This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Welcome!
Hello, Blowdart/Archives/Archive1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! - FrancisTyers 15:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi Blowdart. Just to remind you that 'advert' is not a reason for speedy deletion. I recommend using ((prod)) or ((afd)). DJ Clayworth 14:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Blowdart, While it seems that you are a strident user of this system I am new and wonder how to react to you tagging my first contribution on fish lures (a very mundane and trite subject)with this ADVERT tag with no way of understanding what brought you to this decision. While it may not be of the highest publication quality I believe this is a bit of a rash judgement.
First of all, according to the Wikipedia standards, I believe it meets the satndards. I quote "Advertising. Articles about companies and products are acceptable if they are written in an objective and unbiased style. Furthermore, all article topics must be third-party verifiable, so articles about very small "garage" or local companies are not likely to be acceptable. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic..." The base of discussion was concerning Akron, Ohio (a town I lived in 30+ years ago) is credited with the first commercial fish lures according to the Wikipedia Akron, Ohio listing (check it yourself) and that caught my curiosity. It also became the stimulus to investigate this subject, and inso became an intregal part of the story I felt.
Secondly; I not only do not have any connection with any of the companies discussed, hell I don't even fish! I found out the topic existed in my curiosity about the I-76 route of the U.S. Interstate system. I was just surprised anything of much note other than rubber and Lebron James came out of Akron.
So if you might be so kind, could you take a few minutes to guide me to what might be so offensive about this article and what you might suggest to improve it. Other than that I might be led to believe your action may be assumed to be just something to do out of boredom. This being based on your response to DJ Clayworth, "the very existance of a template where you can specify the reason would lead me to think that any reason is fair game :) --Blowdart"
Thanks for catching and fixing my typo so quickly! --Ed (Edgar181) 18:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm new to this and didn't catch that I had included the plural in the article. (Epstein's Mother 04:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC))
Sorry about that... I was watching the "recent changes" and saw an IP vandal add obscenities to a URL. As it happened, the original URL itself was also bogus. I didn't see your revision, and the "popup" reversion tool didn't warn me another edit had been made in the meantime – I'll have to look out for that in future! JRawle (Talk) 15:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. I did make the original version controversial to try and attract some interest. ;) I've a few days off next week so might have a go at making a template table for NI villages/towns.
Were you referring to the James McDade article when you said "active service makes you seeth"?GiollaUidir 22:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Although it may have had the "hoax look", the content of the Kuki Gallman article was true, so I removed the speedy deletion tag. Ardric47 23:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I replied on my talk page. Cheers, CiaranG 18:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thanks for stopping those two word new articles. does he not know what an encyclopedia is? some of them may even be notable but if you create a two word under-stub you can't expect it not to be deleted!
Please take the time to read the history page before automatically adding a speedy deletion tag. There was only one edit with the edit summary as "page creation, more coming...." before you added the tag. Please assume good faith, I am still creating the page. - Ocatecir 15:10, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
He is a candidate for the 2007 elections, and an elected councillor etc, and may be a MLA soon. To fully develop the Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007 article, isnt it a good idea to have an article about each candidate? Frainc 11:21 14 February 2007
Please check the date and time when consider nominating an article for deletion. I am in the middle of creating this article, based on the official biography template - which needs to be saved empty first before I can work on it. Please consider this before add a speedy to a new page. I see you've been reminded above about the policies and procedures regarding nominating deletions, and the strict criteria required for a speedy deletion. These are official policies, they are not optional - even if you disagree with them - so I suggest that you read them again Madmedea 11:23, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Can i know the reason why you tag this artilce for deletion.Please be carefull while putting tags.Khalidkhoso 20:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Now can you have some grammatical improvements in article.Khalidkhoso 21:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Howdy, I noticed that you tagged a number of articles about accounting concepts for speedy deletion. I have added hangon notes to two already, but I am somewhat unclear on the CSD used. I think is was fairly clear that the articles were about accounting (in fact one was even linked from the accounting article). Just wanted to let you know. Thanks, --TeaDrinker 16:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
You tagged this article for speedy deletion, but you did not notify the article's creator that it had been so tagged. While such notification is not mandatory, it is strongly encouraged, and this is mentioned in the various speedy delete templates themselves. please consider notifying article creators of speedy delete tags in future. See Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Notify authors about speedy deletion? where this issue was discussed. B1atv 20:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey just wondering why did you tag my article about kevin allen the author for speedy delition? trfccurt —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 18:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi. You put a csd on Sarah Bunting, and left me a message about it. The subject is the founder of a major website which itself has a wikipedia article. What assertions of notability did you require? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meansarea (talk • contribs) 14:13, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
It is unfortunate that so much time is still being spent with arguments over these Derry City and Londonderry county articles. Wikipedia, as an international organisation have made an excellent and impartial compromise with the naming issue. DERRY is the name of the article relating to the city as the majority of Derry's inhabitants and indeed the council wish it to be named so. LONDONDERRY is the name of the county article as this is how the people have voted in the article. I know unionists may argue that the official name is Londonderry and this cannot change, however the name was made official undemocratically by the British government of the time and not by the will of the Derry/Londonderry people. If there is going to be unsolicitated edits to change these articles to agree with others POV's then these problems will never cease! -- RÓNÁN "Caint / Talk" 20:58, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Glad to see someone's been looking at the lists I've been creating! I can't see an article emerging on your aunt, unless she is notable in some other field; I suspect that only those linked names are likely to have the sources available to demonstrate sufficient notability. Warofdreams talk 17:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
An unofficial invitation to interested parties.
Folks, it strikes me that the current state of infobox warring going on needs to stop. Right now we have a choice between UK infoboxes, and Irish infoboxes and both political strands want one or the other. Neither have the same information, and by forcing your own choice we're missing out on useful information. For example, the County Londonderry article uses the Ireland County info box. This misses out a mass of information that is applicable, UK National Office of statistics references, UK MP information, ISO codes and so on.
The map is perfect, it no longer has NI floating in space, but the current use of an Ireland info box simply isn't applicable, it ignores the political reality that the north is administered by the UK.
So I propose a compromise. Specific Northern Ireland county, city/town/village info boxes. If we can merge the UK and Irish ones I think we'd come to a solution that everyone can agree with.
I'm willing to put the work in for this, but without broad agreement from people who kick with each foot it'll be useless, and reverts will continue. So I'd like your thoughts before I even make a start.
I'm going to seed a pointer to this bit on my talk page on a few of your own talk pages. I assume you know your "compatriots" better than I do, and I would encourage you to forward the link to them. If you've come here and I didn't leave a note on your talk page, then please accept my apologies. I wasn't ignoring you, there's just too many people to cope with! --Blowdart 13:01, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
David Jacobson - list of films is a clear assertion. The speedy criteria are hard and don't stretch - please take more care with these. (This is becoming a matter of public concern and PR problems, so a few people are looking at all CSDs and particularly A7s lately.) Thanks! - David Gerard 16:31, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm a newbee in wikipedia and I got your tag about my article on Explosive Child. Not sure how this work but I start a talk about it. Need your help. Thanks --Chrix Bedard 12:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Well done! Thank you for proofreading the article! — Tirkfltalk 09:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Blow dart why do you keep deleting the Student Youth network page! You have no reason to do so! If i9t happens again mI'll will be contacting wikipedia about the matter. If you want to help FIX THE ARTICLE, instead of deleting it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Any12345678 (talk • contribs) 07:05, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
May I ask then, why haven't any of the wikipedia articles on other Melbourne radio stations not been deleted as many of them if not all, contain very few references, and I doubt highly if as important as SYN —Preceding unsigned comment added by Any12345678 (talk • contribs) 07:32, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
why did you remove the tag? Please explain! --Any12345678 05:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
It's hardly your fault. The actions of others can't rest with you alone. They stopped as soon as they started anyway so no real harm was done. -- Longhair\talk 08:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I am also trolling the new pages right now and I noticed you speedied some without putting a note on the author's talk page. Please remember to notify the author in fairness. Just a head's up, keep on keepin' on.--Old Hoss 16:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
This organisation isn't even in a grey area in terms of notability. It's well known and culturally significant in my home state, although I've never listened to it myself. I have little patience for people who insist on challenging the notability of topics they know absolutely nothing about, even in the face of previously uninvolved people who actually do. Rebecca 05:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah that may be my fault. See the talk page for Student Youth Network. It's the user's 3rd attempt to create this, the previous two having been culled as non-notable (and again they just cut and pasted the previous article in). In their whine over why the article should stay they tried to use the existence of other stations as justification. I pointed out this wasn't the point, and anyone could also mark those as non-notable. *sigh* That backfired --Blowdart | talk 08:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
I was looking through the history and noticed you'd tagged The Bridgeburners for speedy deletion. I'm trying to work on it along with the user who created it (he's a newbie), would you mind holding off for a bit to give us time to expand it? Another user redirected the page to Gardens of the Moon (which isn't really appropriate either) and the reversion deleted the speedy tag. Also, if you still feel it should be delted, could you take it to AFD rather than speedy? I'm not certain what the community would say and it would have implications for other pages extant and still to be created for other fictional people and groups. WLU 17:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I am an employee, though I didn't write the original article. Should I have an outside revise the article? Turnerzworldcorp 16:42, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Blowdart, I've removed the speedy deletion tag from Sean Mathias. Since you nominated the article for deletion, the author has greatly expanded the article and has made sufficient assertion of notability to preclude it from a speedy deletion. If you feel the current revision of the article still merits deletion, nominate it at AfD. Thanks, Caknuck 19:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Blowdart,
Thanks for adding the content about the managed card authentication methods and for saying that some of the post felt too marketing-esqe to you.
