Jump to content

User talk:Pdcook/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 < Archive 1    Archive 2    Archive 3 >
All Pages:  1 -  2 -  3 -  4 -  5 -  6 -  7 -  ... (up to 100)


Cecilia Hjortsberg

Thank you for your comment. I'm a swedish semi-professional photographer, I took the photo of her and thought it should be in the public domain. I simply took facts from the swedish part of wikipedia (written by someone else), made the article in english and linked in the photo. I have contact with her every now and then, and she will check the article herself to make sure all the facts are right and probably add some more information. I guess there should be some references listed anyway, wonder if I can find some, hmmm...

Mattias Kristiansson (talk) 08:49, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks

Yeah, it was just that those two i was putting up were the only tags i knew, thanks for the info, can you please tell me the neutrality issue tag as well?--Sopher99 (talk) 16:54, 31 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sopher99 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:January 2010

Please take note that I've already reverted the edit you've made on my talkpage. I did put the Template:BLP unsourced on my first edit and fyi, the first sentence is translated from ms:K.Rajagopal Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 18:31, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great, it still needs a reference. PDCook (talk) 18:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ibrik Tepe

Is referenced now. Thanks for the heads up.sulmues (sulmues) --Sulmues 21:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian Charity Law

Pdcook, thanks for the welcome - any suggestions would be appreciated. As you can tell I am new to this! Mb2010 (talk) 01:50, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I provided reason in the dissussion going on the deletion page

I provided the refrences. and have provided the reasons at the disscussion page on the deletion. still if the problem persists let us wait for more improvementGurezi 15:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heman60 (talk • contribs)

Re: Tim Forst

I am currently sourcing further reliable sources for the Tim Frost page. This will include the cast/character mentions in his theatre/TV appearances. I shall try and include this asap. Kind Regards AaronHuckett —Preceding unsigned comment added by AaronHuckett (talk • contribs) 15:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Harckham

What do I have to do to ensure this article is not deleted? There are many politicians of local notoriety on Wikipedia whose pages don't seem to be threatened with perpetual removal, and yet they have no more evident "notable documentation" than Mr. Harckham, so it's not clear to me why this page is being singled out. It's equally unclear to me what anyone's objection to the mere presence of biographical data would be, or, again, why each and every local politician ought not face similar threats of deletion. Mr. Harckham is presently a sitting County Legislator in NY, which seems to me to qualify as a "member of the main citywide government or council of a major metropolitan city", as quoted in Wikipedia's guide lines. What would you like me to add? I can add links to coverage from Westchester, NY, lots of it. Is that going to be good enough? This didn't seem necessary for a little bio page, but since it's getting picked on, I guess it should be added?

Sorry if i'm sounding overly sarcastic or defensive, but I honestly think this is all a bit silly. I do want to comply with the rules however, so just let me know what needs to be done in ENGLISH, rather than Wikispeak, and I'll do my level best to comply. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ml283 (talk • contribs) 01:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I have been using "wikispeak" as you say. I pointed to relevant WP policies, however. I believe Harckham fails WP:Politician because Westchester County is not a major metro city like Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, etc. The article currently lacks WP:Reliable sources. I found a few articles here and there, but none that, in my opinion, constitute independent coverage in multiple reliable sources as outlined in WP:Bio. I realize there are other articles about local politicians on WP. The fact is that there are far more people creating articles than there are people to critically analyze them. I assure you if I saw these "other articles" about non-notable local politicians I would be just as critical. To save this article, it needs sources as I mentioned above, not just a link to Harckham's webpage. See WP:Citing sources for how to properly cite sources. Also, if you believe Westchester counts as a major metro city, you should direct your comments and justifications at the article's deletion discussion, as others won't see them on my talk page. If you find or add references, mention it there too.
I also read the long comment you posted and deleted at the deletion discussion and I assure I have no political motivation here and I thought and researched this deletion nomination. Please assume good faith. I have. Regards, PDCook (talk) 01:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Surely you can understand that it's the "in my opinion" thing that I take some issue with. When someone from Michigan can arbitrarily designate a County In New York insufficient irrespective of its proximity and importance to New York City, to say nothing of its housing the City of White Plains, it's a bit confusing. Why are cities given more credence than the larger, politically more relevant Counties that encompass them? Also, and please don't take this the wrong way, but "assumptions" are inherently subjective. You have no way of knowing whether I'm assuming good faith or not, and I can type the words "I have" as easily as you. In short, it does feel a bit like being arbitrarily picked on. I'd be happy to point you to the plethora of similar articles if you'd like. It's hard to imagine how or why this one got on anyone's radar.

