Jump to content

User talk:Triwbe: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
EdwardsBot (talk | contribs)
354,693 edits
EdwardsBot (talk | contribs)
354,693 edits
Line 1,709: Line 1,709:
</div>
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0456 -->
<!-- EdwardsBot 0456 -->

== ''The Signpost'': 11 February 2013 ==

<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-02-11}}
</div><!--Volume 9, Issue 07-->
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
* '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]'''
* [[Wikipedia:Signpost/Single|Single-page]]
* [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]]
* [[User:EdwardsBot|EdwardsBot]] ([[User talk:EdwardsBot|talk]]) 10:10, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0461 -->

Revision as of 10:10, 13 February 2013

Template:Archive box collapsable

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010

Gray Powell article nominated for deletion

Nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gray Powell AkankshaG (talk) 00:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please Read This

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_restore_removed_comments

Lusanders (talk) 06:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, So, what are you implying ??? --Triwbe (talk) 06:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's no implying at all, just don't restore removed comments.

Lusanders (talk) 06:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I never have done have I ? If so, when and where ? --Triwbe (talk) 06:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will have to say here: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALusanders&action=historysubmit&diff=225847007&oldid=225846457

Lusanders (talk) 07:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness, 2 years ago when I was a newbie, my deepest apologies. --Triwbe (talk) 07:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

creating wiki page

hello, This is Japanesebusinesswriter.

For the first time I tried creating wiki page in English about a Japanese company called Ubiquitous Corp. which I have been following recently for its uniqueness that I thought useful to let overseas people know also.

I may have missed some writing rules as I later found my poting was deleted. Frankly I know very little about wiki creating or editing rules so I appreciate it very much if you can advise the way so that my creation will not be deleted.

I have followed wiki questions such that I do not relate to this company nor I have conflict of interest, and also cited all the sources that I originally obtained the information from.

Sorry if my questioin sounds not wise, but truly I would like to know the specifc rules, if someone can help.

best regards, Japanbusinesswriter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Japanbusinesswriter (talk • contribs) 07:59, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bihari lal

Why did you move this page to a title with a lower case last name? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 03:59, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


BLPPROD of Mayou Trikerioti

Please note that I have removed the BLPPROD from this page, as ImDB is widely used in referencing of films on wikipedia, and I see no reason why it should be declared as uncontroversially unreliable. Prods should only be used for uncontroversial deletion, so if you still feel that this article should be deleted, please take it to AfD and give your reasons there. Thanks. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 16:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have just added a second reference to the page. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 16:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did not see the second reference before an admin deleted the page, but I agree with Wikipedia:Citing IMDb (although failed) and for a BLP article I think a better source is required as per WP:BLPPROD. --Triwbe (talk) 17:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, I added a second reference which was a review which mentioned the individual in relation to one of the films listed on the article. It'll need more to establish notability to the satisfaction of an AfD, but it passes a BLPPROD and also the A7 speedy deletion criterion, so I'm appealing to BzG to restore the page so that more references can be added, etc. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 17:17, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would have been OK with that. --Triwbe (talk) 17:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"the Hunches' article and notability

Hello Triwbe, I'm posting to your talk page to ask how I should better establish notability for "the Hunches" page I just created. I reviewed the standards for musical notability before writing up the article, and found that this article was sufficient. I would be happy to add whatever documentation is needed. Most of the references I provide are long-standing and significant music critic sites in the US. I have to run off to work, so I will save out the article in case it is deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canavarbey (talk • contribs) 20:38, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, The criteria for bands is given in Wikipedia:Notability (music) and it was not clear to me precisly which of these criteria, if any, the band met. I expect they do pass, that is why I did not propose it for deletion, but clearing this up now will prevent future editors from deleting it. --Triwbe (talk) 20:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"saama"

I have the content, can you plz help me recreate the page Chowdharyramineni (talk) 21:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this. -- Hoary (talk) 10:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Luis Radford