I expanded the managed card authentication info into its own section describing the details of managed cards, also including information about auditing versus non-auditing cards. I also changed the (possibly marketing-esqe) title "Benefits of Information Cards" to "Sign-In with Information Cards" and edited accordingly. More facts are good.
I am going to push back on one thing you wrote to me on my talk page, however. You wrote about "different keys are used at each site":
Whilst on a basic level that's true; it depends. With managed cards it's certainly not true, it's only for unmanaged cards that PPID are guaranteed unique, an STS may choose not to implement PPIDs at all.
Actually, even for managed cards that provide a PPID claim, they're required to use different keys for every site. As per An Implementer's Guide to the Identity Selector Interoperability Profile V1.0, where it talks about the privatepersonalidentifier claim, "An identity provider issuing this claim must do so using data present in the RST request." This can be done either with the target scope information from the RST or the ClientPseudonym. But in either case, a pair-wise unique PPID is required to be generated by all managed cards that provide this claim.
Cheers,
-- Mike
Yes, you know the spec well. I can guess what *kind* of work you've been doing for the past 6 months but I'm very curiuos what the actual work has been. You won't, by any chance, be at IIW this coming week will you? If so, I'd love to chat with you about what you're doing. If not, maybe you could drop me a note at mbj@microsoft.com and tell a little bit about it if you're willing. Anyway, back to Wikipedia issues...
I took another stab at accurately describing the unique pair-wise key generation behavior of information cards, this time incorporating your correct observation that realms need not be sites. I believe that it's important to document this property of information cards in the article.
Do me a favor, if you still believe that the wording is inaccurate for some reason, take a stab at fixing it rather than deleting it this time. Or tell me what you still think is wrong and I'll fix it -- your call.
Thanks, Mbjencyclopedia 02:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
How can I certify the page and properly display its purpose?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dramatic
thank you for your time —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedramatic (talk • contribs) 19:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your kind help cleaning up the page on Tokyo Diner. Thank you also for your advice on references and citations.
I was delighted to see that members of the Wikipedia community had made improvements to the page. Unfortunately, however, someone has now deleted the whole page before I had a chance to save a copy of all the improvements [see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Tokyo_Diner].
Is there any way to find the page from just before the deletion?
Richard Szumlicki 10:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello again.
I am now beginning to understand the power of the peer-review process.
Other user’s deletions were very effective at getting me to read and digest WP guidelines, particularly the ones concerning notability and neutrality. I finally managed to produce a contribution that other users were willing to accept.
However, almost as soon as the page was accepted, a user called Irishguy decided to put up a COI banner. I did not like this, because I thought that I had removed all the COI from the page.
Nevertheless, I am totally committed to following the guidelines, so I do not feel that I am in a neutral enough position to remove the COI banner and have not done so.
Blowdart, I understand that you know Tokyo Diner as a neutral observer. Now that the page has had contributions from other users, do YOU think the COI banner should stay?
Thank you very much for taking an interest in this.
Regards,
Richard.
P.S. I've noticed that the protocol in these discussion pages is for each new response to be indented slightly to the right. I'm afraid I don't know how to do that. Where can I find out how to? Richard Szumlicki 11:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Well....I wouldn't call two a bunch :D. But yes, they have no real information yet, but I was hoping to simply enter them in before I forgot again. I'm going to expand them later today. But I figured that their jobs have enough notability for them to at least be in as of now. Cheers! (mastrchf91) 20:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
If you've got an anonymous email address to hand, drop me a line. Not urgent or important :o) ➔ REDVEЯS says: at the third stroke the time will be 22:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
He's definitely "notable" and I added a decent amount of material. Wasn't sure if I could delete the "notability" tag or leave that to you. Sn14534 (talk) 03:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Excuse me? How is the William Adam Trellis Award 'made up'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.9.138.53 (talk) 20:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The website is the Foundation. What on Earth has the fact that it is a free domain got to do with anything? Similarly what has it's absence from Google got to do with anything? Also do you have any grasp of (n)etiquette? Reverting an edit you disagree with is one thing, doing so and then threatening to ban the contributor is something else. If you disagree with an addition fine, that can be discussed. If, however you are disagreeing with a relevant, verifiable claim then what right do you have to threaten to ban the one making it? Please at the very least use some common courtesy.
Yoshi525 (talk) 21:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)Yoshi
I stopped reading at 'This page is a style guide'. Style =! policy. Now do you have a more substantial challenge or are going to continue your bad manners by citing entire, and ironically irrelevant material as your entire argument? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hippytrout (talk • contribs) 21:32, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Hang fire a little! Please don't be quite so over-zealous when nominating articles under construction, such as Tumblagooda sandstone, for deletion. I'm going now going to have an edit conflict to resolve when I save the page! Anyhow, thanks for new-page patrolling so thoroughly, and all the best, Verisimilus T 12:28, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Worked on getting the page up to spec. It's one of my first pages so please bear with me. Also would appreciate not having it deleted but rather get some help.
thanks 24.21.183.177 (talk) 11:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Not hiding behind any IP. Nor trying to hide my identity. Just wasn't logged in. It's the same IP as when I started it. Again, I'm working on the content to make it of value, please don't penalize me for being a newbie!! Help don't punish. 24.21.183.177 (talk) 11:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
not at all. I'm sorry if it seems this way, but it's not the case. I've been working on the page off and on through out the night. I didn't realize I was logged out until I went into the history for the page. I removed the deletion notice as I didn't know you shouldn't. Again I AM A NEWBIE. I think it's important that you give some leeway to new people who are learning how to wikki. I know you get a lot of crap of people spamming the wikki and perhaps you are jaded, but realize that not everyone knows how to effectively wikki, so rather than make accusations here, help a newbie learn! 24.21.183.177 (talk) 11:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Fair point. But seriously. WP:BITE It's not a license and i'm not abusing. There IS a learning curve. I just wish that there was a path to INFORM before rush to delete/criticize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkleinman (talk • contribs) 12:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Anyway we can call a Truce here and not have you reverse all my edits? Seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkleinman (talk • contribs) 14:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Please see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pornography before proceeding with deletion. There are issues that need to be addressed. Gkleinman (talk) 18:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I don't think referring to editors as "muppets" is helpful. For what its worth another user did create a pretty defamatory version of the xcritic page after it went through DRV and before User:Gkleinman recreated it. The defamatory page was quickly deleted but unfortunately Google crawled and cached it in the period it was up. So you can still find the inappropriate page on Google. I don't think Gkleinman is correct to say that the page has to be recreated in order to clear the Google cache, bu his complaint about the defamatory page is valid. The question of notability of the page is still completely valid. The page does make an assertion of notability so shouldn't be speedied under A7, but the AfD seems perfectly reasonable. Best, Gwernol 19:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
It seems like you have had interactions over this article and its creator before, however, that does not mean that its appropriate to make personal attacks. Please try to deal with this in a civil manner. Shell babelfish 23:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
OK I think we're over the hump on the notability issue. We're now a member of the X-Rated Critics Association XRCO. Need more convincing? Gkleinman (talk) 16:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I did add some 'juice' to the XRCO page, but more to give it some references than anything else. I think the quote on IMDB's page is the clincher for notability of the members "The organization is an amalgamation of established reviewers representing a wide range of adult publications, including Adam Film World, Hustler, AVN and many retail Internet sites." Link to IMDB. What do you think? And yes it's XCritic who is a member not me personally. Gkleinman (talk) 02:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. Do you now see my notability references as sufficient and properly done to take off the notability warning on UltraBac Software? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevetechguru (talk • contribs) 15:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
I noticed when I click on my watchlist which contans articles I created and edited ,there are green theumps up and a number. I was wondering how I could also rate other articles.--Gia Primo (talk) 18:11, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Please say you were joking saying that a gaming review website is a good example to back up statements about the accuracy of a C64 emulator :( Apparently you have no idea of the subject. To be able to compare the C64 emulators in terms of their accuracy, you need to see tens if not hundreds of demos and have a really good eye for tiny details. A reviewer from a "gaming review website" playing Last Ninja to relive his youth will not be able to tell a difference, sorry. You may want to discard CSDb as a trustworthy source, but then again you're discarding the most trustworthy source about the C64. Abc64 (talk) 00:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Careful with what you're calling nonsense out there ([9]). That one is better candidate for ((db-web)) or ((db-context))... Nonsense is reserved for things like 21340923afdsh089//afds09234 and the like. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, --Nsevs • Talk 20:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for tagging this article with a G11 advertising tag. My own tag was (In my eyes incorrectly) previously removed by a third user. You just saved me from having to spend 10 useless minutes to create an AFD for this, since the rules forbid the origional tagged to retag when a third user removes the speedy. Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 22:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for helping with the new pages. Please notify, however, per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion the article creators of the tagging, e.g. with the template message displayed on the tag itslef or e.g. with ((firstarticle)) for articles created by new users. Many tags (e.g. A7) point at issues that can be remedied if given the chance. --Tikiwont (talk) 12:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi blowdart, please note that "non-notable" is not a speedy deletion criteria. Thanks, Marasmusine (talk) 17:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Hey -I have just updated the article. Citations have been added where possible. Some of the comments are difficult to cite since there are no articles in wikipedia yet about those subjects or there are too many articles and liks scattered throughout the web... thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Machinima (talk • contribs) 11:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
I saw your notability tag on Woopra and was curious as to why you didn't list it for speedy. It seems to be fairly blatant advertising. Sunray (talk) 18:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
im not quite sure what you mean regarding your last messageHalowithhorns89 (talk) 12:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, I'm going by the geographical island of Ireland, rather than any political entity. Personally i call it Derry, however it is officially Londonderry Waterside railway station. I'm just being accuarate. the Sligo Leitrim Northern Counties Railway is in both NI and ROI, so how would i do that? have i done a good job on the templates?Halowithhorns89 (talk) 12:20, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh good! Well, i wish i had a colour guide/catalogue rather than just using 00bb00. When you say existing templates, what do you mean? i read the "this is an Irish railway" as this is a railway on the island of Ireland. How do i make thigns consistant? just done the Mallow to Youghal and Cobh, but forgot to put "line" at the end, so need an admin to do that, currently on Mallow to Tralee. Would all branch lines deserve there own template? I hate politics lol, i'm very political, but on here i just go by facts.Halowithhorns89 (talk) 13:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm...well isn't it possible to re classify them? as the railways of NI were never part of British Rail, they were always part of the Irish network (Great Northern of Ireland operated County Armagh, Cunty Down, Louth and the line to present day Dublin Connolly? maybe an open discussion, in which put their two pence in. although my two points would be a sysytem for the rail network of the european island of Ireland, and that they were never BR.Halowithhorns89 (talk) 14:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
7 companies in all have lines that crossed the two political entities, i dont want to make a template under one country, and have ppl warring saying "this is UK" or this is ROI. I have been categorising the stations of ireland past present future, to keep all of the stations of one company in same place i always done as Ireland and Britain rather than ROI and UKHalowithhorns89 (talk) 15:15, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Sooo, I'm am still wondering what the reason is for deleting my complete article when there are referenced bases to help support what the band is. should i add more accomplishments for them. please do tell so i can revise it and put it back up. i feel it is important for fans to know what happens to some their favorite members of bands and what they are doing now, in that being concise in talking about any band. let me know what i can do to make it a "worthy" article thank you --Xjerkkx (talk) 07:03, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey I not done editing this page can you wait till im done please —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam81291 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Good work finding the cites. I have been looking though news archives for something (anything!) with a positive spin but like you have not found anything - perhaps that is telling in itself.... Kind regards, nancy (talk) 13:04, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
I am currently adding all the links to news stories regarding this topic. In fact over a dozen links have been added but are continually deleted.
