User talk:Wiki0709/Archive 1

Archive 1

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, Wiki0709, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style
• Neutral Point of View
• Civility

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 at the help desk, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up, probably in less than 15 minutes, to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  · AndonicO ^Talk

Grandiosa

Hi, I've been answering you now, in the article-discussion section.

The information I'm writing is based on well known facts, like you can see in the article, I'm linking to the official company website, and to well-known newspapers etc. which are supporting all the information I'm writing.

So this is certainly established research, since it's from official sources.

Also, I'm not parial in any way, in the Nordic pizza-industy, I'm a Norwegian living in Britain.

And these are issues that have been discussed on a Norwegian message-board, and I'm simply trying to update the Wikipedia article, with the things we found on official websites, while we were discussing the contence of the Pizza in the thread on the message board.

I think that this is something that should be publicly known.

I'm simply just putting well-known, documented information, in a new context, which maybe reveals a paradox or two.

But I can't see that there should be anything wrong with doing this.

And these paradoxes has also been revealed from before, in the mentioned thread on the Norwegian message-board.

Doctor Who

Hello! While I disagree with you (and consider 'borne out of' to read nonsensically), I agree that it can be nicely reworded as you have done. 'Borne out of' makes as much sense as 'held out of'! The phrase "born out of (discussions)" is creating a metaphor of the idea being 'born' from the discussion. "Borne out of (discussions)" has no meaning at all! Maybe the idea was borne out by evidence, maybe people who don't like Dr Who can bear it, so the idea is borne by them. But it can't be borne if born is the meaning intended. But your rewording is a nice, safe, and probably better anyway, alternative. Skittle 22:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Beauty

Wow what a nice previous comment, Hi, I'm sorry I marked one of your revisions as vandalism, too quick on the click, the Beauty page has been the butt of quite a lot of 'school' vandalism lately. I can see that you are working quite hard to keep the nonsense out of here. :) SallyBoseman 14:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, looking at the history now it does look like I put back some vandalism in error. I was of the belief I was removing it when I made the edit.

Ros0709 15:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Moon Zappa

It's probably best not to revert the removal of information from the Moon Zappa article by 206.116.209.195. Per our Biographies of Living Persons policy, "subjects of articles are welcome to remove unsourced or poorly sourced material," and "Anonymous edits that blank all or part of a biography of a living person should be evaluated carefully." The paragraph about Zappa's marriage was uncited, and it could have been Zappa herself or someone close to her removing information that wasn't true. Thanks, Mike R 14:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For the revert. :) Acalamari 19:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they've just been blocked as a vandalism-only account. Funny, they mentioned a user called "NaeNae18", who was a vandal I encountered many months ago. If it's the same person, they remember me, despite the vandalism that they did was from March! Acalamari 20:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

There are three classes of deletion, and it is my understanding that speedy deletion tags and WP:PROD can be removed by anyone for a valid reason, it is only the WP:AFD tags that must be debated. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

To quote the tag, If this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice. That's open to any editor, not just admins. The editor who placed the tag is no admin. So go for it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem! And I must say I really have a concern about how this editor is using this Twinkle program to slap on speedy deletion notices. Most have been reverted and that's not a good track record. I've noted several instances where s/he does not even seem to be following basic WP notability guidelines. I thought we were supposed to use speedy only when it's a fairly open and shut case. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello there

I see you are interested in the Life On Mars Television Series, as I am.

At the moment I have A Life On Mars Wikiproject currently up for approval by the Wikiproject Approval Council. As you are interested in Life On Mars I was wondering if you would be interested in adding your name and joining. If you are interested you can find it on Wikipedia: WikiProject Council/Proposals its right at the very bottom you cant miss it as its titled ‘Wikipedia: Wikiproject Life on Mars (Television Series)’. And after your name is added to Wikiproject propsals please add it to the main page Wikipedia:Wikiproject Life On Mars

If you are interested by all means feel free to join

Regards

Police,Mad,Jack —Preceding comment was added at 20:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding my user page

Hi there, Thanks for taking an interest in my user page and pointing a slight error in my wording, I will be sure to make ammends to it. --Spherea (talk) 08:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your removal of a speedy on Robert Abbinanti

it is not clear to me that the google hits are him until you get to this one which looks like a wiki and that the article was copied from. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 19:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I did this search which gives loads of relevant results, but you are right, there does seem to be a copy there; not sure if it is authorised - perhaps it should be tagged {{copyvio}} Ros0709 (talk) 19:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

well...after I looked at some of the other links that just his name comes up with, he seems to be a minorly notable organized crime guy as well, so perhaps a longer article is warrented....--Rocksanddirt (talk) 00:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding modifying own talk entires

Thank you Ros0709 for the helpful comments. No offense is taken, and point is understood. Best wishes. Mwbseiso (talk) 20:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

On Hoffman

I am having a big problem with the hoffman article as you can see if you fo to my user page while I was adding information anotehr person changed the name because I didnt capitalize the last name and when it was reworked the article became stuck in the phase it was even after I tried over and over to add the additional information To no avail Wiki isnt allowing me to add the additional information I need to make this work. Artintegrated (talk) 23:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the name change should cause any problems; the page seems editable to me. Ros0709 (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Memphis Tennessee History

Hey, I undid your redirect. I am in the process of shortening the parent article Memphis, Tennessee. Like today, the history section goes to its own article History of Memphis, Tennessee. For that purpose I copy and paste the information to the new article first and then reduce the subsection in the parent article. Man, you need to give me more than three minutes to do that. ;-) doxTxob \ ^talk 00:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Go for it. Duplication of the article was going to cause problems but what you're suggesting sounds sensible. Ros0709 (talk) 08:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

And yes, I was a bit quick off the mark. Apologies. Ros0709 (talk) 08:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz

Dear Ros0709! The article Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz is about a person who STARTED POLISH WIKIPEDIA! It is very important and it isn't about wikipedian. It's about someone, who is a very known person. So please, don't delete it. P.S.: See w:pl:Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz - it's the same article about the same person, and it isn't deleted! Kubek15 - Talk, Userboxes, Contributions 12:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an admin so I won't delete it. Anyone else can simply delete the tag or an admin can delete the article but either way there'll be a second opinion. I tagged it because I think someone should review it: I'm not sure article this would be considered notable if it had nothing to do with Wikipedia, and I don't think we should treat it any differently because of that. Ros0709 (talk) 12:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Shades(monsters)

I agree it should go ASAP, but G1 does not apply- have a quick reread. Doesn't quite fall under vandalism either, due to the fact that it does not appear to be deliberately introduced to cause disruption. WP:SNOW would have to be used to delete this, really, and I would rather not personally touch it, due to negative experiences with it in the past. I'll leave your tag up, but just thought I'd mention this. J Milburn (talk) 18:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Good call. "I cant decribed them perfectly, but i can descibe them" is gibberish, mind you! I'll leave the tag for now - it should at least attract an admin's attention. Ros0709 (talk) 18:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

article was dup of four-velocity

Frame-specific and minimally-variant "proper" values for time, length, speed and acceleration have been finding their way into textbooks for several decades, thanks to the conceptual clarity they offer to students not yet ready for four-vectors. I realize that relativity is probably a target for recreational contributors. However, is there a way for those of us who do physics for a living to make the case with wikipedia on items of pedagogical value that are common knowledge in the field, clearly referenced, and easy to check? Thermochap (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Crikey, had to read that twice over! If you feel that the Proper velocity article is distinct from Four-velocity then please revert my change; there'll be no edit war over it. Ros0709 (talk) 21:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

(follow-up) Getting the edit history of a redir can be awkward. It is here. Ros0709 (talk) 21:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

(reply) Thanks! Sorry about the need for editing of the note above. It is pretty unintelligible. Is "reverting a change" something simple, like clicking on cur versus last? Cheers. Thermochap (talk) 23:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yep, follow the link above, click on Undo and you'll be back to the edit page with the previous (your) text which you can save. Might be worth adding something to the article's talk page too otherwise the same thing could happen again. Ros0709 (talk) 23:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Bubbleboy007

why was my aberdactyl colony paper deleted?

are you going to answer?