Again, Sir, I truly don't wish to be argumentative or to escalate this into a needless, time waisting argument. As you've no doubt ascertained, I'm new to the Wikipedia thing, and I'm sure that you are just doing your job. As am I. I will make every effort over the next several days to make the appropriate adjustments, and will direct all further comments, and "justifications", such as they'll be, to the article's deletion discussion. I truly hope we can come to some agreement. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ml283 (talk • contribs) 04:58, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to argue or escalate this any further. My opinion is but one of many and WP is designed so that a single person does not control content. The purpose of AfD discussion is to reach consensus on the notability of the article. You know my opinion; I know yours. Let's see what the community says. Regards, PDCook (talk) 07:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Gypsy Queens

Ok! Thanks again. ( for the gypsy queens) Take care Liamdale Liamdale (talk) 18:29, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Valley State University acticles

Thanks. That is too my goal for the page. And thank you for splitting the Grand Valley State Lakers article from the main page, I could not figure out how to do that so I put the splitting tag on there, im glad you saw that and agreed.Demhem (talk) 04:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Susy Dorn - Categories

Hi Pdcook, thanks for the welcome note. Just noticed you added a tag on the Susy Dorn article recommending to add more categories. The article already have three. I understand that the more the better. What would be the minimum number for categories required in order to get the tag removed? regards, --W1k1w4lt3r (talk) 05:41, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Silas Malafaia

i didn't found good sources in English about the Brazilian televangelist Silas Malafaia.Agre22 (talk) 19:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Sources in any language are fine. PDCook (talk) 19:31, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sister Vincenza Taffarel (2nd nomination).Borock (talk) 20:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I didn't contribute much to the article, but thanks anyways. Regards, PDCook (talk) 20:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dharokowns

The problem is, I feel that Paul Dunay was notable and was well sourced, and other people obviously did not. I also create the short articles to add pages to Wikipedia. I click Random article and find something that doesn't have a page, I create it with a short definition and call it a stub. A few times when I did that, people built up the page and made it look great, like the AVAYA page I created. The Xikuangshan Mine article I started was even on the did you know page, I had just one sentence on it. I am simply making pages for other people to make great, I even find it fun. Only about half of them are deleted, mostly about people and organizations. Dharokowns (talk) 21:59, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Response on your talk page. PDCook (talk) 22:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems like you're out to get my articles and I made it a lot better, I got his permission to use his website content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dharokowns (talk • contribs) 15:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not out to get you. But your stuff happens to be on my watchlist now, so whenever you recreate an article, I will know. Had you read the information we've urged you to read, you'd know that you cannot copy material from another website.PDCook (talk) 15:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

would you review my rationale?

Hello, Pdcook. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sister Vincenza Taffarel (2nd nomination).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

This is about as close as I can come to arguing my case perfectly according to policy. Please read my comments on AFD and see if you disagree.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:19, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I really want to get into this anymore than I have. PDCook (talk) 14:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I had only added a few reasons why I thought she should be added accorded to our policies. If you feel it's not nec. to review these, I had hoped by pointing out the policy and it's exceptions in the case of one event notability I might get a reversal. Thanks anyways. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Image of John Keith Irwin

Thanks for helping me edit the entry for John Keith Irwin. I have an image of Prof. Irwin, but don't have high enough status at Wikipedia to upload it. Starting Saturday afternoon, I'll be on the road for 7 days and will not have access to the Internet. Could I provide this image to you to upload to this article?