Negative news appear okay to link to but not positive news stories. Maybe I should be allowed to finish with all the links before it is deleted and decided whether it is unverified statements.
Deleting the whole post when there are many links cannot be reasonable and then claimed the statements are unverified.
Please reply ASAP —Preceding unsigned comment added by GaryMcHale (talk • contribs) 13:17, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
As suggested the Bindass Programmes page has been merged with Bindass. I was just trying to incorporate how other similar channels work..For e.g. see NDTV Imagine Programmes. Should I put a request for deletion for the programmes page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganeshcp (talk • contribs) 09:14, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for tagging, but I've removed the speedy tag as the article does contain assertions of notability.
I suggest Prod or AfD may be appropriate.
Anyway, keep on tagging... we need RC patrollers like you. --Dweller (talk) 15:24, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Please can you explain what was wrong with the page that I created? MillionaireMan (talk) 18:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Don't delete my real information sequence that I had to edit.
This is real research. This is a common conspiracy theory about leprechauns and aliens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jahalmightyone (talk • contribs) 19:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I second the above comment. Honestly, have you seen Special:whatlinkshere/Denys_Page? Tiddly pop (talk) 14:23, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
How come you want that article to get deleted, when there are a lot of other music festival articles here in wikipedia? List_of_festivals#Music_Festivals AramaeanSyriac (talk) 09:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
"at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Usury, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed"
I just added a missing space after a coma at the beginning of the article - this needed to be done. Regards, MrMPS
Hi Blowdart. Its just the order the returning officer places the candidates on the ballot paper by their surnames, simply A-Z order really. All we do is follow it as per WP:NPOV. Cheers - Galloglass 17:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
There are numerous references to companies that exist soley for the purpose of identifying them. Seibel is a prominent example. If all references to all companies are removed I will not contend this , however if you do not remove Symantec, Oracle et al then you have no right to remove my company. Mitchton (talk) 23:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Mitchton
Okay, yes. I see what you mean for speedy deletion. My bad. If you need me, i'll be deleting something now. MKguy42192 (talk) 09:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me, but all of the edits I made were requested by the community of Artix Entertainment. These were all factual edits with no errors. I don't understand the noncompliance with your policies. Plus, vandalism? I think not. No part of what I wrote was vandalism. All of these edits were in good faith, and are honestly trying to improve Wikipedia. None were compromising its integrity in any way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dirgelicious (talk • contribs) 19:07, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I dont see why the LeagueUnlimited page should be deleted cause other websites, notably, BigFooty have their own page on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Novacastrian panther (talk • contribs) 01:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
ok, no worries. will sort it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slide89 (talk • contribs) 13:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, would like to point out that I based it largely on the page for the River Cafe in London. Therefore, as the content is of a similar style, I think you are being unjust in deleting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slide89 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Did you "navigate" into the Bella web site, I do not think so. If I descibe the page as Eduardo's biography is because the site includes three different links with a biography about the subject. As a matter of fact it is important for all the people who wants to read about the subject and to get more information about the movie (which is included into the biography)to obtain another link about the movie and more information about Eduardo Verástegui (life, role as producer and cast member) I still do not see your point of view por deleted the link and for being so rude calling me "lyer" because I am not, also please let me know if set the Bella the movie link with a short biography about the subject and all the information about the movie causes a "damage" instead of provide with more information to the people who uses the wikipedia as a source. For me what you done is a vandalism, because you are trying to force to the people to get your personal point of view and not allow to everybody to get the information they want. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eduardosalg (talk • contribs) 19:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I understand the thinking of the order you put them in. I also thought the positive and negative review does reflect the balanced reviews. i replaced the SF Chronicle since Roger Ebert gave it a pretty good review and he is much more known. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.243.218 (talk) 04:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know that I have listed this article for deletion here, after your speedy request was turned down. -Toon05 15:10, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah this by-election has been strange for knowing who are standing and who are not, heh. I deleted the wrong candidate, as it goes, but have now filled the list as per SODC (snigger, ahem) so all should be well. I can't believe we use light green for The Common Good; any ideas for another colour? doktorb wordsdeeds 14:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted your unexplained edit changing the year of the locals (with the somewhat misleading edit summary, "spelling") as South Oxfordshire is listed on UK local elections, 2007#Whole council up for election but not on UK local elections, 2008#District councils. Do you have any evidence there were any elections there in 2008?
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 17:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I just wanted to let you know that i updated your edit to include the positive alongside the negative thus showing the high ratings from the users/people and the lower ratings from the critics. I led with the people and finished with critics which flowed well into the other critic site you added. i hope this is ok with you. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.109.243.218 (talk) 04:13, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I wan t to know who declares you a "proper critic" and gave you the right to judge the othe people and named "ordinary"; you have no values, please stop insulting or trying to demerit the people; you have to learn to see different point of views, not only you have the knowledge or the truth. Peace!--200.85.31.70 (talk) 14:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
It was an awful start, but I think it passes WP:STUB. Bearian (talk) 21:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hello. There are articles about many CMS solutions here and I intended to describe WebQuick like it has been done for other CMS (like Clearspace for example). Do you have any suggestion in order to prevent my article to be deleted? Thanks, Wikibourg (talk) 21:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi Blowdart, If you object to my inserting external links to so called commercial sites, why do you tolerate Inglewood Engineering's commercial site link (Hazardous Area Inspections)? Am I free to remove it too, to match the standards of links? And then can I remove all the links that are to commercial sites on the RFID page too? Cheers! Abby1001 (talk) 05:36, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me Mr. Blowdart, how dare u say this comment to me. Being the person closest to the Himesh Reshammiya has full right to upload his gallery as well as create the new section. I have full A-Z info regarding our the india rockstar.
So, its my request u don'nt perform speedy deletion ! Also I have mentioned the link and external source webisite for your help ! As i have started the new section, so it will take some time to expand it ! We r humans not robot like u Mr.
It will be the rockskar and my insult if u do speedy deletion
Thanking You —Preceding unsigned comment added by HR4 (talk • contribs) 10:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Mr. Blowdart,
This is to make avery kind request that u are degrading and making the downfall of the wikipedia by performing all sorts of non-sense activities. To name few, speedy deletion and other rubbish. If u think ur enough expert then do visit the article named "Pritam". u will first of all find the artcile unsystematic and secondly is the unusual illegal picture.
Now lets take an example of another big personalities, say "Shahid Kapoor", "Salman Khan", "Modern Talkings", there we observe some unusual illegal photos. So in this case where is ur rules are gone.
And inspite of the fact the "Himesh Reshammiya" is the grand Indian rockstar, u can't challenge him.and there we find no photo bcoz of ur stupidity.
Well ok i also agree the free image i have uploaded. But u can manage the legal photo of the Rockstar in any and how, when u have managed to keep other pics safe in ur wiki stores like "Shahid Kapoor".
So u plz. upload else i will stop contributing some factual matter on any topic or article.
Thanks
Jai Mata Di Lets Rock !
