User talk:Fabrictramp/Archive 01
Archives of talk page
Just FYI, this template isn't supposed to be subst'ed. Thanks for all your good work tagging copyvios. --RobthTalk 01:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the thanks. :)
I'm scratching my head over what exactly I need to change in the way I do the copyvio tags. What I leave on the offending article is {{copyvio|url=http://example.org}} (with the appropriate url, natch), copied directly from the copyvio template page -- no subst that I can see. When I copy and paste the text to the appropriate copyright problems page, there is a subst in the text that the template is asking me to copy. Is this something I should be removing?
Thanks in advance for any help! Kathy A. 20:58, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Wow, slow response by me. It turns out that what was happening was that you were not blanking the articles you found; I confused this with substing the template since these are the two mistakes that people tend to make when applying the tag. you are placing the correct code; just remember, when you place it, to also blank the text that was in the article. Thanks, --RobthTalk 04:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
AfD Nomination: Liza Wright[edit]
I've nominated the article Liza Wright for deletion under the Articles for deletion process. I am notifying you because of your previous involvement in the editing of this article. I do not feel that Liza Wright satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and I have explained why in the nomination space (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liza Wright. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them. You are free to edit the content of Liza Wright during the discussion, but please do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top). Doing so will not end the discussion. GringoInChile 17:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Don't you think adding 6 boxes was just a little overkill on an article that's about to be deleted anyway? --humblefool® 08:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- The deletion proposal was added after my maintenance tags. I apologize for my lack of ability to predict the future. :) Kathy A. 15:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello[edit]
I am a new comer on wikipedia, learning its methods. I have pasted some Pakistani proverbs which are interesting and which we use daily. What is the best method to display them ?
Now I have given the Urdu/Pakistani phrases of the proverbs too of 2 of the proverbs. Gradually will do with the others. But I need your guidance too i this matter.
thanks.
Sincerely
Khalid Mahmood 18:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- A good place to start might be Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles, especially the section titled "Think of the Reader". Some things that could really improve the article (to the point where it should be kept) would be to write an introductory paragraph (or paragraphs) explaining why these proverbs are interesting to a global audience, and how they are used in every day life. Perhaps adding some references to other works that discuss this topic, and links to other relevant articles in Wikipedia. And be sure to register your vote at the AfD page. :) Kathy A. 19:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Project Stub Sort[edit]
Hello,
Thank you for your stub submission. You may wish to note that it is preferable to use a stub template from Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types instead of using simply {{stub}}, if you can.
Thanks!--Ohms law 19:48, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
copyvios[edit]
Hello. I noticed your work in flagging some copyright violations. One small note - when you add the copyvio notice you should also blank the content of the article. It will be kept in the article history so anyone reviewing the case can check it. Thanks for your good work! --cholmes75 (chit chat) 21:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks -- I was just recently made aware of that. I think I've got it right now. Kathy A. 22:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
East Java template[edit]
Fixed - invoice in the mail. ;-) (Go here: Template:E_Java) --Merbabu 00:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Gracias! I learn something new every day here. :) Kathy A. 00:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Approved for AWB![edit]
Thank you for your recent application to use AutoWikiBrowser. I have approved your request and you should now be able to use the AWB application. Be sure to check every edit before you save it, and don't forget to check out the AWB Guide. You can get any help you need over on the AWB talk page. Feel free to contact me with any questions, Alphachimp 03:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks much! Kathy A. 05:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Nabih Youssef, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Nabih Youssef. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Argyriou (talk) 23:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I have at my disposal the means to update WP:DEP with a dump dated November 30 2006. The downside of this is that it is huge, and slightly out of date and thus full of redlinks. Would you prefer I refreshed it now, or waited until L-Z is finished? I'm asking you since you seem to be a frequent contributer to the dead-end pages work, and I want to get some opinions before I just go ahead and add thousands of more entries. Thank you. Salad Days 12:25, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for asking! My pref would be wait until it's cleared out, but that's only a slight preference. Thanks for taking on the update task. Kathy A. 14:20, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Salad Days 19:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Jewgrass Boys, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. Tenacious D Fans (talk) 17:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Elliot Maddox[edit]
http://www.jewishsports.org/jewishsports/detail.asp?id=87, which is cited, and the other indicated links, have all the info you indicate requires citations. Are you suggesting that we have to put a footnote at the end of each sentence? If not, please RV.--Epeefleche 18:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- My apologies -- I missed that citation. (Thanks for catching it!) I'll remove the tags ASAP. Kathy A. 18:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I must really be blind. I went back to the article and I still don't see the citation. I even did a search to find it on the page, and I can't find it. The only external link I can find in the article is baseball-reference.com, which doesn't have any of the info I tagged with {{fact}}. (Yes, I checked.) Mind pointing it out to me? Thanks!!! Kathy A. 18:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi. I did the search in this format so you can see the Judaic courses reference. Cheers. [1] --Epeefleche 18:44, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link! I still couldn't find that reference in the article itself, so I've added it, and removed the fact tags for stuff that was in the article. Kathy A. 18:50, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Tx. I put in citations for you on the litigation. The other material has cites, but I cannot tell if those cites are based on the wikipedia cites. So I left your tags in there. --Epeefleche 05:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- Muchas gracias! Kathy A. 05:40, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
User:Rcc105[edit]
Did you bother to read my announcement on my talk page? I refuse to do anymore edits. --Ray 00:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- And yet you (or a user signing on as you) did. Very odd. Kathy A. 00:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- jam it--Ray 06:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry about my remark. I should not take out my frustration at the loss of what Wikipedia once was on people that are responsible users.
--Ray 22:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the apology, and sorry about the frustration. I do know how that goes. :) Kathy A. 22:43, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Templates[edit]
Why don't you find the information yourself rather than put up templates asking other people to do it. - Diceman 16:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- If you take a look at my contributions, you'll see that I spend a lot of time finding information myself. I still ask that you don't remove {{Importance}} and {{primarysources}} tags until someone does the work.--Kathy A. 16:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article All British Field Meet, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Logical2uReview me! 13:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Curious as to why you took the time to insert a large warning on Caption Competition that the article was uncategorised, when it would have been easier and much more productive to simply add the category yourself? --Beachy 15:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Since the article has been deleted, I can't tell you for sure. I was probably using AWB on the Dead End Pages project -- AWB will automatically add the {{uncat}} tag, but I would have to launch a separate browser to look up the category. While possibly more productive, it's definitely not easier. FWIW, when I'm not using AWB I more often than not take the time to categorize the article myself (assuming I can figure out a category).--Kathy A. 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- I found the article now (it should be Caption competition). Definitely an AWB edit. Despite that, I really have no clue what category it should be under -- games doesn't seem right, but neither does competitions. Feel free to take a stab at it yourself. --Kathy A. 23:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi Kate. I redirected the General entertainment page to the Entertainment page and removed the merge tags because the general entertainment page had no new content. You were right to think that two articles were unnecessary and I thought the general entertainment article was so trivial I was bold and went ahead despite the lack of discussion. Just wanted to let you know what had happened since you added the tags. -- Siobhan Hansa 18:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks!--Kathy A. 23:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Ages in infoboxes for baseball players[edit]
Kathy, check out my solution at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Baseball/Players#Infoboxes and have a look at Ron Mahay to see how it looks in application. Let me know if you have any suggestions or can figure out how to eliminate that blank row. Caknuck 04:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- Looks like a good solution. I'm clueless about how to build infoboxes, so I'm absolutely no help on that blank line. :) --Kathy A. 05:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Bryan Fogel Notability[edit]
Would you agree he's notable if I added that he was the co-author of the longest running play in Los Angeles? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by -Ozone- (talk • contribs) 02:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC).
- Take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (people), especially the primary criteria. It's pretty hard for an unreferenced article to show notability.--
Kathy A. 14:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- I can also add a reference to their book, "Jewtopia," which I own. It states that they are the authors of the longest running LA play.Ozone 04:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- Eventually you'd get another editor tagging it for importance/notability, because your source is the subject himself. (I'm not saying don't add the reference -- primary sources can enhance articles quite a bit, but they don't show notability). If you're determined to show notability, you might find some secondary sources out there -- non-trivial articles (either printed or on the web) that show how Bryan Fogel meets WP:NOTABILITY. Hope that helps!--Kathy A. 14:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help, when I'm not as tired I might insert some other references as well, they I'll take out the tag.(http://www.hachettebookgroupusa.com/authors/84/3549/index.html) Ozone 07:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Eventually you'd get another editor tagging it for importance/notability, because your source is the subject himself. (I'm not saying don't add the reference -- primary sources can enhance articles quite a bit, but they don't show notability). If you're determined to show notability, you might find some secondary sources out there -- non-trivial articles (either printed or on the web) that show how Bryan Fogel meets WP:NOTABILITY. Hope that helps!--Kathy A. 14:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- I can also add a reference to their book, "Jewtopia," which I own. It states that they are the authors of the longest running LA play.Ozone 04:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Chicken Attack[edit]
An article that you have been involved in editing, Chicken Attack, has been listed by me for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicken Attack. Thank you. Chunky Rice 19:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Prod warning (2)[edit]
Hi, I just read what you wrote down in my discussion page and I wanted to say that the current article is not the one I wrote. I made an In Vain article about a Kim-Lian song, but someone has edited over it and removed all of the info about the song. I hadn't noticed that until u came and brought up the In Vain issue. I went to the history of In Vain and created a new article about the song I originally created the article for, In Vain (song). The user that removed my song info is Bloodhou, that's where you should be. * Luigi-ish 15:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC) *
please I ask you do not merger History of DC Comics Timeline to DC Comics.[edit]
reason I don't edit anymore is because I am very upset after they identified me as vandalism. that why I don't edit anymore.
