User talk:Patent Lawyer 001

Welcome!

Hello, Patent Lawyer 001, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Edcolins 17:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LSAT preparation

A tag has been placed on LSAT preparation, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article that does not provide sufficient context to identify its subject. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kingpin¹³ (talk) 18:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of List of LSAT Instruction Providers

I have nominated List of LSAT Instruction Providers, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of LSAT Instruction Providers. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. MBisanz ^talk 17:56, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Patentlyo (blog)

A tag has been placed on Patentlyo (blog) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ZimZalaBim ^talk 21:00, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In response to what you posted on the talk page of the above article, blogs are not considered important just because they exist, or because of the importance of their subject matter. You need to show that this blog is itself important. Are there references to it in the mainstream media?

Can I also ask you a straight question - are you the author of this blog? DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:16, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not Dennis Crouch. Can I ask you a straight question - are you a patent lawyer? No you're not a patent lawyer. If you were, you would know about patentlyo. Now, for the second time, please point me to the wikipedia guidelines that mentions the requirement for "mainstream media" attention. Or did you just pull that out of your arse?--Patent Lawyer 001 (talk) 21:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since you're obviously not a patent lawyer, why don't you try to call one on the phone and ask him what patentlyo is? That way you can be informed so you won't be talking out your arse. Thanks. Why don't you go try to delete an article about a blog that is truly not important, like The Soxaholix or any of the celebrity gossip blogs (Dlisted, Gawker.com). Oh, because you read those blogs?--Patent Lawyer 001 (talk) 21:30, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We seem to be having this conversation twice. So to answer your question, the place in the Wikipedia guidelines that mentions having to have the attention of the mainstream media is Wikipedia:Notability (web). While we are here, please don't insult other editors. See Wikipedia:Civility. If this blog is genuinely important in its field, and demonstrably so, then it can stay. I've never heard of the other blogs you mention. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:50, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't talk out your arse and I won't accuse you of it. If you don't know anything about patent law, you should not be editing a page about it. Stick to what you know. People like you make it a pain in the arse to contribute here. Thanks to you I've wasted 30 minutes defending my contribution, which I can assure you is quite valid. It is THE most widely followed blog by US patent attorneys (and probably many foreign patent attorneys as well). How exactly do you want me to demonstrate this to you? As we've already covered, I am not the author of the blog, so I can't provide you with logs showing the number of visits. But maybe if you take the 2 minutes necessary to GO TO THE BLOG and look at its HUGE history of detailed posts about patent law, you would realize that it is probably a rather significant blog. Thanks for wasting so much of my time out of sheer laziness. --Patent Lawyer 001 (talk) 21:57, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can I suggest we finish this conversation at one place, at Talk:Patentlyo (blog). DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A brilliant suggestion, coming from the person who originally started two conversations..--Patent Lawyer 001 (talk) 22:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So I found a reference supporting the statement that PatentlyO is a widely read blog. Now that wasn't so hard was it? You will find as you edit Wikipedia more that we don't just "take people's word for it". If you add a statement to Wikipedia, it's up to you to find supporting evidence for that statement. I remind you again about being civil to other editors who, just like you, don't want to waste their time arguing. DJ Clayworth (talk) 22:03, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Now that wasn't so hard was it?" I don't know. Was it?--Patent Lawyer 001 (talk) 22:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 21:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]