Rock the Wiki my dear brother Blowdart ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by HR4 (talk • contribs) 19:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
In apparent accord with your own theories, I've established a suspected sockpuppet page for the creator of this article and two suspected socks. Since you've been monitoring this situation and may have theories/evidence of your own, I just wanted to draw this to your attention. Even if you decide to weigh in against my theory, that's fine. It'd just be a more legitimate thing, I think, to include the opinion of someone else who's "in the know" on what's going on. Please take a look if you have the time. Thank you! - Vianello (talk) 20:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
I was just wondering why you speedily deleted the Amethyst RPG article I was in the process of putting up?
Argent Mantle (talk) 17:55, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Argent Mantle
I used ((db-i3)) on Image:Desktop bsd screenshot.png, because DesktopBSD logos and artwork collection are licensed Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 License. Austria. Ref: http://desktopbsd.net/index.php?id=76 According to policy for non-free content and CSD I3, all images, including DesktopBSD screenshots with DesktopBSD logos or/and artwork will be deleted immediately. DesktopBSD screenshot include bubble DesktopBSD in taskbar, that is licensed Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 License. Austria.( Ref: http://desktopbsd.net/index.php?id=76 ), thanks Shooke (talk) 17:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
The screenshot is not free, also, is a screenshot of KDE with logo of desktopbsd Shooke (talk) 18:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Sigh, that a piece of software is free, does not necessarily imply that the imagery, logos, etc. presented by that software are also free. Dragons flight (talk) 19:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
This was a first draft, we are open to making changes, however, after careful review of the standards, and our submitted article, we can find no violation in what we submitted. Therefore, i respectfully request that you identify which specific portions if any, violated the wikipedia standards. Please help us to understand how to craft an appropriate encyclopedic description of a free software tool or commercial software tool. We worked hard to remove any "sales pitch". I have reviewed many other commercial products listed in Wikipedia, and our article was purely factual, made no comparisons with other products, nor any claims, furthermore the product is free. There were no opinions in the article. The uses described were strictly factual and provided as important information about the use of such technology.
We do not understand why the simple straightforward description of our software tool is considered blatant promotion of a product. Especially one that has such educational benefit (used by numerous Universities and Court Reporting schools around the country) and when so much educational video is being moved to mainstream media outlets such as Youtube (MIT OpenCourseWare). Does this mean Winzip, Photoshop, Microsoft Office, Realplayer, Windows Media Player, Flash, QuickBooks, Quicken, TurboTax, Easy Media Creator, Rhapsody, etc etc, all should be removed? This was a first draft at posting the article so that my colleges could review it and add to it and the history of the evolution of the article would be preserved. We were sharing the [[User::Enounce]] because the user needs a number of revisions before being able to upload an image, such as screen shots. There is almost no content on Wikipedia about the field of Time-Scale Modification of audio or Variable Speed Playback; a very important component of online learning, readers for the blind, electronic voting, etc. Our submission was deleted even before any review of the content or augmentation from the community could take place. We had planned to add more articles in the field of Time-Scale Modification but now the User:Enounce account has also been blocked. We felt that our company's significant role in the field of Education and participation with the US Library of Congress 1 2 3 to support electronic readers for the blind would enable us to post informative factual articles on a very important technology and the products that help visually impaired and learning impaired individuals. New standards for Electronic Voiting starting in 2008 require that Voters be able to control the speed of audio instructions presented to the voter. "Many blind voters are accustomed to interacting with accelerated speech. This feature may also be useful to voters with cognitive disabilities." Sec 3.3.3-C.8
Other references: Autonomous Technology-Assisted Language Learning/Input
In closing, I would like to request a re-review of our submission and our status as a submitter. I look forward to your reply and remain open to removing any offending material you identify. We reviewed our submission and found it in line with all the stated requirements. --Rosso1876 (talk) 15:14, 10 July 2008 (UTC) (really User:Enounce)
I notice today that you're AfD listing a massive number of rpg-related material. Would you care to explain the recent surge? Since they're all independent deletions with an assertion of no notability, you'll have to forgive me for raising an eyebrow. Why all the separate listings instead of a large, related entry that could collect everything together? On the surface there is the appearance of WP:NCR or more likely WP:POINT #3. This is only an appearance, I am just curious and want to hear your thoughts. HatlessAtless (talk) 16:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
I did it by mistake, wasn't expecting Pickens Plan to got removed ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poseidon123 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I understand my article may be a bit pithy, hence, instead of simply deleting, can it be merged into a relevant section under "Godwin's Law"? Perhaps a "Variations" section would suffice. Thank you.
BTW, I wonder how you're so quick. Is there a function to view newly created pages in Wiki? เอๆ (talk) 16:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I notice that you've edited a number of pages relating to towns etc to remove links to TownTalk.co.uk websites from the external links sections, with the comment "towntalk.co.uk spam link". Whilst I hold no brief for these websites, I think they are valid links. I notice from the main TownTalk website that the TownTalk project is supported by the regional development agencies, the DTI (now BERR) and the European Regional Development Fund. In the case of Frome (the town I'm interested in) I also notice that the local District Council received a presentation from TownTalk's Chief Executive about their project. So they would appear to be bona fide. Dmvward (talk) 17:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Your speedy deletion was removed by the creator. I added it back. Might want to keep an eye on it. Virek (talk♦contribs) 20:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Blowdart - I understand you must comply with rules etc. however this is not an advertisement. This is something I found helpful with my new lawn. I thought that was what wiki was all about?!? I am new to this and used this website to help me. why was this not right for wiki?
--Geri222 (talk) 10:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Maybe watch this and the user? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 16:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I fail to understand why you keep deleting our entry for decribing the GPS file format.
The fact that you cant find this a google seach I suppose will depend what search criteria you are looking for and where you are looking.
This is a Chinese defined file format very commonly used for goods sold in Europe and USA. Currently the file format is used and supported by 15 different Chinese manufacturers of small GPS units. The same file format is adopted by all 15 manufacturers to allow interchangeable point sharing between different units manufactured by differnet companies.
If you have a no-name brand GPS then most likley this is the format it uses.
Zavvyy (talk) 16:56, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
My intention is to maintain and update the desciption over time, adding in lists of the units that use it etc. But I am not going to type that up all in one hit. I will come back to it and improve it as time goes on. So yes it may migrate into a detailed description similar to .ZIP format but it wont happen immediately.
The format is currently in use on the Guider being handed out at the Olympics in Beijing. You can see the Beijing guider here. http://www.pmr-technology.com/pmr/gpscompass/index.htm
So please leave it alone and give me a chance to finish the edit. Zavvyy (talk) 17:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello there
Yes, for two reasons.
1: He's active in the one of (the?) highest profile public finance jobs in the UK and not a relatively obscure former politician 2: He's actually known as Richard Douglas, rather than Dick. Doug graeme (talk) 09:07, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks - yes, I was and you've beat me to it. I'm a bit new to the editing and was feeling my way around. (PS thanks for the signing tip, which I had meant to do but as a lame n00b forgot to)--Doug graeme (talk) 09:12, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
You wikipedia lot aren't scary at all, really rather nice ;-). Thanks for tip(s) - entirely sensible--Doug graeme (talk) 09:16, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I don't see how including an external link to a page that expressly shows you how to install sod yourself without any sales information could be considered vandalism. Same thing goes for the lawn care guide. There are other guides on there that are much less deserving. Considering there are no external links on the Sod page at all, I don't see how affording the user the opportunity to find other websites that show them how to install their own sod is anything but helpful. Here are the pages in question that you referred to as vandalism, which under Wikipedia's guidelines cannot be considered as such (they are helpful): http://www.evergreenturf.com/do-it-yourself/index.php and http://www.evergreenturf.com/lawn-care/index.php
Please explain how you came to the conclusion (within a very, very short period of time) that these pages were not helpful to the end user. 70.184.122.73 (talk) 19:06, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
how can you help me to get Mo abudu to stay on wikipedia. each time i put it online , ,it is deleted . Mo abudu runs a talk show called moments with Mo, this program has touched so many lifes in africa, and still is. i need to build a pages on her please help. she has som website , www.momentswithmo.tv,inspire-africa.com, the talk show is on MNet west, NTA, Stv tv chanels —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inspireafrica (talk • contribs) 12:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
excuse me whats your problem this article is none of your bisness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cutajarc (talk • contribs) 10:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Just a friendly note on Ricky K. I declined your speedy on the article because there is a claim of notability (nationally syndicated show).--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
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) 20:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes it is a British city. Great Britain is the island. Britain is not an island. Britain is either the United Kingdom or the British Isles. Being part of the United Kingdom or British Isles, makes it British. Belfast is both. The Birmingham page says "This article is about the British city" not "This article is about the city in England". The Belfast article should be styled exactly the same way. Christopedia (talk) 10:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
It says it is in Northern Ireland in the first sentence.Christopedia (talk) 10:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Why mention Northern Ireland when Birmingham doesn't mention England? Everyone knows where London is. It's about 30 times the size of Belfast. Seems the Irish want to insert the word Ireland in an article about a BRITISH city as much as they can for petty political point scoring and because the city is located on "THEIR" island that they think they should have all to themselves no doubt. Northern Ireland is our part of the island and its got nothing to do with them. Christopedia (talk) 11:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
is there a quick command to enter the ( --Theonlyoxymoron | talk 10:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC) ) information, instead of having to type it up everytime
not sure if you saw, but the creator removed the PROD. It's AfD time, kids! Yay! Ironholds 19:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Hiya, I noticed that you placed a ((notability)) tag on the article Yeardot. I feel this may be an error. I've delved slightly deeper and it seems it is a national TV program that stars at least one person, Gilly Flaherty (a professional footballer) already determined to fulfill WP:NN Articles exist a Ghits such as here and with another star being a candidate for election to parliament (one of the youngest ever). As such I feel that it passes WP:NN and I'm going to remove the tag. If you feel this is an error. Please place the whole article up for deletetion. Thanks and have a nice day! fr33kman (talk) 23:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi
the author of this page who you have placed a CSD:BIO tag contacted me showing me he edited the page showing the notability. I removed the WP:NOV & WP:BIO tags I have placed and I'm asking you if it would be a good Idea to remove the speedy tag.
