User talk:Nihiltres/Archive-26

This is an archive of past discussions on Nihiltres' user talk page, as archived on January 15, 2009. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

banning

You, whomever you are, have banned me in error son.

I have tried to read the policies here but the print is awfully small, but from my understanding I have been banned for vandalizing. I was entitled to a warning email so that I can dispute anything that is allegedly said or printed by me.

Now, what is the alleged infraction? What are the words that have offended?

I don't lie.

Keep in mind it's extremely easy to bypass IP addresses so I could have done whatever it is I have been alleged to have done over and over again without reprisal. I assume no action took place.

Say your peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heywoodyablowme (talk • contribs) 01:15, November 27, 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't have your username or IP address (I didn't block the username you used to post here), so I can't review the block. Feel free to send me an email with the details, and I'll let you know exactly why I did whatever I've apparently done. I usually prefer not to use email (and I have no idea where you're getting this idea of a "warning email"), but as you are (apparently) blocked, it will be useful this time. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 03:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-Kasir IFV for Counter-Terrorism

Hi. Did you give the correct CSD when you closed this? - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I made a typo. I fixed it; thanks for catching the error. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 05:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 66

Hey! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 66: Searching High and Low has been released. You can listen and comment at the episode's page and, as always, listen to all of the past episodes at wikipediaweekly.org. WODUPbot 07:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.

Speedy thanks

Speedy thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 19:24, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. I hope Chris Cunningham will take it well; though I do think the consensus was clear enough. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 19:31, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of User talk:45Factoid44

Hi,

I note that you deleted User talk:45Factoid44 earlier today.

I would ask that you reverse this deletion, as it runs counter to accepted practice (see WP:USER#How do I delete my user talk pages?).

It should be noted that this users talk page has a rich history in respect of a sock puppetry incident, and that the practice exists exactly to prevent problematic users permanently dumping their history. Mayalld (talk) 07:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anything in particular that you want from that page? Reviewing your talk page and his, it seems that most "evidence" remains undeleted. Unless the user (or an obvious sock) edits again, I'm inclined to respect a request to vanish—requests to vanish are an exception to the general rule you mention. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 13:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the user has been making strenuous efforts to rehabilitate, not by changing his behaviour, but by attempting to airbrush out his past, I would be extremely dubious about RTV applying here. I think it very likely that he will be back very soon under a new guise. Mayalld (talk) 15:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you see further sock-type activity (a "new guise") or the user edits again, let me know, and I'll undelete the page immediately. In the meantime, it might as well stay deleted—there's no use to it if he has actually left, and our courtesy would then cost us nothing. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 17:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help with signature formatting

I've been trying to create a signature, but am having a bit of trouble with combining colors and links. I can get colors alone to appear without problem, but as soon as I try to turn the colored text into a link, it appears the ordinary blue again. I think I've messed up the formatting somehow. Can you help me? You can see my experiments so far here (the last line has the proper links and color formatting - just click the edit tab to get a look at the markup).

By the way, many thanks for your help on International Aid Transparency Initiative. I moved my article out and redirected Aid transparency as you suggested.The Fiddly Leprechaun (talk) 17:44, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The trick is that you need to put the span tag with the style inside the wikilink, using piping. Otherwise, CSS decides to show off a minor quirk. Since the wikilink is inside the colour, and the innermost object's style takes priority, you see only the usual blue. When you have the span inside the piped part of the link, the span is the innermost object, so its style takes priority. So for coloured links, instead of <span style="color:rainbow;">[[Link|Piped title]]</span>, you should use [[Link|<span style="color:rainbow;">Piped title</span>]]. I've added some examples to your sandbox. Oh, and I should note that if you plan on using | (the pipe symbol) in your signature, you should surround it with <nowiki> tags so that if it's in a template it doesn't get completely borked (since templates use pipes to divide parameters). I learned that lesson when implementing my current signature. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 18:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you! That makes perfect sense. As you can see, I've made my signature work properly now. :) The Fiddly Leprechaun · Catch Me! 17:55, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good! {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 18:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Niobium

Sorry, but a few of your requests are still open, but I will try with some help to solve them! Thanks for the help to get the article featured. --Stone (talk) 00:08, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it! My requests largely pick apart the writing for weak spots—weak spots that are inevitable in writing. Revision is important for almost all good writing. If you consider how far the article has come since the start of the FAC, it's pretty impressive. The ultimate goal is to improve the article, and we're doing that. I'll take another look at the FAC: there might be more issues which I can help resolve myself. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 02:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as GM food

If anyone lisons to this crap i will not live the same way. jkhsdf;jahd;jfhadjkfhakljdhfjkl
This is a lie. The goverment does not use this food.

