This page 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.

Thanks FRF for your adjustments to the Andrew Jarecki page. Is it possible for me to email or message you privately? Andrew Jarecki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elliot36 (talk • contribs) 20:38, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Unless you are planning to share some information that cannot be made public (which is probably not necessary in this case), we prefer to handle everything here in the open. Fixes to articles and content issues should be discussed here. Otherwise, you can email me with the link on the left-hand of the screen. Your subsequent edits to the article are OK, given how poorly they were sourced. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

To expand on this... it doesn't matter who is making the edits or why. There is no need to justify removal other than when seeking consensus, and that has to happen here in any case. What matters is whether or not the information is appropriate given our policies. Neutrality, quality sourcing and undue weight are what I considered when I removed that mess on the bio. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:22, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

The following phrase should be deleted from the Wikipedia page of Martine Rothblatt. It is not accurate because Rothblatt hired each of Briskman and Margoles after she had already created Sirius and filed for its FCC approval. They were not its creators but could legitimately be called co-founders: along with David Margolese and Robert Briskman, — Preceding unsigned comment added by LikeAturtle (talk • contribs) 21:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hexbooter#Unsourced_BLP.27s just sent a note too! Wgolf (talk) 20:00, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lemieuxpilon4dart Even just recreated one that was just deleted Wgolf (talk) 20:02, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@Wgolf: Both warned. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:25, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, FreeRangeFrog. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

WikiEditorP (talk) 10:22, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sangeeth sugathan There is this page that has been created by at least 2 users that has been deleted a couple times with different names each time. (Which includes Sangeeth s and Sangeeth S as well). Wgolf (talk) 05:17, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

@WGolf: Well, the article was deleted previously as A3 and it doesn't look like the accounts were used in bad faith... the latest version should probably be taken to AFD. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 15:58, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog, You deleted my page. I requested that it not be deleted or that someone give me some constructive feedback to improve my page. I'm confused as to why my page was deleted when I've seen dozens (and I'm sure there are hundreds more) of high tech corporate pages?

Would you please let me know? I worked hard on that page and I would like to put it back up. I was also working on another tech page...so I could really use some constructive feedback on how to get it back up. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Best wishes, --WikiGuru100 (talk) 19:06, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

The sandbox talk page is still there, and I posted a comment. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog, Thank you for getting back to me so quickly. I researched and got some facts on the websites/articles I used for citations:

Recruiter -- Has 350k monthly visitors and is a third-party, impartially written article CIO Review -- Is both a print and online publication based in the Bay Area (thus it has expertise in the high tech arena) Enterprise Systems Journal -- 50k UV monthly WebWorks is not impressive, I will remove it. TMCnet.com -- 3.5mm readers monthly MrWeb -- the UK’s biggest MR recruitment medium, ie since the year 2000 our ads have helped to fill more UK MR jobs than any magazine, newspaper or any other Web site

I will smooth out the business jargon so that it reads more neutral. Would you please put it back up and let me continue to work on it? --WikiGuru100 (talk) 20:26, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

• • formatted for your viewing pleasure**
    

Hi FreeRangeFrog,
Thank you for getting back to me so quickly. I researched and got some facts on the websites/articles I used for citations:

• • Recruiter -- Has 350k monthly visitors and is a third-party, impartially written article
    
  • CIO Review -- Is both a print and online publication based in the Bay Area (thus it has expertise in the high tech arena)
    
  • Enterprise Systems Journal -- 50k UV monthly
    
  • WebWorks is not impressive, I will remove it.
    
  • TMCnet.com -- 3.5mm readers monthly
    
  • MrWeb -- the UK’s biggest MR recruitment medium, ie since the year 2000 their ads have helped to fill more UK MR jobs than any magazine, newspaper or any other Web site
    

I will smooth out the business jargon so that it reads more neutral. Would you please put it back up and let me continue to work on it?

I have another page I would like to do...I would love to be a frequent Wiki contributor. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiGuru100 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 8 October 2014 (UTC) --WikiGuru100 (talk) 20:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, restored. Please edit the article to make it less promotional, make sure you have some kind of assertion of basic importance there, or someone will tag it for deletion again. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:43, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey FreeRangeFrog. I was wondering if you could provide a second opinion on whether we should remove this BLP's compensation to respect his privacy, or merely source it as a matter of public interest. There are plenty of reliable sources,[1][2][3][4] but none that I have found suggest the information is a huge matter of public interest. OTOH, he was the CEO of a Fortune 500 public company for eight years and a person in that position has their compensation publicly available as a matter of governance. CorporateM (Talk) 23:33, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Removed. Not sure what the point of that was. In some cases compensation of a CEO might be a contentious issue due to mismanagement or corporate performance, but without such context it's nothing more than trivia. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:38, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

ok, thanks. It looks like he took a 25% cut during an industry-wide slow-down, then bumped back up 25% a few years later. He is listed highly in rankings, but not with any specific criticisms or context that I've seen so far. CorporateM (Talk) 23:56, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, that would be a good example of context (positive in this case I suppose), but otherwise it shouldn't even be there. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:59, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog,

I am writing in regards, to the deletion french version of the RS Components:

Here is the UK version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS_Components

This is simply a french version of the page with similar content. Allowing the information available in multiple languages.

Please let me know the best course of action.

Kind regards,

Franklin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin Adcock (talk • contribs) 09:28, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

You know there's a French Wikipedia right? That's where that goes. We don't speedy delete articles because they're in another language, but I can read just enough French to know that it was indeed written as a brochure or press release rather than an encyclopedic article. And quite frankly the existing English one is not much better. I don't know what the content policies are are in the French Wikipedia and I don't know if they'll accept something so badly written, but in any case that's where your article goes, not here. If you want the deleted text let me know. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:33, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I will be working on the DeskAlerts page over the next week to fix it. Thank you very much!--WikiGuru100 (talk) 15:35, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear FreeRangeFrog,

I uploaded an article on straightline.in on Wikipedia a few days back. Being a happy customer of the website, I thought I should write on it (as there were no pages on the same). I do not have any connection with their website whatsoever and was taken aback when my article was labelled as promotional. Would you be kind enough to help me understand, what seemed promotional so that I can rectify it and get the page uploaded.Souvikchelsea1 (talk) 10:04, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

The article was written in a promotional tone that read like a PR release, although I will admit it had secondary sources rather than primary ones, but the wording on what you were paraphrasing was all wrong. I question your claim that you have no connection to them given that you wrote "The Technological Leverage to this website is provided by IBM and Cognizant" - it's difficult to know the technology behind a website unless they happen to be promoting it. Nevertheless, creating a draft and submitting it for review would probably be a good idea. You can do that here. If you want the original text let me know and I can email it to you. I won't restore it though, because it will be tagged for the same thing immediately. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir; My User Page by the name of User:Shashank.S.Shukla was deleted quoting blatant misuse. I have no intention of misusing Wikipedia as I respect it as a resource base. I however want to continue working on wikipedia. I am not sure how I can do that without a page. I may humbly request that if any content on my page was objectionable then that should have been deleted instead of deleting the page itself. Thanks in advance and apologies for any inconvenience.

Regards; Shashank — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shashank.S.Shukla (talk • contribs) 14:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

What you have there now is acceptable, considering you have less than 10 edits to the whole of the encyclopedia. What you had there before was not acceptable, because you had less than 10 edits to the encyclopedia. See how that works? §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

This is no hoax, Kim Jung Un has mysteriously disappeared from public view. Every major news agency has an article about it. Example: from the NEW YORK TIMES

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, who has been absent from public view for more than a month, skipped an important annual ritual on Friday, a development likely to fuel further speculation about whether he has lost his grip on power.

The state news media hinted Friday that he might be ill though still in charge, lending support to one of the many theories swirling among analysts, the media and others who closely watch the nuclear-armed and notoriously opaque nation. Friday was the anniversary of the founding of the governing Worker’s Party and he ordinarily would have been expected to visit the mausoleum where his grandfather — the country’s founder — and his father lie in state. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.93.158 (talk) 03:59, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

It takes a lot more than your opinion and a few news stories to create an article like that. We're not a blog. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:19, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

How are you doing FreeRangeFrog? Sir I seek for your opinion on certain issues. Three weeks ago, there was a report against me at ANI where various concern were raised on my edit behavior particularly about one NAC of a controversial discussion. Other concerned include my hostile tones on Newbies. prior to the report, I had learn not to be harsh on newbies or any editor based on the advice you left on my talk page about my tone when replying your msg. But they acted on my old habit. Some raised a suggestion that I should not patrol NP, as this will limit my encounter with newbies but unknown to them, your note on my talk page has change my orientation on how to interact with Newbies. Luckily for me, I was not sanction at the end of the discussion which lasted for two good weeks. Having learn from my mistake, I intend to patrol NP and your brotherly opinion and advice will count on this decision. Thanks. Wikicology (talk) 16:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The best advice I can give you is to not take things personally, and maybe volunteer for the Teahouse for a while. If you were not banned by consensus from NPP then you can still do it, although if the same things start happening you can and will probably be sanctioned. Just be careful how you interact with new users. Be careful what you say and how you say it. Perhaps the problem is more of a language issue, and that will take a lot of careful practice to correct. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:15, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you mr. Frog! I will take absolute precautions. However, I never got any information that I was banned from NPP. Is it possible for me to be ban without anyone leaving such notice on my talk page? Wikicology (talk) 18:38, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

No, you would have to have received a notification from an administrator. Perhaps it would be a good idea to archive your talk page rather than simply delete its contents. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:41, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I will subscribe to your suggestions. Thanks for your time Wikicology (talk) 18:53, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

FreeRangeFrog I don't mean to bother you but I don't have an idea of how I can achieve my talke page. I need your help on that. Wikicology (talk) 19:13, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I do it manually, just create the new archive and cut and paste. But you can use bots as well. See Help:Archiving a talk page. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:01, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Our previous conversations is missing so i'm writing here. My latest article is corrected. How can I show you this inscription? Create new page in wiki or send you in another way? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wio-Master (talk • contribs) 08:38, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Please use Articles for creation. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, done. Do you need url to check my draf? Or you have access to my account?:)

Thank you for all your advice! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wio-Master (talk • contribs) 21:01, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

No, there's no need for me to check anything, Wikipedia doesn't have a gatekeeper or formal review board. I recommended AFC because that's probably the best approach after you've had an article deleted, since you can work on it unmolested until it's ready and then submit it for review. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:26, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thank so much for help. I think that was big mistake but I created draft which I published (status: Review waiting) and I created new page with the same content. Can you help me with this? Who can accept my article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wio-Master (talk • contribs) 07:59, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

You should not be creating the article, since we agreed you have a conflict of interest here, but there's nothing I can do once the article is live, so it all depends on whether or not someone nominates it for deletion at this point. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:28, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello FreeRangeFrog,I have posted pages about companies to Wiki before in this format and have never had problems with verifying significance. I also see other companies listed on wikipedia with the same level of information supporting significance. Could you explain why the page was deleted when we included verifiable sources and have not made any false statements? Are there any additional indications that need to be included?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globo_PLC — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeanutButterWolf (talk • contribs) 16:26, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

See WP:CSD#A7, WP:CORP and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi,
I have worked on the language of the Draft:DeskAlerts page. I was hoping that you would be able to look at it and give me some feedback. I really worked on the wording to make it sound neutral. I also included some additional facts and deleted a weak citation.