your
Alexnia (If you reply here, please leave me a ((Talkback)) message on my talk page.) @ 11:09, 9 September 2008 (UTC),
Why did you delete my artical on Red Shirt Security? The C of E (talk) 14:50, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I'm not too bothered about it but is there any way of mentioning that the two venues are in Bucks, not Oxon, or is it just not worth it. The Berks/Oxon border is more pronounced due to the river, but the Bucks/Oxon may is less obvious, and I don't like seeing places categorised in the wrong county. Mpvide65 (talk) 16:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Hello Blowdart. I want to make a suggestion about dealing with User:DavidEMorton on the page for this film. First off you were quite right to remove his edits. The info he is putting in has all sorts of problems. The two big ones being that they violate WP:SOURCE and WP:COI. The also have WP:NOTABILITY problems since the whole thing is really only important to him. I want to suggest that you use any of these as the reason for removing his edits in your edit summary rather then claiming that they are vandalism. In my time of editing here I have seen some editors who were doing the right thing get in trouble for using the vandalism edit summary in this kind of situation. If DM persists in entering this info we will have to report him to admins at some point and I think that COI is probably going to be our best bet. If we were to take it to AIV I think that they would be unlikely to block as they would say that it is a content dispute rather then out and out vandalism. Now as I say this is just a suggestion and I want to apologize if you are offended by any of this or if you think that I am sticking my nose into your business. I am just trying to give you some of the benefits of my experience and I have the film on my watchlist too and I will be trying to help out with this editor if he persists. Keep up the good work and happy editing and again apologies if I have caused offense. MarnetteD | Talk 23:32, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Please stop making modifications to the page online classified ads. The page did meet the guidelines of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.213.57 (talk) 17:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
For the last two hours i have been attempting to post and edit articles relating to a book which is currently in the publication process. i am not advertising in any fashion. I am putting up various articles to help answer questions people have had about my story. how can i post these without having them deleted before the article i try to reference is set up?
Rogue ghostie (talk) 19:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I have referenced to an article advertising the fact a new fanzine was available back in 2006 on the Scarborough FC website.
Is this a reliable enough source to remove the notability warning?
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lurgan. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Toddst1 (talk) 15:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Why did you vandalize my recent page on Middendorf's restaurant? I am new to this wikipedia, and if you would have spent the time to look at the history, you would see that I gave an appropriate citation to the Southern Living article, but I couldn't figure out how to link it. http://www.southernliving.com/southern/travel/food/article/0,28012,607588,00.html is the source.
You sure did go a little overboard by seeking the deletion of this important article, which details the history of a very important New Orleans area restaurant, because it didn't have one quote cited properly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NOLAhistorian (talk • contribs) 15:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
P.S. Jerk: Maybe you should read the rules on Wikipedia before going on an editing splurge. You live 6000 miles away and do not understand anything about the importance and history of New Orleans food, but you feel you are an authority to say that my articles are advertisements? —Preceding unsigned comment added by NOLAhistorian (talk • contribs) 15:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Considering I was IN THE PROCESS of editing the article while you felt the need to assert your online authority, you might want to reconsider what you've written. All one has to do is look at the history of the page to see that I was in the process of linking the quote I gave, and you stepped right in, not to help, but to nominate the article for deletion. That is the antithesis to Wikipedia community guidelines, and judging from your brief history as an editor, not an isolated incident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NOLAhistorian (talk • contribs) 16:34, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
According to the Southern Living magazine article I linked, it states, "Quite possibly the best fried fish in the world--yes, the world." Next time read the citation before making a false statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NOLAhistorian (talk • contribs) 16:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Again you have not read the article thoroughly. It is listed under the rubric "Fried Catfish". --NOLAhistorian (talk) 16:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that. William Avery (talk) 20:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
I just wanted to give you a heads up about this article. Books are not eligible for speedy deletion; consider instead a PROD tag or AfD. I saw where you offered to help the author on the article's talk page, which is great. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 15:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Dear Blowdart,
Any help you can give me to keep off the notability tag on the Necessary Heartbreak stub would be much appreciated. Thanks! Conniesmall (talk) 13:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thanks for the speedy response. the author is a well-known sports writer, has published 6 books previously as well as a popular book about new york city that was the lead for a column by cindy adams. if i add an author bio paragraph, would the notability tag still be an issue? thanks - cs Conniesmall (talk) 13:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thanks. i'll follow-up with your advice. -cs Conniesmall (talk) 13:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
blowdart! i put up the new page on the author, mj sullivan. could you merge the necessary heartbreak page with it? i'll edit it from there for relevance. thanx. cs Conniesmall (talk) 14:05, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Great. Thanks again. -cs 24.47.209.51 (talk) 14:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If they continue to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. Thank you! --VS talk 11:55, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry I didn't link to it. They don't have a copy easily available, however I had just agreed to the license when I made the modification to the article.
One significant term that comes to mind was that one cannot write commercial software and if one does, one must buy the products from Microsoft before one can sell software made. I am sure that provision is not within the normal license agreement. Second, I remember that if Microsoft doesn't like what you are doing they have the right to tell you to delete the software from your computers. Further, you are only to use the software to support work in a science, mathematics, something something, or engineering curriculum.
I'll poke around a bit and see if I can find the license text to link to.
BrotherE (talk) 02:41, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I found someone quoting parts of the license here:
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
3. STUDENT PROGRAM USE RIGHTS.
a. Installation and Use Rights. You may install one copy of the Software made available to You through the Student Program on Your own device, but only Angel to support science, technology, engineering, mathematics and/or design (“STEM-D”) courses, labs, or programs You are enrolled in and attending through Your educational institution; (b) in non-commercial STEM-D research; or (c) to design, develop, test, and demonstrate software programs for the above purposes.
b. Restrictions. You may not use the Software:
- for commercial purposes (except as permitted under Section 3(d); or
- to develop or maintain Your own administrative or IT systems, or those of Your educational institution.
c. Violations. If Microsoft informs You that You have violated these license terms, You must immediately discontinue any use of the Software provided to You under the Student Program, and You must return or destroy all copies of the Software in Your possession.
d. No commercial use. If You use the Software to create software programs, You may only commercially use or distribute them upon the purchase of appropriate commercial license(s) for the Software.
4. END OF STUDENT STATUS; TERMINATION.
a. End of Student Status. If You no longer qualify for the Student Program (by failing to meet the definition of "You" above), then Your membership in the Student Program will automatically terminate, however, You may continue to use the Software You obtained prior to termination of Your student status subject to the terms of this license.
b. Termination. Microsoft may terminate Your usage of any Software obtained from the Student Program if You fail to comply with any of these terms.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Point 3c is what I was referring to when I said I remembered that Ms could tell you to to stop if it didn't like what you were doing. On one hand this section seems to be geared towards "you must stop if you are in violation and MS tells you so." But what it says is that you must stop and delete everything if Microsoft tells you that you are in violation. It does not say anything about your actually having to be in violation for this to be in force. I could see a judge going either way in a case based on this, thus I remembered the more extreme interpretation. Either way I feel that section 3 qualifies as significantly more restrictive than the standard license.
BrotherE (talk) 03:07, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I now have a link to the full license agreementon the channel 8 website. However, you may need to be part of the student program to access this page. I had to sign in before I could get there. So I have put a copy in my user-space for you to look at.
BrotherE (talk) 04:24, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
We are not "vandalising" wikipedia. We are making it impartial and representative, instead of only reflecting British opinion on the matter. The GAA is Irish, not British, and the Republic of Ireland, and therefore its registered sporting bodies, refer to "London"Derry as Derry or Doire. By being representative of the language comprimise in Ireland, Derry GAA is being refered to as Derry and not Doire. The Anglo/ Gaelic debate should be the only one which affects the GAA side. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.61.159.26 (talk) 14:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
We have another anon user now, going the other way, changing Derry to Londonderry. User:78.33.101.58 mainly dealing with City of Derry Airport. May wish to assist me in keeping in eye on him. Canterbury Tail talk 15:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Some things you cannot change! The official name of the city is Londonderry and no amount of discussion or debating will change this!—Preceding unsigned comment added by The Maiden City (talk • contribs) 17:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
To prevent a ForestFire, please see User_talk:Xaosflux#Speedy_deletion_of_Make_a_page. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 15:47, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
watch out before deleting content, I see you have a history of making unneccesary removals, kinda childish isnt it? read the articles next time
--Caloss (talk) 12:46, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Please use your brain when reverting. Thank you. The first edit was a ref fix if you did not notice.--Kozuch (talk) 11:08, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Thats fine by me, but might I suggest just saying the full name of the UK instead of using brackets to include NI? It reads a bit better.78.16.109.244 (talk) 11:57, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure you aren't quite understanding why I chose to fold Windows Azure and Azure Services Platform into a single article. It's pretty simple -- the two things are part of a single package offering from Microsoft. Don't be fooled by all the hoopla and fluffy terminology... it's just an application hosting platform with some interesting development tools. This doesn't entitle us to write a whole set of articles on it... it's one product, one offering, one thing. If Azure Services Platform expands to the point where there is so much information that splitting it into multiple articles makes sense, then yes, an article on Windows Azure may make sense. But not now.