I should have read it and ask question in the first place before I edit Timeline. I am make mistake. my apology
I change my mind I like to have edit more. if it ok for you. please let me know thanks. Thethunderstrike04 23:29, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I have absolutely no idea what your question / comment is.--Kathy A. 23:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- If you have thoughts or concerns about History of DC Comics Timeline merging with Dc_comics#Origins, best to put them on the discussion page linked in the merge box.--Kathy A. 23:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Cubs all time roster[edit]
I'm pretty sure I have all of the players off the roster who didn't play with the Cubs. --CFIF ☎ ⋐ 18:13, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
- Awesome! Thanks for the help!--Kathy A. 21:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
COI Templates.[edit]
Hi, I'm sending you a message because of your involvement with the Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_18#Template:COI_and_Template:COI2 discussion. The result of the TfD was no-consensus, but there was a significant expressed consensus for editing the templates to bring them into line with good practice. Unfortunately this has not happened, and the templates have been left pretty much in the state they were before the TfD. Would you like to assist in bringing these templates in line with good practice? --Barberio 16:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'd be glad to help. Just point me where to look.--Kathy A. 17:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
- Duh. I figured out where to look. :) --Kathy A. 17:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
COI Templates.[edit]
Hi, I'm sending you a message because of your involvement with the Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_18#Template:COI_and_Template:COI2 discussion. The result of the TfD was no-consensus, but there was a significant expressed consensus for editing the templates to bring them into line with good practice. Unfortunately this has not happened, and the templates have been left pretty much in the state they were before the TfD. Would you like to assist in bringing these templates in line with good practice? --Barberio 16:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
uncat tag dating[edit]
Hey! Noticed you were tagging articles with the uncategorized tag, which is cool. But one of the hinky things is that the date needs to be date=. Like {{uncategorized|date=June 2007}}. The wikify tag works the same way. I know, some of the other tags don't work that way. Who says we need consistency? Keep up the good work! ;) --Ebyabe 23:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- The ones without the "date=" are AWB insertions. Until they release an updated version of AWB, it's a major pain to add the "date=" manually. :( --Kathy A. 23:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- You're doing that with AWB? How? I use it like crazy and didn't know it could add tags like that at all. Do tell. :) --Ebyabe 23:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm always finding new things it can do. :) Right click in the edit box where you'd like the tag to go. A menu will pop up with lots of options. Choose "insert tag", and you'll get lots more nifty choices, uncluding Uncategorised, which adds {{Uncategorized|{{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}}. Try right clicking a few other places in the AWB window for other nifty pop ups.--Kathy A. 23:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- You're doing that with AWB? How? I use it like crazy and didn't know it could add tags like that at all. Do tell. :) --Ebyabe 23:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 11th, 2007.[edit]
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 24 | 11 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 02:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
John Coltrane:Infinity[edit]
I've been working on the COltrane discography - what tells you the article is a cut and paste job? I'll be happy to rewrite the introduction, if it is. Editor437 02:14, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- The formating on John Coltrane: Infinity, especially on the track listing and performance sections (I have redone the formatting to wikify it, so you'd need to look at an older version to see what I mean), was extremely typical of a copy/paste job. That always makes me suspicious of the rest of the article. If you're confident it's not a copy/paste, feel free to remove the tag.--Kathy A. 12:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you are a regular DEP contributor, so I wanted your opinion.
I have made a new template, at Template:Deadend. Could you please comment and/or vote on the templates talk page (here)?
Thanks! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 04:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 25 | 18 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Re: Scat Metha deletion[edit]
Hi there, thanks for your message. It's true about notability, I see that now on the wiki baseball project... Just a SINGLE major league game makes them notable. I can't believe that doesn't create some conflict with the criteria of WP:BIO though. Must be the administrator who deleted the page thought as I did about notability since they deleted it. Do you think perhaps the wikiproject might want to rethink notability criteria, in the interest of non-stub bios, for starters? Eliz81 17:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- It's been discussed at least twice at WP:BASEBALL that I know of, and been discussed at least once at WP:NOTABILITY recently. Initially I shared your opinion, that we really didn't need bios of everyone who played just a single major league game. However, given the wealth of biographical information out there (at least for baseball players), I've been persuaded otherwise. For most of those guys, the fact that the article is only a stub is not due to a lack of sources, but more a matter of it just hasn't been expanded yet. (I wish more newspapers had their archives online in a searchable format -- that would help tremendously!)
- Now if we could just train some of the people who make articles on players to list their sources... *grin* --Kathy A. 17:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Baseball player naming conventions[edit]
Thanks for your input into the proposed naming convention for baseball players (made either here or here... or both). Hopefully, the final tweak has been made to the proposed guidelines. If you get a chance, please review them here and add any comments/suggestions/feedback on the talk page. If there are no major issues, we'll put this thing to a straw poll in a few days, and if successful will then submit for inclusion on WP:NC. Thanks again, Caknuck 04:29, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 26 | 25 June 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Shulamit Elson[edit]
A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Shulamit Elson, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. KenWalker | Talk 03:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
- You might want to notify the author of the article. I just added several maintenance tags.--Kathy A. 13:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
- I ought to have done that, but since the only recent edits seemed to be by bots or editors adding tags like you and I, I ended up deciding there was no one else to give notice to. On a closer look, I see that Shell Kinney did some of the content, so I have let him know. Thanks for reminding me. --KenWalker | Talk 16:14, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
- De nada - keep up the good work!--Kathy A. 16:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
- I ought to have done that, but since the only recent edits seemed to be by bots or editors adding tags like you and I, I ended up deciding there was no one else to give notice to. On a closer look, I see that Shell Kinney did some of the content, so I have let him know. Thanks for reminding me. --KenWalker | Talk 16:14, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 27 | 2 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Nazi super soldier[edit]
A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Nazi super soldier, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Mendors 08:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
This article was deleted as a prod as a result of your tag. The article was subsequently undeleted after a request at DRV. For your information. Spartaz Humbug! 19:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know! --Kathy A. 20:39, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 28 | 9 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Could you possibly take a look over the said article? I have already reverted 2 edits of an I.P. and obviously do not want to risk a third. Would you be able to give me your opinion on it and whether it's fair to say that there are some mistakes in there? And, also, some material [since before the I.P's edits] has been omitted by the I.P. address. Thank you in advance, hope this doesn't waste your time. ScarianTalk 17:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the subject to say whether the IP user is adding incorrect info or not. Perhaps someone who has made a substantial edit to the article in the past could help you? --Kathy A. 17:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Interwikis[edit]
Hey, to link to pages on meta you can use links in this style: meta:Magic Words ([[meta:Magic Words]]). That makes it easier, and it doesnt affect any external-link-watching-bots. Just saw the external links to meta on your user page, so I thought i'd point this out. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 22:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the hint! (And I really need to get around to cleaning up my user page one of these days, too.) --Fabrictramp 22:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Re AfD[edit]
Sorry, you're quite right, I forgot to delete them when closing the AfD. I've deleted them now. WaltonOne 11:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
- Just glad to know I'm not completely confused! :) --Fabrictramp 14:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Families of Freedom Scholarship Fund[edit]
A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Families of Freedom Scholarship Fund, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. B. Wolterding 11:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
IFactum e-Business Suite[edit]
A {{prod}} template has been added to the article IFactum e-Business Suite, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}.
(Same applies to IFactum.) B. Wolterding 14:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- I only did some general cleanup to the article. You might want to notify User:Vsarmien, who did most of the writing on that article.--Fabrictramp 14:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
SDS Action Camps[edit]
Just a FYI: If an article only is there to redirect to another page, as this one does, you can use the db-empty tag and get it deleted pronto!
- Thanks much! I use db tags a lot, but I didn't even think to look if there was an appropriate one for this. :) --Fabrictramp 15:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
G'day Fabrictramp (great name!), Just cruising around sorting out our general Cambodia stubs and found Sdach Korn. Looked at the history to see what kind person had sent him our way and saw this diff - [2] eek! I thought it had to be some kind of cruel joke - but then I saw the next diff - [3] and relaxed. Thank you very much for returning one of our missing Khmer rulers to his home. I've found one ref for him (so he's not too intimidated by that template) and will look for others. Thanks again. Cheers, Paxse 18:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 29 | 16 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 19:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 30 | 23 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.[edit]
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 31 | 30 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
A template you created, Template:1860s-baseball-pitcher-stub, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --MZMcBride 02:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 32 | 6 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Drake & Josh in New York! taken to AfD[edit]
The article Drake & Josh in New York!, which you put a {{prod}} on, already had a prod that was removed by another editor (albeit an anon one). By policy at WP:PROD, it has to go to AfD then. Rules are a pain sometimes, but I did the AfD, so feel free to vote. Realkyhick 19:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for catching that! I looked, but obviously didn't look closely enough. *grin* --Fabrictramp 20:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
POCS article[edit]
{{helpme}}
Cleaning up new articles, I came across POCS. I wikified, added a few maint tags, and thought it should be moved to Piner-Olivet Charter School, which appears to be protected from recreation. This is a wiki-area I don't have much experience in, so I can't tell if I should be worried about the existence of POCS, or even what the issues were that caused the page to be protected. Can someone toss me a few pointers? --Fabrictramp 14:36, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Sure, here are a few pointers. The links on Piner-Olivet Charter School are useful: see, especially, "activity logs for this page", which shows a log of all administrative actions taken -- such as deletion and protection against recreation (or "salting"). Both places (the log and the salted page itself) link to a particular entry on Articles for deletion. At that entry, you can view discussion where it was decided (for a number of reasons) that the page should be deleted and protected from recreation. At this point, it seems that POCS should probably be deleted as well, probably under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, or "recreation of deleted content". I've tagged POCS with the {{db-repost}} template, which marks it as a candidate for speedy deletion. I hope this helps! I've nulled out your helpme tag; if you still need more help, feel free to un-null it or leave me a message. Cheers, Iknowyourider (t c) 14:54, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks -- that was exactly the help I needed! --Fabrictramp 15:01, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
Dead-enders[edit]
I'm interested in cleaning up articles and have a question for you. I'm curious to know why you add maintenance tags to articles rather than some other course of action. Some of the ones I've looked at read like advertising and could be put up for AfD or prod, maybe even ((db-spam)). So how do you decide? 24.6.65.83 00:17, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- We do a lot of that, too. I'd say I probably prod, AfD, or speedy about 5% of the articles on the DEP list -- other contributors may do more or less. Ultimately, it's a judgement call. --Fabrictramp 01:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
DeadBot[edit]
It appears to be good old multibyte charsets - it reads the two-byte characters as one byte, and both are invalid characters, so it ends up as two ?'s. Not much I can do, so hopefully it isnt a huge problem. Maybe its a good idea to speedily undeadend those pages that have the issue? Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 23:43, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'll see if I can get them done this morning. Thanks for taking a look! --Fabrictramp 13:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 33 | 13 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
text copyrighted problem[edit]
someone say it is ok to based on other websites, like note, References and soures. I base on other website and http://www.supermanartists.comics.org/DCHISTORY/DCHISTORY-1.htm I change some of the words. there nothing wrong with that. check this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_DC_Comics_Timeline delete this page, if you want. thethunderstrike04
- I've taken a look at History_of_DC_Comics_Timeline, and I have to confess I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. Could you please clue me in? Thanks!--Fabrictramp 15:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
please delete history of DC Comics timeline or merger with DC Comics. I don't know how to write. thethunderstrike04 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thethunderstrike04 (talk • contribs) 01:38:45, August 19, 2007 (UTC).