Thanks in advance for your help with this. I really appreciate it.
Talk soon,
--WikiGuru100 (talk) 17:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Again, no claim to notability whatsoever in your article. If a company does not meet that then it's unlikely an article about them will be allowed to remain. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 22:48, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jillian_Hall Just about to put a notice on there page now. Wgolf (talk) 17:34, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Deleted one of those as a clear A7. If they keep doing it and I'm not around, warn them and post a note to WP:ANI. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 22:46, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

I had just begun to work on the article with the new editor when I found that the page had been deleted. Is there anyway you can restore the page and give us at least a couple of hours to get it into shape? She posted a message on the Teahouse questions page.

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:20, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Could you just move it into a sandbox of mine? I've helped rescue a couple of articles before and I really don't want to lose this new editor as a contributor.

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:23, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

@Bfpage: Restored to User:Bfpage/Foodology. Please insist on them going through WP:CHU, or they're going to be blocked. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:34, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much for doing this. I have communicated with the editor and told her the first thing that she needs to do is change her username. If she doesn't do that, then her article will stay deleted and I will delete it from my sandbox. Thank you so much for doing this. I hope we can save it.

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:36, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, just wondering why this article name on this page is not yet red-linked (since October 8 deletion). Does it matter? Yours, Quis separabit? 18:54, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

@Rms125a: The AFD page was still cached. Load it again, I purged the server cache. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:11, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Frog, I invite you to express your opinion about the article for deletion. --Rossi101 (talk) 19:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)Rossi101

About Kazumi Evans, she is a Canadian voice-actress and a singer. But why did you deleted it with any reason? --Allen ^{(talk to me! / ctrb / E-mail me)} 01:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog. I was hoping you might have a few minutes to provide a fourth opinion of sorts regarding a potential BLP-type issue.

A few editors have, after being notified by me, agreed to remove the following sentence from the McKinsey & Company page, where I have a COI:

For example, according to an article citing public tax records, a senior partner in McKinsey's Norway office earned 67 million NOK in 2011, or between $11 and $12 million USD.(source)

Each time the sentence and/or some related material is removed, it has been restored by user:My2011[5][6][7] in a kind of slow-rolling, mild edit-war over the last year and a half.

My2011 believes I am trying to censor or hide criticisms regarding McKinsey's high salaries. I don't feel this particular employee's salary is really that significant such that it over-rides privacy concerns and note that extensive profile stories I feel are more reliable say most directors earn $1-$3 million.[8][9]

CorporateM (Talk) 19:12, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey FreeRangeFrog. Do you have an interesting in working on this page some more in general? I would like to take it the GA route, but it still needs quite a bit of work, including in many controversial areas where I should not edit directly on account of COI rules. CorporateM (Talk) 04:06, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Remember what I did at Mansoor Ijaz? If you're game to create a full draft to replace the existing article, I'll be happy to review it and do the same thing. We can even do an informal call for comments in the talk page and so on. But I'm just afraid I won't be very responsive for piecemeal edit requests. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Yah I know what you mean. I can put it together in an annotated draft with bold red text for additions and strikeouts for trims, then provide a copy/pasteable coded version once approved. However many of the remaining items are things that were contested when I made the current content. For example, an editor opposed my suggestion of breaking up the Knowledge Management section, which relied heavily on primary sources and content not related to knowledge management. My2011 has repeatedly restored the sentence starting with "However, these numbers have likely increased substantially" (it use to say "apparently" rather than "likely") that also sounds like Original Research to me. Now that the controversies are merged with regular sections, it has become apparent how overly-weighted they are and I'd like to trim a few of them, and there is always much resistance to a COI editor doing so. CorporateM (Talk) 18:41, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Annotated draft

How's this? CorporateM (Talk) 22:20, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Looking good so far, give me a coupla days to get through it and diff with the current one. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:51, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey FreeRangeFrog. I just thought I would check-in and see if User:CorporateM/McKinsey was still on your To Do list. Looking around your Talk page, you look to be quite busy! I've been spending most of my time as of late doing some major DIY home improvement projects. Anyways, let me know if you still have time/interest to review the GA-ready proposed draft. CorporateM (Talk) 21:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Yes! Sorry, I got sidetracked and had a lot of real-life work. I'll continue my diff review on Thursday. Thanks for the ping! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 01:31, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Ping! Not to be a pest, but just following up since you mentioned Thursday. CorporateM (Talk) 20:00, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

A page I am was working on about a notable upcoming South African artist was deleted (Evans Musa Ndobe). Can you please reverse that action and restore the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dumindobe (talk • contribs) 06:12, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

I left information on your talk page on how to create a draft. The article you mention has been deleted twice already, because it does not make a minimal assertion of importance. Wikipedia is not a directory - subjects must meet the notability guidelines for inclusion. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 06:19, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Objection to your deletion of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asma_Chandani. Please reinistate text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acesq24 (talk • contribs) 00:56, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Please reinstate text from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asma_Chandani. I did not have a local copy of the text and object to the basis of your deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acesq24 (talk • contribs) 00:58, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

First thing first - you created an article using an account, which is not allowed. Second, I see at least three accounts and two anonymous users have edited the content and done nothing else. I assume you and them, whomever they are, have a conflict of interest. So you all need to follow the instructions here. You need to disclose your relationship to the subject, and you need to submit a draft for review, not create the article directly. Finally, you need to evaluate whether or not the subject meets the notability guidelines to avoid wasting everyone's time. Once that's done we can talk about restoring the content into a draft. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I am writing you concerning a page you recently deleted, Terragon Group. I have checked through the guidelines that was claimed was violated (A7) and have matched this with the article that was submitted. The article was thoroughly reviewed by a team of editors here and we believed that all guidelines were strictly followed. How can we resolve this and restore this page, making the necessary edits where required? Aazubuike (talk) 15:12, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Given your comment, there's obviously one guideline that was not strictly followed: The conflict of interest one, which is clear about the need to submit a draft for review. The deletion itself was appropriate - your article made no claim of importance whatsoever. It only described the company. Wikipedia is not a directory, and subjects must meet the notability guidelines for inclusion (beyond the basic claim to importance, which would have prevented the speedy deletion in the first place). §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I still object to the deletion and will like this re-instated. I already stated in the first sentence the claim of importance which was 'Africa's leading digital marketing company' as well as sources to prove the claim. If this is insufficient information, i will like an opportunity to edit it and send it to Wiki editors to review beforehand. Thank you so much. Aazubuike (talk) 14:25, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

None of your sources seemed to back up your Africa's leading digital marketing company claim, that has to come from someone else, not your PR material. Nevertheless, maybe you can get it working. The article is at Draft:Terragon Group. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello again. The sources were independent sources. However, i have taken note of your comments and will edit appropriately, and submit for review. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aazubuike (talk • contribs) 09:27, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much for reverting my recent edit here. Am glad you did. It serves as a reminder for me. It escaped my mind over time. I hoped I never “bite”? If there is anything you think I should no, don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page. Your corrective advice is my strength. Thanks. Wikicology (talk) 17:14, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog,

I noticed that earlier today you marked the page "Changer d'Altitude" for speedy deletion. I was hoping that we could resolve this.

The information that was provided to the page is all that is present in the online domain at the moment: a blog from the author and the page from the publisher. It would be great to develop the page to be more content rich, with alternative viewpoints and reviews, but at present there are none in the public domain and therefore the page can only represent the facts currently stated about the book.

I had found similar content while looking at other book articles, if only less content rich due to lack of blurb, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_We_Decide, but this could be removed if you think it makes a more neutral tone to the article.

It would be great to get your guidance on this article, rather than simply deleting it.

Many thanks, Phil Solimp (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

The article was deleted because it was written in a completely inappropriate and unencyclopedic way. We don't normally speedy delete articles about books for any other reason. With that said, you're basically arguing against the inclusion of the article (assuming it was re-written) because books must meet certain notability guidelines, which must be proven with multiple references to secondary sources that evidence the work's notability. If a book is not notable by that measure, then it does not belong in Wikipedia. And while we don't consider X when talking about Y, I will note the difference between your article and the one you mention is that it contains those multiple secondary references that can be used to assert said notability. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:54, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, so sorry, just wanted to ask why my page for Ahead Learning Systems was deleted for unambiguous advertising when I wrote it in much the same way as the following pages?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InstaEDU

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TutorVista

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tutor.com

Just wanted to ask why these pages weren't speedily deleted as well. I have a mortal fear of frogs, but, I'm hoping you will respond without any photos ^_^

Thank you so much for your time and attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YuXin Writer (talk • contribs) 00:25, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Every claim to notability in your article was sourced to the company's website, aside from the fact that it was written like a brochure. I'd suggest you start over, assuming the company meets WP:CORP. I will not restore the material, but I can email it to you if you wish. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:34, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

In the most recent AFD of a particular article, you made a comment that referenced "original research" or "WP:OR". I am sending this same message to every non-IP editor who metioned either character string in that AFD. Please consider participating in a poll discussion about adding secondary RSs to the listing criteria at that talk page. Thanks for your attention. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:33, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

That seems pointless to me. Why would I help improve the article, if in my opinion it shouldn't even exist. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:37, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

The editor is still adding advertisement and spam to their talk page. I just thought I'd let you know to stop them. Thank you Callmemirela (talk) 01:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@Callmemirela: Already blocked for blatant spamming. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 01:25, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

User:FreeRangeFrog I am very well aware of that, but they updated their talk page after being blocked in the same pattern. here. That is what I meant. Callmemirela (talk) 01:28, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Removed talk page access now, and the spam. Thanks for the heads up! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 01:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@FRF, I don't understand why has the article - AproGift been deleted. I am a freelance blogger and reporter who covers media and technology companies. Please restore the article as it is written in a generic manner and is not promotional directly in the form of sales or marketing. The way I see it, the article qualifies the criterion - Note: An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.203.76.67 (talk) 09:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea what page you're referring to, because you didn't link to it, I can't find it in the logs or via search, and you're not logged in. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 15:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the attention to the page. I wrote a response to the mod who marked the page for deletion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ubiquity#Speedy_Deletion_of_Experion_Developers_Page I have not received a response. Kindly let me know what was missing in the page that led to its deletion and how I can improve upon it to make the page appropriate Wikipedia content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bootpalish (talk • contribs) 14:05, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Ubiquity left a helpful and detailed message in your talk page which explains the deletion. I would have told you the same thing. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:43, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi!

I am the creator of the now deleted page for The Human Element. I am very confused as to why my entry was deleted. I am a new wiki editor and am doing my best to learn this process. Can you please clarify why my entry was not only rejected but deleted?

The page I am (was) creating had over twenty legitimate, published sources.

The research/behavioral model/method being depicted in the page is of historical significance to the fields psychology, behavioral development, and organization development.

There are multiple books published on or around this work spanning over sixty years.

The son of the man who developed this research (originally for the Navy) advised me in the creation of the page and is the caretaker of the intellectual property of the research, so really there won't be a more accurate version of this page than the one we collaborate on.

Aside from any feedback/clarification you are able to offer I would also really appreciate my draft being restored or emailed to me.