User:bubbleboy007 —Preceding comment was added at 23:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

According to the delete log: 23:24, 23 January 2008 Majorly (Talk | contribs) deleted "Aberdactyl Colony" ‎ (This article or other page provides no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. It is patent nonsense (CSD G1).) Ros0709 (talk) 23:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes

Yes i did. Thank you for reverting the page for :D. P.S. do you use Twinkle? Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 00:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

My Talk Page

Thanks for restoring the message on my talk page. I hadn't even read it before the editor deleted it. It looks like we have an election coming up in Canada so we can expect to get a lot of SPAs trying to create articles for various candidates. This particular one was deleted following an AfD and has since been recreated and speedily deleted at least twice. --JGGardiner (talk) 01:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judith Moses

Can you please give a rationale for deletion in this AfD? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 20:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Now fixed. Don't quite know what went wrong when I made the proposal; I suspect the link to WP:BIO (which I may have entered incorrectly) messed it up. Ros0709 (talk) 20:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Amit Sahai suicide

I nominated an article, Amit Sahai suicide, that is related to the List of deaths caused by ragging that you've edited and so maybe you would interested in that AfD debate. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amit Sahai suicide. Thank you. --JJLatWiki (talk) 15:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks for helping me with the spam tag on GILA

:) ViperSnake151 18:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Shelly burns

My apologies: it was a speedy. I misread the article. 12:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I should have tagged it db-web rather than db-bio; db-bio was correctly declined! Ros0709 (talk) 12:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Ashwini Gupta

Oh, okay then. I'm sorry, I didn't know that I could remove it. Wow, that makes everything a whole lot easier! Thank you! — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 09:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Wills n(N)eck

Thanks! I was just trying to sort that out when it magically happened!

You're welcome. Ros0709 (talk) 10:17, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

BTW - Google has a lot of references to "Will's Neck". I added a redir for that. Ros0709 (talk) 10:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

HelenaMaria

I noticed that you removed the speedy deletion tag from this article. Just wanted to let you know that this is an almost exact re-creation of the article that was speedy deleted earlier today. I am still not convinced that it assets notability with appropriate references so, if you don't object, I am going to re-nominate it for speedy deletion. Thanks. --ukexpat (talk) 21:09, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I think this one is a close call and therefore not a speedy candidate. Perhaps PROD it instead? Ros0709 (talk) 21:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

TrimWater

What makes TrimWater spam as opposed to Ramune or Red Rain Energy drink? The tone isn't advertising. Red Rain energy drink isn't notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sugarisbad (talk • contribs) 21:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

See WP:SPAM and WP:WAX Ros0709 (talk) 21:58, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Abongo (Roy) Obama

Thanks for tagging this article. I hope the original poster now figures that its not me against him and that this is simply not ok with the guidelines. In case your interested, there is an open Deletion Review for this article. Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 20:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thanks for standing up for me RE: the personal attacks on the Michael Minns afd. Much appreciated. Note that I created a Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names for the User:Michael Minns username requesting that it be blocked, reason: duplicates the name of a living, notable person whom the user is not (by his/her own admission). Best, --Pgagnon999 (talk) 16:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

PCD album

A schedule of future events may be appropriate if it can be verified. :Well it's been verified by a group member on the OFFICIAL web site--KingMorpheus (talk) 04:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

My response here

Re: Phoenix Film

What do you mean, recreate? I didn't recreate anything. Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 16:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

oh, wait. #@!. Hold on a sec.... Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 16:38, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks! Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 17:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Dovetail Ranch

The article I posted about Dovetail ranch is almost the same as the one for some of the other Brothels in the "list of brothels" page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_brothels_in_Nevada SnitchyCat 2 March 2007

WP:WAX Ros0709 (talk) 17:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

SICA

Please read User talk:Xenon54#SICA and try to understand how I view tearing down SICA as tantamount to tearing down The Commonwealth. Next time, please consider running a quick Google check for notability or following the links listed therein before posting a speedy. Ta. :)--Thecurran (talk) 00:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

An article which consists of nothing but external links (as it was at the time it was tagged) satisfies the criteria for deletion at Wikipedia:CSD#A3. I did not actually delete the article, applying the tag merely brought it to the attention of an administrator for further consideration. Notability was not an issue in this case, the lack of content was.

In the circumstances you correctly applied a {{hangon}} tag and continued development of the article (an explanation on the talk page would have been advisable). Note that the Wikipedia process (which I was following) worked: your article was not deleted, but if you had left the article as it was when tagged (and this happens a lot) then it would have been.

As a suggestion for the future, if you wish to create the article in small incremental steps I recommend you do it first in your own user space, where it will be left alone by new page patrollers. You would initially create the article as eg User:Thecurran/Newpage and then copy/paste to create the actual, completed, article. Thereafter you could blank the original and reuse it for a future new article, or tag it {{db-author}} and an administrator will delete it for you.

Ros0709 (talk) 09:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Desktop video

FYI: The original author has removed the dated prod tag without discussion. I am of the same opinion as you, even with the added sources, that this is original research. At best, the information should be included in another larger article. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer (especially as I had omitted to watch that page). I'll recheck it later and consider taking it to AfD if necessary. Ros0709 (talk) 18:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Holiday (Haylie Duff song)

Hi Ros, I've removed your speedy deletion tag, as criteria A7 does not apply to songs. Marasmusine (talk) 11:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Just noticed; no prob. Actually, I had marked it as such because there was no assertion of notability of the performer and that was probably an error - she has her own page but the link was missing to it. Ros0709 (talk) 11:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Viral injection

I see we were both taking Viral injection to AFD at the same time, and I created a discussion page at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Viral injection while you were adding a notice to Viral injection. Apologies for any confusion. EALacey (talk) 15:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Likewise! No confusion; I have added my !vote to your nomination. Ros0709 (talk) 15:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Stefano Gualeni

Fair enough. Please note that to avoid conflicts or disputes I reported just stark facts that can be quickly verified. If it doesn't suit Wikipedia's notability criteria, please delete the whole article. I was tired of meeting people that say that they "googled" me and decided to give a reliable, minimal base myself. Thanks and bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiipsi (talk • contribs) 20:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Eastern Creek V8 round