I removed the prod because, contrary to your impression, the article does cite references. In fact, it cites over 400 of them, namely 100 cites at Google Scholar per each of his four articles mentioned. Radford is a distinguished educator and your suggested deletion shows insufficient attention to detail on your part. Tkuvho (talk) 16:31, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate it. I fully agree with the policy of "no personal attacks", yet it surely leaves room for constructive criticism :) Tkuvho (talk) 16:41, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was well aware of those "citations" but I believe that none of them gave any direct verification as required by WP:BLP. A simple google gave more than enough sources, so I took one and added it.
Also I am a firm believer in the phrase "Comment on content, not on the contributor". No one has any right to say if my attention is sufficient or not. --Triwbe (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, it was far from my intention to offend you. As a way of explanation (not excuse), I would like to add that a number of articles I have recently created go through what seems to have become a standard routine of being prodded for deletion. Usually the deletion of the prod takes care of the issue. Tkuvho (talk) 16:55, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be an inherent problem with WP:BLPPROD, it is very different from the PROD. PROD can be removed by absolutely anyone for any reason and should never more be used on that article. PROD is for uncontested deletions. BLPPROD, on the other hands states "Please do not remove this tag unless the article has at least one such source". See Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people#Objecting. It also say's that I should also have looked for a source before tagging, which I admit I did not (and mostly do not) do. --Triwbe (talk) 17:40, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

trikerioti deletion

Dear sir or madame,

I understand the deletion of the trikerioti article becaus eyou kept only the IMDB verified parts. As there is no site equivalent to imdb, but the official site of the artist, and as theatre designers are not listed the same way, I would appreciate you not deleting the article in the future. This is a full credited artist and you can see the personal website CV and cross-reference it.

Thank you in advance,

BT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.125.128 (talk) 14:55, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article deltion is being discussed here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mayou Trikerioti and you should add your comments there. I am not an administrator and cannot delete anything. The deletion is decided by consensus and not one person anyway. The article can only be kept if the person passes the WP:Creative conditions. I accept english lanuage sources may be difficult to find, but Greek sources are also acceptable, and I even mentioned this in the discussion. I have a greek assistant so validating any sources given is not a problem. --Triwbe (talk) 15:05, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and by the way, I was at UKC and remember the Gulbenkian theatre :-). --Triwbe (talk) 17:37, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have bee referencing like crazy last night. Even though I had started referencing theatre credits and films that are not in IMDB, you deleted again. (for example productions in the national were referenced with links in the theatre section, and the films that again were deleted were referenced in the site of the Greek film institute.) Therefore I am going to undo once more and then give up. As I stated in the deletion talk, I give up, and I am letting my University overseer know that this job is not possible. PS. i am sorry i do not know what the Gulbenkian is. I am a student in the greek uni writing about theatre people as part of my thesis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Despw22 (talk • contribs) 17:50, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Triwbe. Could you please let me know how I can edit in-image advertising so it doesn't get deleted? I see you have marked it for speedy deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inimagead (talk • contribs) 17:36, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

in-image advertising article

Hello Triwbe. Could you please let me know how I can edit the in-image advertising article so it doesn't get deleted? I see that you have marked it for speedy deletion.

Inimagead (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2010 (UTC) Inimagead Inimagead (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I tagged it, it was practically empty. No article can be left if it does not meet the minimum level of standards. new articles can be developed in User pages before moving it into the main namespace. In this case, yuo managed to get the article up to standard before one of the Wikipedia:Administrators got around to deleting it. I have now removed the delete and added a few little extras to the article. --Triwbe (talk) 19:03, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Josedavidcuartas & International Image Festival

Just noticed your message on User talk:Josedavidcuartas' talk page, realised I was somewhat violating the 3RR myself. Rehevkor ✉ 03:08, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:3RR does not apply when you are reverting vandalism, I think. --Triwbe (talk) 06:31, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was never really sure if removing maintenance templates could be considered vandalism. I've restored them anyway, to hell with the consequences! Rehevkor ✉ 12:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. –xenotalk 12:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC) [reply]