Furthermore, w/r/t its placement on ((Microsoft Windows family)), Windows Azure isn't a release of "Microsoft Windows" in the traditional sense. People aren't going to be installing it on their desktops or servers as a replacement for Vista, 7, or Server 2008. It's a hosting and development platform. Don't be fooled by the presence of the word "Windows" in its name; not everything Microsoft calls "Windows" is "Microsoft Windows". Take "Windows Live", for example... Windows Live has about as much place on that template as Windows Azure does.
Furthermore, it's hard enough for the average person to understand what the hell is Microsoft is on about with this cloud computing stuff... spreading parts of the information across multiple articles doesn't help create an understanding. Quite the opposite, really; over time you'd get a variety of edits across the articles that could end up being either repetitive or contradictory. I've seen it happen... it's really ugly, and reflects badly on the encyclopedia.
I know it's fun making a pile of articles, but at some point you have to stop and ask if it makes sense to have a pile of tiny articles, or if one larger article serves readers better. When talking about closely-related components of a larger topic, the latter is pretty much always preferable.
I hope that, instead of engaging in a stupid edit war over this, you'll have some trust that after three constant years of working on Windows articles, I know what I'm talking about here. Warren -talk- 22:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Dear Blowdart,
I am thankful for every hint.
However I do not agree with your opinion regarding my xbox edit.
For me it appears pretty arrogant to ignore a part of the xbox history. The history of the idea and its name (and the people behind) is an essential part of the xbox history.
To accuse me of vandalism is detractive.
To make it very clear, here in short:
1. The box is nothing without its name. It is nonsense to separate the name from the box. What do you think why Microsoft bought the name?
2. At least Bernd H. Pollinger was technical part.
3. Your objection does not meet the reality: The existing article talks about the advertising issue in the UK, which has nothing to do with the box itself - at least not more as its name. Are you measuring with different measures?
4. Many articles are talking about inventions and the names of the inventors and other people who were involved in any way. It is simply part of an encyclopedia to honor poeple who were involved in a world wide known product etc. It is kind of intellectual vandalism to ignore people who participated in an invention. People are interested in the facts I added.
5. What gives you the exclusive right to judge the value of my edits?! I did not edit judge or remove any part of the existing article, although I do not agree with everything.
6. Instead of fighting we should find a way to provide the users of wikipedia with correct information. Proposal: We could add part called "History of the xbox Brand" - although this does not meet the reality because Bernd H. Pollinger had the technical idea and proposed this to MS... (I have been in contact with all the involved people.)
Thank you for your respect.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cwnusa" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwnusa (talk • contribs) 15:54, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I forgot to sign.
--Cwnusa (talk) 15:55, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thanks blowart,
I didnt realise my mistake --PastorMcNabb (talk) 22:41, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
go ahead and delete it. My bad.
I was trying to work out how to create a user talk template. Any ideas how to go about it? Lihaas (talk) 09:30, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
why are you to delete my pic? sarah ferguson has red hairs and is good example of red haired woman? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellas1980 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
but i upload it myself and sarah is more beautiful than your woman? i don't understand ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellas1980 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
no i found on internets. its a problem? if you say its a problem i believe you. please receive my apology. i will make only free images. cheers, ~ ~ ~ ~ Hellas1980
Thought you might like to know I nominated What is Knowledge Management for deletion here --Clubmarx (talk) 20:42, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi! I saw your vandal report for User:195.153.101.94 on AIV. I did initially block them, but then realised that they hadn't had any warnings since early October. This is what is called a stale warning, and so they unfortunately cannot be blocked as yet. I unblocked them and added a level 4 warning on the talk page. If they vandalise again in the near future, then they will be blocked. In case you don't know where they are, there are a list of useful warning templates on WP:MLT. StephenBuxton (talk) 10:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Data of both tables (on Garlic & Ginger) is correct, by mistake i did'nt replaced header of table relevantly. I'm sorry for that, anyways I have rectified the error. Thanx for your message.
-Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi (talk) 12:26, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
You're doing a great job addressing the problems. But I think the removal here[10] was over-severe. It's appropriate to have content relating to the Saatchi Gallery (with the main content at the dedicated article) especially when it highlights Saatchi as a person (the gallery is his personal expression). For example, content about "the only completely free-entry contemporary art museum of its size in the world" and "a private museum grand and serious enough to compete with national institutions" is relevant and significant (and referenced), certainly in the gallery article, and I would have thought here, as it shows his philosophy and achievement. The fact that it is favourable to the gallery is not our concern, any more than it is if there is relevant and significant content which is not favourable to the gallery. Ty 05:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Re User_talk:Euqueria, User_talk:Rocco15FN, User_talk:Cfrisemo, Sockpuppet, spamming articles, Spreed - I added a speedy delete tag, this person is kinda out of control. - Perhaps WP:V and WP:N tags should be added as well. - Cheers - DustyRain (talk) 19:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
They were not privateers, however, and they identified themselves with those national symbols. I think it is perfectly valid to have the flags on the infobox, since the templates used in Wikipedia to refer to both ideologies (Irish Republicanism and Ulster Loyalism) show the respective "colors".--Darius (talk) 14:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Please see the article Yuyuan Tourist Mart again to see the meaningfulness of its content for the largest retailer in China and the operator of Yuyuan Garden in Shanghai. Ricky@36 (talk) 14:30, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
...but would you want to edit the article anyway?!
Anyway, I'll take it into account!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bapunque (talk • contribs) 09:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello your page is verry long I think you should Archive it. Jammmie999 (talk) 21:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Dear Blowdart,
I have irrefutable proof of Alexander Boris de Pfeiffer Johnson's buccaneering ways. Is a citation needed? As a rookie contributor to Wikipedia, I must confess to be feeling somewhat out of my depth when it comes to substantiating many of gems of knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.247.177 (talk) 23:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I am a PhD, Computer Vision/Medical Imaging, and an old member of Wikipedia. I did not post any thing since a year. Therefore, I am not a spammer!!. Yesterday, i shared with the several communities several external useful links to materials i authored from a ".org" site. Lately, I post my stuff there, since I graduated and I do not have an access to my university's server anymore. Could you please gives me reasonable explanation why have taken that action?
Happy Thanks Giving
Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabry hassouna (talk • contribs) 16:27, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
You are still giving me hard time. Again, you have removed my links, while they are not violating Wikipedia external links (EL). So, let's review what Wikipedia rules are
1. "Such pages could contain further research that is accurate and on-topic" -> (TRUE) skeletonization datasets. 2. "information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail; or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy." -> (TRUE) these are datasets, which can not be embedded inside Wikipedia. 3. "No page should be linked from a Wikipedia article unless its inclusion is justifiable." -> (TRUE), any new research in this area requires datasets to validate the performance as well as the accuracy, which is barely found on any website.
Therefore, i would ask again you to undo your last action.
Thanks
These are links to datasets and Wikipedia does not host datasets but text!. Theses datasets are so important to validate any skeletonization technique. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabry hassouna (talk • contribs) 2008-12-01 17:03
thanks Sabry hassouna (talk) 23:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Given what happened with the last commissioner I think warned is a more appropriate term for what he said. In any case, it is widely acknowledged that Boris forced the last commissioner out, and it seems relevant to the comments he made to the acting Met commissioner. Whatever you think about the former Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis's comments, he did make them, and they are relevant. Please do not remove large chunks of text from articles just because you disagree with them. It can be considered vandalism. Dolive21 (talk) 18:00, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Blowdart, I notice you hae just reverted an edit to the talk page. I was just reporting the topic to the BLP board as the whole DA-Notice thread on the talk page looks like the work of one obsessed individual with a conspiracy fantasy who uses multiple IP addresses. I think the whole thread needs deleting and was wondering about whether it should be oversighted as he seems to have an onsession against Hodge. Given the fantasy also seems to involve other cases such as the Jersey one (which has since been demonstrated to have been a lot of smoke with no fire) I was wondering whether the individual ahs been active on other articles and where we would be most likely to find people who might recognise their modus oeprandi. What's your opinion?--Peter cohen (talk) 20:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
I think we can take it that Infoart is acting with the authorisation of the gallery. The gallery has not at any point questioned this link or suggested otherwise, including in emails I have had with them. In this case, some of the images, e.g. general gallery shots, may be viable for keeping, but I'll leave that to you to decide. Ty 18:15, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Just making sure you are aware that she has not actually added any further links since I warned her, explained the situation and informed Wikiproject:SPAM. Not all of the edits have been undone yet which they need to be, but they all predate any warnings from anyone. Mfield (talk) 00:56, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello
My thinking is that neo.org should not be deleted, as it is a growing entity with notable members.
neo.org is a growing site founded by XING co-founder Bill Liao with some notable members including:
Rachel Sterne - founder of GroundReport.com who was interviewed on CNN CNN interview Rachel Sterne
International organizations such as The Hunger Project, Collective Wisdom Initiative, World Business Academy, United Religions Initiative, New Dimension Radio, are also represented by early members.
Forward thinking academics are neo.org users as well. These include Dr. Srikumar Rao, London Business School, Dr. Ian Mitroff, Professor Emeritus Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California, Futurist Peter Bishop, Professor Prasad Kaipa, Indian School of Business, Bruce Lloyd, Professor of Strategic Management, London South Bank University, ...