Referring 2008 Eastern Creek round of the V8 Supercar Championship, ummm... how exactly does a page with no text other than a partially filled in template read like a news release? --Falcadore (talk) 02:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

"Routine news coverage of such things as [...] sports [...] are not sufficient basis for an article". All the article consists of is the result of a race that completed the same day it was posted; that seems to be exactly what WP:NOT#NEWS addresses. Ros0709 (talk) 08:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Missing the point. The annotation says reads like a news release when very plainly it does not. Either it is the incorrect annotation to use, or it needs to be re-written. Additionally, the piece is incomplete, pending more information being posted, the bulk of the piece is written behind a <-- needing further editting. Maybe it needs to be removed pending a more complete version of the article being written, but as initially mentioned, the annotation was fundamentally incorrect and no additional explanation was provided as to why it might be appropriate. --Falcadore (talk) 23:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy tags

Thanks for the advice. I obviously still have a lot to learn!--Habashia (talk) 13:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Kieran Murphy (businessman/Nicasol

Hi Ros0709, thanks for message. Please see my talk page for my response. --Agrofe (talk) 17:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Smile!

xeryus (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

RfD nomination of FordFord School

I have nominated FordFord School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Snowman (talk) 23:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

RfD nomination of FoxFord School

I have nominated FoxFord School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Snowman (talk) 23:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit war?

On User talk:Neovik82 you tagged the user as being involved in an edit war, which they doesn't seem to have happened. Perhaps you want to remove that warning so that, as a new user, they're not confused. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

It appears that this was the third time the article was created, having been speedily deleted twice before in the same day. However, a 3RR warning was probably a bit harsh so I have removed it for now. Ros0709 (talk) 14:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't think WP:3RR applied to new page creation, but having just re-read the guideline, it seems to. It did seem a little "bitey", though, since we had both already warned them about related issues. Thanks for reconsidering (even though I was wrong about 3RR). Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Albert Junior problems

Thank you for your advice in that matter. However, I don't feel that removing his hang-on notices constituted vandalism on my part; I was pretty open about what I was doing and why. This user is (or in this case was since he's been blocked) apparently quite familiar with the workings of editing a wiki based on his knowledge of formatting, layout and the use of templates. Won't happen again, though. I do too much "whack-a-vandal" patrolling around here to get clobbered for vandalism myself.  :) Take care. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Quotezone.co.uk Article

Hi Ros - Just wondering if you could give me some guidelines to list the Quotezone.co.uk article? The site is one of the UK's leading insurance aggregators and the first to market with van insurance comparison in the UK. Ive put in some references including one from thesun.co.uk online newspaper - is there anything else required?

Greg w ni (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I am a regular user like you; administrators have the power to delete pages and it is they who will decide whether the page should go or not. My concerns are:

• Yes, there is mention in The Sun, but it is such a passing reference it may not be considered sufficiently relevant. See Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Primary criterion: "The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability".

• As you are clearly referencing your own site (and the title is the website address, not the company name) then you have a conflict of interest. This is a problem because it makes it difficult to objectively write from a neutral point of view.

• Further, advertising - which this could well be seen to be given the conflict of interest and web link - is explicitly prohibited; see Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Special note: advertising and promotion

Ros0709 (talk) 18:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Prostytutka Articles

Hi Ros - I noticed you removed the speedy's on the biography articles for the Prostytutka band members pending discussion with the author. I'm curious what the author says on the matter. From what I can see, the author appears to be one of the band members. Ryanniemi (talk) 08:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you may well be right. I had not made that association - I first came upon one of the other bios which is "obviously" a speedy candidate and tagged it, along with the others that had been created and the band article itself. The band article got deleted and then I realised that it was not a candidate at all because it had asserted notability. The article has been restored and I feel somewhat duty bound to assist this new user get the articles cleaned up; I'm keeping a close eye on them! I suspect the main band article will get taken to AfD and the band member articles will get speedied so I am just giving her a chance to merge the text into the main article. Ros0709 (talk) 08:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I have merged the bios into the main article and nominated it for deletion. Ros0709 (talk) 11:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Roger that, looks like the best course of action. Ryanniemi (talk) 11:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

User name same as created article KOS i said so

yeah. no worries. The name KOS stands for Kids of Sangh(very innocent). the "i said so" bit is part of the concept that this is a youth movement not a safe name that and adult organisation would use. Any other problems let me know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KOS i said so (talk • contribs) 23:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

On restarting at Talk:Criticism of Bill O'Reilly

I think restarting the discussion is a good idea. It seems to me that we're more likely to get progress if we freshen up the set of editors dealing with the subject by asking for more input from Wikipedians. Why not post a request for comments at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies or Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard because it deals with a biography, or Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard because the title violates WP:NPOV policy? My preference would be all three at once, get as many new people into the discussion as possible, restate the issue or provide them with a link to the top of the original section of the talk page where you've got your initial paragraph, and see what happens. I think there's an especially strong reason for posting at both noticeboards at once because the problem here touches on what both boards do. I'd note in the post on each board that you're posting on the other one (or other two). I'd do it myself, but I'm involved in another dispute in which I think I'll be doing the exact same thing. I don't think we're going to get progress any other way. That's my advice. I'm willing to back any sensible name change as long as we get away from "Criticism of". Cheers, Noroton (talk) 00:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to get to this. Right now real life is limiting my involvement in WP. Ros0709 (talk) 22:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I've started with a RfC - hopefully this will be suficient. Ros0709 (talk) 08:27, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

List of Outsider musicians

Hi, I should let you know, we are "on the same page"...I hate unsourced, OR List articles. I think that there should be a policy requiring all list articles to be sourced. It sounds hard, but it can be done. Look at People with depression; every single name has a source. I am so sick of going to list articles on music topics where editors have added all sorts of random bands that they happen to like. I am going to check every name, and erase the OR examples.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 20:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

:-) Hopefully others will join you in that task! Ros0709 (talk) 20:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

XHD-TV

thanx for your help buddy :) -AMAPO (talk) 08:40, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Ros0709 (talk) 08:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Word choices

Hey, I really appreciate your effort to maintain standards and help keep wiki legit. You rock. However writing stuff like "If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia." on my talk page just makes us all look petty. I'm clearly new at this and don't understand all the guidelines. I spend a lot of time and breath saying good things about wiki and trying to convert non-believers. Please back me up here; we are not all a bunch of lifeless, petty, slandering, no-nothing geeks. Lets drop the threats and offer to help each other. Leviculus (talk) 10:52, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

The wording is standard, created by concensus of the WP community; all I placed was a template. FWIW, you might have made sufficient changes to the article to avoid speedy deletion, but that is for an admin another editor to decide - neither you or me. Removing the speedy deletion tags from your own artcles is considered vandalism. Ros0709 (talk) 10:56, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thats cool, I get that you're doing your job. In the future if you include a simple, but elegant explanation like that, I think it will help reflect the standard of quality & community orientation we are all aspiring to. Thanks Leviculus (talk) 11:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Vehicle Theft Protection Program

Hello Ros0709, As a new user to Wikipedia, I am struggling to understand why the "Vehicle Theft Protection Program" page has been the victim of speedy deletion and I hope you could help me better understand for future reference. After uploading the content the first time it was removed becasue of image, citation, and content problems and was suggested by an editor to use sandbox to edit the page and upload it again once some tweaks were made. After uploading it a second time with the suggested edits the page was removed again and more edits using sandbox were suggested. After loading the page a third time today with all third party sources for citation, drastically cutting content down, no image, and no references to corporate websites or products, I am confused at what problems still remain on the page?