WP:BITE

Hi, please keep in mind not to bite newcomers. Adding a speedy-delete tag on an article within minutes of its creation is only going to terrify new users. If you're patrolling new pages, I suggest you start with the oldest pages, as is recommended. Shreevatsa (talk) 07:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do keep this in mind, but SPAM is SPAM and should be removed pronto. I see Themaxviwe (talk · contribs) agrees with me and restored your CSD removal and has now AfD'd it. --Triwbe (talk) 08:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously? Within two minutes, and without being sure that the article can be nothing but spam? "Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion" — says the notice. I still don't know if the article can be kept, but what makes you think it's spam with no possibility of being encyclopedic? Nominating an article for AfD within a few minutes of its creation is just absurd. I'm giving up on this, but things are very wrong with Wikipedia if this is how newcomers are treated. Shreevatsa (talk) 08:23, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please also read the essay Wikipedia:Concerns about Speedy Deleters, which is about the potential harm that editors like you may be doing to Wikipedia. I see no compelling reason not to give new users a little while to see if they improve an article, before scaring them away. (In any case, I'm pretty sure speedy-delete tags should not be re-added after they're removed once, but that's not your fault.) Shreevatsa (talk) 08:33, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you think it a worthy article, you can say so. I CSd, you remove it, some one else AfDs, we discuss and we arrive at a WP:consensus, that is how it is supposed to work. It's how wikipeida works. The article may well improved and be kept, that is not for me to say. Unfortunately too many people see Wikipiedia as a vehicle for promotion and propaganda and it is the New Page Patrollers who defend against this, but we are not a single person making a final decision, we flag and an admin decides, check out my CSD, probably only 1 in 100 is declined, that shows I have a good sense of what is acceptable and not to the community.
The new commer process can be tough but if you read the guidlines and templates, it is quite clear. You and I both survived it because we keep to the guidlines. --Triwbe (talk) 08:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did say so, and removed the tag — the CSD tag was added again despite this — *twice*. How much do you expect a random third party like me (who just accidentally stumbled on the page when looking at Special:NewPages) to do to say an article is worthy? I'm of course not debating that spam should be deleted — just the idea that it should be deleted within seconds, and newcomers should be scared this way. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, and expecting new users to have read all the guidelines and giving them no time to react is silly. Leaving them a message saying the article may be inappropriate and giving them a day or so to fix it seems just as fine. In any case, before marking something for deletion shouldn't you do your due process and check if it may be notable? This one seems to be covered in several major publications. I think the fact that you got so many articles deleted is nothing to be proud of — for instance, if I hadn't noticed this article, someone else may have deleted it based on appearance alone, and it would have added to your statistics. See WP:BEFORE: it says, in bold, "If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a good candidate for [deletion]." (It talks of AfD, but the same idea applies.) Shreevatsa (talk) 08:56, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi: I've found a case where you (doubtless inadvertently) unfairly bit a newcomer and even though it was over a year ago, I'd like to point it out to you as a cautionary tale - the editor created a lot of short articles, got piled on, and vanished, but your admonishment was wrong. Hornet (comics) is about characters in the Marvel universe; the one-line fragment User:Mancula had created at Hornet (comic) was about a D. C. Thomson & Co. comic book called The Hornet and s/he had included that information. Yes, it was a woefully inadequate stub, not even a complete sentence, lacked linkage, and the editor created a large number of those that day. But you erred in assuming based on the similarity of title that it was an almost empty article on a subject Wikipedia already had an article on, because you didn't look at the information the editor had supplied. He/she was putting in solid info but nobody advised him/her to write complete sentences and include at least one link - or that a reference was needed - so half of his/her articles were deleted. I think it's regrettable we lost him/her, and although you were not the only one to make a wrong snap judgment, yours was based on not really looking at what the editor wrote, so I thought I'd drop you a belated line about it. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New BLP articles

You may want to consider tagging unreferenced BLP articles with {{subst:prod blp}} instead of {{unreferencedBLP}}. The former puts the article up for deletion if no sources are provided within 10 days, unlike the latter which allows them to hang around for (potentially) years. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 07:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which I do always!!!. Oh why do I bother ? --Triwbe (talk) 07:58, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm. I could have sworn I saw an article you tagged with a stand-alone {{unreferencedBLP}}. My mistake. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 08:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


There is one which has a standard PROD for notability, so I adde only an unreferencedBLP to get the article improved. If the PROD is removed I will blp prod. --Triwbe (talk) 08:20, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Neemrana_Hotels

BLPs

Please notice that BLPPRODs are only for subjects which are actually a living person. Cola Wars (band) isn't a BLP. Thanks! Hobit (talk) 01:17, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why? This is a band article, an article about living people, which should follow WP:BLP just as any other bio. --Triwbe (talk) 15:19, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Should a company article which mentions the CEO also fall under this? While most articles mention people, at the moment only BLPs are eligible for the BLPPROD. There is some discussion on the topic though, see here and the associated talk page (where the band issue has gotten a bit a traction) Hobit (talk) 16:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Accept

Hi, this edit that you accepted, did you think it was correct? Your acceptance was reverted by an IP and I accepted the IP edit. Off2riorob (talk) 20:20, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There was no reason not to accept it. Wikipedia:Reviewing#Reviewer responsibilities only requires that the edit is not obvious vandalism or an obviously inappropriate edits. It is not a thorough 100% check on every item added. --Triwbe (talk) 06:02, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jessica jarrell.jpg

Hi Triwbe. Thanks for your hard work in file CSD. However, please note that while File:Jessica jarrell.jpg is copyrighted, no copyright violation exists. A copyvio only exists when the uploader claims work which is not their own as their own OR when the uploader asserts a free license on an image which is clearly copyrighted. Regards, FASTILY (TALK) 03:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


You got your policies a little mixed up there..