I believe you're talking about genetically modified food, correct? What help do you need from me? {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 17:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Student Seeking Teacher

Hello, Nihiltres. I am a high school student in the United States and I would like to learn how write in wiki formatting. I have no religious beliefs and I have nothing against the existence of gods. I am available Monday, Wednesday - Friday at 4:00 AM EST to 5:00 EST. May you be my Mentor? DanSand (talk) 22:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Religion doesn't matter, everyone's welcome. :) I can be your mentor; just let me know where in particular you'd like help, or what you're trying to do. If you're looking to learn the formatting, I'd suggest you start off by keeping the cheatsheet open in a parallel browser window or tab, and dive into editing from there… something to remember is to be bold. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 23:44, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to learn how to make user boxes and how to colorize your signature? For example the heading three spaces above this sectionHelp with signature formatting.Your whole explanation make absolutily no sense to me ?:)? DanSand (talk) 20:38, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, those might not be the best things to start off with :p

Userboxes involve a basic understanding of templates, with an understanding as well of HTML colour values. Coloured signatures similarly require a basic understanding of HTML and probably CSS. Since HTML and CSS are hard to teach, can you please be more specific (e.g. you want a green, bold signature with a superscript "talk" link, or a red userbox with black border and blue square on left which says "Hello, world!")? This will make it easier to give a specific example.

For starters, it might be helpful to read about userboxes and templates in general. Signatures can wait, as they require a more advanced understanding, but I can construct an example for you that you can modify, if you want. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 19:37, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:deletion Neil on impression

Hello Nihiltres,

I have to admit that i'm totally new to the Wikipedia world as a contributor, and for sure it's been a mistake of mine that produced the almost instant deletion of the article related to the band "Neil on impression".

I hope to find an easy way to explain to you and also to the user(s) that suggested to delete the article that my will was absolutely not self-promotional or whatever connected to selling anything or helping the diffusion of the name of the band.

It's completely clear to me that Wikipedia is NOT a promotional network (like Myspace).

To tell the truth, I happily discovered that there were articles of some bands of the indipendent DIY (Do it Yourself) music scene, like Raein, La Quiete, Unwed Sailor, and other more with which we played with in many shows and in several countries. I was surprised because they are actually a part of the story of the contemporary music and I was really happy to find them, even if in a very short article. To make things clear from the beginning: I am a member of Neil on impression, but I was not worried about the fact that friends of mine had an article and not me (or my band). Actually the first thing I did was to contact directly the members I know of those bands to suggest them to complete the information about their bands. Then I decided to add the article of Neil on Impression, basically copying the ones that i found already, in order to keep the right balance between the importance of the article itself and the relationship that may occur with the other related articles. But I'm not complaining about anything. It's definitely not a matter of popularity: recently in Italy has took off a huge project between many bands, labels, organizations and artists, that want to collect in a single product all the history connected to this "underground" activities, trying to make a complete scenario of who did what and when. This is something that actually already is part of the Wikipedia content, so I don't have to add more information. But one of the aims of the project was actually to add (or create) a good contribution to Wikipedia, since this is not a matter of selling copies, this is almost a non-profit world. It's a matter of giving the right importance to what has importance, and made a part of the contemporary indipendent music scenario. That's why I put a brief list (that was there to be completed by whoever wanted to) of the bands that came from our own hometown, and with which, exactly as Raein or La Quiete, we shared the same reharsal room.

So, to be clear once more: it's not that MY band that is not on Wikipedia, but that MANY OTHER bands will have to be added, sooner or later. I just wanted to begin this process.

I will try to understand if I made a mistake, putting it in a wrong section, or forgetting to add the correct links, or maybe I'll have to add the article in the Italian Wikipedia, but it would be really grateful from you to help me in this correction.

Thanks a lot for your attention and forgive me for my English mistakes.

Sbarbie Sbarbie (talk) 02:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted Neil on impression because it qualified for speedy deletion under criterion A7: the importance or "notability" (in our jargon) wasn't asserted in the article, and it further didn't contain references to reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

If you want to fix any problem, it would be to provide sources. What makes your band special? Can you give references to reviews, news articles about, or listings of your band? We need information on Wikipedia to be verifiable, and if we can't establish that verifiability, the article about your band can't grow so well.

I'd recommend that for now, you restart the article at a user subpage of yours (e.g. User:Sbarbie/Neil on impression) and work on incorporating what references you can.