Thank you for your time, I appreciate it! Theschutzcompany (talk) 17:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Mariah

Please request a change to your username, or you will be blocked. The relevant policy can be found here. As to the article, it was written in an inappropriate way - the way a brochure or a fansite might be written. See WP:CSD#G11 for more information. Such material is routinely deleted. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi again, I am in the process of requesting a new username per your suggestion, so please don't block me. I would really appreciate my draft being restored or emailed to me, and would consider it very courteous as I am a new user. As far as the style I'll be honest this wasn't very helpful. Most of the article was sourced directly from academic articles on the subject. If I am to start over I would really appreciate feedback that is more specific. I am feeling a bit "bitten" as they say. Again, thank you for your time. Theschutzcompany (talk) 17:28, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel bitten. I don't tend to do that to users, which is why I requested that you change your username instead of flat out blocking you, as we normally do. You understand we can't have "Theschutzcompany" writing about a subject invented by Will Schutz of the The Schutz Company. What sources you used are irrelevant, because the article was deleted as an advertisement, not because it was unsourced. Let me quote from the draft:

The Human Element was created by Will Schutz, Ph.D., a psychologist and creator of FIRO® Theory and FIRO instruments. The Human Element uses experiential learning, including small group discussions, structured feedback, imagery, and physical activities, combined with an integrated set of FIRO-based psychometric assessments to address interpersonal issues in organizations. The experiential basis of the methodology provides the means for individuals and teams to change their behavioral dynamics and ways of working together. It is usually delivered as a course followed by interventions using the modules and tools in consulting and coaching.

I note the liberal use of the registered trademark symbol (usually a red flag in these cases), and the generally meaningless buzzword-laden prose that really explains nothing but looks good. Here's more:

Schutz believed that truth or openness is essential for high performance and solving problems in organizations. In The Human Element, Truth is used interchangeably with Openness and has two parts

More:

Schutz presented the concept of Choice (which he also called self-determination, or autonomy) as a “pragmatic assumption,” which reorients one’s search for solutions to problems. The assumption of Choice involves assuming that one has complete control over one’s life, for the purpose of raising awareness. By looking for ways in which one created his or her own situation, one becomes more aware of his or her own choices, both conscious and unconscious. Schutz emphasizes that this is not a statement of presumed fact, but intended to be a means for practical problem solving. “If I preclude nothing, then I put my energy into figuring out how to succeed… If I start out by assuming some things are unchangeable, then I am imposing limitations before I even try…Choice is a pragmatic operating principle that allows me to devote all my energy to doing what I want to do, rather than wasting it on finding reasons for why I’m not doing what I want to do.”

And all this is just a small part of the overall draft. The amount of material dedicated to the awesomeness of Will Schutz was also highly problematic. His bio thankfully seems to be fairly neutral though.

If you can't see why all this is appropriate maybe for your website or a brochure about the subject but wholly inappropriate for Wikipedia then we really can't help the fact that you feel bitten. While the concept might meet the notability guidelines for inclusion, Wikipedia is not the place to promote it, which your draft was essentially doing (even if that was not your intention). Quite honestly, all this could have been condensed into to a single paragraph in the author's bio. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:55, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi again! Thank you for getting back to me so quickly, your feedback was very helpful and really clarified a lot for me. The account was originally set up by the company but I have taken it over now because I use this behavioral model in my work and felt it would make a good wiki contribution. My username has been changed to reflect the account as my own and not The Schutz company's. My intention was not at all to sell anything but rather to make a well written and thorough entry. It seems I overshot.

I would very much appreciate the opportunity to take your feedback and re-work the entry. It would be a huge help if you could email or restore the draft as my last revisions were not backed up and the coding bits still take me quite a while. I think with this new feedback I will be able to edit the page significantly and meet wikipedia's standards. As many tutorials as I have taken on this process it there are obviously nuances that must be learned through experience.

Again thank you for your time. If you need me email address to send me the draft I am happy to provide it. Thank you! Mariah OrgDevNerd (talk) 00:38, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

@OrgDevNerd: Thank you for changing your username. I've emailed you the contents of the deleted draft. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:45, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

please allow my editing on vimi...i am trying to tell about a great heroine of bollywood to the world...please allow me to edit... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.230.22.218 (talk) 06:14, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

I did not realize there was a non-free exception for "primary means of visual identification of the subject" as was done here for photographs of the article-subject. Is that kosher? CorporateM (Talk) 17:01, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: For deceased persons, yes. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:47, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

awww... CorporateM (Talk) 20:03, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey FreeRangeFrog! Would you mind closing Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Mian Amir ghani, since you deleted the page. Thanks, --///EuroCarGT 00:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

@EuroCarGT: Closed, thanks for the heads up. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 01:01, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

hello,

i just wanted to know, why my article related to infopercept has been delete, it is an article which gives information about my company, what it does? that is it, can you please clarify so i can workout the way you suggested and i can publish my article.

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.23.141.179 (talk) 04:35, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

See WP:PSCOI. That's not why it was deleted, but it's what you should be doing. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Frog. I too have noticed some very problematic AfC acceptances by this editor. They probably all need to be checked [10]. The situation is not helped by a possibly incomplete name change. See my message at User talk:MBisanz#Confusing name change. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 19:26, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

@Voceditenore: Will look at this more tomorrow or Tuesday, for now I'm assuming good faith but I agree there is some troubling stuff back there that needs attention. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 22:37, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, FreeRangeFrog. You have new messages at Jersey92's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Dear FreeRangeFrog,

My name is Pauline. I am a french student in Finland. You have deleted my article about Princesse tam.tam. I am sorry to know it. I wrote this article for a study exercise which was to contribute in Wikipedia. Unfortunately, the article has been detected as advertising. To show my work, please, could you send me a copy of the article?

Thank you in advance,

Regards,

Pauline — Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulinePalm (talk • contribs) 07:45, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

You will have to enable email on your Wikipedia account. You can do so at Special:Preferences. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:17, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi I was wondering why my user page was deleted? It is not a resume or for social networking. It provides a limited amount of biographical information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.111.27 (talk) 08:13, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

I've opened an WP:AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obihai Technology. K7L (talk) 16:33, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

@FreeRangeFrog: Good evening, Sir. I thought I'd bring to your attention that Montanabw has done a superb review of article Timothy M. Carney, in which I have worked with the editor to improve and correct an article that I had substantially re-written. I thought perhaps this would be a good reviewer for the Mansoor Ijaz article that you have nominated for Good Article status. Just a thought, in case you wanted to reach out as it has been some time since the GA Nomination was made. Hope all else is well in your neighborhood. Best, --Mansoor Ijaz (talk) 01:05, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@Mansoor Ijaz: I'll reach out to them once I see the work on Carney is done. Thanks for the heads up. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 15:36, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Several times I have asked that I be notified of changes to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Eve. I have a conflict of interest so I may not make changes, but I can discuss and I can request changes. I wonder if it has to do with an f*** up from a while back when I did not understand the COI and was disabled for a while. HELP! Thank you. Oh, and thanks for keeping an eye on this page. Greenwayfriend (talk) 04:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Help:Watching pages#Email notification and Help:Email notification should be available to any registered user who has an e-mail address verified in their profile, has enabled the feature in their special:preferences and has the page on their special:watchlist. Any chance your e-mail provider is inadvertently rejecting the messages as spam? K7L (talk) 14:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@Greenwayfriend: What K7L said... I remember you asked me about this before, and there's nothing related to COI or anything like that which could be causing the problem. Check your preferences, and your spam folder. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 15:37, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

FRF, thank you. My "Junk e-mail" and "Spam" folders are empty. On my preference page I have provided my email address and both "Enable email from other users" and "Email me when a page or file on my watchlist is changed" are checked. My watchlist shows both "Amazon Eve (talk | History)" and "Amazon eve (talk)" in that order. I just deleted the second one since I don't think the article with a lowercase /e/ exists. My recollection is that last time you changed something and then I got one (or maybe two) notifications and then they stopped. I wonder if I should try changing my email address. Greenwayfriend (talk) 21:51, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@Greenwayfriend: Do you want me to send you an email via Wikipedia to see if that works? If it does, then the problem might be your watchlist or something else. One thing to remember is that you don't get a notification if you were the one that changed the article. On Commons for example I have my preferences set to receive an email when a page on my watchlist changes because I don't visit there very often, and I've never failed to receive the messages. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:28, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I must say I thought carefully about that one. Why would a band call themselves "The Stomachs"? Peridon (talk) 17:29, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@Peridon: Pfft, that's nothing. There was one called Un Pingüino en mi Ascensor, which translates roughly to "There's a penguin in my elevator" §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:06, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Having been in groups called 'Me, him and her', and 'Missing Link', not to mention 'The Wandering Willies', I could go with the penguin... Not stomachs. Peridon (talk) 18:10, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello FreeRangeFrog,

You deleted a page I created for LeadFerret. I'm requested that I be given explanation as to why the page was removed. All I'm trying accomplish here is publish a nuetral article about LeadFerret. The page was not intended to sound at all promotional or advertising like. Would you be able to put the page back up so I can continue to work on it. Thanks!

LeadFerret 22:25, 5 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddie at LeadFerret (talk • contribs)

You were following the COI guidelines well enough (e.g., your username) until you went and created the article yourself, which you're not supposed to do. You're supposed to submit it for review here. Now, generally I'd restore the deleted material and move it to a draft for approval, but I'm not going to do that here because the material is completely unusable for Wikipedia:

The robust online search and data management platform connects users to a database of over 17 million business contacts, and every user gets complete access for free. Users only pay when they choose to DOWNLOAD records to a spreadsheet. Sales people can quickly find detailed contact information for their ideal prospects, including email addresses and social media profiles. ... The site allows you to search any records for free and only pay when a record is downloaded. LeadFerret also allows you to earn points and use these points to download individual records to a vCard. There are several ways to earn points, once you have a free account with LeadFerret, you can earn up to 5 points a day (use all the points in your account and LeadFerret will replenish your account with another 5 points, everyday).

"was not intended to sound at all promotional or advertising like" Seriously? That's the reason we require a review. There was a also an excessively large laundry list of "Specialty directories" (whatever that is). A section for references, but no footnotes. There's nothing salvageable there at all. We're not your website, and we don't publish brochures or prospectus about your company, we publish verifiable facts that prove it is notable, written in a neutral tone. Speaking of notable, before you submit a draft for review, please make sure yours meets WP:CORP, otherwise you'll just be wasting the reviewers' time. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:15, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello FreeRange frog, the page i published https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interaccion_Trans-forma was deleted, please could you tell me the reasons behind deleting it as It was a uni project and in no means promocional or anything of the sort. All content was produced by myself and classmates. Please could you help me restore the content. Thank you — Preceding unsigned

comment added by Augusto hermosa (talk • contribs) 08:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Fue borrado por la misma razon que fue borrado en la Wikipedia en Español. Wikipedia no es el lugar para hacer trabajos de la escuela. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:15, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello I was in the process of writing a wikipedia article concerning a local organization in the Ottawa community, could you explain to me why you deleted the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peer-reviewed skeptic (talk • contribs) 14:46, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm new to the Wikipedia page backend and was trying to edit my new page, yet you deleted it before I could finish editing

Taylor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talyfish (talk • contribs) 20:38, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I left information on your talk page. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:18, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mansoor Ijaz you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 20:40, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

@Jaguar: Thank you! I'll be watching for your review to make all necessary changes. Mansoor Ijaz We're on §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:14, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks a lot for help rendered on Dr.K.Loganathan's page. I am new here and very much lost, but trying my best to save Dr Loga's page. Machupichu5678 (talk) 07:46, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Would appreciate any help in saving Dr K LOganathan's page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Machupichu5678 (talk • contribs) 08:29, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello,

can you please consider undeleting the page Connie Garner, the initial page did not have much content or references and I will update with verified content including competition videos and history results and evidence. Newspaper articles that provide evidence, News footage and a number of magazines including editions that can provide evidence. This is a genuine request to provide evidence of a susbtanial person in Australian Fitness and one who has won many Australian Titles and a World Title. Evidence of such can be verified and any further evidence you may need following resubmission, will be provided

Much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roundtheroundabout (talk • contribs) 01:32, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

I left a message at WP:REFUND where you initially requested the undeletion. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 05:27, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

thank you so much for your assistance FreeRangeFrog

I think I am finally getting the gist of wikipedia, The article indeed is much better with the citations.

best regards Roundtheroundabout (talk) 10:23, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I didn't know I wrote it in the wrong place, and you did a fast deletion without asking or giving an alert. I hope at least you saved the code, did you?