- So if I understand you correctly, you'd like me to remove the merge recommendation for these two articles. The best place to discuss that is on the article's talk page (and I see you've put a comment there). And expanding the article into a well referenced, non-trivial article that stands on its own will help convince the wikipedia community that the articles should not be merged. --Fabrictramp 14:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- Anothter thought - you might ask some of the people who are interested in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#DC Comics to help you with the article. By definition, these are people who are interested in that type of article. --Fabrictramp 16:22, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thanks, I will do that. Thethunderstrike04 01:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Redirect of WilhelmWeiss[edit]
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on WilhelmWeiss, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because WilhelmWeiss is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting WilhelmWeiss, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 03:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 34 | 20 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Prod warning.[edit]
This is Gary Moody from Greater Michigan Realty. I am a newbie to Wiki. I am trying to understand why my generic article about my company templated based on other real estate companies is suggested for deletion. Please help me understand.
Thank you, Gary MOODS 16:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- You might check out WP:COI and WP:NOTABILITY. Also check out #4 of this section of WP:ADVERT. Hope that helps! (Also, traditionally new discussions on someone's talk page go at the bottom.) --Fabrictramp 19:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 35 | 27 August 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Tagging overkill[edit]
I would say that this was a bit overkill. No need to use so many tags. Just put an article that you see like that up for speedy deletion. --Cyde Weys 22:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- Alas, the article has been deleted, so I can't see your example. I have to assume I had a good reason for not speedying it, as I do prod and speedy quite a few articles in the Dead End Pages project. --Fabrictramp 22:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 36 | 3 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 03:48, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
RFA?[edit]
I would like to nominate you for adminship via the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship process. Please respond on my talk page if you are interested. Shalom Hello 04:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 37 | 10 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 20:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Your RFA page is ready![edit]
Hello Fabrictramp, I've been busy in real life for the last week, so I just managed to write a recommendation for you to start an RFA. See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Fabrictramp. Answer the questions, then transclude the page into Wikipedia:Requests for adminship by editing that same page: see instructions at Wikipedia/Requests for adminship/nominate. You may do this at any time, whenever you are ready for it. Please let me know if you have any questions. I wish you good luck. Shalom Hello 20:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks much.--Fabrictramp 00:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 38 | 17 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:12, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Polytetrafluoroethylene (data page) redirect[edit]
Please see template:chembox new. This page is an overspill from the main PTFE article which means that the infobox on that article can be kept to a reasonable length. I've reverted this redirect. Chris Cunningham 10:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for cluing me in! I've left a couple of comments in Wikipedia talk:Chemical infobox about some issues with template:chembox new. I'll also add a comment to Polytetrafluoroethylene (data page) to help prevent others from making the same assumption I did. --Fabrictramp 14:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello FT!
Don't worry, please. Your Firefox is fine (I work with Mac OS X, too). Let me explain something to you. When I created the page I tried to kept it simple, listing only players who had (or not) wikipedia pages. As I understand it, a list article is the place to create a comprehensive, ideally annotated, list of every item/individual in a category where the list has a value in and of itself. But the problem came after a wiki user added a country flag for each player. Can you imagine? 1500-plus flags, one after the other. I actually agree. At first the changes looked a little extreme, but I'm finding them to be beneficial. I can't say I like the new style for this page, having it broken up into individual columns, but I think this will make it most comprehensive, describes the major aesthetic image elements. Note I also replaced each bold Hall of Famer with an asterisk, and two players were removed: Joe Shidall (never played for the BoSox) and Ben Sypher, definitely a joke (a Guatemalan major leaguer?). As for today, the list of BoSox all-timers is complete and updated: 1557 players; Baseball Reference reports 1556, but do not includes J.C. Romero *. I still working on this page, creating at least a stub for every player. I know is a hard work but would be more easy if somebody want to help me and share the work. it's good to see someone else working on filling in the baseball gaps. Keep up the good work! Cheers. MusiCitizen 22:32, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it's been nice seeing I'm not the only one toiling away on these rosters. :)
- I'm thinking we need to revisit the all-time roster standards discussion at the baseball project, because I'm finding a number of formatting issues that weren't addressed the first time around. Some pages have flags, most don't. Some pages have columns, some don't. There are other issues that don't come to mind at the moment. I'll jot them down over the next week or so, and let you know when I post something for discussion (unless you beat me to it. *grin*) --Fabrictramp 22:55, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations![edit]
You are now an administrator! Welcome aboard! Secretlondon 00:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the welcome! --Fabrictramp 00:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Woo!! Congratulations, indeed :) - Alison ❤ 00:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Congratulations. You are welcome.15:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC) Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 15:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yup, Big congratulations!! And no problem on the AWB front ;) Reedy Boy 18:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Woo hoo!! Congrats on becoming the newest admin. -jj137 Talk • Contribs 20:59, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- But your identical note was much more special than any of the others. ;-)--Fabrictramp 00:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Richie S[edit]
Played half a dozen games for the Cardinals. Pls revert your deletion--Epeefleche 01:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Can you give me a clue what article and what player we're talking about? --Fabrictramp 12:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Could this be the player you had in mind? I have absolutely NO clue why I missed the Cardinals line in baseball-reference.com. Good catch! (pun intended) --Fabrictramp 17:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- You got it! Tx.--Epeefleche 02:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
And now I've retagged it as a copyvio from http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=933406. :) Corvus cornix 23:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Good catch! (And I'm stealing your Jeopardy user box.) --Fabrictramp 23:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem, I was hoping other people would. When were you on? I was on around 1987, but I came in second. Corvus cornix 23:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Around 1995. Came in third but didn't miss a question. I just sucked at the buzzer. :) --Fabrictramp 23:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- One of the categories was classical music, which has always been one of my downfalls. The guy who won ran the category. Corvus cornix 23:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Around 1995. Came in third but didn't miss a question. I just sucked at the buzzer. :) --Fabrictramp 23:39, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem, I was hoping other people would. When were you on? I was on around 1987, but I came in second. Corvus cornix 23:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.[edit]
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 39 | 24 September 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
R. S. Neaville[edit]
A {{prod}} template has been added to the article R. S. Neaville, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. B. Wolterding 08:28, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Your request for adminship[edit]
You are very welcome for my support in your request for adminship. :) Acalamari 18:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
False information[edit]
Sorry Fabrictramp, I had only tagged all those pages as "nonsense" because the information is completely false and has been made as a prank. There, in fact, exists no Durga Maa Telefilms company at all. A few users have made this to tease Balaji Telefilms, one of the leading production companies on Indian television. Is there no way to remove those articles, as they are not true? Related pages, like Kkusumanjali, is a spoof of the highly popular Indian shows Kkusum and Kavyanjali. Kanya (Hindi Serial), Keh Do Na, and Kismat Kaa Khell all contain false information as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdmt319 (talk • contribs) 19:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'd suggest tagging the articles with a {{hoax}} tag at the very least. (See WP:HOAX#Dealing_with_hoaxes). The best way to get hoaxes into the deletion process is to take them to AfD. The AfD page has great instructions if you've never done an AfD before. Hope that helps -- if not, feel free to ask! --Fabrictramp 19:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
See-through frog[edit]
Fair enough - it seemed over the top at first glance, but thanks for the heads up... --Mhking 22:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Diagonal Intercept clipping[edit]
I know that wikipedia policies were being not being followed to the t in that article, but I was planning to write a complete article in due course, and this deletion seems waay too speedy. I will create than page again, but I was hoping that my incomplete page would not be deleted so fast, because I can't find the time to write the entire article at once, and would prefer to do it in bits and pieces. Any tips so that someone else does not delete my work-in-progress article? --Weedrat 04:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- Looking at the deleted articles, the most content you had in any of them was just a reference (with no other content), which will get you speedied every time. :) If you need some time to develop an article to the stub stage, a great way to do that is to work on it in your sandbox. That way you can take all the time you need to get enough content to avoid the dreaded {{db-empty}} tag. (And I see from your talk page that others have suggested variations on the same idea).