Notable media people have also become neo.org users. These include Alan Webber, founder, Fast Company magazine, James Autry, author of Love and Profit and other books, David Schwerin, the author of Conscious Capitalism, Robert White, author of Living an Extraordinary Life, Sanjoy Mukherjeem, editor of Journal of Human Values, Dr. John Adams, author of Thinking Today as if Tomorrow Mattered, Debbe Kennedy, author of Putting Our Differences to Work, and a diverse roster of others from around the world. The creator and host of the U.S. television series "Thinking Allowed," Jeffery Mishlove, is an early signer.
David Roosevelt, grandson of U.S. President FDR, is also an early signer.
Thank you for your time. Intersys (talk) 19:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC) intersys 12/11/08
Sorry; new to actually doing things on Wikipedia instead of just being blown away by it's facility and depth, and was therefore blissfully unaware of the actual naming policy. I've put in my name change request per your suggestion. The documentation said it would take a couple of days to fulfill.
BroadswordCommunications (talk) 02:16, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Please make sure you sign your submissions to PUI by adding ~~~~ at the end. Also, if the only problem with an image is that a free license has been claimed but there is no verification of it, you can tag the image ((subst:npd)). Stifle (talk) 12:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi Blowdart, I noticed you (I think it was you --- I'm not sure I know how to tell) put a tag on my article "Christopedia". I'm aware that the article isn't very good atm, and reeking of POV, but the site is growing quite rapidly (454 to 538 articles in a week) and *may* represent a trend that should be reported. What do you think?--Leon (talk) 19:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi - So far you have deleted everything I have tried to put up. These pages were a work in progress and no where near finished with history etc to be added but as I am just finding my feet on here, which is quite frankly the least user friendly site to add to in the world. Please can I have the copy from these pages as I clearly need to develop it a little more? Thanks in advance, and any tips or advice on what you do accept would be appreciated. Becbranded (talk) 09:01, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
He roves around like a maniacal megalomaniac whose sole purpose in life is delete articles he deems unworthy. He thinks he is far more intelligent than he actually is, and his status as an editor gravely injures the quality of Wikipedia. Please ban this bloviating blowhard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NOLAhistorian (talk • contribs) 20:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi Blowdart,
Please can you advise as to why the feelgd entry to wikipedia is in breach of insertion rules, i am new to this so as much help as you could offer would be appreciated.
Regards --Helpfulwriter2009 (talk) 12:45, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi. About this. Just want to inform you that the template ((repost)) (WP:CSD G4) is used only when an article that was deleted via a deletion discussion is reposted. I have checked any link of the article to WP:AFD and found nothing: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miley Cyrus: Wii. That means the tag isn't the proper one. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 13:27, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello I have provided sorces to verify the infomation on the Virtual Playground page however you keep putting messages on the page saying I havent please explane. Jammmie999 (talk) 15:14, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Would an ongoing study validate the topic? Would a review on a website from a CEO who has purchased corporate tai chi for her (his) company validate the topic? Would the discussion or actions of members of a Corporate Tai Chi Association validate the topic? Could you give me some advice here? Thanks for reading.
I am fascinated by Wikipedia. Being an editor or books and screenplays, I am respectful of the process. Corporatetaichi (talk) 19:13, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the deletion tag from this article; it now shows context. In future when tagging pages could you please hit the "mark as patrolled" button? It removes the page from Special:NewPages and means other patrollers don't need to look through pre-tagged pages. As to a comment I saw above ('Indeed; it's very POV which is reason enough'); POV is not an immediate reason to speedy delete. POV and spam are different things entirely. Ironholds (talk) 15:03, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
The The Troubles article is currently subject to Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/The_Troubles#Final_remedies_for_AE_case, as laid out during a previous WP:AE case that closed October 05, 2008. If you are a new editor, or an editor unfamiliar with the situation, please follow the guidelines laid out in the above link. If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it on this talk page first. |
Please note: All articles related to The Troubles, defined as: any article that could be reasonably construed as being related to The Troubles, Irish nationalism, the Baronetcies, and British nationalism in relation to Ireland falls under 1RR. When in doubt, assume it is related.
You have now made 3 reverts on this article in breech of the above sanctions. Please revert yourself and use the talk page. In addition, please read talk page guidlines because edit summaries like this here are not acceptable anymore on Troubles articles. Editors should be civil and adhere to good wiki etiquette when stating disagreements. As a matter of polite and effective discourse, comments should not be personalized and should be directed at content and actions rather than people. Thanks --Domer48'fenian' 20:22, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
You have been informed of the 1RR rule, and having been informed reverting yourself to avoid breeching the sanctions would be a corrective action on your part. However, if you don’t wish to correct yourself, having been informed of the sanctions your intensions must be questioned. The above template is on the top of the talk page, after the second revert editors would at the very least raise the issue on the talk page and become aware of the sanctions. Is it now your intension, having been politely informed, to ignore the advice offered, and not address your clear breech of AE imposed sanctions?--Domer48'fenian' 20:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
You clearly breeched the 1 Revert Rule, do you wish to correct your inadvertent breech having now been made aware of it or not? --Domer48'fenian' 21:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your corrective action on the Troubles Article, it is very much appreciated. We can now address the concerns you have on the Article Talk Page which I have opened. --Domer48'fenian' 22:15, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
"having been informed reverting yourself to avoid breeching the sanctions would be a corrective action on your part." Correcting a mistake, is not a mistake. Thanks again, --Domer48'fenian' 23:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
He actually did notify me. I remove most notifications to WP:DRAMA when I receive them from the person posting so as to not tempt myself to immediately respond. ScienceApologist (talk) 09:40, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Not sure why this was removed from the "list of social networks" by you.
Its one of the newest, and yet already one of the biggest. Alexa has it moving up from 2,000,000 to 5,000 within two months. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.227.190.218 (talk) 01:47, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Ok, so one should be added then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.227.190.218 (talk) 14:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Dont see how it differs from any other contribution and therefore why it should be deleted??? I dare say I'm finding the contribution process a little tricky so perhaps you could enlighten me to what I have done wrong with the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mankef (talk • contribs) 22:43, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Oops Mankef (talk) 23:11, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Why did you remove this link under "medical imaging" - there are no relative links included under this discussion that cover "thermography" in any shape or form. This is perhaps the only web site online that does cover infrared thermography news, discussion, and images. Please explain how this link is not only relevant but necessary to further the information available for infrared thermography medical imaging. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.77.42.214 (talk) 20:33, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
If you could please respond, otherwise I am going to assume your removal of the link was an act of vandalism and replace the link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.77.42.214 (talk) 14:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I do not understand how it took less than 2 minutes for you to determine that what I had edited in was vandalism, and yet a week later you still have not responded - my only conclusion is that you do not have a response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.77.42.214 (talk) 22:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I've deprodded Lloyd Bond. The article was indeed a press release. I've stubbed it to remove the copyright violation, and feel that there's probably sufficient notability claimed at least to merit discussion at AfD. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 20:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Blowdart the Man of Ice Awards are a 'notable' awards ceremony as they are the main awards ceremony of the UK's PROFESSIONAL ice hockey season. Please can you reconsider? Also please can you give me some advice on exactly how I get things listed on Wikipedia as I am struggling. Becbranded (talk) 16:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I agree the notability's borderline at most. I'd most likely vote to delete in an AfD if no other sources showed up. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:37, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for removing that, it was on my list of things to do. You'll see I keep removing what looks like an OR interpretation of the author's interviews. dougweller (talk) 19:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you are referencing because the link you provided on my talk page was dead. If you're referring to WP:NOT#NEWS then I'm sure you know that pertains to articles not information within the article, "not all events warrant an encyclopedia article of their own." On the other hand if you were referencing WP:NOTNEWS then I'm sure you realize that was a essay. Only Policies are enforceable, even guidelines are just that; guidelines are not law. An essay is just an editor's opinion. One cannot justify a delete with it. Thanks, I'm going to reinstate the edit. Naufana : talk 02:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
hello Blowdart, ive readed the G11 rule but i think i didnot understand it well... mobx is a web article system i made for webmasters and people who want to make a website for articles its totally free, yet to think about it , i want people to know a about it, i didnot understand why it has been deleted but i think Cpanel is not deleted, yet its under a company copyright its like an advertisment for it, iam sharing something for free here , iam not a company
hello blowdart,
ive readed the G11 rule but i think i didnot understand it well... mobx is a web article system i made for webmasters and people who want to make a website for articles its totally free, yet to think about it , i want people to know a about it, i didnot understand why it has been deleted but i think Cpanel is not deleted yet ,
its under a company copyright its like an advertisment for it,
iam sharing something for free here , iam not a company
best regards HS-M0BX (talk) 21:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
I am not in the United Kingdom, I am in the States of Jersey, the court order does not have any jurisdiction over the people on the Island. The local media have published this information as has the press over in Gurnsey too. 90.197.118.16 (talk) 18:32, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Please note from this diff that I am only reverting to the status quo. The start diff is you reverting BHL's changes to my edit showing there is no change. Though I understand your concern I am not that Wikipiere character, I just don't have an account.194.125.86.146 (talk) 22:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I thought you might want to know, I have corrected two edits made by user 193.62.43.139 to the above article. They seem to be mild forms of vandalism. I noted that this address has a number of warnings for vandalism and that you were the last person to issue one. Dposte46 (talk) 13:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
How can you say that a link to a site containing information on turf is against your terms and conditions. You have 2 links from the turf page to "the turf tavern" a pub, surely this is advertising as the pub sells beer. Another link to the "turf hotal" what information can these 2 sites offer other than promoting the existance of their establishment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.137.255.6 (talk) 15:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I am sorry, but I was asked to put up a page for my play. When it was pointed out that there was a conflict of interest, I merely passed relevant materials to a third party and let them do it. What they have produced I personally would not have produced, but I have left the text unaltered. However, they mentioned including certain productions photos (to which I own the copyright) and the programme notes explaining where the play came from (to which I own the copyright). I fail to see how this in ANY way contravenes the terms and conditions of this website. I am currently filling out a well-sourced page for myself having previously deleted it MYSELF. I am not sure who you are, but, whilst I admire your interest in keeping Wikipedia objective, I fail to see your actions as objective since I am not breaching any of your codes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiskeharrison (talk • contribs) 14:48, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
This is a minor change, which i believe is a fair change to Globespan. As you have for Thomson and thomascook as 'British' it is only fair that Globespan is the same —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joyce118 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
FYI: I had reverted the change, too ... but an admin in the UK (and an aviation expert) makes a case for British on the talk page. NOTE: Yes, there may be other thing at play here (and other considerations), but life is short. :) Cheers. Proofreader77 (talk) 00:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I have no interest in enterring into an argument about this. There is a certain amount of good stuff and a certain amount of rubbish in circulation written about both this play and myself (see how they cut my interview in Tatler or my old school friend Charlie Methven in the Daily Telegraph or Andrew Haydon's oh-so personal venom in Time Out). When someone said my play had no page and neither did I and I should put them up, I agreed at first. Then I didn't. Now I do again. It is a thorny issue. Their page probably looked like mine because when I sent them all the information and told them that that had been objected to, I sent what I had written so they could avoid repeating whatever errors you lot decided were there.