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daveymo (talk • contribs) 21:32, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to help edit the article and steer people to the right places, but I'm not in the habit of uploading people's images for them (for many reasons). Any registered and autoconfirmed (4 days old, minimum 10 edits) user can upload images. Just check out Wikipedia:Uploading images. Regards, PDCook (talk) 21:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas John Gerrard

In this site: [Google] in found a source showing that Thomas John Gerrard was a priest. In the article about Thomas John Gerrard I changed the sources, ading this source. Go there.Agre22 (talk) 19:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)agre22[reply]

re. Ford P100

The majority of information on that page is taken from my experience in owning and repairing the vehicles, there has never to my knowledge been a reliable source of information on the vehicle in particular, it only getting an add-on in the Haynes manual. because of this i have stayed away from including figures such as lengths, power and compression ratio however i am aware that they would add to the entry, but i cannot exactly reference my measuring tape or a compression tester However i welcome any suggestions for referencing you have. S00048736 (talk) 06:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Allexperts.com

The "encyclopedia" section of allexperts.com is a Wikipedia mirror site. If you scroll down to the bottom of the article you added to the links section of Ford P100, you'll see that Wikipedia is credited as the source. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 14:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow talk about small print. I completely didn't see that. Thanks. PDCook (talk) 15:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Pivot of Civilization

I wrote many thing in my article about the book The Pivot of Civilization. Go there and see if you think that it becames better.Agre22 (talk) 21:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)agre22[reply]

Those references still aren't independent. I also really wish you would read and understand WP:MOS and WP:Citing sources, but you seem resistant to my suggestions. I guess other people will have to continue to clean up your articles. PDCook (talk) 21:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Difficulty citing references on brain metastases

Hello, Pdcook. You have new messages at Immunize's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I followed your advice of trying to add citations to the page brain metastases,and added [1],but it failed.instead of a link do emedicine neurology's article on brain metastases,it said:template:{{cite web emedicine neurology/brain metastases}}.any helpImmunize (talk) 23:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You needed to have a verticle bar | followed by "url=" and then the full URL. I fixed the template, but noticed the website was invalid. I assumed you meant to cite this article, which I went ahead and added. Please add additional citations. Also, given the difficulties you've had, I strongly recommend reading WP:Writing your first article. Regards, PDCook (talk) 01:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information on citing references.I will try to improve the quality of my edits,and will learn to cite references.Immunize (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC) My edits to the article kidney cancer consist of information on emedicine oncology's article on renal cell carcinoma and there article on wilms tumor (nephroblastoma).Regards.Immunize (talk) 16:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then please cite that article accordingly. PDCook (talk) 18:38, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also,i just found out that while emedicine radiology's article is titled brain metastases,emedicine neurology's article is titled brain metastasis.this is why you were unable to find the page emedicine neurology brain metastases.Immunize (talk) 16:38, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They have two articles. One called Brain Metastasis and one called Brain, Metastases. I've included both references. Regards, PDCook (talk) 16:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Immunize (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sheldon Pinnell

I've declined the request for Speedy Deletion of Sheldon Pinnell. It doesn't look like he passes notability, but there's at least one additional reliable source since the previous AFD. And there's still a WP:COI issue. I'd prefer you taking it to AFD if you still think he doesn't pass notability - just to be sure :)

Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll probably do that. It seems suspiciously promotional to me. PDCook (talk) 13:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The one new source that looks reliable is the Nature.com article. The reason I bring up the COI issue is because I was looking at the edit history of the previously deleted article - sorry :) But the fact that the user that created this did so in their one and only edit is suspicious. I believe the article won't make it through AFD, but figure it wouldn't hurt to check :)
Hope you're handling the cold well :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 07:09, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Acidica

Is there any particular reason you PROD'd instead of Speedying? If you want to keep the proposed deletion tag up for the 7 days I'll endorse it. Cheers, Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 10:40, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After another read through, I suppose it is speedy material. I've speedied it. Regards, PDCook (talk) 12:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Otago Boys' High School Board of Trustees Student Representative Election, 2009

I've added the 2009 election to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Otago Boys' High School Board of Trustees Student Representative Election, 2008. Would you be willing to offer an opinion about it there? Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 15:45, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Booth

Hi Pdcook

I have recently added additional citations to this page. Why do these not constitute reputability?

With best wishes,

Danielcowdrill —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielcowdrill (talk • contribs) 19:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marcus Booth