- Before copying that stub to Wikipedia's main space, check out Wikipedia:Stub#Ideal_stub_article to make sure you've covered everything suggested there. Having written plenty of stub articles myself, I suggest that you have a strong introductory paragraph that says (briefly!) what the subject is and why it's notable. Include the reference you have, and if you can include the appropriate stub tag, so much the better. I hope that helps a bit -- if anything isn't clear, please feel free to ask. --Fabrictramp 14:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit]
Just wanted to say thanks to you for tidying up the page I have started on the village of Navenby. You have done a brilliant job! Poor old Navenby has so much history - yet no-one had bothered telling Wiki until now. Once again, thanks!!
- You're welcome! I moved your comment down to the bottom, as that's the traditional place for new comments. --Fabrictramp 13:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Fury Trucks[edit]
A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Fury Trucks, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. B. Wolterding 17:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
San Ysidro McDonald's Massacre Redirects[edit]
I get the point. I just think that they were non-notable victims and were being udnone by anon IP's with edit summaries like "Tracy Tap Dances" and "rv vandalisim" and "I love Kristy Licciardi durring a fire drill in art" and my favorite "LEESA BODDEN DID THIS TO MATAO HERRERA" why would someone use the silly edit summaries. weqeqwe 20:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Probably the same reason we see a lot of attack pages getting created about a half hour after the junior high schools let out for the day. :) --Fabrictramp 22:20, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- More thoughts on the vandalism. This looks like an isolated incident that was quickly reverted by one of the vandal watchers. If these pages were vandalized more frequently (looks like the last time was over a year ago), you might want to request semi-protection for them. Wikipedia:Rough guide to semi-protection has some good guidelines on what pages are good candidates. Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp 22:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Justin Hancock[edit]
You've despeedied this saying there's an "assertion of notability" - where? The text of the article in full reads Born in 1990 to Janet and David Hancock, Justin Hancock was raised in Salt Lake City, Utah until he was thirteen years of age. When he was thirteen he developed an interest in poetry. His tallent grew rapidly, and was soon close to an obsession, writing one to three structured and flowing poetic works each day. — iridescent (talk to me!) 23:56, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- I was going off the statement "He was soon known as an established poet", which I took to be a (weak) assertion of notabilty. I'm currently doing a gsearch to see if he meets WP:BIO (probably won't), and if he doesn't, I'll prod him. --Fabrictramp 00:02, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
speedy criteria[edit]
You are quite right in what you said above. But your comment with respect to Hiroshi Ikeda wasn't consistent with that. As I understand it, you should have said just the same as above, and declined the speedy. (while of course giving advice on making the article stronger--and the advice you gave about that seems fine. ) DGG (talk) 23:12, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
- I had intended to remove the speedy tag after giving my advice, but got interrupted. When I got back to my computer a couple of minutes later, I had no clue what I had intended to do. Thanks for removing the speedy for me! :) --Fabrictramp 23:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
PMBus (Power Management Bus)[edit]
Hi, you've marked PMBus as needing additional reliable sources. I can't quite make sense of that request. This article is (now) a straightforward summary of the (peer-reviewed) specifications (i.e. verifiable against those primary sources), and in terms of basic scholarship you can't really be more reliable than that. As a technology still being bootstrapped, it's not particularly realistic to expect tertiary sources; and secondary sources classically add no value. (Plus in this context they're almost exclusively "trade press", which is notoriously biased and inaccurate ... questionable sources, extremely ill suited for encyclopedias.) I was scanning Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources and those policies seem ill-suited to technologies of this type: they'll never generate academic bibliographies since there is no rocket science, while the relevant product ecosystems have both long closed development cycles and "hidden" markets which would rarely generate much text. Sometimes even marketing collateral only goes to special customers, effectively under NDA. Many similar technical articles also stick to primary sources, and at least a few folk have commented that it seems clearly wrong to prefer secondary sources over primary ones. So, what's the motivation for needing "additional" sources? From what I see, they could only add errors... --69.226.208.120 04:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- What secondary sources can do in this instance is show that PMBus meets the requirements of WP:NOTABILITY. I still think the {{primarysources}} tag is warranted.--Fabrictramp 16:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- If notability is the issue you're raising, the right tag is either {{Importance}} or {{notability}} then, yes? The info referenced by the "primarysources" tag doesn't bring out that issue. (In fact the referenced info seems more than a little bit confused...)
- I'm not sure what to do about notability at this stage. As noted in the pmbus.org website (linked from that page), it was only last month that the first multivendor product interop event was held. The fact that major silicon and systems vendors participate, and several have announced (or sampled) products, seems to establish notability in the relevant contexts. Even in the current shortage of secondary sources. It's referenced in the new Rev 03 I²C spec, but that's essentially a (minor) primary source. It would be rare in this industry to see many secondary sources at this stage of technology development. And in specialized cases like this, as I noted, even at later stages they may not be common.
- And I notice you haven't disagreed with the point that secondary sources, essentially by definition, can never address technical accuracy. The "primarysources" template text appears to be incorrect on its own merits! Secondary sources can only be accurate about the narratives constructed around facts. In today's media, such narratives all too often have an adversarial relationship to facts; that's not an encyclopaedic goal, which explains the large amount of discussion on those topics. --69.226.208.120 22:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't address the issue of primary vs. secondary sources because I really don't want to get into a debate about the merits. Primary sources are by definition closer to the "source". They are also more prone to bias. Secondary sources have their issues, as well. But it doesn't matter what I think about the issue, because the guideline for notability is "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." (from WP:NOTABILITY). One of the guidelines for the existence of an article is "If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." (Wikipedia:Verifiability).
- Many creators of articles get a bit possessive about their subject and get peeved if they see a {{notability}} template on their article, so if secondary sources are missing I'll tag it with {{primarysources}}, which will accomplish the same thing: secondary sources will show that the article meets WP:NOTABILITY. And Wikipedia:Verifiability says that reliable third-party sources are needed to justify the existence of the article, so the {{primarysources}} tag is still justified under that policy.
- If you dislike the wording of the {{primarysources}} template, the place to bring up your concerns is not my talk page but at Template_talk:Primarysources. If you think that WP:NOTABILITY is too restrictive towards new technologies, the place to bring that up is Wikipedia_talk:Notability. Similarly, Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability is the place to bring up issues with that policy. --Fabrictramp 22:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Guan Shengdi[edit]
I got a few hits under that, but none that specifically reference the topic in the article. The user who started Guan Shengdi also started "The Feast of Immortal Peaches" and another article which seem bogus. I suspect it's either a fringe theory or vandal-nonsense. Maybe it is better left to AFD though. Perspicacite 22:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
- If you do suspect a hoax, speedy definitely won't work. Feel free to AfD it / them if appropriate. :) --Fabrictramp 23:56, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
You were right about the nonsense tag. Don't know what I was thinking. As a penance for wrongly tagging it I have expanded the article and now know more about bubble wrap toys than I would have thought possible.
I also removed the maintenance tags, as it appears suitably wikified and copyedited, at least for a minor toy stub. Let me know if I missed anything here. Euryalus 03:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- Awesome job on the penance! :) --Fabrictramp 13:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
"Joseph mccann"[edit]
How does that "article" not meet the criteria for patent nonsense? It's completely idiotic. --PMDrive1061 15:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, being completely idiotic doesn't meet the difinition given in WP:SPEEDY, which is "Patent nonsense and gibberish, an unsalvageably incoherent page with no meaningful content. This does not include: poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, badly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes of any sort; some of these, however, may be deleted as vandalism in blatant cases."
- Yes, this is very counter-intuitive, and I'd love to see the words "patent nonsense" changed (but at this point they may be too entrenched). The best way to deal with this type of article is to prod it. (which I was in the process of doing when another admin, incorrectly in my opinion, deleted the article.) --Fabrictramp 16:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
BoSox all-timers edits[edit]
- Thanks for be alert. MusiCitizen 19:46, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- De nada! Thanks for all your disambig work on the rosters. --Fabrictramp 19:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
help with new posting[edit]
Fabrictramp, I hope this reaches you. I am new to wiki and recently posted about a person, Grace Fernald. You tagged it as a dead-end page without internal links. I have cleaned that up and would like the tag removed. How can I make that happen? Also, I would like to add categories at the bottom of the page. She is an educational researcher, teacher, psychologist, etc. Any information about how to add such categories would be greatly appreciated. Enjoy the MLB playoffs (even without the Cubs) Thanks, Klumperz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Klumperz (talk • contribs) 18:46, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- Glad to try and help!
- Since you've added internal links to the article, you can simply remove the deadend tag yourself. When you are in the article editing screen, simply delete the line that says {{deadend|date=October 2007}}, and the whole deadend box will go away.
- To add categories, I find the Category Browser is the easiest way to find the correct categories. Go to Special:Allpages. In the box marked "Display pages starting at:" start typing the first part of a word you think might start the category (try psychologist, for example). Make sure the box marked "Namespace:" is set to category, and press the "go" button. A number of categories come up -- I'd try the second one, Psychologists. When you click on that link, you'll be taken to the category, which will tell you a little about that category, and list a number of subcategories. If you like that category, and none of the subcategories are appropriate, add the category to the article. You can do that by adding [[Category:Psychologists]] to the article right below {{DEFAULTSORT:Fernald, Grace}}. Be sure to always use the most specific category that is appropriate. For example, the subcategory [[Category:Educational psychologists]] looks like it might be appropriate, so you would use it instead of [[Category:Psychologists]]. Once you get a category or two in the article, you can remove the [[Category:Uncategorised people]] that is currently in the article.