If there aren't references out there, perhaps your band can work on establishing them. If your band's success causes people to want to write news articles and reviews and so forth, it's likely that someone will write the Wikipedia article for you. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 19:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thank you. You were very clear and precise, and also very polite, I appreciated it a lot. As you said, it's necessary to add references and external links, things that I was about to do once I had the time to collect them all, but in the meanwhile I thought it was possible to leave the page as a stub. Anyways, while I was going on in reading suggestions and rules to how to build a good article, I thought that it's a better idea to add the article of Neil on impression on the Italian Wikipedia, and also starting from some links that I already found on the band, making it easier and more senseful, since it's an Italian band, working on an Italian-European scene. Maybe I'll try to help also the other bands, related and connected to us, to develop info on the Italian Wikipedia, trying to create a good network of links and references with the other articles already present on the English one.

Thanks again, and godspeed you.

Sbarbie 89.97.35.72 (talk) 15:25, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 67

Hey! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 67: Fundraising Interview has been released. You can listen and comment at the episode's page and, as always, listen to all of the past episodes at wikipediaweekly.org. WODUPbot 06:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.

Radiant Logic

Hi Nihiltres, is there anyway you can undelete the page Radiant Logic Inc so that I can edit it so it makes a better fit for wikipedia. Heyeppy (talk) 16:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I undeleted the page and moved it to User:Heyeppy/Radiant Logic, Inc. for you. You can work on it there, and then move it back once you're done. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 18:20, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me get my page in order. I was wondering how to change the title from Radiant Logic, Inc. to just Radiant Logic?--Heyeppy (talk) 17:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You use the "move" tab that should appear on the top of most pages, which allows you to "move" a page to a new title. I've deleted the cut-and-paste move that you seem to have initially used, and properly moved the page from User:Heyeppy/Radiant Logic, Inc. (which is now a redirect) to Radiant Logic, Inc.. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 17:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"You have messages" templates?

Hi again,

I've seen the templates on a number of user's talk pages that say, "Hello so-and-so, you have new messages at Joe Schmoe's talk page." Is there an easy way to insert those, i.e. not having to go to the other person's discussion? It seems it would be useful if I could do it right on my talk page when replying to someone. Not that I have any need for it right now, but am just curious. :) --The Fiddly Leprechaun · Catch Me! 18:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not as far as I know. You use the template by inserting {{Talkback|Your username here}} on their page, but I'm not aware of any script that will allow you to do this automatically. I must admit, I get around the problem primarily by being strict about message grouping: if a message is posted here, I reply here, and if I post a message elsewhere, I reply to responses there. If you really want such a script, a place to go might be Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Requests. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 18:46, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, looks like this has already been requested there. :p {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 18:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right, thanks :) I've added my voice behind the request. Hopefully it doesn't get ignored for being old, as it would be quite useful. --The Fiddly Leprechaun · Catch Me! 21:49, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate Tai Chi Deletion

Hi, Nilitres:

I wrote to Shuym1 thinking he made an entry after you. Can you read it? My mission is to educate people on the subject matter. Although corporations use it in fitness programs, few have written about it.

I am writing about it since I want people to do it. This is not an attempt for people to hire me. This is a viable new technology that deserves notation.

Can you tell me what to remove so that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Tai_Chi

is not advertising?

Is it a rule that the author cannot be associated with the article? When an expert writes about a new invention, (s)he is the only one with content about it. I have searched for info on the subject. What I have found is listed here.

This is a newly studied and validated field that can save minds, destress, build team spirit. Especially in today's world.

I could disassociate myself from the information and just report it if there were other information. Can you now look at this article as informational and not promotional?

If not, I have many domain names that are unused and have nothing on them or in them. If I put the content that is on websites associated with me on pages of a completely blank domain, would that fix the article so that it is not advertising? It would be like Tom Edison placing his discovery info on an anonymous page. I am cultivating Corporate Tai Chi, for the good of the world. And I brought it to Wikipedia because it deserves notation.

Is http://onetaichi.com OK to list since it is not about me and there is no about us page? I am listed as the contact but I can anonymize the contact info on the site, if this is necessary.

There are 6 relevant studies at the bottom of http://www.onetaichi.com/corporatetaichi.html that have nothing to do with me. I can list them separately, but then people don't get to read the overview content first.

Could you delineate what I have to remove so I understand the rules. I have read them twice, but they are a bit overwhelming. And could you cite a specific rule section that I should reread?