PdCook

I think your judgement is questionable. This individual has been mentioned in independent, reliable secondary sources. Furthermore, surely his position within the Conservative party (especially in the City of London), in addition to the high standing of the sources given (eg. the BBC and the Guardian newspaper), are sufficient. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielcowdrill (talk • contribs) 20:10, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not questioning that he's been mentioned in reliable sources, but the coverage is not significant in the references currently cited in the article. Surely if he is so notable you can provide reliable sources that demonstrate his notability. Which criteria on the notability page do you believe he satisfies? Regards, PDCook (talk) 20:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I have to protest. I am not persuaded that the coverage is 'insignificant'. Furthermore, although the citations used are not entirely about the subject in question, the references to the subject are certainly not 'trivial' and I do provide multiple citations. Consequently, it can be argued that my subject meets Wikipedia's 'basic' criteria. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielcowdrill (talk • contribs) 22:29, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In reviewing the given references again, I have to say I'm sorry, but they simply don't constitute significant coverage according to Wikipedia's guidelines. Perhaps there are some more newspaper articles about him or his organization you could provide? If additional sources demonstrating notability aren't provided someone may list the article for deletion. Also, please continue on this existing thread if you wish to reply rather than creating a new heading. Regards, PDCook (talk) 23:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SkinCeuticals

Hey Pdcook,

Thanks so much for your suggestion. However, I thought I did create this article with a username, Legal575? Is there any way I can attach the username to the article now that it's already up?

Thank you, L —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.18.173.40 (talk) 20:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not quite sure what you're asking here. User names are not "attached" to articles. But If you did create the account Legal575, I recommend signing into that account to do any editing. Regards, PDCook (talk) 20:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.18.173.40 (talk) 21:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Marcus Booth

Hi. I've decided not to pursue the article at the moment. I have made a record of the existing article and will gather new references. Meanwhile, I'd like to take it down. Best wishes.Danielcowdrill (talk) 23:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, well if you need any help don't hesitate to ask. Regards, PDCook (talk) 23:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Do you know how long it takes for the page to be deleted?Danielcowdrill (talk) 23:57, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed you placed a WP:CSD U1 tag on it. That's only for user pages. You'll need to put a WP:CSD G7 tag on it instead. I'm not 100% sure the article will be deleted via WP:CSD G7 anyhow, since you were not the only person who edited it. How long it takes to delete depends on how many administrators are online and working. It's a Friday night in the US, so perhaps not so many.PDCook (talk) 00:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
An admin assumed you meant G7 and deleted it for you. Good luck finding references and I'd be happy to review a userspace draft for you. Regards, PDCook (talk) 00:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you for your help. I'll be back with a more robust page soon. Best, Dan.Danielcowdrill (talk) 00:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Gasparini

I'm not speak english. Do you speak spanish? My english is very... small. Excuseme.--Erensto (talk) 05:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Erensto[reply]

Sorry, I do not know very much Spanish at all. I tagged the Juan Gasparini article as being too much like a resume (a list of job skills and accomplishments). It should be more like an encyclopedia article. If you don't know how to fix it, don't worry someone else will fix it eventually, but in the mean time leave the like resme tag on the article. I believe the article is notable and deletion is not a concern. Regards, PDCook (talk) 14:38, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Question about Michael Blackburn

Hi,

Thanks for your message on my talk page, I appreciate the time you've taken to help me out with those links and with my first aritcle about British Poet Michael Blackburn (poet). I'm wondering what I should do with regards to the article becoming easier to access on Wikipedia when a user looks up "Michael Blackburn". Clicking the "go" button will take the user to the Australian Olympian's page, Michael Blackburn. I understand there is one of two ways to do this- either create a disambiguation page, or put an other uses type message on the top of the Olympian's page. As far as I can judge, they have about the same notability so a disambiguation page would be more appropriate- however being a very novice user, the thought of creating one, even after reading the Wikipedia:Disambiguation page I'm left with concerns about other articles that link to the Olympian's page becoming dead (which isn't an issue for the poet's page yet). Would you be able to offer me some guidance?

Cheers, TonyMuld (talk) 06:24, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the athlete is probably a little more widely-known than the poet (just the way our society is, sadly), but not by much. I checked the statistics for the athlete's page and he's getting about 70-100 page views per month, and no major editing is going on with the article. If the athlete were way more known than the poet, I'd suggest a hatnote disambiguation link, but I think that a disambiguation page is the way to go here. I'll go ahead and get it started. First I have to move the athlete's page to a disambiguated page, Michael Blackburn (athlete), and then turn the old page into a disambiguation page. The most important thing here is to see what articles link to the athlete's page and go through them one by one and change them to point to the new page. Once I get that done, there are few things we should do to clean up the article a little bit. Regards, PDCook (talk) 15:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Please continue improving the article and don't hesitate to ask if you need additional help. PDCook (talk) 15:25, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Citation query

Thanks for the citation tip, one question, what about an article with multiple citations from the same author, i.e. Alvin F. Sortwell. Wmc.