With Vehicle Theft Protection Program starting this week, I would greatly appreciate any guidance you could give me on creating an acceptable page so that it can be viewed by the masses who visit Wikipedia daily so they can be informed about this educational program and the helpful information it provides. Thanks, Warnickj1 (talk) 25 June, 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 19:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

It hasn't been deleted yet; I tagged it and it is for an admin to decide. I tagged it as spam because it reads like a corporate press release. Ros0709 (talk) 19:30, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

List Of ITV Programmes

I was only trying to show other programmes that have been shown on itv

I appreciate the effort, but there's already a category for ITV programmes which automatically creates the list. 20:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if I seemed a bit harsh in my explanations at this AfD, by the way. I tend only to comment at AfD if I think the process is "going wrong" in some way, but when I do I tend to try to explain my points in detail. No offence meant to you, personally. Keep up the good work. AndyJones (talk) 10:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion regarding Joe Hasselvander. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Joe Hasselvander

I went in and fixed a few errors on this page. The article was actually taken from his myspace site and I foolishly didn't check for grammatical errors! I got rid of all the annoying !!!!!! and made everything in the past tense instead of the present tense, and hopefully now it doesn't sound like a promotional press release!! --Babypengy (talk) 14:54, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Tah!!

Thankyou!!!Luridiformis (talk) 13:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Ros0709 (talk) 19:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Diplomats Vol 1

I have a lot of resources for this CD that's why I put it up there i'm not done that's all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vcr215 (talk • contribs) 21:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Make your case at the deletion debate; the policy cited there concerning mixtapes is quite harsh but tells you what kind of references you need to establish notability. Ros0709 (talk) 21:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Richard E. Jackson Jr.

Two dozen articles at Google News. Just as easy to check yourself, as to place a Prod. I added some key ones. DGG (talk) 00:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps a bit pointy, but if the article creator removes a tag indicating that references are needed with the explanation there are none, should I not believe them? Ros0709 (talk) 07:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Paul Westerberg's 49:00

can you let us know what part of the the guideline you think this "album" fails? It is an album length commercial release by an extremely influential musician. Numskll (talk) 19:11, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Responded at Talk:49:00..._Of_Your_Time/Life. Ros0709 (talk) 19:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Diary of a Teenage Girl

Why do you have a problem with the DOATG page? It does have a relevant link, how much more relevant can you get then the official website? You can contact me at my page... I'm Watchout4snakes! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchout4snakes! (talk • contribs) 23:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I have left the link to the official website (not a good reference, by the way - it is not a WP:RS because it is not independent of the subject) but removed the one which took you straight to the "buy now" link because that was a pure commerical link.

The article itself has multiple problems:

1. It fails to justify reason for inclusion according to any of the 5 criteria at Wikipedia:Notability_(books). This would immediately qualify it for deletion, but it looks like one or more of the criteria can be met so I have not tagged it as a speedy candidate. However, it needs to establish its notability in the article or else it probably will get deleted.
2. The article fails to give any indication of what the subject is. The article title suggests it is the diary of a teenage girl - not that it is about a book with that title. There is nothing in the article itself to suggest it is about a book. There is no mention whatsoever about who wrote it.
3. Even if you realise that this is a book there is still no context. The article launches straight into character biographies without explaining why.
4. There are no links to other articles. The author, if included, would link to the author's page, for example.
5. Whilst a book summary may be a useful section in an article about a book, that alone is not encyclopedic. For Wikipedia to have an full article on the book (rather than a mention on the author's page) it needs to discuss the cultural importance of the book, its critical reception etc.

Ros0709 (talk) 07:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

-My Reply To The DOATG Thing- OK well I guess they are very good reasons why it's not the best article in the world, but I’m new at this whole Wikipedia thing. Thanks for giving me some ideas on how to improve my future articles though.--Watchout4snakes! (talk) 19:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Zakhmet

Zakhmet was the former name of Khachpas - and many sources from pre-1992 will use that name. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks! Ros0709 (talk) 19:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Bradford Perkins

Hi. Sorry, I removed the speedy tag. There's enough there to reasonably say there's a claim to notability. However, I'm not saying an AfD is a bad idea! Thanks for tagging though. We need taggers. --Dweller (talk) 20:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

William T. Russell

Hi, The article draft I posted on Congressional candidate Bill Russell wasn't spam. And, wow! You're really fast! I appreciate your input and help in editing and finishing the article. Best regards, Rusty Dr. B. R. Lang (talk) 18:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Movie Kids

The tag was removed as an act of vandalism. That's not the same as a declined speedy. PRODS go to AfD. Speedys don't always have to. I'm restoring the A7 tag. DarkAudit (talk) 22:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC).

I've explained my rationale for removing it the second time on the AfD. Ros0709 (talk) 22:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

The admins will have access to the relevant information. Keeping this article any longer than necessary serves absolutely no purpose. DarkAudit (talk) 22:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

I appreciate your response to my email. I also appreciate and value your advice. I will leave the tag on the page, in the hopes that someone else will eventually find, and contribute.Bgubitz (talk) 00:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

PRODs

"Any editor - even the article creator - can remove PRODs. You should not replace them. I'm taking all those articles to AfD; bear with me. Ros0709 (talk) 18:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)"

Sorry, didn't know that. Thanks for telling me! --Theleftorium (talk) 18:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of high-impact entrepreneurship

Hi, I am unsure as to why this entry has been proposed for deletion. I followed the same template as the term 'social entrepreneurship', and have provided references etc. This is a term gaining momentum in the field. Please help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Globalendeavor (talk • contribs) 15:59, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

It was deleted by concensus discussed here. My concern is that it is not a well-used term, in fact it appears to be peculiar to the compant Global Endeavor, which you appear to have an association with. WP is not intended to be a vehicle for promotion. Ros0709 (talk) 22:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Afd's

My non-admin closure of afd's were already very thoroughly reviewed by numerous syops during my rfa. No one was able to show that they were improper in any way, shape or form. At best, they were simply unusual as they were a more literal interpretation of the documented limits imposed by the community when non-admin closures were conceived as opposed to following any operating precedent, a case of WP:BOLD if you will. The biggest argument that someone was able to put up against them were four opposes to someone else's rfa. Anyway, this is a moot point as it appears your concerns were addressed at an/i, though that was a curious choice of venue to have them looked at.--Finalnight (talk) 06:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey Ros0709...

Do I have to delete my reviews and stuff on my article? If not I'm fine, If yes, give me a couple of days to work it out...

--Nicholas, the person who loves wikipedia! 04:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

It's not up to me to delete it (I am not an admin) but it surely would have been; I moved it to your user space to allow you to work on it, but it could still be deleted, even there.