- You can find a lot more about categories at Wikipedia:Categorization and at Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories. I hope that helps a bit, and thanks for being bold and taking the plunge to improve an article! Feel free to ask if you have more questions. --Fabrictramp 19:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Bearian's RfA[edit]
Hi, thanks for supporting my RfA, which passed 63 to 1. I really appreciate that you wrote nice things about me. Yes, I lost a battle on the City of Dublin Male Voice Chorus. I hope that I am doing a good job so far. Bearian 20:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep up the good work! It will be nice to have an admin around who isn't completely delete-happy. :) --Fabrictramp 21:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 42 | 15 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 42 | 15 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi[edit]
Do something about Karla Poewe page please...it's messed up : Jon Ascton —Preceding comment was added at 23:46, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure exactly what you'd like me to do. Was there something specific you'd like help on how to do with the page? --Fabrictramp 23:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
re Simon cringle[edit]
I'm fairly sure this article could fall under {{db-bio}} or {{db-band}}, since the "[weak] assertion of notability" is definately a hoax, as shown by a google search. However, you're the admin, so PROD it is. Thanks.--Jac16888 19:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, hoaxes aren't eligible for speedy deletion. (See WP:SPEEDY#Non-criteria.) That's why prod is more appropriate. I have to confess I've wished at times that hoaxes could be speedied, but every time I do I run across an article that seems like a hoax but turns out to be real. (See-through frog is a good example.) Hope that helps! --Fabrictramp 20:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, fair enough. Seems like a strange policy, though, as it would be perfectly ok for me/you/someone/anyone to remove the unref'd POV "Highly acclaimed DJ worldwide", which straight away leaves you with a simple {{db-bio}}. Oh well--Jac16888 23:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
RUDI and the Gays[edit]
So you are aware, this is another attempt to recreate an article that was the source of major sockpuppetry and vandalism back in May. The article is complete nonsense and the show never existed. The previous creator was banned for vandalism and sockpuppetry and appears to be trying again with a new series of sockpuppets. The article has no basis in fact and appears to be someone's pet nonsense project and/or an attempt to attack the people mentioned in it. Improbcat 15:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- All well and good, but it still doesn't meet the definition of patent nonsense (which I strongly encourage you to read). Since the show never existed, the article is fiction, and is not eligible for speedy deletion. I've prodded the article and put a watch on it, so if it gets recreated again I can salt it. --Fabrictramp 15:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I quickly speedied Elliott reed as obvious nonsense and vandalism, those type of articles should be speedied. Thanks Jbeach sup 22:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- While silly, it really didn't meet the definition of patent nonsense and wasn't speediable. (Take a minute to read the def.) I stand by my prod.--Fabrictramp 22:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
It meets the "Content that, while apparently meaningful after a fashion, is so completely and irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever. " part. Thanks Jbeach sup 23:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't have any trouble making sense of it. The only problem with it was that it was fictional, which isn't speediable. --Fabrictramp 23:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
- When it meant fictional, it means like fictional characters from movies, books or television, as many new users just leaves plot, but with no info, not nonsense characters people made up. I hope that helps. Thanks Jbeach sup 01:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- I apologize for not being as precise in my language as it seems I should have been. When I said that the material was fiction, I was using fiction in the sense of a hoax, which is defined as "is an attempt to trick an audience into believing that something false is real. " I tend not to use the word "hoax" in a speedy discussion, because editors get all wound up in a discussion over whether the article is an organized hoax or a bored middle school student playing a trick, when the intent is the same. --Fabrictramp 13:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Just to say I completely agree, fiction per se is not a ground for speedy deletion. I guess I was hoping this might qualify under, I suppose, WP:SNOWBALL on the very loose ground that fiction of this lack of quality is nonsense, but I support your taking it to "prod" instead; more accurate a basis for removal. Thanks for making that good decision. Accounting4Taste 00:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- WP:SNOWBALL does have some appealing aspects, but Wikipedia:Process is important is nice, too. :) --Fabrictramp 00:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
- I hadn't actually been directed to that article before, so another thank-you for that. Rather elegantly put, that working without process throws sand in the gears. Much obliged. Accounting4Taste 00:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Removed a page[edit]
You removed Paul Maiorana (indie artist) page. Please revive. This person is huge on the east coast, Trained by Warhol. Please do your studies before deleting.Sixstring1965 01:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
- The article was tagged for speedy deletion because there was no claim of meeting WP:NOTABILITY in the article. Feel free to recreate the article, but take a minute to read WP:BIO first, and make sure that you include quality, third-party sources showing the notability of this artist. Without those sources, the article is likely to get speedily deleted again and again.
- If you need time to develop the article, you might consider making a subpage of your user page and developing the article there until it's ready to "go live". (If you give me a link to that user page, I'll be glad to post the original article there for you to work on.) Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp 13:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Redirect of I Love Nascar[edit]
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on I Love Nascar, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because I Love Nascar is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting I Love Nascar, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 09:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I've removed the prod on Shelley Batts and added a reference. While I agree she's only notable for one incident, her Google hits suggest that the incident was covered widely in the blogosphere, and the applicability of fair use is something of interest to Wiki readers. If you still think the article should be deleted, please take it to AfD for a wider discussion. Cheers, Espresso Addict 10:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
–I've listed it on AfD - please (both) weigh in if you feel so inclined. Hopsyturvy (talk) 13:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi, a while back I put a db-band on Labtekwon. You changed it to a few maintenence templates because of a probably unfounded assertation of notability ("who is considered an underground legend by many in underground Hip-Hop circles"). I just caughtthis while checking something on my contributions page, and noticed that months later, it is still just an unfounded claim. Would it be alright to reapply the db-band on that page? Thanks - Mbruno42 16:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
- Probably better to prod, since they are asserting notability.--Fabrictramp 17:28, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
sickness and health[edit]
Thank you. It looks like you took off the speedy deletion and helped me with the way it looks. That was real cool of you. I am new to this and although I'm starting to get addicted to this, need to work on my regular work rather then guard these recent things from getting deleted. But I wanted to thank you. hayashiantibushHayashiantibush 20:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem. You might want to review the notability requirements of WP:Music and find a source or two that shows the album meets those requirements -- Sickness and Health can still be prodded or sent to AfD because of notability. Hope that helps! --Fabrictramp 22:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Kut u up[edit]
Just a friendly heads up on Kut U Up. I removed your speedy tag because the article doesn't meet the definition of patent nonsense. (Hoaxes and deliberate false info aren't speediable, nor is poorly written content). Feel free to prod the article if it needs to go, but I was able to verify that the group was in the movie. Perhaps some sources and copyediting will improve this article enough that it doesn't sound so silly?--Fabrictramp 04:21, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- The main reason i was doubting this one was because of the rather silly layout, and also because (In my local language) part of the words were swears. I kind of assumed this page was created by a vandal, and hadn't been detected because it didn't contain any swears or likewise. Thanks for the heads up though, as i was not completely sure if it was nonsense or valid information :) --Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 05:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 43 | 22 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Animal City (film) prod[edit]
Well, don't I look the complete tool. I assumed a simple typo. For the second time, please accept my apologies. Best regards Liquidfinale (Ţ) (Ç) (Ŵ) 15:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Don't beat yourself up -- if you hadn't seen it before, how would you know unless you're psychic? *grin* --Fabrictramp 17:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 44 | 29 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:33, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Delete your page?[edit]
I'm assuming the {{db-attack}} template on your user page is not a real request, and I've removed it. If you really want it deleted, let me know and I'll oblige.--Fabrictramp 16:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- Nope, it was added in bad faith by GRRE (talk · contribs), because I've spotted his repost of deleted material and tagged it! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 16:07, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- I guessed it was something like that. :) --Fabrictramp 16:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
Dolls Place[edit]
Please restore Dolls Place and I will add references. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 23:45, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- There really isn't much to restore -- the whole article consisted of a three sentence stub. Once you've found the references (and be sure to read Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources), you can easily recreate the page.--Fabrictramp 15:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Then please cleanup the incoming links to the article. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you're asking me to do. --Fabrictramp 18:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Faithy05[edit]
Thanks, man. Sorry if i'm a bit slow, i am only in yr 9, but am very knwledgable on Aboriginal dreaming. I will fix the page soon, Biamie is taking up most of my efforts. Thanks again --Faithy05 09:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 45 | 5 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 46 | 12 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Forgive me if I posted this in the wrong place, but Wikipedia's pages are not easy to view and use. I could not find where to start a new entry. The page for the company "AtHomeNet" was marked for deletion by you recently. I want to know specifically how it did not meet the criteria. I viewed profile pages on Coca Cola, IBM, and other companies, and the AtHomenet page stated only facts and was not an advertisement, unlike these other pages which arguably are advertisements. I want the page reinstated, and I would like a clear explanation of what on it was non-factual or non verifiable.
I didn't put a speedy tag on it for being a hoax, I put a speedy tag on it for being nonsense. Corvus cornix 00:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see where the article meets the definition at Wikipedia:Patent nonsense. It certainly doesn't meet definition #1. And I can't make a good argument that it meets definition #2 ("Content that, while apparently meaningful after a fashion, is so completely and irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever."), because if it wasn't a hoax, it would just be bad writing and would make a bit of sense.