If you use different references from the same author (for example Book1 and Book2), then they should be treated as separate references. Even if you get material from the same book, but on different pages, technically they should be separate references as well. However, relatively few people report page numbers (they really should), and just report the book as a whole. I hope this helps. Also, you can sign your posts in talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). PDCook (talk) 20:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


But if they are separate references, and the citation is by the last name of the author, would that not confuse the citations because the various citations are referred by the authors last name. I.E. if the say Mr. Smith wrote two books, and the ref name="Smith" smith is used for multiple works, how can the short citation be used? ~~Wmc.~~

Oh I see what you're getting at. When you add the ref tag, you can put in any name parameter you want. For example: To reference Dr. Smith's first book, you'd use <ref name="Smith1">blah blah</ref>. To reference Dr. Smith's second book, you'd use <ref name="Smith2">blah blah blah</ref>. If you want to reference either of those later in the article, just type <ref name="Smith1" /> or <ref name="Smith2" />. I should mention that the name parameter doesn't have to be the author's name, it's the name of the reference, and can be almost anything you choose. Regards, PDCook (talk) 20:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

message for you.

Hello, Pdcook. You have new messages at Immunize's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

there is another message for you at my talk page.Immunize (talk) 21:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC) Hello,it's immunize.When you get a chance,please look at my talk page.There is a message for you there.Thanks.Immunize (talk) 19:56, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,it is immunize (talk · contribs).I have responded to your query on my lack of referencing information in the article mercury poisoning. Immunize (talk) 16:43, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Cats

Hello active member of WikiProject cats. There is currently a discussion as to whether or not feline acne should be merged into cat skin disorders here. Brambleclawx 01:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Theofylaktos, Konstantidis and St Gregory of Nyssa entries

Hi. The articles on pontosworld.com which you refer to as being copyrighted are actually my articles. see Konstantinos Konstantinidis Konstantinos Theofylaktos and Saint Gregory of Nyssa Metropolitan Church. I translated them from Greek text. As far as I am aware, translating material for fair use, is fine with regards to copyright. In effect it makes me the copyright owner. If not, please advise. If you wish me to contact you via my pontosworld.com email to verify that I am the website owner, please state an email adress and I will do so. Thanks Euxine (talk) 07:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Euxine (talk • contribs) 06:14, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of the text being translated, it exists on a website in English that is copyrighted (© PontosWorld (2005-2009) at the bottom), thus it does not appear to be public domain. So copying and pasting it directly from that site is a copyright violation according to Wikipedia's guidelines. There are a couple of options. If you hold the copyrights, you can release the information into the public domain, a process with which I am not familiar (see Wikipedia:Public domain) or give Wikipedia permission, a process I with which I am only vaguely familiar (see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission).
The other option is to avoid this issue all together and rewrite the material in the WP article so that it is not significantly similar to the source. Let me know if you have any other questions, but If you need more specific guidance on releasing/permissing the copyrights, you could ask at the Wikipedia:Help desk. I hope this helps. PDCook (talk) 14:13, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Biographical information about a living person provided by them. Citations?

I created the article for Allen Paul with the primary intention of providing an impression of how he came to be involved in the Katyn Massacre issue since his book is listed in the references for that article. I've had some professional contact with him before, so I just asked him for a quick bio as it related to the book and his career as an author. What I received now resides in the newly created article. I clipped out any blatant bias as long as it didn't injure the meaning of his writing and took out a lot of his discussion about his family. I'm now trying to collect references from him for any quotes or opinions. For everything else I gathered that if it is from him and about him (without bias) the information does not need to be sourced. Am I on the right track? It seems like there is something missing. EclipseJRB (talk) 22:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any personal communications you have had with the subject cannot be used as source material because it is not verifiable. This is considered original research and borders on conflict of interest and autobiography. Thus, all content in the article must be sourced from independent reliable sources. Since the time I tagged the article for independent sources, it looks like you have added several appropriate sources like Boston Globe, NY Times, etc. It would be helpful if you could find archives of those newspaper articles online and add them to the references, but this is not required. I can look too sometime. Let me just reiterate: all material in the article must be sourced from those sources you added and not from personal communications. Please note that all of the bluelinks I wrote above point to the relevant Wikipedia policies, which I recommend reading. If you have any additional questions, please ask. I sincerely thank you for asking! PDCook (talk) 22:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I should mention that the subject's website is an acceptable source for biographical information, since his notability seems to have been established through being cited in major newspapers. Regards, PDCook (talk) 23:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I changed a few things in the article. The first line was a little non-neutral and I reworded it. Also, the article made predictions about Paul's upcoming book. Unless you can cite a very reliable source for this, such claims are not allowed per the policy Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Otherwise, I haven't really given the rest of the article a good read-through, since I imagine you will have to reword some of it in light of not being able to use personal communications as a source. Regards, PDCook (talk) 23:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A question about whether or not this would be good form. If I can get him to put the biography info he originally provided on his website (which it probably should be anyway) and write a shorter summary of it (or perhaps just copy it?) with a reference to that author page in the Wikipedia article, then the claims about where he worked, went to school, etc. would be considered verifiable? So I guess it would be akin to asking someone to publish information just because I wanted a way to officially cite it.

