nominate a page for AfD, make sure you tag that page with the tag "{{subst:afd1}}." You forgot to do this on Witthaya Hloagune, so I took the liberty of adding the tag for you. Cheers! Redfarmer (talk) 16:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, it was tagged by Niaz. The tag was apparently removed by the article creator (who has been duly warned). —Travistalk 16:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- My mistake. I didn't look far enough down. Redfarmer (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks Travis and Redfarmer. I usually tag article for deletion or warn user (vandal) using Twinkle which automatically generates necessary tags and pages. In case you find anything wrong, please just let me know. I'll then report about he bug to the author or you may also directly tell him about that issue. Cheers. -- Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 16:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- I noticed a lot of the articles you put up on for deletion was extremly notable. I strongly suggest that you lurk around to see what articles are deleted and at least do a Google search to see what hits show up before you decide if they are notable or not. Tavix (talk) 23:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Failed Deletion Nominations
[edit]I respectfuly request that, in light of your 7+ successive failed nominations, you review the notability guidelines for Wikipedia. One thing to remember is that current lack of sources has no bearing on notability, especially on recently created articles. If an article is truly not notable, there will be no sources available. SeanMD80talk | contribs 03:24, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to VandalProof!
[edit]Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Niaz! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. βcommand 14:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
WROO
[edit]I am in the process of gathering information for the page. I'm one of those folks that creates in sections, so hang in there. :) --InDeBiz1 (talk) 15:44, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's nice. Just put some appropriate citations, if possible some third party references. Cheers. - Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 15:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm on it! Have a great day!--InDeBiz1 (talk) 15:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- Same to you too! - Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 15:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm on it! Have a great day!--InDeBiz1 (talk) 15:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Wadham Wyndham
[edit]Thanks for flagging up the citations issue on my article on Wadham Wyndham - you are quite right though I was working on it when you posted the citations check request. I have tidied up the citations now and would be grateful if you could check and, if satisfied, take down the request for citation check. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukhistorysoc (talk • contribs) 16:15, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Wadham Wyndham
[edit]Hi Niaz, thanks for your comment on the new citations. By using footnote numbers am I not showing precisely to which areas of the main text the references relate? I followed Wikipedia guidelines to do this - how else would you do it?Ukhistorysoc (talk) 16:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 3 | 14 January 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)