- G1, which is the reason you gave, says "Patent nonsense and gibberish, an unsalvageably incoherent page with no meaningful content. This does not include: poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, badly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes of any sort; some of these, however, may be deleted as vandalism in blatant cases." Since the article comes down to being bad writing or a hoax, it seems to be specifically excluded from G1.--Fabrictramp 00:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- You don't think such stellar prose as His Uncle is bluejays closer B.J Ryan Mows lawns in third worl country's in the offseason if grass grows that year is nonsense? Corvus cornix 17:17, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Silly and very badly written, maybe, but it doesn't meet the definition (as I read it) of patent nonsense. And yes, I really wish someone would make that definition a little clearer, because it is certainly open to a wide variety of interpretations. I tend to err on the side of a stricter interpretation, largely because I have come across a number of articles tagged for speedy deletion as nonsense that were quite true and verifiable. (Joseph Gayetty, which you yourself tagged as nonsense, is a good example.) Prodding the article instead of speedying gives more editors a chance to look at it and research the issues involved, but still gives a heads up to the average reader that there are (potentially) serious problems with the veracity of the article. If the article is really a hoax / silly / nonsense, it will go away in 5 days, and the end result will be the same. (And if someone is foolish enough to remove the prod, that's a good excuse for AfD and SALT. *grin*) --Fabrictramp 17:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I'm not going to continue this, I think the whole bureaucratic need for a prod in this case is silly, but at least it will get deleted eventually. :) And don't forget that the name of Gayetty was initially misspelled, making it impossible to verify. Corvus cornix 18:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Except that there were also a number of sources with the name misspelled, too. (Although if a source can't spell the guy's name right, it does bring into question the reliability of the source. *grin*) No biggie either way, and keep up the good work on catching a fraction of the crud. :)--Fabrictramp 18:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I'm not going to continue this, I think the whole bureaucratic need for a prod in this case is silly, but at least it will get deleted eventually. :) And don't forget that the name of Gayetty was initially misspelled, making it impossible to verify. Corvus cornix 18:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Silly and very badly written, maybe, but it doesn't meet the definition (as I read it) of patent nonsense. And yes, I really wish someone would make that definition a little clearer, because it is certainly open to a wide variety of interpretations. I tend to err on the side of a stricter interpretation, largely because I have come across a number of articles tagged for speedy deletion as nonsense that were quite true and verifiable. (Joseph Gayetty, which you yourself tagged as nonsense, is a good example.) Prodding the article instead of speedying gives more editors a chance to look at it and research the issues involved, but still gives a heads up to the average reader that there are (potentially) serious problems with the veracity of the article. If the article is really a hoax / silly / nonsense, it will go away in 5 days, and the end result will be the same. (And if someone is foolish enough to remove the prod, that's a good excuse for AfD and SALT. *grin*) --Fabrictramp 17:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- You don't think such stellar prose as His Uncle is bluejays closer B.J Ryan Mows lawns in third worl country's in the offseason if grass grows that year is nonsense? Corvus cornix 17:17, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Frank Harbord[edit]
Regarding Frank Harbord. I have no objections whatsoever to you removing the page. But regarding my previous messages, it would appear the problem arises with 'External Links'. The obvious answer would be to take off the the External Link altogether, leaving the Biographical fact intact. I intend doing 'Bibliographical' and 'Footnotes' sections eventually regarding the origin of the Biographical Fact TonyDodson 09:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- I have to confess to being a bit confused, as I can't find where you and I have ever talked before. The reason I placed a prod tag on the article is not the external links section (although I'm not sure what a picture of his signature adds to the encyclopedic content of the article), but that there's no claim of meeting the requirements of WP:BIO. Please take a minute to read through that guideline, especially sections 1 and 3 of "Basic criteria". --Fabrictramp 13:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Beat me to it - I was just about to decline and it ec'd with you! Pedro : Chat 15:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Seems we've been racing on the speedies this morning. You've deleted a couple of pages while I was looking at links and logs. :) --Fabrictramp 15:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
CSD: Hoax[edit]
Greetings fellow dead-ender :)
I tagged Sky Friends as a hoax earlier this year and you declined and prodded. One of the many reasons I see for speedy close at AFD is hoax. It may be a valid reason. I did the usual and customary checking and saw the user pretty much tore up Sky channels, nothing on google, and previous contributions were vandalistic. Anyway, keep up the good work! spryde | talk 17:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Although many AfDs are speedily closed as hoaxes, WP:SPEEDY#General_criteria is pretty clear that hoax isn't a valid speedy reason: "This does not include: poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, badly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes of any sort". Alas, you can lead an admin to water, but you can't make them read the instructions. :) I wonder if it's time to SALT Sky Friends and its variations? --Fabrictramp 17:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- sigh* Obvious hoaxes should be CSD criteria. I might go propose that and use this as an example of why. I am not sure if salting is appropriate right now. Unless I am missing something, this is the first time it has happened. spryde | talk 17:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- It is tempting to make obvious hoaxes speediable, but everytime I start thinking it's a good idea, I run across an article that seems like a hoax (and has been requested to be deleted as such) that isn't. See-through frog and Joseph Gayetty are good examples of this. Sometimes having that article stick around for 5 days in a prod can give people a chance to find the references. And if it's really a hoax, it will still get deleted. --Fabrictramp 17:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- I can see your point and it has already been discussed. One person's bleedingly obvious hoax is another man's transparent toilet paper inventor. In this particular case, you would think a large media conglomerate with access to millions of eyes would at least mention something about it. Knowing who owns Sky makes this even more glaringly clear. Cheers! spryde | talk 17:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Admin Action Favour[edit]
Could you possibly look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alien's Stories and snowball close and delete? It seems my lack of WP:BOLD is irritating people. You can certainlky delete per WP:SNOW but I don't want to as I initiated the AfD. Pedro : Chat 15:21, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Looks like WP:SNOW is called for here, but I've never closed an AfD before (although this is something I want to learn how to do.) Mind walking me through it?--Fabrictramp 15:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- No probs. First of delete the article. Then go to the AfD and click edit. Remove the line that says "remove this line". Then add {{subst:afdtop}} '''Deleted''' per [[WP:SNOW]] ~~~~ at the very top and {{subst:afdbottom}} at the verry bottom. That'll do it! Pedro : Chat 15:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Done, and thanks for teaching me something new! --Fabrictramp 15:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Brilliant, thank for that. I don't close a lot of AFD's but sometimes at CSD I see something that's tagged as speedy as well as at AFD so if I do speedy then I close of the debate as well. It's easy when you've done it a few times (I cocked up my first few by not putting the afdtop part at the very top!!) Cheers for your help. Pedro : Chat 15:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Done, and thanks for teaching me something new! --Fabrictramp 15:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- No probs. First of delete the article. Then go to the AfD and click edit. Remove the line that says "remove this line". Then add {{subst:afdtop}} '''Deleted''' per [[WP:SNOW]] ~~~~ at the very top and {{subst:afdbottom}} at the verry bottom. That'll do it! Pedro : Chat 15:32, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 47 | 19 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Kirei board[edit]
Hello, Fabrictramp. You recently deleted a page I created (kirei Board). Kirei Board is a brand of sorghum plywood sold by my company, Kirei, and is a recognized name for this product, a product made by no other company. While i recognize that the page had been flagged as "written like an advertisement" I believe I in good faith described a product used in the open market (much like "Kleenex" or "Epson" have pages) and showed several pictures of it so that those interested could learn about it via wikipedia, which several people have. I request that this page be reinstated, and I am open to any suggestions you may have to help me rewrite it to meet standard wikipedia syntax. I can be contacted at john (at)kireiusa.com if you have any questions. Thanks. (sorry if this does not fit the format for this discussion page, but I could not find any other way to post.) John —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oobelly (talk • contribs) 02:00, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- First, I moved your comment/question down to the end, which is where new talk is traditionally put.
- Please take a moment to read WP:Notability and WP:COI. The Kirei board article as it stood made no claim of meeting the requirements of WP:Notability. Certainly many new articles have the same problem, but as the article had been tagged for improvement for quite a few months, and no one had been interested enough in improving it, another editor tagged it for deletion. There is nothing to prevent the article from being recreated, hopefully this time with quality, third-party sources that show the notability of the subject (you will notice that the Kleenex article has been tagged for this problem).
- This leads me to another problem. Your e-mail shows that you have a conflict of interest with Kirei board, something many editors take a very dim view of. The consensus on wikipedia is that it's generally better to wait for someone else to write the article -- if your product is truly notable, someone will write it for you eventually.
dead-end[edit]
Hi, Fabrictramp. I saw your edit updating the date of the last revision of the DEP list, but I tried opening a few links from the beginning of the list and they were stubs, but had links. So I'd like to ask you, how is the list updated? Waldir talk 17:27, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Mike Shamus - Bio[edit]
Hi, You are recommending deletion due to "lack of notability". I have revised my bio to include some "notable" items that my artists and I have accomplished. Please revisit. Thanks. Mike Shamus —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamas1678 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
- Please take a moment to read WP:Notability, WP:BIO, and WP:COI, as all these issues still apply.--Fabrictramp (talk) 15:10, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 48 | 26 November 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Zad27[edit]
You recently deleted my post Russell Poison. You stated that it was a page created to "disparage its subject" or that there was no neutral point of view. The reason I started the page in the first place, is because many people in my dorm ask me about Russell, becasue I have known him. It was not created to disparage him. He worked on it with me, therefore it isn't attacking if one does not feel attacked. Also, I collaborated with many people to gain a neutral point of view. Is there any way I can edit the page so that it won't be deleted? I would appreciate any help, thank you. -Zad27 11-29-2007
- First, it's traditional to place new comments on a talk page at the bottom -- that helps people read things in order.
- There are so many problems with the Russell poison article, I don't know where to start. The section on "Hygiene" really can't be viewed in any other way than as a personal attack against the subject. You claim that the subject helped you write it -- fine, but Wikipedia is not the place for attacks, even when directed at ones own self. If you want to post that type of humor, facebook or myspace is a much more appropriate venue.
- Then, there's the problem of notability. Nothing in the article remotely suggested the subject meets the requirements of WP:BIO, which is also grounds for speedy deletion. If, after carefully reading WP:BIO, you think that Russell Poison meets the requirements and you'd still like to make a neutral, verifiable article, you might want to write it first on subpage of your user page and ask an admin to look it over for comment before moving it to the mainspace. One easy way to do that is to put {{Helpme}} on your talk page and post your request right below the template.