EclipseJRB (talk) 00:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it raises conflict of interest issues if you have the type of relationship with Mr. Paul in which you can suggest to him he put this information on his website. Aside from the COI issue, I suppose what you are suggesting doesn't really break the letter of any Wikipedia policies (except for COI), but I think it goes against the spirit of many of them. If you do proceed with having him publish that information on his website, I would highly recommend disclosing this on the article's talk page. My personal advice would be to use the available reliable sources (including his current website) to rewrite the article. Regards, PDCook (talk) 16:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

should non-hodgkin lymphoma be redirected to lymphoma

I have been considering removing the content from the page Non-hodgkins lymphoma and replacing it with a redirect to the page lymphoma was about to do it earliar today,but i thought I should ask a more experienced editor about their opinion prior to making this major of a change.Please post a reply on my talk page,or leave the talkback template.Thanks.Immunize (talk) 17:24, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no personal opinion on the redirect itself, but looking at the talk page it seems like a somewhat controversial topic. It has been redirected before and then restored. Given that the discussion is more than a year old, you should ask what the others involved think and wait for consensus to emerge. PDCook (talk) 17:43, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Radio Cine Forniture

Thanks for the patronizing message about my entry on the RCF page. Being a new user I guess you stumbled across it whilst out on 'patrol'. Go fuck yourself. Don't tell me what to do. You down own wikipedia, despite spending most of your life on here. You sad pathetic loser.—Preceding unsigned comment added by IamJack247 (talk • contribs)

You created an unreferenced article about a small company. I requested citations. None were given. I proposed deletion. You just attacked me. The messages I left on your talk page were standard welcome, unreferenced and proposed deletion templates. I am aware that I "down own" Wikipedia, but there are standards of notability and verifiability that your article did not meet. Please feel free to improve it. PDCook (talk) 22:42, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

speedy A7

The criterion for a7 is "an article about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability". If something is asserted which would possibly be significant if sourced, then whether or not it meets WP:N, A7 does not apply.

I have therefore removed your speedy tag on World Database for Islamic Banking and Finance. If you think it should be deleted, it is your responsibility under WP:BEFORE to look for sources first, and nominate for deletion only if you do not find them. DGG ( talk ) 18:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC) `[reply]

Fair enough that you declined the speedy; there is certainly room for interpretation of what a credible claim of significance or importance is. I am well aware of WP:Before and have spent plenty of time looking for references. I would like to add that just finding a couple sources is not enough; they need to demonstrate notability. PDCook (talk) 18:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010

Brenda Jean Patrick

I don't know whether you wanted me to respond to you directly or whether you wanted a response in the discussion section. In any case, below you will find the response I posted there. Please let me know if you have further issues that I need to resolve.

I don't believe there are circular references back to Wikipedia in the Reference section any more. If there are, please remove them--or point them out to me and I will remove them. The See Also topics do relate to Wikipedia topics and are there so that someone who is interested in the concept of customer service can find more in-depth discussions of the topic and the ways in which business organizations handle customer service/customer care issues. At one time, I had links in External Links that may have referred to Wikipedia. BaronLarf removed those. The only reason I included them in the first place was so that readers would be able to find additional discussion of the concept of customer service in education. References I located indicated that the idea of educational institutions treating students like customers dates back at least to the mid-1970s and gradually trickled down to public school districts. Please let me know what else you would like me to do to make the article acceptable.Captaincorgi (talk) 21:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Captaincorgi (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I re-read your question again and focused on the word "article," which I had not done before. If your question relates to the body of the article, here is the response I posted on the discussion page.