Wikipedia is not a place for original thought or opinion. You cannot say something like "this is the best game ever". If a game has had good reviews you could say something like "The game was critically well received. Joe Journalist in Respected Gaming Weekly praised its gameplay and awarded it the maximum possible score in his review[1]" - and provide a link to the reference. In other words, you can only report what other people have published. If reviews were mixed you should report that, not just the ones that support your own opinion.

The article you are working on seems to have no real theme to it, and Wikipedia doesn't like indicriminate collections of stuff. There is already an E8 2008 article. There is no obvious reason to collect various games into one article because they happpened to be shown there.

Look at other articles on WP to get a feel for what stays the course, and do follow the links in your welcome message on your own talk page - WP's policies are all laid out therein.

Ros0709 (talk) 19:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Please read

WP:ILIKEIT Dalejenkins | 22:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Dreadmoon page up for deletion?

Basis for reopening Dreadmoon page is that they are referenced in published works via Resistance Magazine, which is a published magazine. Urho was interviewed about Dreadmoon in issue #17. Urho was also interviewed by Wotansvolk who has a strong presence in the black metal scene on and off line.

Also, they have released two or more albums on one of the more important indie labels. Desastrious Records is very "notable" in the black metal scene (whose main site is unfortunately down at the moment). And yes, that is how they spell it. But here are some other sites that reference them: Geocities, Discogs, Crionic Mind posting in regards to Desastrious hosted black metal festival in Dallas, TX, Spirit of metal. The criteria states "i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable." Per the Spirit of Metal website, the oldest album released from Desastious is from 2001 which is more then a "few years" with a good sized listing of "notable" performers in the black metal scene. They are also listed on the ADL [1] Wickedabintra (talk) 05:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Stagg tree

Well i can't find an up to date reference.. but as you should know the second largest tree washington lost half it's trunk in 2005, see Washington Tree and check the giant sequoia page, which has an up to date list, ranking stagg tree number 5 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bradluke22 (talk • contribs) 13:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi again...

My article is kind of short, and yes I am acctully thinking right now that it is a little dumb...

Nicholas, the person who loves wikipedia! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Categories on your user page

I've removed the categories from the bottom of your user page. These categories are designed to go on pages in article space and by placing the on your user page you have created links from article space to user space, which is not allowed. Ros0709 (talk) 14:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

As an aside, please also see WP:NOTMYSPACE. The contents of your user page are probably in violation of that (FYI only; I am not an admin requesting any action nor am I following this up!) Ros0709 (talk) 14:49, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Ros. Those links only served as a template draft for an article currently being edited. The category links had previously been disabled by adding an asterisk after the lead double brackets in each category, pending completion of the final draft. That allows editors to review the applicable categores without listing the user file at each of the categories (until the asterisks are removed). I appreciate your interest and input. Thanks again. Best regards, Rusty Dr. B. R. Lang (talk) 15:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

On: Deletion of Peterstan article

I'd like to point out that no information given in the article on "Peterstan" was untrue (there was a case of bad wording, however)*. I still have a copy, if you want to reconsider your opinion on the article. Otherwise, I respect your work here.

• The 3x3 area in Svendborg was not "peacefully reclaimed" by the Kingdom of Denmark, it was given back by the occupying forces of the NPSG.

~Gobmech —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobmech (talk • contribs) 23:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

"Nonsense" does not necessarily mean "untrue" - it means the article is unsalvagable. With no sources the article was unverifiable and it was clearly written in a humourous manner - the section about an assassination attempt (getting stuck in a bus doorway) being for me the clincher that the article was not serious. Ros0709 (talk) 10:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I see your point and I agree with it - but nonetheless, the "getting trapped in a bus door" thing was regarded as an assassination attempt by the Peterstanian government and as such, the Kingdom of Denmark was forced to follow up on the case for diplomatic reasons.

~Gobmech —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gobmech (talk • contribs) 22:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Guitar Zero 2

Regarding the deletion of this article, I do not think that the article should be deleted, considering there is an article on a very similar, even identical, game called Frets on Fire. If this article should be deleted, why shouldn't the one on fof? If there is something that I must do to make the article "more important" (with lack of a better choice of words) or more in line with wikipedia standards, please tell me. BTW I have added the references section. I forgot to when I first made the article, sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lts100 (talk • contribs) 21:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, Frets on Fire has been released and appears to have won some awards, which makes it far more notable. You are entitled to remove the PROD on the article in question yourself if you contest the deletion. To delete it then it would have to be taken to AfD where there will be discussion amongst the WP community to decide. Ros0709 (talk) 21:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, is it possible for me to update the article over the next 2 or 3 days, to make it a slight bit more legit, because I have yet to list features, gameplay, or anything of that nature, and then delete the PROD? (Thnx for the fast reply, and your help.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.57.60 (talk) 21:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

You can delete the PROD at any time for any reason. Ros0709 (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Knot Feeder

Just a friendly note on Knot Feeder. A speedy was declined by another admin about 40 minutes ago, so I've declined your new speedy. (The band has at least one notable member, so this would not be an uncontroversial deletion.) If you think it still needs to go, AfD is the proper route. Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - I had missed that. Ros0709 (talk) 23:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Bootstrap (word origin)

My purpose in creating Bootstrap (word origin) was to provide a linkable page that presents the image of the leather boot with a visible strap in a short article that can be linked from Bootstrapping (disambiguation) where the link will be seen by people who click on Bootstrap. I have not yet added the link in Bootstrapping (disambiguation). It is not likely that such people will search on Boot and if they do they will probably exit because they are interested in bootstrapping, not footware. I tried to put the image on the Bootstrap (disambiguation) page, but that was reverted because images are not allowed on disambiguation pages. If I put the image in Wiktionary there is probably a rule that I can't do that. But even if the boot image is allowed there, it is not likely that the person searching Wikipedia for Bootstrap will want to access the dictionary because they already know generally what bootstraping is and want more information on it, oblivious to the fact that the term bootstrap originated with straps on leather boots. I don't think it would be appropriate to add the boot image to every one of the links from the disambiguation page such as Bootstraping (computer), Bootstrapping (finance), etc. etc. So were should I put it where it will be seen by those who would be interested? Greensburger (talk) 23:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Hang On A Second

Did You Actually Read The Article Page=breathing+booty It Was Pure And Offensive Spam So Don't Have A Go At Me Have a Go At it's Creator. Whittlepedia (talk) 11:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but the ends don't justify the means. If the contents are offensive delete them and place a {{courtesy-blanked}} tag in their place. Ros0709 (talk) 19:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Diego Garcia AfD

Hello Ros0709. You were the nominator of a recent AfD. Can you let me know if I missed any articles, or made any errors in the AfD close that you can see? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks - I did not realise there was such a history to these! When I nominated I checked all the articles that User:Diego145 created and you have deleted them all. The user's edits to other articles were also related and have all been reverted. I also searched on the name and couldn't see anything left. Two of the articles you deleted are not SALTed but as those are the more generic ones that don't include the DJ name I assume that was intentional. Ros0709 (talk) 08:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Gomalan Brass Quintet

Dear Mr.Ros, I would like only to say thank you for the number of messages I've recieved from you about my contributions. Yes, I was writing about a music group where I am one of the members. But first, I was adding the PURE translation of the ITALIAN wikipedia site: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gomalan_Brass_Quintet And second, there was a missing internal link from the brass quintet page of the english version. I have written nothing but history and links. No comments about our activity or if the Gomalan Brass Quintet could be better than others. In my country that means CENSURA. And it was present only during a REGIME, not in internet or on a FREE enciclopedia. Thanks again. Have a good day. Marco Pierobon—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gomalanbrass (talk • contribs) 13:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, please. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia anyone can contribute to, but that does not mean there aren't any rules. No-one is censoring you; you have a website of your own and you can put what you like there. But you do not own Wikipedia - if you want to use Wikipedia's website you have to abide by their rules, and you broke many of them. I didn't even apply those rules; I did alert the admins that the rules were being broken and the messages you received were to let you know. You had the chance to rectify things but chose not to.