- Hope that helps answer your question.--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:58, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
My article didn't include a "Hygine" section. I misspelled it. The article was titled Russell Poisson, with two s's. That was the name of article I posted this morning. I will read the WP:BIO page and try to re-write the article. And I moved my question to the bottom of the page.
- Your October article on Russell poison (one s) did include a hygiene section. (Since you spelled the name that way on my talk page, that's what I searched for). Your recent article on Russell poisson (two s's) did not, but still had the same problems with attacks and lack of notability. But I do appreciate that you're willing to read WP:BIO, and I hope you'll make some valuable contributions to wikipedia. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 20:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
You just A7'd it while I was looking to tag it. Are you sure this is a proper A7? He had won some sort of award, and when I was just about to check if there was any substance in the award, the article was gone. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:42, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- The award was for being an intern at a particular company -- not much of a claim of notability, is it?--Fabrictramp (talk) 23:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- No, it isn't. I just fixed some formatting, and was about to set out to see what the award was, and there was an edit conflict to a redirect, and the redirect was gone. Being pedantic and all that, I just wanted to double check ;) Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- No problem! :)--Fabrictramp (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 3rd, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 49 | 3 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
AtHomeNet[edit]
Forgive me if I posted this in the wrong place, but Wikipedia's pages are not easy to view and use. I could not find where to start a new entry. The page for the company "AtHomeNet" was marked for deletion by you recently, and subsequently deleted before i had a chance to contest it as I am new to this. I want to know specifically how it did not meet the criteria. I viewed profile pages on Coca Cola, IBM, and other companies, and the AtHomenet page stated only facts and was not an advertisement, unlike these other pages which arguably are advertisements. I want the page reinstated, and I would like a clear explanation of what on it was non-factual or non verifiable.
- The problem was not facts, advertisement, or verifiability, but that there was no claim in the AtHomeNet article of meeting the requirements of WP:Notability or WP:Corp. Articles about companies must meet the requirments, especially Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Primary_criterion, or they are subject to deletion. If, after carefully reading this requirement, you think that an article can be created which does meet the requirements, I'll be happy to copy the deleted article to a subpage of your user page so you have plenty of time to get it into shape before posting it to mainspace.--Fabrictramp 23:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I am providing the following links which establish press releases, other articles from industry sources. Let me know if this works, and what I need to do next to get our page back up.
http://www.wikigwinnett.com/content.cfm?Action=wiki&WikiID=3518&CFID=2608044&CFTOKEN=66994276
http://www.communitytechcommerce.com/Resources/community_now.asp
http://www.glenwoodbrooklyn.com/News/newsobserver_com%20-%20Web%20brings%20neighbors%20together.htm
http://www.paginadeinicio.com.mx/videotube/index.php?search=reservation
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/11-27-2007/0004711804&EDATE= —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenrage (talk • contribs) 16:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC) An editor has asked for a deletion review of AtHomeNet. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Edenrage 16:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please read Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Primary_criterion as I asked you to. Wikis and news releases don't establish notability. --Fabrictramp 16:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
There are at least two articles about the company written by outside sources such as:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=athomenet
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20011207/ai_n13932816
In general, how much outside press do you need to verify the facts in the profile to meet the criteria? I have some other people digging up some stuff, and our CEO, Susan Sanders was featured on the cover of USA today a few years back. I will send you more links as I get them, but can you tell me if that will be enough or what exactly else I need to provide. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenrage (talk • contribs) 17:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Here are a couple more articles which establish that the company has been around and doing this for a while.... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/07/AR2005060700498.html http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-06-01-technology-communities_x.htm?csp=34
please let me know what further you would need to see. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenrage (talk • contribs) 18:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Once again, I recommend you read the guideline. Both of the links to actual articles you posted (as opposed to links to searches) are just passing mentions. However, your response brings up another issue, WP:COI, which I also recommend you read.--Fabrictramp 19:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- I see that you've had the article restored, so there isn't much need to keep filling up my user page with links about your article. However, I still recommend that you do the recommended reading, as the article still has serious problems that can lead to deletion.--Fabrictramp 19:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I read COI before, and it is noted on the page that jsut becuase you may be affiliated with the comapny or entity you are writing about, you must keep your remarks in a nuetral tone, which I believe the article does. it simply states who they are, what they do, and how long they have done it. there are no statements of opinion in the article. Since I'm new to this, in your advice, what needs to be included here to make this article acceptable. it can be established as fact that the company does exist, and has for the last 9 years. It can be established by PR or by internal receipts that there are over 1 million homes on the service. the fact that a company may have large enough pockets to get Newsweek to write on them should not exclude smaller companies from getting a factual listing of existence, especially in a smaller niche market. Either you are suggesting that because a national entity has not written a lengthy bio on us that we are not notable enough, or you are suggesting that there can be something added to this page to make it passable. the niche market of community website providers does exist, and AtHomeNet is the nation's leading provider by the #s. If there is another company or a slu of other companies that can claim otherwise, why not let them propose edits and or prove or disprove anything stated on AtHomenet's page or their own. Can anyone really verify anything claimed on IBM's page without calling them directly? Outside media sources and magazines report facts given by the corporations themselves, and media magazines give lengthy articles to companies not based on sharing information with the world, but driving profits and paying back advertising dollars. So I would submit to you that if Wikipedia is truly an Encyclopedia based on facts and recognition of the factual existence and status of a company, then this should be applied across the board based on the relativity of news media coverage. More importantly, the whole reason anyone can edit a page is to allow someone to disprove what is otherwise a statement of fact; so I ask that you consider allowing that process to occur. All of these terms like 'Notable, Verifiable, COI, all of these are subject to the interpretation of the editor. If there is anything listed in that company profile that you need proof of, it can be provided..so how would you suggest I go about making this page pass the test? thank you: Edenrage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenrage (talk • contribs) 19:34, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- You are still confusing verifiability and notability. Verifiability was never the issue. (and do we really need to continue this discussion? I'm going to keep pointing you to WP:CORP and WP:Notability, you're going to keep arguing, and we aren't going to get anywhere.) --Fabrictramp 20:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Notability per the description is based on whether what the company does is notable. it is verifiable that we are the nation's leader in pioneering the technology exclusive to this industry from a # of clients and homes perspective....so unless another company can claim a higher yield from operating in this niche market and a longer sustained existence in that market, does that not meet the criteria of notability? If someone wants to know who is the longest existing, privately owned community website provider with the most active homes on their service in the U.S, AtHomenet would be the answer. I am working on finding concrete reported sources to back this up that I can cite on the page...so that our notability can be verifiable. Is that what you were suggesting I include? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenrage (talk • contribs) 17:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- The following is quoted from WP:Notability, the page I keep asking you to read:
- "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
- "Presumed" means objective evidence meets the criteria, without regard for the subjective personal judgments of editors.[1] Substantive coverage in reliable sources suggests that the subject is notable.[2]
- "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive.[3]
- "Reliable" means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject are a good test for notability.[4]
- "Sources,"[5] defined on Wikipedia as secondary sources, provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.[6]
- "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including: self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.[7]"
- Where are the links to the "significant coverage in reliable sources" in the article? If they exist, please add them to the article. If they don't exist, perhaps you should work on getting significant coverage, rather than relying on wikipedia for your marketing. --Fabrictramp (talk) 18:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Raging Safari[edit]
Hey, you are recommending deletion due to lack of notability. Raging Safari is a very important part of Youth Ultimate Frisbee community, in Minnesota, and a the national level. I am currently adding more information to make this article more credible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samerickson (talk • contribs) 23:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please read WP:Notability for the requirements. If you can add sources that show notability, please do so as soon as possible, as that will make a difference in the AfD debate.
- Also, new sections on a talk page typically go at the very bottom. Thanks! --Fabrictramp (talk) 23:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
My bad, I've moved to the correct place now hopefully.
- No problem! --Fabrictramp (talk) 00:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Could you give an example of something I would use to show notability. I read the article but still am a little confused. Would it be something like a local news story? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samerickson (talk • contribs) 01:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm trying to find a page to direct you to and am striking out. My personal experience has been that a local news story will be better than nothing, but it won't carry nearly as much weight as regional or national news stories. (Our local small town newspaper, for example, carries a story every time someone in town sneezes, so a story in that paper doesn't do much to show notability). Also, depth of coverage is important -- a single paragraph mention or reporting of results won't sway nearly as many editors as a full page profile. Hope that helps a bit. --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Redirect of George daly[edit]
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on George daly, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because George daly is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting George daly, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 08:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
KOL[edit]
An editor has asked for a deletion review of KOL_-_Key_Objects_Library. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. JonDude 19:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I hope that I have done this correctly - I am following instructions from Wikipedia:Deletion review page and posting here. I understand that my article was not up to Wikipedia's standards. If possible can you undelete it so that I can improve it. I shall look at the Russian version (http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/KOL), since KOL is of Russian origin, for inspiration.
- If you create a subpage of your userpage at User:JonDude/KOL for the article, I'll be happy to paste in a copy of the deleted article. That way you can have as much time as you need to fix the issues (lack of quality third-party sources showing notability) before copying the article to mainspace. --Fabrictramp 23:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've pasted the article into your userspace. Yes, it's very easy to recreate the article once you've made the improvements. The easiest way is to click on the redlink for KOL_-_Key_Objects_Library and then paste in the wiki-markup from your userspace. Give me a holler if you have any problems.--Fabrictramp (talk) 23:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Orphaned Page[edit]
Hi. About my article on Michael Guider being an orphan, I have added internal links now. Is this enough to remove the Orphan tag, or should I desist for the moment?
