User talk:Vianello/Archives/2010/August
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Vianello. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Supermattyb
Hi, you just deleted a page i just made on my favorite author. Why did you do this? I just wanted to start the page, and maybe others could contribute, making it better. But why did you delete it? He is a real author, and his books are being made into a movie. Please undelete the page, Dale e. Basye. Thank you. Supermattyb (talk) 23:01, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 19:57, 3 August 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Another user has a question about a speedy deletion. Would you be willing to follow up, since I am unable to view the original deleted page? Regards! VQuakr (talk) 19:57, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Why the indefinite block? KnightLago (talk) 20:14, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
- Bump. KnightLago (talk) 01:10, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
deletion
I'm a bit surprised at the prompt deletion of an entry on Mark Custom Recording Services I posted recently. I will attempt to repost this again with more substantial references, awards they have won, and a longer list of artists they have recorded if that will satisfy the threshold of importance. A search of the company IN WIKIPEDIA shows that several entries cite the company as recording their music. Perhaps that will help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by HistBib (talk • contribs) 21:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Regarding the speedy deletion of Cairo International Model United Nations
You deleted the article Cairo International Model United Nations without any discussion or prior notice. The article was tagged for speedy deletion but I removed the tag as I saw it as notable enough and discussion could be made regarding if it meets the notability criteria. My main concern is why you would delete the article even though I showed interest in discussing notability. All the content that was created with notable references is now deleted even though a compromise could have been made for a merger or anything of that sort. I do not see why you would ignore my previous removal of article speedy deletion and request the undeletion of it until it is discussed for deletion --Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 08:40, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
- The article listed several references, and that's typically enough to escape a CSD A7. Would you be willing to restore? Thanks, Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 11:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
You wanted to be notified if further disruption has occurred. It has. See his edits. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 22:08, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I was just about to send you a page link to prove what I said above, when I saw you'd blocked him. You'll probably need to keep an eye out on his Talk page now, though. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 22:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
It's a shame. Well, thanks again. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 22:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Game Plan (company) under construction - Thank you!
Thanks for adding that template! I was going to add it myself but I'm bad at remembering the names of all the relevant templates that I use at times. Bumm13 (talk) 22:58, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion request
Hi, I noticed you deleted Sgt Susan E Miller under A7. A related article, David N Seeloff (you may want to check the deleted history of Miller), could probably be speedied per same criteria, though I had PRODded it to be safe. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 23:00, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Notability deletion
Hi, Vianello. You may want to rethink that A7 speedy on Masters V. Winner of a grammy award is an assertion of notability and a quick google search confirms it. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 19:48, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually... the article did mention the Grammy when you deleted it. (Unless, of course, I'm somehow misreading the edit history -- which is always a possibility :) -- but that was the only reason I knew to google it). — CactusWriter (talk) 00:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Understood. And no problem because I am all too familiar with my own brain's misfirings. Maybe those two sentences were just some weird ambigram. Anyway, thanks for rectifying it. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:19, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
tb
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- Dank (push to talk) 16:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Richard Trifan
My comments, just for your information Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
72.34.71.50
I'm curious -- how was this vandal report dif 72.34.71.50 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) resolved ? I notice that they were not blocked. ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 22:40, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Blocking My Bot
Please take a look at User talk:WelcomerBot. Thanks. - EdoDodo talk 23:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
It's quite obviously a bot account, and as this was created quite obviously by an experienced user, it's even more obviously an account intended for a bot. Therefore, it's not a breach of the username policy, unless you're gonna be bold and block this lot too. Please re-think this one. Thanks, [stwalkerster|talk] 23:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Just seen your comment at the bot's user talk page, thanks. Just as a quick heads-up for future, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval states "Before applying for approval [...] You will need to create an account for your bot " :) [stwalkerster|talk] 23:13, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- And I've just seen your reply on my talk page. Seems we're too fast for each other :D [stwalkerster|talk] 23:13, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the unblock. I've created the user page of the bot, and redirected the talk page to mine, to make it clearer that it is a legitimate bot, should have done that earlier as it may have avoided misunderstandings like this one :). Anyway, thanks. - EdoDodo talk 23:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- And I should have been more aware of the involved policies, so the fault is primarily mine. My apologies for the brief but unwarranted impound of your bot. I hope it hasn't been too badly traumatized. - Vianello (Talk) 23:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
- Haha, no worries :). - EdoDodo talk 23:25, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Progarchives
Hi, you deleted my page Progarchives on the basis that it was unimportant, when I gave plenty of exaples of it importance. I would like you to reconsider the deletion, and if possible "un-delete" it.
--Andy (talk) 23:45, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Page deletion
Hi Vianello.