On your userpage.. Notability, is not a "core policy", it's actually a guideline.

Wikipedia's 3 core content policies are Verifiability, Neutrality, and No original research.

Just thought I'd give you a heads up. -- Ϫ 06:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Walloon language

Is it possible to remove the tag you placed? We have now many sources. Sincerely (and Friendly) José Fontaine (talk) 21:19, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Euronext

Dear Triwbe, Euronext is in fact a Dutch company, see [1] and [2]. Kind regards,--Btsz (talk) 14:53, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok that's fine. But you can put this on the article's talk page to avoid future confusion. --Triwbe (talk) 14:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do that.--Btsz (talk) 14:59, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

inserting a photo

Hello,

I wondered if you could help - I think you corrected a typo in the page on business woman Julie Meyer I have helped to put together; thank you for doing that. I wondered if you might be able to give me some advice? I would like to upload a photo to the page but do not have the required level of admin access to do this. Do you know how I can achieve this so that I can upload a photo of her?

Many thanks, Notts214Notts214 (talk) 14:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lucy DeVito

I added the source, now okay? If so, you can then remove the warning? --Trackdelphi (talk) 08:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 September 2010

NEMO

I honestly thought I heard something quacking, but I figured an AfD would be better because a PROD tag would be removed by the IP. Ishdarian|lolwut 06:45, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think a CSD which is not removed by an admin or experienced editor and is removed by an IP editor should be replaced. However I CSD'd that hours ago and no admin had done the deed, so I figured AfD was probably a good idea. --Triwbe (talk) 06:48, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bethany (band)

Hi there. I would like to express my desire for wiki not to delete the page I just made? They're a legit band and they have music online... Peanutbutterdimsumstyle (talk) 11:53, 18 October 2010 (UTC)peanutbutterdimsumstyle[reply]

They have played for a television station RCTV 36 in Cebu, Philippines, for a show. You can find their TV performance in Youtube.com with keywords like Bethany Tambayan Sa Outpost. They were also featured in a local daily, Sun.Star Cebu, last October 4. They also played for NU107 FM, a rock radio station in the Philippines... I really hope you don't delete the page, thanks sir Peanutbutterdimsumstyle (talk) 12:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)peanutbutterdimsumstyle[reply]

Hello, thanks for your message. You have said this on the discussion page which is good. Others will also see this and may be able to improve the article and it may be kept. I have anounced it on the Phillipino lists and Musicians lists so there may be some support for the article. Have a look at Wikipedia:Guide to deletion. You need to show that it satisfies any of the criteria in WP:BAND and show sources for verification which it currently lacks. --Triwbe (talk) 12:46, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks! Will check on that band and verification links you just posted. I think the best I can do right now is to edit the article that it "passes" your standards... Thanks again! Peanutbutterdimsumstyle (talk) 17:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)peanutbutterdimsumstyle[reply]

Hi sir, references added to establish: band's existence, notability and quick rise in the local community scene in the span of a short time frame, and other pertinent information for verification purposes. Hope the page stays sir, thanks Peanutbutterdimsumstyle (talk) 03:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)peanutbutterdimsumstyle[reply]

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

Significance and notability

Thanks for the note. I trust you looked into the merits of the previous user's admonishment before agreeing with him/her?

For what it's worth, I seriously question the notion that a simple assertion of fame constitutes a credible claim of significance. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 09:02, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I have made the same mistake before, and been told the same thing as you. That's how we improve ourselves. --Triwbe (talk) 09:08, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate external links, as you did with this edit to Jeans

HI Triwbe,

I just wonder what do you mean by "inappropriate external links, as you did with this edit to Jeans?" As a Fashion school student, we need to study all kind of material including denim but when i do research on the web I found this web site contain further research that is accurate and on-topic about Jeans and Denim that why I would like to share this information to everyone. I do not intended to promote a website or external link spamming. I'm still new with this wikipedia maybe the first editing I didn't direct it to the right web page which you may find it as spamming. Just hope you will read the article in the website " http://www.bugattifurniture.com/newshow.asp?id=34" which explained step by step process on how denim is made into Jeans .... Thank You. Felicia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.115.223 (talk) 15:44, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, when I looked at the link I saw the advertisements for furniture and got the idea that it was spamming. I see now that you are correct and will replace the links. This kind of misunderstanding can be avoided if you explain your edits in the edit summary. --Triwbe (talk) 15:56, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Triwbe

Thank you for time to read the link ... By the way this 'Master of blue jeans' holds key to fashion riddle, by Emma Charlton, AFP,Sept 19, 2010. link is not active any more. Thank Felicia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.115.223 (talk) 16:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The Diver (play)" Edits

Hello, just wondering why you have deleted the US Production section of The Diver (play). It has been accredited as the US Premiere and therefore is notable and relevant to the article.