If your question regards the blue linked references in the body of the article, I have no idea where they came from. I didn't put them. One day, I looked at the article and found that these links to certain word strings had "magically" manifested themselves overnight.Captaincorgi (talk) 22:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)Captaincorgi (talk) 22:04, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let's keep this conversation at the deletion discussion. PDCook (talk) 22:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Gsautter

Sautter has fully disclosed that he is working for the Plazi project, which believes that the information they provide, in the format they use, is public domain, and is seeking to add it to Wikipedia. I see that you already started by taking it up on his talk page. This may need to be taken up at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:56, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thank you & question

Thank you PDCook for working on my article and suggesting that I clarify the citation style. I've done so now. May I remove your comment at the head of the article?

Also - you suggested I include internal links to relevant articles in Wikipedia. There were already several relevant internal links in the article so I'm requesting clarification as to why you suggested that the article needed more. Signalfire2000 (talk) 13:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks pretty good now; I went ahead and removed the tags. The only thing I might recommend is to find if any of the references you've used are archived online. It's not required, but seeing an online newspaper article is a good way to quell any concerns if anyone questions the notability of Mr. Littauer. I'm willing to look as well if I get the time. Regards, PDCook (talk) 14:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me about the citation templates and for doing 2 as an example. Very nice! Signalfire2000 (talk) 18:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry (Fayazahamd)

I noticed you put a comment on User_talk:Fayazahmad123 about Sockpuppetry - I have just found User_talk:Fayazahamd creating pages that User_talk:Fayazahmad123 had also worked on - I have added a note to his Talk page but thought it best to let you know as well. Codf1977 (talk) 13:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. I hadn't noticed the other registered account. Regards, PDCook (talk) 14:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Sorry about getting my self all confused about which Fayazahmad I was editing !!!! Codf1977 (talk) 14:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have posted a Sockpuppetry investigation - though one of the accounts and one of the IP's is currently on a ban. Codf1977 (talk) 14:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for doing that. PDCook (talk) 14:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Floating market

Replied at User talk:Paul_012#Floating market. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010

February 2010

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to snowmobile, you added links to an article which did not exist, add content or meaning, Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid improper/overlinking. Thank you. Srobak (talk) 02:01, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, thanks for the template. I think you're confused. PDCook (talk) 02:11, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Gee, thanks for the edit requiring getting templated. Redlinking would be confusion. Srobak (talk) 02:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
?? PDCook (talk) 02:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see you changed where the link goes, and now it goes to an actual article. Your previous submission for the stud led to a blank page.Srobak (talk) 02:21, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It did not. It always pointed to the correct article. Check the history. In fact, all I did was UNDO your removal of the link. PDCook (talk) 02:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you saw this version, in which I messed up the link, but within a minute fixed it with this edit. PDCook (talk) 02:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed... I apparently did not see the later edit. Too used to having to monitor bad faith edits on that page. My apologies. Srobak (talk) 02:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Apology accepted. PDCook (talk) 02:36, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of infections of the central nervous system

Hi, thanks for the help sorting this out. I have pasted the relevant conversation from the deleted page at the bottom of my talk page, should we need to refer to it. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 19:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC) P.S. Sorry it's been a long day, I see the conversation has been preserved on the "new" discussion page. Thanks again. Graham Colm (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thanks for helping. I've been trying to work with Immunize to get him to follow policy and discuss before editing, but he's not listening. I left a strongly worded comment on his talk page about this, and if things don't change soon I wonder if sanctions are appropriate. Regards, PDCook (talk) 19:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I just read the comment and sanctions might be appropriate if all the good advice is not heeded soon. I'm also concerned about continuing copyright violation, but there is nothing I can prove at the moment. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 19:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
TimVickers had a little discussion with Immunize about copyright violations. I hope that is still not happening, but when I see unreferenced additions to articles, it certainly makes me suspicious. PDCook (talk) 19:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Message

Hello, Pdcook. You have new messages at Immunize's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
  1. ^ {{cite web www.emedicine neurology/brain metastases}}
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pdcook/Archive_2&oldid=1079771437"