If you still think you are being censored answer me this: why can I not add an article about myself on your website?

Ros0709 (talk) 14:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the this web page is wikipedia.org, and not ros709.org. I don't understand why the same rules are in the reality different from country to country. I repeat. The SAME article was accepted in Itali's wikipedia and not here, thanks to you. Other groups have the same page. I do'nt understand. Who are you? But you're rhight. You have the thruth. Bravo. Ciao. Marco Pierobon—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gomalanbrass (talk • contribs) 13:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

And I repeat, I did not decide the rules. Take your anger out somewhere else. Ros0709 (talk) 19:12, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Shen Tianhui

I don't understand why you propose to delete this article. The person is a renowned scientist in China, and a member of prestigious Chinese Academy of Sciences. If you want to delete this article, you need to delete other few hundreds of articles about academicians of CAS as well. Please do re-consider it. Ramtears (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm still waiting for your response. Ramtears (talk) 18:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I responded at Talk:Shen Tianhui. Ros0709 (talk) 18:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

A little outdent from me: Lack of sources is never a reason for a CSD as long as the article holds several claims to notability. In those cases either a {{unsourced}} tag should be added, or the article should go to WP:PROD or WP:AFD if a quick search does not give any confirmation of the text in the article.

Not trying to criticize here though, just passing on some friendly advice i have also been given in the past :). Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 18:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

You are right; I failed to register sufficient notability. I have removed the CSD and added tags for now. Ros0709 (talk) 18:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Good call

I was a bit startled that such elementary terms as Buyers market and Sellers market did not seem to exist nor redirect to anything. But indeed, the apostrophe makes all the difference. Good call creating the redirect; it may have been a redundant article, but it is certainly a plausible typo (With me already being an example for that) Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 17:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

:-) Apologies for not getting to let you know on your talk page before you got to me; discussion with another editor intervened. Ros0709 (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem whatsoever. It was a good call to redirect it, so it does not really need any form of explanation :). Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 18:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I wanted to catch you before you started on Buyer's Market. :-) Ros0709 (talk) 18:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

XPanel

Just to let you know that you cannot prod a recreated article, as the recreation itself constitutes a challenge to an eventual prod. I have listed XPanel at WP:AFD. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XPanel. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 19:40, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Simple. The challenge to the prod does not have to be explicit (i.e. removing the tag), nor does its rationale need to be valid. It is better to send an article directly to AfD when you see it substantially edited after the addition of a prod tag, even when the tag itself is left untouched. It is a matter of assuming the author's intention when he obviously wants the article kept.

Besides, chances are the article will be gone much sooner this way. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 19:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

STARS methodology proposed deletion

FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=STARS_methodology&oldid=197488843

Josh Bisignano

Was it necessary to remove the deletion tag? You could have read the article... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antivenin (talk • contribs) 17:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Our notes crossed; I explained at User_talk:Antivenin#Josh_Bisignano. Ros0709 (talk) 18:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

For your note. Much appreciated. Cheers, JNW (talk) 22:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem, and good luck with the patrolling. You may find Twinkle of use to you, especially for AfD nominations. (As an aside; I saw and was amused by your user page. Regrettably, I think it could apply to me also!) Ros0709 (talk) 22:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

If you go back a few months, you will see that the page once proudly displayed philosophy, work, and barnstars. Besides it being an unmitigated self-advertisement, it also attracted far more negative attention, i.e. vandalism. Things are quieter now...Thanks again, and keep up the good work. JNW (talk) 22:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Sir Bruce Forsyth

Hi, I have removed the {{db-r3}} tag you placed on Sir Bruce Forsyth, because I felt someone might actually search that way. If you still think it should be deleted, please re-add the tag. Thanks, LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 00:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

As you have contested it I have taken it to RfD. I am concerned that as Bruce Forsyth is not a knight having that redirect would give the impression he was. Ros0709 (talk) 09:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Your recent reversion

Thank you for the attention to detail that led you to revert a recent edit of mine on an AfD discussion. You are correct that in general, closed XfD pages should not be edited. However, in this case, I was the closing administrator and the edit just adjusted an inadvertent grammar/punctuation error in the closing statement. This minor adjustment to my closing does not change the substance of the discussion or of the closing rationale, and therefore my view is that it should be allowed to stand. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you are quite right and I apologise. For some reason I had misread the diff and seen it as a modification to one of the !votes. Ros0709 (talk) 21:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all. Thanks for all your efforts. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

SuperAntiSpyware

SuperAntiSpyware is a known anti spyware program. I gave references, screenshots and information. Why do you keep deleting it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperordarius (talk • contribs) 20:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I tagged it for deletion on one occasion; I am not an admin so did not delete it. The article was spammy in that it was peppered with peacock terms and contained marketing info such as the feature list of the two versions. Ros0709 (talk) 20:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer, but other programs such as Visual Studio have a comparison of editions, and no one tagged it for speedy deletion. Anyway, if I removed the comparison and just put the technologies used along with the critical reception, would it be fine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperordarius (talk • contribs) 20:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

The Cheetah Girls 4

Just a friendly note on The Cheetah Girls 4. I declined the speedy because the article definitely does not meet the definition of patent nonsense. Prod or AfD would be the way to go on this one, as it probably doesn't meet the requirments of Wikipedia:Notability (films).--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Birnkrant 616

You have noted Birnkrant 616 for deletion, and I heartedly disagree with that decision. Birnkrant 616 is the first student produced sitcom in the history of USC Film, the most famous and renowned film school in the world. In addition it is not an in-house series. At USC it broadcasts to 50,000 students, but it also broadcasts to 1.8 million Los Angeles residents via Channel LA36, and over 3 million via the OSTN (Open Student Television Network). The first sitcom, in the history of the world's top film school, that broadcasts to nearly 5million people (not counting the internet) is not notable?