Thanks for your help with my first try. I an so confused. Also, don't know where the ((hangon)) tag is supposed to go. Corporatetaichi (talk) 16:06, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I deleted the page Corporate Tai Chi because it qualified for speedy deletion under criterion G11 (general criterion 11), which is that a page is "blatant advertising". I did this because, regardless of whether or not any person or cause would profit from it, advertising is not allowed on Wikipedia, and that article was promotional of corporate tai chi. Articles on Wikipedia are supposed to conform to a neutral point of view, so anything promoting a topic is therefore in violation of that policy. This neutral point of view is about stating facts and letting a reader make their own judgement: instead of saying "Corporate tai chi improves productivity", you say "An independent study found that test groups functioned more effectively as a team after practicing tai chi together" (and reference the study). It would similarly be important to mention what criticisms there are of corporate tai chi, where it's been implemented, et cetera: the goal is informational rather than promotional.

Now, it's possible that you could write a valid article on the subject, but you need to know where to start. Since articles on Wikipedia are supposed to be verifiable, we need references to reliable sources (which are usually preferably formatted using footnote form). If you want to write an article about corporate tai chi on Wikipedia, you need to show that the topic is "notable", which in our jargon means that there are enough news articles, books, journal articles, textbooks, etc. which cover the topic that we can write a good article on the subject. One of the key points here is about reliable sources: reliable sources are independent of a topic, so, for example, a website promoting corporate tai chi would probably not be a reliable source on the subject. Many of the links you made in the now-deleted article have this problem: while they might be useful as supporting references to describe the position of proponents of the subject, they wouldn't be good core references to define and describe the topic.

In this reply to you I have linked to a number of relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. For the most part, it should be sufficient for you to read the summary of each guideline at the top of the page: nevertheless, given your confusion, I suggest you read further. In particular, it would be useful for you to read the criteria for speedy deletion. As a new user, you might also find it useful to read Wikipedia:Your first article, which is a guide intended specifically for new users wanting to write an article from scratch.

In future, you place the {{hangon}} template immediately below the deletion template, and remember to place it within double curly brackets ( {{ and }} ) so that it appears properly. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 18:27, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What makes people notable?

Wedensday, December 24th 2008.

hi there, i bet you admins are awfully busy, but I'd really appreciate it if you'll find the time to answer. i tried writing an autobiographical article, but i couldn't convince them that i am important enough to be mentioned at all. i am a performer and I've been touring for a while, playing music. i can't really think of what is considered important enough in Wiki terms - popular? in underground terms, looks like we're doing quite well, we have several dozens of thousands of hits on myspace. and of course we're independent, so what? i can't stand it when people shut other people's mouths, why can't i exist in the cyber space? what's the criteria? i know folks who are virtually anonymous, yet they're there, on their wiki pages.

)

Merry Xmas,

  Mariya (OddDot).

For musical performers, specifically, the criteria are listed at Wikipedia:Notability (music). "Notable" on Wikipedia is jargon for "we can find reliable sources about the subject", and the general concept of "notability" as we mean it is largely an extension of one of our core policies, verifiability. By the way, if you know "folks who are virtually anonymous, yet they're there", let me know: biographical articles fall under the strict biographies of living persons policy which helps keep libelous disinformation from articles, so a biographical article without good sourcing is problematic. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 02:43, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Marc Kelly

An article that you have been involved in editing, Marc Kelly, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marc Kelly. Thank you. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 19:06, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't plan on getting involved in the AfD; my involvement in that article was primarily to turn down a speedy deletion request since it didn't meet the criteria. Thanks for the notification, {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 17:32, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Plutonium

As promised, I created a PR for this article and copied your remaining comments to it. I've since tried to address each point. Please, take a look. --mav (talk) 00:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented there and endorsed the changes made. Thanks for your excellent work. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 01:46, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks . . .

for changing "page" back to "article". It makes more sense. Rivertorch (talk) 18:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; my intent is that we all have input into our interface. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 19:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Weekly Episode 68

W00t w00t! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 68: Wikipedia's Nicotine High has been released. You can listen and comment at the episode's page and, as always, listen to all of the past episodes and even subscribe to the RSS feed at wikipediaweekly.org. – wodupbot – 12:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list.

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Read more

How the heck is this not a test page? It's got nothing of value, and is all b0rked coding. You'd really rather let this page slog through mfd for a week? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:17, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it might have been used for something at one point, and in any event I am pretty sure that it is not a test page. While I think it could safely be deleted without complaint, I disagree with the idea that it qualifies for deletion under G2, and I stick to that. It isn't a test page, and I think that people need to use the speedy deletion criteria more strictly. The explanation for G2 is "Testing is permitted in the sandbox and in users' own user space" and I think that shows the intention for obvious cases and not questionable ones like this. Hell, I'd be OK with someone calling G6 and a touch of IAR, but G2 doesn't quite cut it. It's nothing personal, and it's certainly impractical, but I'm stubborn. Sorry, {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 19:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]