I was still working on it. Fox of Foxes 01:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JesusDrog (talk • contribs)

You mean this?

Please do not recreate it. Not only is it not a viable subject, it belongs in the Spanish Wikipedia (assuming they'd accept it there, which they probably won't, at least not in that form) §FreeRangeFrog^croak 02:05, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Might appear again. You warned her about COI, and she carried on with her promo. I've indeffed for NOTHERE. I wonder if she foresaw that.... Peridon (talk) 17:18, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

@Peridon: Fair warning and all, she had her chance. I tidied up and deleted the (twice-rejected) sandbox as well. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:20, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for doing what I was sorely tempted to do but was too cautious to execute. I endorse all of your actions.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:03, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Mikenew1953 (talk · contribs) is at it again uploading copyrighted images. You warned him/her a few days ago. Best, ///EuroCarGT 20:29, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

@EuroCarGT: Thanks for the heads up. Looks like my warning had the opposite effect :\ Blocked for one week, one final chance. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 22:07, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

The article Mansoor Ijaz you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mansoor Ijaz for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 21:00, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello Mr Frog. You just deleted Digital Logic Design. That article was actually an incompetent attempt by the author to move Digital-Logic-Design to a new title. I had already sent that article to AfD, but you might decide to speedy that one as well as it is practically identical to the one you have already speedied. SpinningSpark 00:35, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@Spinningspark: I removed some of the description material since it neither helps not hinders notability. I'd say let the AFD run its course, maybe the author can save it. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 05:31, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Dear sir,

Can you check if the draft page is ok https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Steven_Z._Pavletic ?

Can we move it from Draft to production?

Thank you, Darko Keric --Darko1983 (talk) 14:50, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@Darko1983: I wasn't sure why you asked me until I realized I deleted that article at some point. You did a good job, although there are some structure issues that should be fixed (at one point you have commas in between some references, etc). However, the most important thing is to make sure the subject meets WP:GNG and/or WP:PROF. Once you've verified that and improved it, click the green button at the top to submit it for review. DGG is the administrator that tagged it initially, I'm not sure if he wants to take a look as well. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:22, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@Darko1983: The current draft is free from the direct promotionalism present in the original article. I shall review it for other matters. DGG ( talk ) 03:59, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

The article Mansoor Ijaz you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mansoor Ijaz for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 14:23, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey FreeRangeFrog,

My page /Flex-Watches was marked for deletion by you on October 30th. I was wondering why? Also, if there was a chance I could get that overturned could you please tell me what I need to add to make that happen, or an example of a good page. Sorry I'm new to wikipedia and not well versed in what works best for your guy's approval! Please help me out here, it would really be irritating to have all my work go to waste...

Best,

Holden

The reason for the deletion is at the top of page. If that's not enough, it would be awesome if you could provide me with a link, or at the very least log in so I can track it down. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 01:26, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Here's all I have left, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flex_watches&action=edit&redlink=1 if you restore it I will have my team fix the article immediately and add the info that needs to!

Any insight so I can make the needed adjustments?

@Holdawg: Sorry, I sort of spaced out about this. Please sign your posts. I hadn't realized this was from a deletion discussion (AFD), and these are generally not restored on request without consensus from the nominator. More to the point, you have a conflict of interest and I worry about what you mean by "my team". You should not have created the article yourself. In any case, please talk to the administrator that nominated the article for deletion, DGG. He'll either tell you no, or tell you that he's OK with it, and then either restore the article to a draft so it can be submitted via AFC (again, because of your conflict of interest), or ask you to tell me to do it, which is no problem. But this deletion is neither controversial nor does it fall under the type of "soft" removals that can be reversed by request. Before you do, please consider the reason for the nomination - notability is not inherited, and the subject must meet the guidelines for inclusion. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:54, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

@FreeRangeFrog: You're right, I didn't really understand the specs of what is good content for Wikipedia and just including overly name dropping, we will downsize and focus only on public information about the company that matters. @DGG: Mind providing your input please? §Holdawg^{WE REALLY OUTHERE} 19:28 12/10/14

Thanks! Trivialist (talk) 00:57, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

The IP was very similar to MariaJaydHicky. He/she repeatedly disrupting editing. Can you sockpuppet him/her? 183.171.182.98 (talk) 01:51, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

He/she is now using their talk page for advertising purposes. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:20, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Never mind, it's been sorted. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:46, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Can you also delete Mario Martinez (baseball)?--Yankees10 21:05, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

@Yankees10: Done, thanks for the heads up! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:15, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

I see you've been involved in this. At the moment have Draft:Mohammad Nuruzzaman which is normal but declined for lack of evidence of notability. We also still have Wikipedia:Mohammad Nuruzzaman Zaman which is the same BLP but in the wrong space. And finally we have User:Mohammad Nuruzzaman Zaman/sandbox created by User:Mohammad Nuruzzaman Zaman. I'm not sure what to do about these. The sandbox one shows up on Google. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 13:29, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

@Dougweller: Sigh, what a mess. I spent time diff'ing the three versions and it looks like the one in the Wikipedia namespace was more up to date, so I deleted everything else, including redirects, moved it over the draft one and restored the AFC tags. I've left what amounts to a final warning in the user's talk page, so hopefully this will be the last time we have to clean up after them. Thanks for the heads up. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 22:24, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog - I note you have deleted the article, and while I don't dispute 2Cents comments on the references, I would have liked to see more comment/input from other editors, especially those within the scientific research community. I have difficulty seeing why a company that has created a specialised programme that is used globally is not notable. On researching it I found it cited in numerous scientific papers as having been used and its being available for use at numerous Universities globally. I also presume when assessing notability we should ignore the awards the company won at a nationaly level because they are not international? I genuinely would appreciate your comments. NealeFamily (talk) 01:24, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

@NealeFamily: What would you like to do? Do you want me to userify the article, and if so would you be willing to put it through AFC for review? §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:22, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - if you can userfy that would be helpful - the problem I have is that the topic is on the edge of my expertese so I am open to suggestions as to which Wiki Project might be able to assist. NealeFamily (talk) 03:39, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Have you userfied the article? NealeFamily (talk) 23:17, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

No, sorry. I asked the nominator to see if they're OK with the restore. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:10, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

@NealeFamily: Restored and moved to User:NealeFamily/Biomatters. Please keep in mind that given this was an AFD, we are expecting that you will go through an AFC review before moving it back to article space. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:21, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - appreciate your assistance and agree that an AFC is appropriate. NealeFamily (talk) 21:39, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I have finished working on the page User:NealeFamily/Biomatters and have resubmitted it. Thanks for your help and advice. NealeFamily (talk) 03:31, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey, would you consider standing for arbcom? They are desperately in need of qualified candidates, and you are absolutely qualified. (They don't discriminate against frogs.)

Due to strange situations, you would also be pretty certain to get elected.

You would need to post a statement at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2014/Candidates in less than 48 hours now, but that could be short since you could refine your position later through questions etc.

Last year one person didn't bother answering any of the questions, and still got elected anyway.

Hope you'll consider it. Thanks! --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:34, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

@Demiurge1000: I am tempted but at the same time concerned I'd be unable to fulfill the demands (time-wise). I'm also not entirely sure I have the level of experience to be useful in that role. I'm seeing you have a bunch of good candidates at this point, so I'm going to pass and make a serious consideration next year. Nonetheless, thank you for thinking of me. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey FRF! As a host at Teahouse, I watchlisted the page and a recent user who asked a question regarding adding images of balloons is a sockpuppet of David Beals, the user is Amma Zon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Best, ///EuroCarGT 03:29, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

@EuroCarGT: Are you sure? I thought the Beals troll thing was ceiling fans? §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:33, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Balloon, check on the page... ///EuroCarGT 03:34, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Howicus removed it, check Special:PermaLink/633966616. ///EuroCarGT 03:35, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

@EuroCarGT: Lulz, you're absolutely right. Blocked and tagged. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:37, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

While adding content showing the importance and significance of the organization that was subject of the page, the page was deleted. How can deletion be avoided while the page is being edited?

• (talk page stalker) Try adding "under construction" within double (( )) at the top of the article. This will mark the page as being actively worked on. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:22, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

There were two copies of this article, one of which was deleted as a copyvio (you pasted material from your website into Wikipedia, which is never a good idea). It's not complicated to assert minimal importance (which is what prevents immediate deletion), however I'll assume you have a conflict of interest here, and so I'll recommend you use Articles for creation instead. Please see this for more information, and above all make sure you review the notability guidelines for inclusion. If your org does not meet them, the article will not be accepted. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:29, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

I re-created the page using the "under construction" advice above and added some of the notable work done by the organization. If this is not acceptable can it be moved to Articles for Creation? Stogiec (talk) 22:39, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

@Stogiec: Working on a draft is just easier, but how you go about it is up to you. The real question is, do you have a conflict of interest? Are you associated in any way with the organization? If that is the case, then using a draft and submitting for review is not optional. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 22:49, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

I am an unpaid volunteer officer for the organization. However, I thought these were Non-controversial edits. Stogiec (talk) 23:04, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

@Stogiec: You misunderstand the COI guidelines. "Controversial" is when you're removing criticism of your company for example. COI by definition forbids the direct creation of an article about a subject you are associated with, without first going through a review by an unconnected editor. I've moved the article to Draft:Florida Carry and added a banner at the top you can use to submit once it's done. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I saw that you deleted the Marcelo Tosatti article after a very minimal discussion and I had totally missed the conversation. Can you copy the text of the article into my usespace and leave me a message on my talk page when you do? I'd like to see where things were and to see if it would be possible to improve the article and find additional references to establish notability for a possible creation of an improved version of the article in the future. Thanks! —mako๛ 01:22, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

@Benjamin Mako Hill: So long as Black Kite is OK with it. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:10, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

@Black Kite: Any objections? —mako๛ 16:34, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

@Benjamin Mako Hill: You might want to drop them a line directly on their talk page. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:41, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Frog, you deleted my article because you thought I had not written a reliable source, but in fact I had. I linked (or at least I tried to, don't know if it worked out) to the person of the subject's youtube and twitter on which you can find all the information I wrote. Yours sincerely, January

This is what a reliable source is, your contribution was sourced to twitter and YouTube, not to mention it was worded inappropriately. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:11, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

may i know what make you think that baluchistan is not A PART OF PAKISTAN

Look at this and tell me if "BOLD TEXT" seems OK to you? I don't care where Balochistan is, but if you're going to edit an article please try to avoid breaking it in the process. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:07, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I was wondering if you had an opinion on whether an article should exist (see discussion here and an initial work in progress here). I have a COI and am somewhat conflicted on whether it would be appropriate for me to submit a page to AfC. I don't feel he quite meets GNG because he is not the subject of multiple works, but there is enough source material for a decent short article and common sense suggests the CEO of a multi-billion dollar public company should be notable (many former CEOs of Juniper Networks have pages). We have some non-GNG criterion for athletes, creatives and professors, but none have been formulated as of yet for businesspeople. CorporateM (Talk) 16:29, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Based solely on GNG, yes. On the other hand I've always considered these to be essentially a form of BLP1E... Perhaps DGG's observation that we should have a "List of Juniper Network CEOs" is more on target, but lacking a more specific notability guideline for business people, we're left with these kinda stubs. But yes, assessing as if it were at AFD for example, it would probably survive. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:34, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Hrm - I suppose I was fishing for a yes-no answer that I'm probably not going to get ;-)

If you say that it would survive an AfD, that seems to suggest it would be an appropriate submission to AfC, so I'll suggest we work on it, unless you suggest otherwise. CorporateM (Talk) 19:10, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Actually List of Juniper Networks CEOs sounds neat, though some of their prior CEOs have full pages and are notable for more things than being CEO at Juniper. I haven't really seen it done that way, so I'm not sure that's aligned with our norms, but it sounds like a good way to do it. CorporateM (Talk) 19:26, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea how many of them there are, but it's certainly a valid alternative to having multiple stubs. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:10, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

On a separate now, it's been a week now and if you're comfortable/ready to merge the updated McKinsey draft into article-space, I can cleanup all the annotations and make it copy/paste-ready. I also modified the draft slightly to reduce how much trimming was done in the environmental consulting section. CorporateM (Talk) 14:50, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: I think we're ready given the (lack of) feedback, if anyone wanted to object they've had their chance. Get the draft ready and let me know. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:57, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

 Done I gave it one more readthrough and made some copyedits/trims in the Lede. I also made some additional minor trims/copyedits in the controversy section, incorporating a New York Times source that was recently published and trimming another 1.5 sentences or so. CorporateM (Talk) 19:07, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Here are the changes I made in the controversial section just now, so they are easier to review.