EarlofGowrie (talk) 1:38, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

You need, IMO, to address the issues of notability and verifiability. However, please note that I, like you, am a "regular" editor with no ability to delete - that would happen, if it happened at all, after discussion at the AfD and you should certainly make your case there. Take a look through those policies I've highlighted and look for a criterion that is met and the article should be saved. However, I personally still feel that the notability standard has not been reached. Ros0709 (talk) 09:05, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Question on Norma Deletion Nominations

For what reason was the Norma (female name) article nominated for deletion? Any reason? Adding an article isn't always the lighning speed; often information takes time to add. We should give Norma a chance to become an official article. Neurotic heart (talk) 17:34, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Customer centric selling

An article that you have been involved in editing, Customer centric selling, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Customer centric selling. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Accounting4Taste:talk 22:51, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

aenanl

Hello, I noticed your speedy deletion request. Thank you for pointing that out. I've changed the article of OpenASelect to something similar to the one of OpenSSO by SUN. I guess the OpenASelect is now complies to the rules? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aenanl (talk • contribs) 22:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Justin T. Wayne

I'm not sure why you felt the speedy deletion of Justin T. Wayne was necessary, This page should remain on Wikipedia because of the important positions held by Wayne and his current political affairs. He is no different from other Omaha Politicians who have Wikipedia pages such as Brenda Council or anyone else. I've equipped this page with the necessary references and have provided much information on the various positions on which he holds throughout the North Omaha Community that plays a huge impact on the everyday lives of many people throughout our city. He is running for position of the Learning Community, the first time this type of election has ever been held in the state of Nebraska considering its a new Council created in 2006, which is history.IceTreay (talk) 00:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia has rules for inclusion and I saw nothing which asserted sufficient notability for this individual. WP:POLITICIAN states that standing for office does not infer notability. Your argument above about the importance of the election is an argument for an article about the election, not the candidates. See WP:WAX for why comparison with the Brenda Council article is not a valid argument, but also note that there is assertion there of notability in other areas, particularly the awards. Ros0709 (talk) 06:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

kevinkph85

i am the author of INCA Internet. If you believe that there is a point of view flaw or promotional aspect, please point out the parts in the "Discussions" page so the article may improve. Someone had previously tagged the article for these reasons and I have fixed the issues that were mentioned, recorded them in the discussion page, and removed the tag. Furthermore, please tag your name when leaving a discussion. Thank you for your time. Kevinkph85 (talk) 06:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

The following text posted there:

Problems I see are:

• The "Products" section is a feature list straight from marketing material

• The article is peppered with excessive praise. Just about the entire article suffers from this in one way or another, but some examples:

INCA Internet provided a new paradigm in the online PC security industry and went beyond the hardware and software based security solution and applied the concept of an Application Service Provider (ASP). The product performances have since been recognized by financial institutions, public institutions, on-line game companies and has acquired experience in the global market through international marketing.

The main strength of the INCA Internet products are a SaaS (software as a service) model being applied to the entire product line.

Young Heum Joo, born in 1976, is considered one of the most successful young CEO’s of Korea.

• The article is full of corporate-speak, such as

The business model of nProtect is to avoid the high market access barrier and intense competition “red ocean” market and conform to true customer and end-user’s niche and furthermore create various new business models that suit the broadband environment which requires an intimate co-work with the supplier.

• None of the references suggest particular notability. The biggest claim to fame is being 339th in an Asia-Pacific only list of companies, based on growth. All the other references are in Korean so are difficult to verify.

In short, the article is clearly not written from a neutral point of view; there is very likely a huge conflict of interest; it is purely WP:SPAM.

Ros0709 (talk) 07:06, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Question: Why was David Platt (pastor) deleted?

The article on David Platt (pastor) was deleted under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. I don't understand why because I did state that David Platt is the pastor of the biggest church in Birmingham, Alabama. I think this is of importance and significance, particularly to the people of Alabama as well as Christians and curious people in the South. Could you please explain why it was detailed? And if it was not done so erroneously, how I could specifically better present it? Thank you for your time.

The article's gone now and I cannot recall the exact detail of what was there. I nominated it (an admin subsequently deleted it), and almost certainly this would have been because there was no assertion of notability. The criteria are at WP:BIO. Note that Wikipedia does not automatically regard churches as notable and even if this one was that does not in itself make the pastor notable - see WP:BIO1E (a subsection of WP:BIO). IMO it would be better to create an article about the church itself (properly sourced etc) and then add a small section about the pastor; preferably about the pastors past and present. Ros0709 (talk) 06:49, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

thanks

i will take better care in my editing in future!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nube87654 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Is this how it is done?

Hello, I am new to this. I will scare references as soon as possible. I am open to changes suggested by others at any time. However, I believe that this concept is needing clear definition. So, I think shared contribution is better than deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardleddy (talk • contribs) 23:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

RE: Deckplate leaders

Thanks... I'm a dummy!--Sallicio^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 01:53, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The outsiders (1983)

In case if you were wondering, I have simply redirected the page to the proper article on the film. Hope you don't mind. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 21:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I tagged as an implausible redir before changing to redir, for some reason. It's done again now. Ros0709 (talk) 21:57, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

68050

Your CSD G4 nomination of the Motorola 68050 article was not G4 at all. I'd like you to explain your position on recommending CSD G4. Wayne Hardman (talk) 22:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Only an admin can see the actual previous content but the previous discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Motorola_68050 is pretty clear that he nomination is because the product never existed. There is absolutely nothing in the current article which challenges that - there are no attempts to establish notability at all. [This text also posted to article talk page] Ros0709 (talk) 06:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Partners in Leadership

Hi there. I am helping the author of the article (who is a new editor) to make the article conform to Wiki policies. I would appreciate if you removed your CSD tag. I will personally rewrite the article. The new user is not familiar with our policies and I am giving advice. It would be much appreciated Olly¹⁵⁰ 22:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Done, and added to my watchlist :-) Ros0709 (talk) 22:31, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for understanding =] Olly¹⁵⁰ 22:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

William T. Russell

Perhaps you'll take another look at this article and the deletion discussion I recently initiated. Thanks, Grsz^talk 22:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Done. Ros0709 (talk) 07:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:22, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Ros0709 (talk) 06:59, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Please review my Article

I'm sorry about the quality of my article on Cristobal Dominguez Biography, I've done some improvements and i'll keep on cleaning and providing more background on the subject. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedrominguez (talk • contribs) 22:56, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

umm

who are, how do you know about GZ and its status, and why are requesting deletion of the Wiki page?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by X orange90 x (talk • contribs) 23:15, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Assuming you meant "who are you" then I refer you to my user page. I regularly patrol new pages and that's when this article first gained my attention. I've cited the reasons for deletion in the AFD and the PROD I placed on it when originally created (here). I missed this one when the PROD was removed and should have taken it to AFD sooner. Wikipedia has strict guidelines for inclusion; in my opinion this falls far short. Ros0709 (talk) 06:58, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

well the project isnt dead, nor is the community being sued. it was all on behalf of Activision's greed and stupidity that the problem arose. but the project, as of yet, is suspended, not dead. i see no reason to remove the Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by X orange90 x (talk • contribs) 18:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Sonic Boom Six deletion

I feel that the pages are not suitable for deletion, as both the Rarities and Remix (now called Play On: Arcade Perfected & Rare and Rejected) and their 3rd album (City Of Theives) have both been announced personally by the band via their website.

www.sonicboomsix.co.uk has proof of Play On, incl. artwork, the tracklisting can be found in their forum, along with posting from Paul 'Barney Boom' Barnes regarding the process of their 3rd studio album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calummckenna (talk • contribs) 22:09, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Make your case at the AfD discussion, but note that the cited policy (WP:NALBUMS) is pretty clear. It includes the requirements that there is coverage independent of the subject and that release dates are confirmed - neither of which appear to be the case here. Ros0709 (talk) 22:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Alaerea deletion

I think that you should not delete this page!! Have you read Alaerea? Someone's off to a great start! Shouldn't we just keep it? PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEASE?