Sardaka (talk) 09:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- You added links to other articles, but there still aren't links from other mainspace articles to the Michael Guider article, so it's still an orphan. Once there are links from a couple of other pages, it's okay to remove the tag. --Fabrictramp 14:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete it, I thought i'd try to improve it but i can think of anything to write about it--Rockies17 (talk) 18:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
|
The Template Barnstar | |
| For Making some Useful recent Changes Newlinecinema (talk) 21:40, 9 December 2007 (UTC) |
From Msr de Lusignan[edit]
Please do not delete my page, msr. I assure you i am no petty vandal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaisuteknon (talk • contribs) 18:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Care to give me a clue what page we're discussing? Thanks!--Fabrictramp (talk) 18:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm guessing it's Christian kingdom of albion, the deleted article you just recreated? --Fabrictramp (talk) 18:48, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 10th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
How do we salt this mess? I just deleted it a second time at AfD. It's like the Night of the Living Dead. Bearian (talk) 18:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- WP:SALT can be our friend. I'll do the deed. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 18:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Another thought. If you're using Twinkle, just navigate over to the deleted page and one of the tabs should say "salt". I haven't used that tab because I keep forgetting about it, but I hear it's a snap. --Fabrictramp (talk) 19:03, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I am puzzled why you put an hndis tag onto this article. This is intended for disambiguation of human names, and surely doesn't work for abstract concept. I have removed it.--RichardVeryard (talk) 00:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Because I'm an idiot? :) I meant to select the next line down in an AWB pop-up window, and clearly didn't catch my error in my review before saving. Thanks for fixing my goof!--Fabrictramp (talk) 01:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
T.B. Joshua tags[edit]
Hi Fabrictramp, I tried my best to clean up and wikify the T.B. Joshua article that you marked with several tags. Could you take another look to see if some of these tags could be removed now? --Cruzlee (talk) 15:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Good job on the cleanup! I've removed the cleanup and wikify tags, and changed unref to primarysources. --Fabrictramp (talk) 15:24, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for December 17th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 18:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Topless Sun Tanning[edit]
Just a friendly heads up. I removed your speedy deletion tag on the Topless Sun Tanning article. You added a {{db-nonsense}} tag, but I just can't see how this article meets the definition of Wikipedia:Patent nonsense. Feel free to prod or take this article to AfD if it needs to go. --Fabrictramp (talk) 20:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- (shrug) OK - no problem. "Nonsense" was the best rationale I could come up with. It just seemed like someone was putting it in for shock value; at that time, the picture was MUCH bigger (which has been fixed) and there was very little content/context (which has not). Your call on the SD tag was probably correct, so let's let it ride and see what others think. Thanks... ΨνPsinu 21:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. I'm not convinced the article should stick around (although I bet there's plenty of literature on it! LOL), but it just isn't speediable.--Fabrictramp (talk) 21:12, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
re:deadend template[edit]
Don't mention it :) It's useful to me, too, so you can in a way say that I added it for my own convenience :P Ok now seriously, I heard about Nick's tool from himself, and thought it was a great improvement to the existing wikify tool, as I stated here. I hope many people will find it as useful as I do. Maybe with more feedback Nick becomes more responsive -- he hasn't replied to my suggestions regarding the tool, so far... I'd also like to congratulate you on you work in the DEPs. I'll be helping sporadically as I have time and feel like. Best regards, Waldir talk 03:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Sugar Land Ice, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Sugar Land Ice & Sports Center. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 00:57, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
The Frodo Franchise[edit]
The Frodo franchise. You have questioned the notability of this book. It is notable for the following reasons. It is an independent work of Scholarship based on the authors own research including in depth interviews of people who participated in the making of the film. It is the only in depth analysis of the effect a major film has had on a small country that I know of. It discusses in depth the machinations that occur when people try to make a film of this importance and how close it came to not being made at all. When one considers the amount of content that you find in Wikipedia related to Prof Tolkien and his works I believe it qualifies as being notable —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glenorchy (talk • contribs) 21:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please take a minute to read Wikipedia:Notability (books). From the end of the first section, ""Notability" as used herein is not a reflection of a book's worth. A book may be brilliantly written, fascinating and topical, while still not being notable enough to ensure sufficient verifiable source material exists to create an article in an encyclopedia." This section lists the notability criteria, and the article does not claim to have met any of those criteria, nor are there any independent, reliable sources listed that show the book meets the notability requirements. If you can find some quality sources, please add them to the article, as that will help establish notability. Thanks!--Fabrictramp (talk) 21:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Krishna Raghavendra[edit]
Could you enlighten me a bit, please? You removed the copyvio tag on Krishna Raghavendra with the comment that it's not a significant copyvio. It seems to me that the last paragraph of the source was lifted word for word, with about three or four additional phrases added. I'm certainly not an expert on copyvio, but the text as it stands today is the same as the text from when it was speedied as a copyvio in 2006. Are you thinking that the additional phrases make it okay, even without a rewrite? (I'm not trying to argue for a reversal here, I'm trying to learn.) Thanks!--Fabrictramp (talk) 21:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, Fabrictramp! I'm not an expert on copyvio either, and I'm a brand new admin, so go easy on me :) I've just taken a look at the historical copy that was deleted in October, and I think you're probably right - best to err on the side of caution. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- No problem -- I've only been an admin for a couple of months, so I constantly ask questions. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 22:49, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA Thanks[edit]
|
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 44 support, 4 oppose, and 3 neutral. I will work hard to improve the encyclopedia with my new editing tools (and don't worry, I'll be careful). |
TfD nomination of Template:1860s-baseball-pitcher-stub[edit]
Template:1860s-baseball-pitcher-stub has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. -- ALLSTAR echo 09:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA thanks[edit]
|
|
Great success! Thank you for supporting my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 53-3-2. Special thanks goes to Shalom for both the suggestion and the nomination. I'm honored by the trust that the community has shown in me, and will do my very best as an administrator. Thanks again! faithless (speak) 08:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
New Orleans movie[edit]
I got a kick out of your notability template on the movie entry for New Orleans. If a movie with Billie Holiday and Louis Armstrong performing together while playing major roles doesn't make it notable enough, it's hard to imagine what would. I think we should definitely leave that template up, though, just to behold some of the upcoming responses to it. I'm definitely glad you put it up there, Fabrictramp.Skymasterson (talk) 18:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- It should be very easy to find sources that show it meets Wikipedia:Notability (films), right? So I fully expect that the sources will appear quickly, and the template removed. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 19:15, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for October 03, 2007[edit]
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 40 | 1 October 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
| Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.[edit]
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for supporting my candidateship[edit]
Hi. I would like to thank you for supporting my Requests for adminship/Magioladitis. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you removed the CSB tag from the article Isydore Hlynka and that ownership of the text has been asserted on the talk page. Do you have email or other confirmation that the person asserting ownership is the actual author of [4] as I couldn't find any on-wiki. If not, it really should be sent to WP:CP pending proper confirmation. Thanks. CIreland (talk) 17:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- The author of the article is claiming ownership on the article's talk page. I understood that's good enough, but if not, please let me know. Thanks!--Fabrictramp (talk) 17:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- As I understand it, simply asserting that one owns the text on the talk page is insufficient as anyone can make an account. Typically to claim ownership requires either a note on the source web page itself or an email to OTRS. I will send the article to WP:CP pending clarification from the author. CIreland (talk) 18:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification! --Fabrictramp (talk) 18:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- As I understand it, simply asserting that one owns the text on the talk page is insufficient as anyone can make an account. Typically to claim ownership requires either a note on the source web page itself or an email to OTRS. I will send the article to WP:CP pending clarification from the author. CIreland (talk) 18:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to keep bugging you, but when I asked the author for proper permission, they added a GFDL license to their webpage [5] which satisfies what we need. I reverted the {{copyvio}} template on the article, but didn't delist it from Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2007 December 28/Articles as only admins are supposed to do that. I was going to IAR and do it myself anyway, but I figured I might as well just ask you to do it, if you wouldn't mind. Thanks. CIreland (talk) 19:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- No problem at all! I've removed it from Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2007 December 28/Articles -- thanks for following up on this.--Fabrictramp (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Revision history of Aix les Bains Circuit du Lac[edit]
Hello Fabrictramp !
Your request has been executed. In fact you caught me while I was in editing mode... Thank you
Maseracing (talk) 19:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
reversal of speedy deletions[edit]
Hi -- Thanks for quickly removing the speedy deletion marked by Realkyhick on the new article Katherine Schipper. It would be nice if you would do the same for Accounting Hall of Fame, which he also marked. doncram (talk) 00:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Accounting Hall of Fame is a prod (proposed deletion), which anyone, including you, can remove. Feel free to do so. :) --Fabrictramp (talk) 00:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks[edit]
Thanks for your support in my successful RFA. I'm ALWAYS polite around armed people. ;-) AliveFreeHappy (talk) 07:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Pretty Crane[edit]
Hi, I see you put a notability tag on the Pretty Crane article. I have added several references and made a few other tweaks to try to improve the article. I'd appreciate it if you'd review it again and see if it still deserves that tag. If so, any tips for future improvement would be appreciated. Thank you -- Dougie WII (talk) 06:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- What the article is lacking is sources showing "real world notability". From WP:Notability (fiction), "For articles about fictional concepts, reliable secondary sources cover information such as sales figures, critical and popular reception, development, cultural impact, and merchandise; this information describes the real-world aspects of the concept, so it is real-world content.
- Based on this reasoning and the above excerpts, fictional concepts can be presumed notable if they have received substantial coverage in reliable secondary sources."
- Wikipedia:WikiProject_Soap_Operas#Notability_standards also says much of the same thing, and continues with "an article should be created about a soap opera character only if the character is notable within the series and and the subject of third-party discussions. Otherwise, the character should simply be listed in a "List of characters" for that particular program." So what the article is lacking is discussion of real world impact, and sources showing that. Hope that helps!--Fabrictramp (talk) 16:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)