• resulting from his board memberships at Goldman Sachs and Procter & Gamble (not relevant to McKinsey)
• "After the scandal McKinsey reviewed of its policies and procedures" -> "instituted new policies and procedures to discourage future indiscretions from consultants" (McKinsey instituted new policies as oppose to just reviewing current ones, per the new New York Times source, which provides a detailed account of changes at the firm resulting from the scandal)
• There is no evidence of any damage to McKinsey's brand, (general trimming)

CorporateM (Talk) 19:10, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: All set. Great work on that draft §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:40, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much! FYI, someone made some edits right after yours that are very similar to the edits this IP has made on other pages on management consultancies. We've had problems in the past on this page with competitors, who were also editing their own page inappropriately coming to this one to plug themselves, or adding awards on their page, than adding criticisms on this one, etc. and this looks up that alley to me, though I'm not sure which one they are affiliated with. CorporateM (Talk) 14:08, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Reverted. That seemed very pointy on the IPs part, but I suppose they can add the competitors back on if they can source them (and not removed sourced information in the process) §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:23, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi,

Yesterday I created the OneShift article and you had it deleted it. The reason I created the article is that I consider the OneShift an inspiring success story, a successful company built by a 21 years old girl. This is one of the most inspiring things about Australian entrepreneurs. It had quite a few references from reputable publications (Forbes) and so on. If the page was deleted because it does;t bring value, then my question is, how come SpotJobs still exists? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpotJobs). I looked for similar pages, and SpotJobs is there, having similar information from the same industry. Isn't that favouritism? If there are rules, they should be applied to all. I don't find SpotJobs more inspiring than OneShift.

Please reconsider your action and reinstate the page.

Thank you

Subject are not included because they are "inspiring", they are included because they meet the inclusion guidelines, they must assert basic importance (you merely claimed the business exists) and not be written in a promotional tone. You must prove that the subject is notable. And we really don't compare articles to any of the 4 million already here. I recommend creating a draft and submitting it through Articles for Creation. That way you won't be subject to speedy deletion, and a volunteer editor can assess your sources and determine if the company merits inclusion. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:14, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog. The Wikipedia article CG Roxane was deleted under WP:A7 and I believe the guideline clearly does not apply in this case. Perhaps you do not live in the United States (or specifically California) but CG Roxane products (specifically Crystal Geyser Alpine Spring Water) can be found in every grocery and supermarket including Wal-Mart, Safeway and Whole Foods. Because it is a private company, not a lot of information about the company can be found on the internet, so it is critical that a Wikipedia page exists so people can exchange information they have about the company. Also, the article I simultaneously created about the sister company that produces sparking mineral water (as opposed to plain bottled water), Crystal Geyser Water Company, was not deleted under the same guideline, even though the corporate ownership structure (subsidiary of Japanese pharmaceutical Otsuka Holdings) and number of employees is roughly the same. Because the two companies are so similar both in name and in activity, it is necessary to create a pair of articles for both CGWC and CGR. Please reconsider the decision to delete this important page and reinstate the page so Wikipedians can share their knowledge and insight about this company. Trialeditor (talk) 08:23, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

@Trialeditor: The guideline does apply, because the threshold is a minimal claim to importance, which was lacking in your article. It merely stated that the company exists. "The largest manufacturer of X" or "The largest employer in the state/city/county", etc. are examples of such assertions. That would have prevented the speedy deletion - beyond that as you probably know the subject must also meet WP:CORP. Wikipedia pages about companies don't exist so people can exchange information they have about the company. They exist because the page documents their notability. Wikipedia is not a forum or a business directory. That said, I can restore the article to your userspace so you can work on it undisturbed, assuming you feel it actually meets the inclusion guidelines. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@FreeRangeFrog: Thanks for the quick reply. Yes, I would appreciate it if you could restore the article so I could expand upon it and emphasize the article's importance. The reason why I want at least a stub page up and running is that CG Roxane is a private company, and although there is no doubt (at least in the US) that Crystal Geyser is a national brand for bottled water, it is hard to collect even basic information like Sales, COGS and Total Asset because financial information aren't disclosed. Therefore you need a place where people with inside knowledge about the company can post the information (e.g. Wikipedia). CG Roxane is a notable company with a notable product with its name on it sold in every supermarket and grocery store in America, so the page does meet the notoriety criteria. If you have any contacts in the US, please ask them if they have a bottle of Crystal Geyser in their refrigerator, and if they do, check the label. Sorry for the long reply. Trialeditor (talk) 11:59, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

@Trialeditor: Restored to User:Trialeditor/CG Roxane. Given that this was a speedy deletion, please submit the article for review once it's completed. And remember to make sure it meets WP:CORP. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:37, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir FreeRangeFrog,
first,please excuse me for my language,I am not a good speaker of english. I created about a month ago ago an article named Aurore Tome.This articles was reviewed and improved by 4 users (I don't remember their names).Anyway,after that I maded an other article Alexandra Mas.This is a French artist (painter) by romanian origin.I'm also romanian.This user Biruitorul(also romanian) discover my article and proposed for deletion.I enter in long discussions in which he used an very impolitely language (for example he say about an french art critic Mr.Jean Deulceux that he is "nobody",or"who the hell is Jean Deulceux and who care about what he say?" ).Mr.Jean Deulceux (who help me to write the article)saw the comments of this user and was stunned by his language.Anyway,after that,I retired the article (by G7) and put it on the draft. Couple days after that,tha same user make again an AFD to Aurore Tome,the former article.I don't want to enter again in discussion with this user and I put it also this article in the draft. My question for your you is this: si it possible that this user to put me on some kind of wathcing list? I feel like I'm blocked by this user with a very rude behavior. If I'm paranoid please let me know.This is the link of the articles blocked by this user.Please tell me what is your opinion?And what can I do to escape from the hands of this user? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alexandra_Mas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Aurore_Tom%C3%A9

Thank you very much Sir,and again excuse my language.
Sincerely yours,
Leedskalnin (talk) 22:47, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

@Leedskalnin: Anyone is allowed to nominate articles for deletion. Barring evidence that the user you mention is actively hounding you or being aggressive towards you in some way, what you should do is just concentrate on improving those drafts. That said, if you do have evidence of that in the form of edits that show such behavior, you can provide them to me and I can take a look. Alternatively you may also request help in the Administrators' Noticeboard. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Dear Sir FreeRangeFrog,I have just this two unhappy experiences with this user,but I have take a look on his talk page and look what I found:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Biruitorul
<<Warning For Vandalism[edit] You recently vandalized the article "Ferdinand I of Romania" by deleting a big block of text supported by multiple reliable sources. Please refrain yourself from trying to import here on the English version of the Wikipedia the very bad practices of perpetrating and condoning vandalism, which are unfortunately still so customary among some Romanian administrators and users on the Romanian language version. Remus Octavian Mocanu (talk) 05:58, 30 June 2014 (UTC)>>

<<Professor Scheppele's analysis and the government's supermajority[edit] ‎Biruitorul, you deleted the following direct quote from Princeton University international constitutional law scholar and Hungary specialist Kim Lane Scheppele saying "how about waiting until the amendment actually passes, and then using a source that isn't alarmist soapboxing?" >>
This is the most stunned example:like in my article of Alexandra Mas (when he contest the expertise of an french art critic Jean Deulceux, which is professor at ISAA (Institute Superieur des Artes Applique), this user contest the authority of hungary specialist in constitutional law Kim Lane Scheppele .This is just two example about the behavior of this user.
Or this example:
<<Malnaş[edit] I definitely have no pleasure in a sterile discussion with you. But I suggested and you agreed that the dispute should be settled following a discussion in which wikipedians find a consensus. Until then, please refrain from vandalizing articles I am working on. And if you merge them, please refrain from eliminating information which you do not find relevant but which could be of some importance to other readers. If there is a discussion which indicates that a consensus has been reached, please indicate where it can be found. Otherwise please refrain from taking dictatorial decisions which are not justified by an accepted Wikipedia policy.Afil (talk) 04:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC)>>.
On this moment I'm affraid to continue to work on my drafts because I believe it is useless. I maded some experiment:I have moved one draft in main space in after 5 minutes, this user put an speedy deletion on it.That means that he follows me.
Have a look in your availability time on the talk page of this user and convince yourself.
Also this is the link of deletion discussion on Alexandra Mas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alexandra_Mas.
Please note the absolut rude tone of this user at address of some art institution (like Musée des Beaux-Arts, Saint Petersburg,or french galleries)or at address of Mr.Jean Deulceux.
Thank you very much Sir,
And thank you for the discretion.
Leedskalnin (talk) 06:54, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

The speedy deletion is just evidence he has the article in his watchlist, and it was appropriate. If you have a draft, you should submit it for review, not move it yourself. Beyond that, sorry but none of what you have here could possibly constitute harassment in any way. You seem to be shocked and offended that someone would doubt Jean Deulceux's opinion, when Wikipedia relies on what can be verified via reliable sourcing, not people's opinions on a given topic. Not everyone knows who Jean Deulceux is, or why his opinion is important. My advice to you is to improve your drafts, and submit them for review once you're done. If the subjects meet the relevant notability guidelines, they will be accepted. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:44, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Dear SirFreeRangeFrog, thank you very much for your help.I will follow your instructions (is very indeed very valuable informations for my articles) and I will improve this drafts and submit them.
Thank you again Sir!
Leedskalnin (talk) 19:39, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, you declined the last speedy that was placed on the Marc Loveless article. I've put another one on - do you think it applies? --Richard Yin (talk) 18:11, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@Richard Yin: Yes, that was a clear copyvio, and it's now gone. Thanks for the heads up. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I understand the article is a little biased but I was basically translating the article from a Chinese version available in Wikipedia. I feel like there should be an English version talking about the matter. However, after all the sources and references I have quoted, I think I am just retelling the truth and facts. Those comments towards the case (unauthorized building work of CY Leung) are all from the Legislative councilors in Hong Kong. I really hope you can kindly reconsider the possibility of keeping my article on the website. Thank you