Let's please not keep it... Drmies (talk) 00:51, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Assessment in computer-supported collaborative learning

The use of that Speedy tag was out of a misunderstanding. Sorry. However, this user is creating non-notable pages, despite some indications from the posting of speedy templates that he should stop. He did not heed the warning. That makes him an non-constructive editor. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 23:01, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

IMO, when a user is only using Wikipedia for promotional purposes, we don't need to AGF, nor do we need to fear "biting". Some of them is here on a mission, and they should know better. However, I will exercise more discretion. Thanks you. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 23:06, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Your Warning

The removal of the hangon template was simply unintended collateral damage. I never discovered that until you brought it up to me. Also, I would recommend you to read this, and refrain from you you just did in the future. IMHO, it was rude, even borderline insulting. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 23:16, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I understand your intentions. I think I am going to take a short break, to clear my minds and reflect on this before I return. What has happened will not happen again. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 23:24, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

IfA

You've undone my edits on the new name for the IFA. Can you undo this please. Their name is now the Institute for Archaeologists.Dunk the Lunk (talk) 22:35, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

You were doing it the wrong way. I've posted a message to your page explaining the procedure. Ros0709 (talk) 22:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. How do I request that its deleted?Dunk the Lunk (talk) 22:40, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Tag the page to be deleted (Institute for Archaeologists) with {{db-move|Page to be moved|reason for move}} and wait for an admin to do it. Then move Institute of Field Archaeologists to there. Ros0709 (talk) 22:43, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Cheers!Dunk the Lunk (talk) 22:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Courtesy notification - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bow tie wearers (4th nomination)

An article in which you have had an interest, List of bow tie wearers, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bow tie wearers (4th nomination). Thank you. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 21:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Holly Marie Combs

User:Jessicaharris2008 has returned to Holly Marie Combs' article and is adding her usual, unsourced material. The page was semi-protected today, but she is apparently an established user and, thus, can bypass the protection. Any chance you could help out when you get a chance? I've reached my revert limit. Thanks. - Dudesleeper / Talk 21:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear, some people never learn. Reverted the latest unsourced gossip. Ros0709 (talk) 22:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Muchos gracias. - Dudesleeper / Talk 22:16, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Parrish & Heimbecker Ltd.

Thanks for your interest in the Parrish & Heimbecker Ltd. article. When you see an article that looks like it might be spam, please try to do a quick Google News search to see if the subject might be notable. You will see several listings for the company here: http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=Parrish+Heimbecker As well, I was able to find a listing in the Encyclopedia of Saskatchewan at http://esask.uregina.ca/entry/parrish_and_heimbecker_grain_company.html and I added that as a reference. -- Eastmain (talk) 23:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

As the article was written it was blatant spam (which is how I tagged it) and merely existing is not an indication of notability. I was surprised you removed the speedy tag but as you, like me, are an established editor I decided not to pursue that and simply removed the spam. It appears the article has been deleted anyway now on notability grounds. Ros0709 (talk) 07:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Holy Trinity Sittingbourne

Reference your comments and editing of sections on services and other activies. I would refer you to 'Holy Trinity Brompton' which has the same content live. I see no reason why my content - which is similar in content has been removed.

Reference should be made to Wikipedia policies, not other articles. There may or may not be validity in what you say, but if that other article does not meet Wikipedia policy then it too will likely be addressed. See WP:OSE for additional discussion. Ros0709 (talk) 22:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, I do hope it is addressed as I feel we are being disadvantaged and so would encourage consistency of approach re editorial moderation. Best regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trinitysittingbourne (talk • contribs) 10:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Audra Hardt COMMENT

What is this?? Audra Hardt is a singer/songwriter with thousands of fans. She has been in movies and her music has been in movies (all of which are LISTED ON WIKIPEDIA). I realize you can't REFERENCE worldwide interest, but alone if her work is mentioned already on wikipedia, that alone should be fine.

Her music is available to purchase world-wide and her albums, superficial superstar, is in the top 1,000 albums on jamendo. I realize she doesn't have a major label - but that is the future of MUSIC. Did you know that many major bands and now independently produce their own music? THE SHRINKING WORLD is a fascinating thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dgoodberg (talk • contribs) 20:50, 8 December 2008

Wikipedia has criteria for inclusion (such as WP:N and WP:MUSIC) which I do not believe have been met. My rationale is at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Audra_Hardt and editors, including yourself, have the chance to dicuss it there. Make your point, and the admin who closes the discussion will bear this in mind when making a decision. Ros0709 (talk) 21:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Image removed - incomplete rationale

Wrt Image:VodafoneBlockPage.jpg, I have reverted your change of screenshot in the IWF block of Wikipedia article. This is only because the image currently has an incomplete rationale, and as such will not qualify for fair use until the rationale is completed. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 10:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - I was not sure of that. I have updated it; does it appear correct now? Ros0709 (talk)

The rationale is now complete, however I'm not sure non-free use is acceptable. It seems that this can be made a free image (like the current one). By removing copyrighted symbols, life the firefox one at the top, and the one in the google toolbar, and also the vodafone one in the bar if possible, it can be made free under {{MTL}}. I am no image expert but guess that non-free would not be justified as it is replacable by a free version, that gives the same required information. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:00, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok; I'll leave it as is. I preferred the explicit message as illustration - but OTOH BT, which I also checked and more people will see, gives the 404 page. Ros0709 (talk) 11:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion Lakeside Special Burger

Please don't add the speedy deletion tag back to Lakeside Special Burger. An AfD is already opened. Please note that the criteria you used was invalid. Per WP:CSD, patent nonsense does not include This does not include poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, poorly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes. Please also see Wikipedia:Patent nonsense. Some of these may be able to be speedied as vandalism, but most need to go to AfD. Thanks. Karanacs (talk) 18:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

The tag was placed by another editor and I replaced it to undo the vandalism caused by the original creator removing it. Taking the article to AfD was unneccessary; the article was speedily deletable as nonsense or vandalism. Ros0709 (talk) 19:26, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Though I disagree with your suggestion to delete 2009 in music, your dilligent work removing poorly sourced entries in exemplary. With that in mind, I hereby award you this Copyeditor's Barnstar, with all the rights and privleges thereof, including lifetime free upgrades to your value meal, with the purchase of any Lakeside Special Burger value meal at regular price. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009 in music

Hi There, I agree but the year 2009 is just 2 weeks away and of course they wont know the release date cause it isnt here yet, so I agree and disagree with you on the deletion. I am 100% ok of you reverting my keep in the deletion since you made the article. Anyway have fun and enjoy your time on Wikipedia!--Pookeo9 (talk) 19:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)