I posted an entry called "Proyecto Horizonte (Ushpa-Ushpa)" and it was recommended for speedy deletion. While I did contest it by adding the 'hangon' and justifying my content, this was still deleted. The organisation I wrote about is a private non-profit in Cochabamba, Bolivia. They are doing some excellent work, and have been recognised by various institutions around the world. All of the information in my written article was factual, talking about the 15,000-strong Mineros San Jan community as well as the organisation. Could you please assist with letting me know how I can re-write/re-submit the article, and what I would need to alter, as I believe I've followed the guidelines.
Thank you,
Aditi Daga
ADITI DAGA (talk) 11:06, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
CI Host
Can you elaborate on your reasoning for SD of CI Host? CSD G10 is a very focused reason, of which a very low % of the article fell into and could have easily been cleaned up - despite that all the "attacking" material was indeed factual. That cite alone does not substantiate its deletion as there was a lot of content regarding the company, its services, products, operations, staff and history. As such - the article should be restored asap, and at worst cleaned up a tad, which I am happy to help with. Thanks Srobak (talk) 21:00, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
- Alright - now it's been deleted again under a 2:1 "consensus" with comments posted about the company's existence by people who don't know how it historically became Cassiopeia, or who clearly have no knowledge of the history at all. In fact both times the article was never tagged as being discussed for afd as it should have - otherwise I would have participated to keep it around, as I'm sure other's would have. It looks like the new afd went up the same day you restored it. This is patently silly - and I am done. It is pointless to lobby or respond after the fact for something that makes sense to have when you have to deal with people who are hell bent on not having it and who in general don't know what they are talking about... but as this seems to be a continuing and growing trend at WP - I can't say I am surprised. It will in time prove to be one of the core items that leads to WP's total loss of credibility, usability, and ultimate demise. This instance shall too be remembered. Srobak (talk) 13:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Baco Liner
Hi,
I created an article on Baco Liner. It was CSD'd; I added a hangon and pointed out the significance of the subject on the talkpage. Malik Shabazz suggested on the talkpage that I should make it clear that the article satisfies the notability criteria. So, I further reliable third-party sources on the subject, hit submit... and it turns out you deleted the article in the meantime. This is frustrating. My understanding is that administrators should avoid deleting a page that appears incomplete too soon after its creation, and that A7 no longer applies if you're just waiting an hour for a slightly better source to be provided which underlines notability.
Would it be possible to restore the article so that I can add additional sources to demonstrate notability? Or is it gone forever?
Thanks for your time,
bobrayner (talk) 23:15, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for userfying it. bobrayner (talk) 10:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Vianello,
You removed my Green Living Journal entry for this reason "(Speedy deleted per CSD A7, was an article about a company or organization that didn't assert the importance or significance of its subject. using TW)" I believe that the 20 year longevity and demand for the Green Living Journal assets its importance and significance. Could you let me know how I should have stated its importance? Thank you for any feed back. I would really like to learn how I should have stated this. Regards, Cascade Sue (talk) 23:56, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
my malcolm in the middle article?
Hi there, my 'Malcolm In The Middle' article has been removed - this is real, I am not guilty of pure vandalism.
It is a craze that is catching on in the area and I think will become larger. It is a new technique and one that I had not seen until six months ago. Because of the surreal nature of the activity, users become manic whilst getting high, and it encourages much laughing about that forgotten division of entertainment, the television show 'Malcolm In The Middle.'
Like football stickers and the use of the word 'sick' to represent something that is actually good, the 'Malcolm In The Middle' is a youth culture phenomenon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angstromhoot (talk • contribs) 22:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
User:Snottywong/userboxes/ARSbackfire
Could you please restore this page to my userspace, thanks. Verbal chat 08:47, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Why did you pick on us?
Out of all the companies in the LMS space you thought we deserved to be removed. Everyday we fight larger companies delivering crap. "an article about a company or organization that didn't assert the importance or significance of its subject". Well if you think the first XML based e learning system is not significant then tell me why http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plateau_Systems is. Either put our page back or remove all links to companies LMS page. (BTW you could have at least rewired the link to the Thinking Cap LMS and not simply deleted it) And then go on and kill all the company pages. If Thinking Cap is not relevant than neither is Blackboard. Your lack of consistency smacks of favoritism and bias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.124.216.90 (talk) 16:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Fouzieh Majd
You deleted this article yesterday, after a nomination by User:Beeshoney, whose deletion nomination practices have since been sharply criticized at AN/I[1] and on his talk page. Please undelete this article; the cached version contains an assertion of significance which is arguably sufficient to survive A7, and a Google search on the native language version of the subject's name appears to show very significant coverage. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thinking Cap
Hello There, You deleted page "Thinking Cap" for "A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content)." Our company is one of the first elearning software firms that created their software with XML and we are the third in the world to be SCORM certified, which in our line of business is a rather big deal. Could you please let me know your exact reasoning for removing the page? Is it possible to get it back by doing some specific editing? Info would be appreciated. Thanks! TabithaFournier (talk) 00:38, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion of Zubeo
I'd like to contest the speedy deletion of the Zubeo article. True, this article discusses a company, but also the software product they distribute (a media aggregation product that competes with Mediafly and Stitcher).