You have a draft at Draft:Unauthorized Building Works of CY Leung in 2012, I suggest improving that. It seems like you're trying to right a wrong or advocate a cause with that material, and Wikipedia is generally not a good venue for that. I doubt it will be accepted. Perhaps a website or a blog would be more appropriate. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:29, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Please delete ALL references to this including j.h.parish:.... I am _not_ connected with the Group professionally but understand the article might be subject to litigation. Delete j.h.parish as a user J.h.parish (talk) 21:45, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "subject to litigation", but just in case, before you go any further make sure you read this very carefully. The article you created has been already deleted. Accounts cannot be deleted, but if you wish you can simply abandon it, or request a change of username here. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:53, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello, FreeRangeFrog,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether it should be deleted. Your comments are welcome.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE9A:860:DD6B:693A:ACF:B874 (talk) 18:47, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, FreeRangeFrog! Regarding your comment at User talk:Osienkie [11]: The reason I thought that article might be part of a school assignment is that (if I remember correctly) the article mentioned Nepal. That made me think it might fit into a pattern: In the past couple of days we have had a slew of new articles about exporting various kinds of agricultural technology from Canada to Nepal. I posted about them here: ‪Wikipedia:Education noticeboard‬#Apparent Canadian class assignment? Each one was created by a separate new user, and each was about a separate agricultural product or technology, but they followed a similar format as well as similar topic, and they all launched within the same 24-48 hours. I interpreted that as a class assignment. I PRODded most of them; they were unencyclopedic essays, but not spam. I nominated Gulliver Italian Stainless Steel Tomato Machine for speedy because it was promoting a particular product, and you did speedy it (thank you). You also blocked the creator as a spam-only account. Obviously I can't see this article, or previous articles you may be aware of, but you might consider the possibility that this was part of a school assignment rather than commercially motivated. And if it was, you might want to re-evaluate the block. Thanks! --MelanieN (talk) 04:26, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

@MelanieN: Of course I have no problem evaluating any of my actions, but my problem with these articles is the part after the essay where they go into "One company that sells ABC is XYZ Corp.." followed by tons of refspam. That doesn't look like a school assignment to me, honestly. If it were a school assignment the "selling" of a specific company would not be there. Also, have any of these accounts actually communicated with anyone? As far as I know, that's not the case. It all seems like another spam botfarm... but again, if you have minimal evidence that this is something else, please let me know and I'll happily reverse blocks and deletions and anything else. Maybe I'm just jaded. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 06:46, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

The question may be moot anyhow, because it doesn't look as if any of these people have come back. No response on talk pages, no additional edits to their articles. Basically they created a username, uploaded their articles, and vanished. All the articles in this sequence that I found have been either tagged PROD or already speedied (in the case of two blatantly commercial ones). As for the block, they may never even be aware of it. --MelanieN (talk) 16:32, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

I would say there's a good reason they didn't come back... but then again, maybe I'm still just jaded §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi, you deleted the page I wrote about FairCoin, thinking it was unambiguous advertising. Yet, I gave references to the official page, to a newspaper article presenting it and to the wikipedia page of an important actor. Can you explain to me what I can do better ? Thank you. Dzecniv (talk) 16:08, 29 November 2014 (UTC) I just saw your message. I'll try to read more wikipedia rules to understand. Still, explanations are welcome :) Dzecniv (talk) 16:10, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

FYI - The "Competitors" section was restored again with no sources or edit-summary from the same IP. CorporateM (Talk) 06:29, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

I was going to move Premasathi Coming Suun(2014) to Premasathi Coming Suun, but see you have salted it. It's not G11ish IMO. Best, Sam ^Sing! 13:14, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: Hi Sam! Unprotected and moved over. That stub is much better than the deleted version. Cheers! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:16, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Frog. Sam ^Sing! 20:46, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Another BLP page where I have offered a draft on Talk. I was wondering if you had the time/interest to take a look. CorporateM (Talk) 16:35, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Looks good at first glance. Are you done with the draft? §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:13, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

As "done" as things get at the encyclopedia that's never finished ;-) CorporateM (Talk) 19:15, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Just one concern - the exit from Juniper is sourced to a CRN article that quotes an issue of "conduct", can we add that (as you see fit) to the draft? I'm just worried about someone arguing about whitewashing or whatever. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:10, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

How's this? CorporateM (Talk) 20:30, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: That works. Draft promoted. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:58, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

FreeRangeFrog, any reason why you deleted the whole Awards & Boards section?--Monstermike99 (talk) 23:32, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

@Monstermike99: I believe because all that information was incorporated into the body of the draft. Did I miss something? If I did, let me know and I will make amends. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

My mistake, I will read through it--Monstermike99 (talk) 23:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

@Monstermike99: If I missed anything at all, do let me know. I'm responsible for any mismatches or problems in the replaced draft, but it's entirely possible I missed something. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:12, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

The awards are not included, because they were sourced to what I would consider primary sources. Primary sources are written by people/organizations affiliated with the events being reported on, in this case the award organizers themselves. The board memberships were also supported by primary sources, though there may be a stronger argument for primary sources being acceptable for that versus awards. CorporateM (Talk) 01:22, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

CorporateM, I disagree with your thought process because I don't feel you would say the same thing if an award was given by the Nobel and someone used their site as the source. Numerous notable publications do hand out awards and because of the way most media works Forbes is not going to profile Time's Man of the Year, thus making the primary source the only option. Now CIO Magazine is not Nobel but seems to be worthy in Shaygan Kheradpir's line of work. Thoughts?--Monstermike99 (talk) 04:36, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

My thoughts are at WP:ORGAWARDS, which mostly applies to people as well. There are certain awards/rankings that are unquestionably notable, such as the Fortune 500, where a primary source is acceptable. The COI Magazine listing appears to be awarded to 20 CIOs per year and the award does not have its own Wikipedia article, whereas the criterion I use says awards are more likely to be useable if the award is bestowed to a small number of people/orgs and is famous enough to have its own page. These types of infotainment awards cited to primary sources are typically indicative of promotional COI editing and I delete them wherever I see them.

I do not own the article and if you find other editors (not socks) that support your point-of-view, I will not be disruptive in the manner, however I think it is unlikely I will change my perspective. CorporateM (Talk) 14:59, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

I understand your view on awards, I just wanted to more so have the conversation in general because I do include awards that are notably industry specific, as are many of the BLP's that comprise Wikipedia. But for Ivy League boards you are not likely to find many specific Wiki pages, or for any University. My previous additions to his page did not include anything for this section we are discussing or any of the subjective terminology you eliminated.--Monstermike99 (talk) 18:25, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

@Monstermike99 and CorporateM: I've added the material to the article (albeit at the top of the Career section). I agree this type of addition looks bad when we have a situation where an intern is cluelessly creating a stub bio about their boss, but given the state of the article I see no problem with it, or with the sources. Thank you Monstermike99 for bringing this up, and I apologize for not noticing that myself. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:55, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello,

I'm the editor of a page called Bunion Bootie. You tagged my page as Advertisement but I respectfully disagree. The article was written to define not promote the object. If you found a section in the article that seemed promotional please let me know and I'd be happy to edit it. I'm open to constructive criticism to uphold Wikipedia's integrity but would appreciate the opportunity to rectify the article so it can be successfully published.

Thank you! Healthcare2014 (talk) 20:11, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, The patent pending designed Bunion Bootie which is not available in stores was created to gently guide your big toe back to a more natural position, improving both your balance and gait. Please make sure you read this carefully. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 20:14, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

When you search the website and read "THE MISSION of the Malki Foundation (in Hebrew: Keren Malki) is to empower the families of special-needs children in Israel to choose home care.", what did you misunderstand? It says nothing about children in Palestine, only children in Israel. If you read the NGO monitor article, it should be clear, despite NGO monitor employees editing the article, that the organization exists to further ideological goals and not to service the public. 76.68.49.155 (talk) 23:08, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I have no problem with your edit per se, but I do question your motives. You obviously have a strong POV about this, evidenced by your use of the term "hateful" as applied to an organization only peripherally associated with the subject to begin with, not to mention this rambling about ideological goals. But, to your point, the given source does not mention Palestinian children specifically, so I've amended the wording. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:17, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Your insults along with your reverting without checking and against sources is very worrying. Do you often misrepresent sources? 76.68.49.155 (talk) 23:27, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

My apologies, your use of the term "hateful organizations" threw me off as just another drive-by truth warrior arriving to tell us how it is (so to speak), an unfortunate daily occurrence. Next time, try not to let the POV show and you should be OK. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:31, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Free Range Frog, Thank you for your feedback about my user page. Would you please give some advice and guidance as to how to properly write a user page for an author from a book being published for academic purposes? Joshua Lee Cohen (talk) 00:23, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

@Joshua Lee Cohen: If you're trying to write an article about yourself, the first thing you need to do is to determine whether or not you meed the inclusion guidelines. Those are either WP:BIO, WP:GNG and/or WP:AUTHOR or WP:PROF. If you think you do, your next step is to use Articles for Creation to submit it, as detailed here. I'll be happy to restore your userpage to a draft if that is the case. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:39, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Free Range Frog. I'll rewrite the submission under notable people criteria [12] as an author WP:AUTHOR. Do I submit it to you first before posting it?

Much appreciated,

Josh Cohen Joshua Lee Cohen (talk) 01:25, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

@Joshua Lee Cohen: Restored to User:Joshua Lee Cohen/sandbox. I added a submit banner at the top you can use when you feel you're done with it. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:52, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

A discussion in which you may be interested is occurring here. BlueSalix (talk) 03:02, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

A discussion in which you may be interested is occurring here. BlueSalix (talk) 21:14, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello FreeRangeFrog. You reverted one of the edits I made to National Union of Teachers page. A friend reverted it back and I apologise for that. Your revert gives only cryptic information as to why you did it. Can I give a little more information and see if we can work on a suitable form of words.

The NUT is a campaigning organisation. That is its main reason for existing. It campaigns on many different issues and those are listed on the page. It also campaigns for sex-selection abortion. This, you will notice, is not on its website but was agreed as a motion in 2008. Paper documentation can be provided. There is digital evidence for this on the Abortion Rights document that was referenced. My intention was to add this campaign to the other campaigns that are listed for the organisation.

The fact that this is a campaign of their is a fact just as much as their other campaigns. I wanted to write an edit that simply stated this fact. I do not want to post a POV on whether the union should campaign for sex selection abortion or not. I do not want to post a POV on whether sex selection abortion should be illegal or not.

Is it possible to find a way forward?