In order to gather as much information in one place about that play and other work I have done in the public domain, it seems to me to make sense to put it all here. That way, if people want to add things, they can add onto a sound basis. There is something self-seeking and self-promoting in all human action, but in this case, mine is no more than usual. Just trying to lay out the facts so when people ask for them, there are some there.
Oh, and as for copyright issues, I have purchased all copyrights when I, as CEO of Mephisto Productions, employed myt friends Matt Jamie as photographer and Andy Cooke as designer. I have no need to credit them, but it seems to me very, very rude not to. Whether I ticked all the boxes on this frankly incomprehensible sit I am not sure. I am learning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiskeharrison (talk • contribs) 18:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Alexander Fiske-Harrison —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiskeharrison (talk • contribs) 18:05, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Responding to your email Fh: I did not want to add the pics in case they fell foul of Wiki rules. --Bigjimedge (talk) 18:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, if you want my writing on your page, you're welcome to it. I see you removed my reference to my bullfighting essay from the Wiki article on the subject; despite it being a comprehensive essay in probably the most prestigious magazine of debate currently in the UK, when no one else is producing such a thing. Hmmm... but then your type of person is infinitely more interested in form, being unable to generate content. So I guess this site does encourage self-promotion then, but not in the obvious way, but of a far cruder and more insidious kind. And to think, for Britannica they had Van Doran. --Fiskeharrison (talk) 00:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. I disagree that the awards establish notability. The British Council of Offices is a minor trade organization that hands out awards to it's own members, it is not all inclusive of all companies doing business in this area. Doing a full news archive search for "eOffice 2000" or "eOffice 2000 Limited", which is the article subject full company name turns up all of a single press release. I don't believe this company meets notability requirements. I'd like your thoughts on whether I am missing something. Best regards. --Chasingsol(talk) 10:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't agree with your deletions. For example, what facts can you show to contradict the reference I gave for the fact that the French Grande Ecole system is unique to France, especially as I referenced the Wikipedia page that says this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JGaynard (talk • contribs) 11:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I read your message on the iVote Mobile talkpage. What would I need to indicate the proof of the subject. I've added a link to the main website in the External Links section and that I think holds sufficient proof. I also read the Notablity page, but I would like more help. Tigernose (talk) 18:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I´m sorry to bother You, but for me it´s very hard to understand, what´s wrong with You guys. If some artist (for example Nelly Drell) has already proven herself, if critics are enraptured and giving prizes, journalists (like me) writing articles about her... What more she have to do, to get some respect and fair attentiveness? Sleep with you?
And btw, how many Estonian artist You know in Saatchi gallery?
You can post me Your answers by e-mail: lauriito@mail.ee —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lauriito (talk • contribs) 12:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
What do You think about those lines? Somebody removed them:
"She looks like a blonde Miss World finalist and paints like a jaded academic. I think of Drell as a born illustrator and a born painter, an artist for whom, by her very nature, academic studies and plaster drawing are ideal – an exceptionally rare quality among artists of her age."
Harry Liivrand (art-historian)
"She is able to mould an image even with the most erratic of brush strokes, lend it depth with the gentle tempering of tonalities, and what is most important – bestow on the image a sense of well-heeled cogency. Drell does not obfuscate her visions in a tactful or delicate artistic fog: she paints them with a pitiless honesty." Johannes Saar (art critic)
Those are taken, rewrited (shortened) and translated - original sources were Estonian newspapers. I didnt put them to Estonian wiki (there are direct links to articles, but I think for english-speaking art-freaks/english wikipedist is too difficult to read in estonian). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lauriito (talk • contribs) 16:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
What is wrong with this text?
Scratch games are a relatively new development in the online games industry and are unique in that they provide the user instant gratification (like an online lottery).
Its exactly what it is... Its a fact...
Peter.neo (talk) 13:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Just in case you missed it:
'Please note before I did this, I did contact the administrator User:MBisanz, and I quote his response of January 24th: "You are free to edit it, or ask someone else to edit it, or place comments on the Talk: page where others would be free to add to the article. Our COI policy lets subject edit their articles so long as they do so in a neutral manner."'
And then your statement: "I suggest you read WP:COI yet again and understand it, stop editing pages about yourself and stop trying to redefine it to justify your own actions"
Do you see the contradiction?--Fiskeharrison (talk) 06:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
No man ever understands quite his own artful dodges to escape from the grim shadow of self-knowledge. --Fiskeharrison (talk) 12:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello Blowdart. I have posted on the troubles talk page retracting my statement that there was a precedent set on the use of references at the British Isles article. I should have double checked before I made my statement as the editors involved appear to be coming to an agreement over the wording. Anyway, apologies for leading you (unintentionaly) to think that was the case. Titch Tucker (talk) 14:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi Blowdart. Thank you for your work on patrolling pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I just wanted to inform you that I declined to delete Lambesis Studios, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion under criterion A7 because of the following concern: Please remember that A7 can only be applied if there is no indication of notability. If the subject of the article is owned by a notable artist and/or notable artists used it, notability is indicated. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion and especially what is considered Non-criteria. In future you should rather tag such pages for proposed deletion or start an appropriate deletion discussion. Regards SoWhy 11:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments here it was much appreciated. On Whiskey in the Jar, just to let you know that the use of a rapier can date the lyrics back to at least the late 18th century. This could also have referred to a rapaire or halh-pike in Irish. Hope that helps, --Domer48'fenian' 14:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey Blowdart, I've made a suggestion on how to progress with this on Talk:Rivers of Ireland (I've outlined it better there than in my response on Superfopp's talk page)—thought you might be interested. Fattonyni (talk) 01:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Dear Blowdart,
I saw your deletion of my edit to MD5 external link to www.hashsum.com which is a online crytography calculator for FILES. I object to the deletion. hashsum.com is a first since there is no such online service available; most provide less and none support hashsum calculation for very large files -- even multi-Gigabyte files. A few other links on the MD5 external link section provide similar service but only for strings. Why are they allowed but not hashsum.com? I feel I created a service very useful to myself and many, and disagree with the deletion. Rabbler (talk) 18:17, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
My edit was helpful. What gives you the right to say it wasn't? If we aren't going to use legal names for articles, we have no basis for an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.231.118 (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi Blowardt, I just recieved such a message
No assertion of notability, none found via google.
I just wanted to let you know that BUGtrack has changed its domain.
This is the old address:
http://www.google.com/search?q=link%3A+www.skyeytech.com%2Fbugtrack%2F
Is everything ok now? Please, let me know.
Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnaVovk (talk • contribs) 10:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I understand the rules but I just reverted my own revert for the sake of resolving the dispute, so I don't see why I should be blocked. See Talk:Dunmanway Massacre Jdorney (talk) 19:21, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi, two things. One. Is it bad faith if I don't answer every time Domer writes something on the Dunmanway talk page? As this is a, extremely tedious and b, pointless. Every time I answer a point he comes back with a barrage of more stuff, using it as a smokescreen to delete whatever he doesn't like. Have a look at the Tom Barry quote on the talk page and see if this is good faith editing.
Two. How do I get a Request for Comment on this article. It is just not productive using the talk page for this anymore and Domer has already rejected the advice of third Opinion. Jdorney (talk) 15:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Surely admitting our own biases is necessary if we're going to edit articles like these? Only then can we reconcile them by including both, or all. The only people who won't state where they're coming from are the true pov pushers. Ok, I'll try the notice board. The problem is that anything that is not binding, Domer will ignore and try to use some sort of sanctions against the editor. Regards, Jdorney (talk) 15:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Done. I await developments. Oh, and re admitting our biases, I wasn't referring to you, sorry if it sounded that way. Jdorney (talk) 15:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)