Quote from the A7 criterion for notability: "This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works."
As I mentioned about, the Zubeo article is about both the company and the software they produce. It does not satisfy the criteria for speedy deletion and I would like the article restored as speedily as it was removed.
Eric.a.mann (talk) 02:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Hassan Barzideh
You deleted this article yesterday, after a nomination by User:Beeshoney, whose deletion nomination practices have since been sharply criticized at AN/I[2] and on his talk page. Please undelete this article; the cached version contains an assertion of significance which is arguably sufficient to survive A7, and a Google search on the native language version of the subject's name appears to show significant coverage. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:08, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
- Can you ensure you undelete the talk pages as well - the WikiProject on them are used to track the Unref BLPs. Talk:Asad_Sabetpour is one that was deleted... not sure if there are more. Thanks. The-Pope (talk) 12:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Holding pen
I'm coming here, because you were the admin making the call on Monkeynuts54; the user responded to your query here and then kept on editing. I don't know if they intend to stop editing as stated here, though... Salvio Let's talk 'bout it! 00:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
The page is still a redlink because, as an IP editor, I am unable to create pages. I've asked on the MFD talk page that somebody create it so I can add my rationale, but it hasn't happened yet. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 23:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
a3ro talk page
It falls under "don't be inconsiderate" and remotely under "trolling". Inka 888 (talk) 03:10, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- It may be a tiny bit immature, but I wouldn't classify it as either. To judge by the history of the userpage you seem to be alone in this impression. I can't stop you from going forward if you want to keep pushing this as being vandalism, but I really don't think people are apt to agree. - Vianello (Talk) 03:13, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Your Love Is My Drug
The tempo is clearly marked at 120 BPM. Further, at the bottom of the first page of the music, a note is made that the original recording is a half-step higher than the notation. The notation is F major. A half-step higher than F is F#. Chapmaning (talk) 04:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm getting a "Metronome: q = 120", but I've been in touch with them and they say they're in the process of fixing it. it IS 120, but should it be left out until there's no difference? Chapmaning (talk) 04:15, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay, let me explain this as ive written many. Key= F Major (This is located right under sheet music and states) "Original Published Key: F Major" Beat rate = (Found under "Arrangement Details Tab") Metronome: q = 132 - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 04:45, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
The "original key" is what we use. In this case its published in "Original Published Key: F Major". Note the writting, "the song is written in the key". Meaning the original key. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 05:12, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
As the person who turned this into a redirect, you may be interested to know I have nominated it for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 August 24#Racism against whites. Robofish (talk) 22:02, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I am David Freedman. I have created a number of cult and not so cult TV programmes and worked on films that have been nominated for Academy Awards. Most notably I co created Aaagh! It's The Mr Hell Show and Bounty Hamster, and helped develop shows like Rex The Runt and Foxbusters. On films I've worked on Thunderbirds, wrote the dialogue on The Old Lady & The Pigeons, and on Brendan & The Secret Of Kells, I was a story consultant. Both of those got nominated for Oscars. Anyhow, I am often known as David Max Freedman. But I noticed that a David Freedman, who died in 1939 was getting the link and the credit on Wikipedia as being me. I'm old (45 this year) but not that old, And I certainly didn't die in 1939.
My reason is not because of Ego, but because nowadays Wikipedia has become a source in which people find people. They want to know who made what, and it's either imdb, or yourselves.
I hope this helps explain why the entry feels quite autobiographical.
ps - Why is there no wikipedia entry for Hugh MacLeod of Gapingvoid? Am I missing something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidmaxfreedman (talk • contribs) 22:10, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I was checking on the deleted contributions of an editor and saw that you speedily deleted this article as "A3: Article that has no meaningful, substantive content". That is not true: the article did have meaningful content, and even a reference. It was a duplicate of Karrar (UCAV), but your reason for deletion was invalid. Fences&Windows 00:39, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
I was kinda hoping this would be deleted because the target is going to be redirect to the band's article for failing WP:NALBUMS. Unless you think both should redirect to the band...? 69.181.249.92 (talk) 19:29, 26 August 2010 (UTC)