Thanks (I see from your page that you are doing loads of good work) MarieWarren (talk) 14:24, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Not unless you a) Stop trying to be clever by editing while logged out, and b) Find a reliable secondary source that directly supports your claim. Arriving at guilt by association via synthesis ("X supports Y and Y supports Z therefore X supports Z also") is the reason we require secondary sources. You need something that clearly and specifically says "NUT supports selective sex abortion", otherwise this is all just a waste of time. That goes for all the other organizations you attempted to edit. And please make sure you heed the warning on your talk page about discretionary sanctions on the abortion topic. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:28, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

FreeRangeFrog thanks for the reply. As well as the document I supplied which listed the unions that support Abortion Rights, I also have copies of minutes of AGMs that the NUT do not wish to make available online (it took me a week to get this and they would only provide paper copies) which state their support for Abortion Rights campaign. I also have personal e-mails from the PR contacts of NUT conforming their position. In my view those were reliable sources for my assertion that NUT support Abortion Rights. I see your issue that none of this is available online (except the document I submitted). I did hope that Wikipedia could do more than just provide a summary of the internet. Is there a way to convince you that NUT does support Abortion Rights. I do not have a POV on whether it should or not but as I see it, it is something that happens but NUT do not shout about it. MarieWarren (talk) 10:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

It's not me you have to convince. You have to meet the basic threshold of verifiability. If that information is not published somewhere by someone then it can't go in the article. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:06, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that. So much to learn... MarieWarren (talk) 10:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

@MarieWarren: One of the things that happens with these "delicate" topics that have caused a lot of internal strife over the years (like abortion) is that we get the heebie jeebies when a new user starts editing different articles inserting the same information, editing while logged out, etc. It's an unfortunate pattern that tends to repeat itself. We should be assuming good faith but we don't always do so, like in this case. My apologies if I seemed aggressive at first. Thank you for taking the time to understand our policies and guidelines. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

@FreeRangeFrog:Apologies are not necessary. I am new to this and made the mistake of telling someone what I did. It is a learnign process for me and I appreciate your help. I do intend to make another edit to the NUT site but I will ensure that it is well sourced (although the scripting might be raw) and with a NPOV. MarieWarren (talk) 09:53, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog. I've probably bothered you quite a bit as of late, but I was wondering if you had the time/interest to chime in on a few smaller items where I have a COI. For example, at Publishers Clearing House we got a third opinion regarding a controversial topic that had gotten out-of-hand in length due to an editor with a strong interest in the subject matter. The 3PO said "The whole article is unencyclopedic and concentrates too much on controversies and media and news reports."[13]. In response, I put together a shorter version[14]. The editor advocating for more in-depth coverage has not participated in the discussion for a week (normally responds within hours) and I'm trying to get it paired back a little along the lines of the 3PO's feedback.

There is no clear consensus on the exact best article structure, but the draft should be an improvement nonetheless. CorporateM (Talk) 15:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: I'll be happy to look at that next week. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:31, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Cool. I'll wait patiently for next week (I'll be on vacation, so I might not respond). CorporateM (Talk) 19:52, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Just a heads up, Bilbobag came back and we managed to hammer out the content between the two of us. We ended up back to the section's original size before it got inflated, minus 80 words and a few sub-section headers, but higher up in the article to give it more prominence and with the latest news update. I disagreed with the "contempt charges" in the article-text, because this appears to be attributed to the plaintiff in the source and the "apologized" item, as it sounds like they were forced to apologize as part of the settlement (most stuff I've seen was more along the lines of denied wrongdoing), but the section is back under control and that's good enough for me.

There is another item here if you have time to get involved, regarding an NPOV tag that was added to a GA page due to some pretty bold claims of political manipulation he/she read about. However, they did identify at least one sentence so far that was legitimately fluff. I removed it immediately. CorporateM (Talk) 22:41, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Not looking like I'll get to this before the end of the year... I'm on vacation starting next week with limited time for Wikipedia (or anything else computer related!) §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:45, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I am on vacation as well, though I have actually been working through much of it. I suspect most clients will be dialing off for christmas about now, which will allow me to focus on my off-wiki work creating a draft Juniper Networks page. The other editor needs time to respond anyway; I hope the discussion concludes in such a way that will not discourage them from further contributions to Wikipedia. Have a good x-mas!! CorporateM (Talk) 17:17, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Why did you delete a band page that i manage? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.9.60.90 (talk) 17:25, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I have no idea which article you're referring to because you didn't link to it, mention its name or bother to log in. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:31, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

A gift for you my friend. Happy holidays!

Holdawg (talk) 03:31, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

good froggy way
Thank you - danke - gratias - for quality articles, starting with Tiefer, for welcoming new users but clearly telling some politely (and seemingly tirelessly) that they bring spam or their own interests, for precise moderation and a concise beautiful user page, for croaking "Sorry to see you go", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:14, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you very much §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:44, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi I decided to try to do some work on this artist to help it along, so as not to get deleted again, after you being so kind to reinstate it.

I can NOT find how to resubmit it again in the embodiment of the article, will you please let me know how, I do NOT see a resubmit button.

Thank you for your time FreeRangeFrog,

poekneegurlPoekneegurl (talk) 23:16, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

@Poekneegurl: The blue button named Resubmit should do it. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:18, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much...

You have a wonderfully blessed and Merry Christmas and if ya don't know, I hope this year you find out how much Jesus loves you!!

Happy New year my wiki guru/savior LOL

poekneegurlPoekneegurl (talk) 23:38, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Your antics have been reported to me and I have blocked you for them.[15] Are you affiliated with City Data? The Wiki team, 23:39, 14 December 2014 (UTC).

I am, I must admit... For my antics, they pay me in frog treats and small shiny objects. Good thing the Wiki Team is on top of things! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:48, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for messaging me about my blunder. I would like to inquire one more thing. The source I quoted is the website run my the Ahmadiyyah muslim community but you have said that you require published sources. Is the information in the official website of the community not a published source? FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 08:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC)freeatlastchitchatFreeatlastChitchat (talk) 08:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

That edit was not only not neutral, claims like those (committed atrocities against this peaceful community) require significant citations to reliable sources. Quite frankly that does not seem to be an encyclopedic fact about the topic of the article. It looks like it would belong in the Zia biography, if at all. In general, the opinion of a person or group of people (or an organization) are important only if they themselves are considered notable, or other people and media think they are. That's why we avoid primary sources. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog, I notice over the last few months you have been in contact with this user regarding his removal of notices relating to Sorin Virgil Oproiescu. He appears to still be at it, removing the AfD tag from the article. I note he has also removed my comments in the AfD discussion. I have restored these and also three others which were removed and not replaced prior to the AfD being relisted due to lack of consensus. These other three were removed by an IP, but I strongly suspect this to be Montecristosolo. It seems that this guy is only here to promote this minor player but regardless, I wonder if a short block is warranted to at least allow the AfD to conclude without further disruption? Fenix down (talk) 09:49, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

@Fenix down: Well I can't block them punitively, but I left them a final warning. If they re-create the article again any admin will probably be OK with an indefinite block. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 16:33, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure enough to even tag it for G11 myself, but would this draft and this sandbox also be eligible? And this that looks like a copyvio, but I'm not sure how to check. Are they speedy eligible or more like MfD after a few days of staying unedited? Thanks! — kikichugirl ^inquire 04:13, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

@Kikichugirl: #1 I'd give it maybe more time. #2 is definitely a G11. #3 looks like a copyvio but who knows of what. Certainly nothing Google can find, as far as I can tell. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:20, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015 !!!

Hello FreeRangeFrog, May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New year 2015. Happy editing, The Herald : here I am 14:08, 19 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding ((subst:Seasonal Greetings)) to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Please see User talk:Bishonen#User:Onlylove18 not heeding warnings. —BarrelProof (talk) 22:47, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

And again. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:21, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Why you delete Asad Zaman without discussion? You didn't replied the contested discussion on talk page and just deleted for no valid reason? UBStalk 01:57, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

There was a discussion and consensus to delete, as per WP:CSD#G4. If you wish to recreate that article you'll have to open a deletion review. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 02:19, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog,

I like how you cleaned up the advertising on the CD page. However I did notice that under their logo that they created in a box to the right of the page they have an Alexa Rank which is not accurate. Please see the link below. I tried to edit it but could not find a way to edit that section.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/city-data.com

Thank you,

DeDe4Truth (talk) 23:34, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi FreeRangeFrog,

I would like to ask that the Alexia Ranking and Quantcast be removed from the City Data page for the following reasons:

• Neither is accurately represented on the wiki page as it changes daily AND it gives the ranking for both the US and Globally
• Current US Alexia Rank: 501
• Current Global Alexia Rank: 1472
• Alexia Rankings are used as a marketing tool for websites: http://www.avangate.com/avangate-resources/article/alexa-ranking.htm
• Wiki should not be used to market any websites traffic
• It really adds no value to the page
• City Data only created a wiki page to advertise
• No verification to the Quantcast claim of CD being the 72nd largest website in the United States. Wiki is not the proper place for marketing a website

Respectfully,

DeDe4Truth (talk) 18:53, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

@DeDe4Truth: You're not banned or otherwise prevented from editing that article, just (like anyone else) from adding poorly-sourced information to it. If you want to remove the rank, go ahead. Honestly I don't see why it was ever used for any article, but that's just me. Just don't get into a revert war if someone objects. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:31, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @DeDe4Truth: About the Alexa ranks, many users (like me) find Alexa rankings in infoboxes neat, one of the first things I did here when I joined was to update Alexa ranks. it is the best indicator of the popularity of a website we have. Trust me, it's not for advertising (if it was, would we have them for WikiLeaks like we do now?) and it's just more information. :) Regards, --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 00:54, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Is it possible to have 2014 World Junior A Challenge rosters undeleted into my User Space? I put a lot of work into that page and I would prefer to keep it in some form, even if just in my user space. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

@Shootmaster 44: Since that was an AFD, I'm not going to restore it anywhere. But if you enable your email, I'll send it to you. Let me know. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:32, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

I guess my point was if it was in my User Space, and suddenly in a year or two the redlinks have become blue, I could simply restore the page intact. As for email, I have no idea how to activate it. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 04:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

@Shootmaster 44: OK, that was a lot of work on your part, I'll give you that. I've copied to User:Shootmaster 44/2014 World Junior A Challenge rosters, with the understanding that you won't move it to mainspace until the concerns in the AFD are addressed. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:35, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate that. I have no intention of moving to the mainspace unless suddenly there are active pages everywhere. Shootmaster 44 (talk) 06:26, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Josh3580#HOPE probation. Some of your actions were discussed on my talk page, just wanted to give you an FYI, in case you wished to comment. Thanks for all your work!  —Josh3580_talk/hist 14:05, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

If I agree your criticism applies to previous editings, I strongly disagree it does to my last posting. That posting was directly copied (as recommended) from a 2014 article that appeared in "Federal Probation" (vol. 78, n 2) and available at: http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FederalCourts/PPS/Fedprob/2014-09/hope.html. This was properly stated and referenced. Then additional materials about 4 points made by the authors of that article are provided. For the first point, references to 2 newspaper articles are given, which meets wikipedia guidelines. The second point is a non personal common sense addition suggesting the same as the authors' intent. The third point further emphasizes the authors' comment with neutral references to the credibility of the contributors of the original article without any personal inputs. The fourth and last point is a youtube recording but it should be emphasized it is the recording of a neutral third party with no involvement in this discussion.

Regarding the neutrality of the text, I believe the last two sentences of the current wikipedia articles are far from meeting your requirements. Reference-6 as given can be found nowhere and was used to erase previous properly referred journal articles about HOPE I had given. Similarly no trace of reference-7 as given can be found and a search of this title returns: http://www.correct.state.ak.us/blog/docs/alm_hope_sept-oct_p28-201.pdf, an article written by ... Steven Alm!

Referring specifically to this diff: The first source seems OK and I think it could be a good addition to the article. However, the way you added it is inappropriate: In developing these seven points, the authors have made numerous strong arguments. Some of them can be further developed Now you're into original research territory. It's not up to you to "develop" anything. You must write what the source says, nothing more. Your other sources are also OK, but not in that contextual way (attempting to "develop" what the first source is saying). You're not writing an essay. The last part is sourced to YouTube (which is overwhelmingly not considered a reliable source) and it's more essay/original research. What you need is a secondary source that says what you claim the video represents, because otherwise it's just your opinion. Please remember that the onus is on you to properly structure, format and source your contributions. We'd rather not have that chunk of information in the article than have three paragraphs of poorly sourced, non-neutral and opinionated essay-like material. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:41, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to explain the neutral presentation of diverging ideas. Points a- b- c- can be easily quoted in conjunction with the addition of the references given following your suggestions. As for d- and the YouTube recording, I do not have other source but please note that this recording is that of a third party speaking, not me. As for references 6 and 7 of the current article, a direct link should be provided I believe as the references can not be found as written. Furthermore, as written, ref.6 implies that all people that had concerns are now supportive, which is unlikely and as a matter of fact, I know is untrue. As for ref.7, the only article with that title on the web is authored by Steven Alm, the founder of HOPE!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello FreeRangeFrog, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015. Happy editing, Educationtemple (talk) 18:09, 27 December 2014 (UTC) Spread the love by adding ((subst:Seasonal Greetings)) to other user talk pages.

@Educationtemple: Thank you! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:00, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Froggy, I think User:FLCLFan25 could easily have edited again before seeing your final warning. Bishonen | talk 17:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC).

@Bishonen: The editing pattern on the account gives me bad juju, but if you think so, feel free to undo my block and give them a final-final warning. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:42, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, no, I don't like the editing pattern either. If they feel they're an injured innocent, let them first appeal the block. Bishonen | talk 17:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC).

Hi FreeRange. I was wondering if you were back yet and had time to engage here. Do you think we should do an RfC or 3PO or something to get other editors involved? Trying to think of the best way to find a resolution that doesn't come across as COI-steamrolling and is compliant with WP:COI, etc. CorporateM (Talk) 20:14, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

@CorporateM: Exit8 made a good point (I think) about including that information. Do you think it's not relevant, appropriate, undue, etc? I'd rather we transparently include negative stuff if merited, but I'm not 100% familiar with the topic as it is to make an informed call. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:25, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

The stuff about building a statue in their honor, etc. looks like political fodder and most of the sources provided are very far from being RS. There are reliable sources however about the shooting (already included) and the billing dispute (not yet included). Off the top of my head, the billing dispute looks to have more prominence in the sources than the shooting and it might be worthwhile to swap them out. One could also argue to include both, but do so more concisely. However, Iraq was 35% of their work over a ten-year span, or 4% of their work overall over a 60 year history. So it's significance to their history may already be exaggerated. I think the details could be debated and I don't care per WP:COIMICRO, but any changes that are actually warranted are probably fairly trivial and open for debate. CorporateM (Talk) 00:28, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

You're just jealous, Corp, because all you got is a time share on the Gulf, and they got a statue. Happy new year! Drmies (talk) 16:07, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

@user:Drmies Oh, I'm not jealous of most anyone living and working in a war-zone. I don't think I really understood how people are about politics before Wikipedia and in particular the James T. Butts, Jr. article. Even extremely minor political issues at a city-level had tons of advocacy sources publishing blatant dis-information on the Web to attack a person and their political position; many of these sources were op-eds or crowd-sourced attack pieces, but were not clearly labeled as such, giving me the impression of covert attack pieces made to look like journalism.

You know, I just finished reading Orange is the New Black and didn't find out until the very end that the author is the President of a non-profit advocacy group lobbying for better treatment in woman's prisons. In other words, I wonder how much of the book is a document of her personal experiences and how much of it is covert advocacy by a special interest group. Either that poor Danbury prison is a horrible place where guards regularly molest prisoners without any legal repercussions after the prisoners get out, or most of the facts are made up and contorted to serve a political agenda. I think the second is more likely, but saying so is extremely offensive if the first turns out to be true. The information war at work.

CorporateM (Talk) 16:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

A blast from the past. Drmies (talk) 04:56, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

• I just noticed that it's the creator I blocked for a user name violation. Ah well. Drmies (talk) 04:58, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

This version looks like a good PROD, but now that you've already spent the time to delete almost everything and put a good stub in place, the stub looks good and I don't think is worthwhile to delete. CorporateM (Talk) 19:54, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

@Drmies: Agree with CorporateM, you pretty much stubbed the PROD away :) Not sure if the org is truly notable though. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 22:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

@Drmies: The funny part about your comment of being paid a bucket-load to de-PROD the page is that some editor in the AfD discussion probably won't realize you're kidding around. Just taking a quick glance at the sources, there looks to be enough criticisms in the source material that I would recommend they abstain and wouldn't take it on if they did reach out to me. Doesn't look to be a corrupt org or anything extreme like that, but there's enough so they wouldn't be happy with a neutral page. CorporateM (Talk) 15:27, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

FreeRangeFrog,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year 2015)) to user talk pages.

Good afternoon,

I just found that a page I drafted was deleted, and I was never sent any notice that the page had been reviewed or that it had been tagged for deletion. Can you please explain to me the process for both and notifying the author? Also, I would like restore the draft so that I can edit the page to be reviewed again for consideration to be included in Wikipedia. It is my intent to have the Men's Divorce Law Firm included as an entry, not for advertising purposes. Can you please send me suggestions as to how I can go about correcting my original draft?

Thank you,

Men's Divorce Law Firm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mensdivorcelaw (talk • contribs) 17:38, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

@Mensdivorcelaw: The draft was written as an advertisement/PR copy for your company, which is the reason it was marked for deletion as such. You received a notification on your talk page. I will not restore it, since it is completely unsuitable for Wikipedia. However, if you enable your email I will send it to you if you wish. And before you go any further please review the notability guidelines for inclusion of companies. Even if your article is re-written somehow, it will not be accepted if it does not meet those. Wikipedia is not a business directory. Finally, consider changing your username. See this for more information. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 21:16, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

(talk page stalker): @Mensdivorcelaw: do you know where "your talkpage" is, where those notifications went? It's here: User talk:Mensdivorcelaw. Bishonen | talk 21:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC).

Our WP:AUTOBIO-obsessed friend is at it again, despite my stern warning and your endorsement. There's a fresh new set of warnings about him recreating autobiographical articles, and removing speedy templates. What's the next step, as he is clearly WP:NOTHERE? --Drm310 (talk) 23:33, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

@Drm310: Indef'ed, given enough warning enough times. Thanks for the heads up. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:33, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

I am quite new here and I thought maybe you could put me through. I want to write an article but don't know how to go about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venoh (talk • contribs)

I'd recommend going through the help contents (which includes links to tutorials) and then use The Teahouse to ask questions. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:44, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello @FreeRangeFrog:,

I have never used wikipedia before and this was my first posting. I accidentally submitted a version with no linking or citations, which was then corrected within 30 minutes of original posting. Can you explain to me why you felt the page should be deleted? I would like to redraft a page to conform with the wikipedia guidelines. I write about tech startups for our school paper, but have never posted anything on Wikipedia before, so the constructive criticism is welcome.

Cheers! JoeyBoy1982 (talk) 19:36, 6 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeyBoy1982 (talk • contribs) 05:24, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Am I doing this right? I hope you are receiving these messages.

You wrote that in the manner of a prospectus or brochure about the company, which is not appropriate for Wikipedia, which is why it was deleted. The sourcing is irrelevant. Please examine WP:CORP and submit a draft for review at WP:AFC, especially if you have a conflict of interest. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:48, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey @FreeRangeFrog:, Thanks for the response, I appreciate it. I actually am not affiliated with the company, so no conflict of interest, just a tech entrepreneurial guy that thought he would give a shot at writing an article for a cool company I have used and noticed there was no page for. I love wiki, exactly for the reason that it is unbiased. Can you please point on specific portions of the article that were too similar to a 'prospectus' as you put it? I attempted to remain as informational and encyclopedic as humanly possible. I would hope that the company prospectus is better than the article I wrote as I thought it particularly drab! Regardless, always good to have a new set of eyes on the page; fresh perspective. Any additional tips/information you could pass along would be very much appreciated. That is how we learn, from mistakes.

@JoeyBoy1982: OK. I think it has a chance given the claims of notability you made. I restored it and copied it to Draft:Blade (company). I also added an AFC submit banner at the top. Since you say you don't have a COI, it's up to you to use it or move the article out of draft directly. With the way it is worded right now (again, something an employee of the company would write, lacks neutrality) it will probably be deleted again as G11 if you simply move it. I would recommend submitting it for review, but either way I'd encourage you to make it more neutral. And better sourced. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 07:05, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Per some nasty one-way conversations from Seph Lawless, and some revealing information, I have proposed the speedy deletion of the page. The information, which threatened legal and personal action, was relayed to Oversight. It was unveiled that the author of the page was a paid editor for the New York Daily News, and that he has some serious issues with conflict of interest stories. I have asked for clarification from the original paid editor regarding his involvement. seicer | talk | contribs 17:20, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@Seicer: I just reverted and revdel'ed an edit to the talk page, and blocked the offending account. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@FreeRangeFrog: Who, user:Bernie44? (And thanks for the heads up - I had no idea we could ping people now!) seicer | talk | contribs 18:01, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@Seicer: no, Briancahal. See the Seph Lawless talk page history. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:04, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

@FreeRangeFrog: So bad it had to be scrubbed! Much thanks. Was expecting this, based on what he sent over in a message earlier. I sent an email with the text to Oversight but can provide screncaps. seicer | talk | contribs 18:13, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

The irony here is that it doesn't take much to create an article online saying 'Joe Melendez is Seph'. It can be done by a blogger, or the referring information could be sent to a reporter who has previously covered one of his articles where they could make the claim 'Seph is Joe Melendez'. All of the evidence indicates they are the same person. His website registered under Joe Melendez according to the reliable WHOIS database. He filed a copyright claim indicating his real name is Joe Melendez AND his pseudonym was Seph Lawless. His father worked for Ford according to the wiki and yet Intelius says Joe Melednez's father worked for Ford. Joe's mother has a photo of Seph (Joe) and her name also corresponds to the Melendez family. So what you're telling me is that in order for this to be accepted, despite there being zero doubt these facts are incorrect, someone else has to compile this information and write about it. Seems quite ridiculous to me, but you're the almighty admin so what do I know. Roadbound (talk) 22:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

If you are unwilling or incapable of reading through the many policies we have pointed you at any number of times, I will live with the "almighty admin" bit just fine. And sure, you can get a blog and write about this guy all you want there. Here you follow our policies and guidelines. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 23:18, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi - You recently deleted my draft about Webpass and noted it was promotional and bias. I wasn't in agreement as it outlined the company's competitors and exposed some of their recent legal battles. I was hoping for comments rather than a permanent deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JenBen456 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

I won't generally restore articles deleted as advertisements, but I note you re-created the draft already. It's more neutral but still fails WP:CORP and WP:GNG, which is the reason it was declined. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:57, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Would you mind having a peek at the last section on my Talk? You protected and the author/subject found me from the log 5 yrs ago. Also pinging TomStar on it as he's had some recent activity. I'm not around daily this week - so feel free to move forward without my input if I'm not online. Thanks! StarM 04:05, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

You recently deleted the article, Tom bibiyan, i would like to inform you that we have all the correct citations for this article. Tom Bibiyan, who lives in he Greater Los Angeles area, is the owner of TabMeta Corp. and founded Bibiyan Entertainment and is a producer of multiple short films with Bibiyan Entertainment. He previously worked as the vp of InternetPlays and was formerly the President of Florence Equity, LLC. He is also an ethics enthusiast who has consulted with over 100 publicly listed companies across the United States and Canada. His roster to date includes NASDAQ, American Stock Exchange, and Over The Counter exchanges. Tom Bibiyan has gained over 500 connections through his career. https://www.linkedin.com/in/tombibiyan http://tombibiyan.org/ http://www.tombibiyan.com/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_bibiyan

The deleted article was a single line of text with a link to LinkedIn. Left you a message in your talk page on how to proceed. You'll also want to read through this. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 19:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)