Andrewkariana (talk) 21:18, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

Thessaly goby

Hi. I don't want to oppose what might be a good faith CSD tag, but I was researching this problem when you applied it. The article appears to be in perfect order and a redirect ha already been made. Perhaps there is something I have missed. I am not the creator, nor am I otherwise involved with the article oter than doing some housekeeping.--Kudpung (talk) 09:46, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A further look appears to show that you have reverted the already created redirect. is there any particular reasosn why?--Kudpung (talk) 09:49, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read the CSD. Thessaly goby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) is a cut and paste move of Thessalogovinós (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). The move is justified, it just needs to be done properly. --Triwbe (talk) 10:14, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. Thanks. In my hurry to sort this out before a wrong page might have been deleted, I did not check the finer details. Nothing personal was meant.--Kudpung (talk) 10:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

speedy deletion nomination of Payleap

Already been speedied and declined once. Use WP:PROD or WP:AFD if you still feel it should be deleted. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:27, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 1st CSD was for SPAM, which the article is not - but it does not claim significance, and so it clearly CSD#A7. CSD are not PRODs, a CSD criteria either exists or does not and can be nominated at any time. Do we have to go to AfD for this ? --Triwbe (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, fraid so. Payleap actually is notable (check Google), it's just the article is written badly by novice editor with COI. Rather than tagging, do you fancy adding a source?--Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:37, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To late for me to work on it right now. But I'll take your word that it is potentially notable. I will check back tomorrow and not AfD for now. --Triwbe (talk) 21:40, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And Ellen's editing has fixed it! A reminder that CSD is very narrow, and in this case even a cursory Google check indicated it would - or rather should - fall foul of any speedy deletion. Pedro :  Chat  22:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's OK now, but we cannot allow every small, non-notable article to remain. We cannot cross check every new article, especially when on-line sources may not be sufficient. The creating editor is clearly informed how to try to improve the article. --Triwbe (talk) 07:17, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, both the tagger and the deleting admin should do a minimum of a Google check. I always do. I agree that NPPers can't be expected to chase up references or reference every article, but a minimum check is wise, as we only want to delete articles that really are without notability. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:08, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Creation's Tears

13th Nov 2010 Parody Paradigm

Hi, I notice that my article Creation's Tears has been nominated for deletion. This band are getting exposure in all the UK based rock magazines at present as well as on a number of credible websites and have been played on radio including BBC Radio 1. I wondered what content you'd require that I would improve in order for this article to avoid being deleted. I appreciate your help and suggestions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parody Paradigm (talk • contribs) 14:07, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination is kind of abligatory because a previous version of it was deleted only a few months ago. It is best that you read the reasoning and make your comments there. --Triwbe (talk) 15:15, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying. I now understand. The previous article was deleted on the grounds that the band did not have any released works. Creation's Tears subsequently released their debut album on 4th Oct 2010 and have had coverage in major UK press and major worldwide websites since. 17th Nov 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parody Paradigm (talk • contribs) 17:52, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right. No one has commented on it yet (neither for or againts) but if the new article show that they pass WP:BAND then it's a keeper. --Triwbe (talk) 17:54, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

Speedy deletion declined: Jason Merchant

Hello Triwbe. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jason Merchant, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 11:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did, and I think it was valid. --Triwbe (talk) 12:26, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I Didn't tag it, I only restored a deleted speedy removed by the creator as per protocol. You need to inform User:Coolug, not me. --Triwbe (talk) 12:14, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A yes good point, though I might suggest that it if you restore a speedy deletion tag it is worth checing to see if it is valid. ϢereSpielChequers 12:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One ref - a software blog. And it's not about Merchant. WSC may have a point, but IMO as it stands, what Merchant has done does not necessarily make him notable, and if it did, I think it needs much better sources. Perhaps a PROD or AfD might get the sources I couldn't find. --Kudpung (talk) 13:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Leandro Leviste

Hello Triwbe. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Leandro Leviste, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: there is maybe just enough here to escape A7; I will take to AfD. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 12:15, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I see you didn't tag it, you only replaced the tag. The CSDHelper script is not very intelligent! JohnCD (talk) 12:17, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Triwbe, I originally CSD tagged it. AfD has opened, you may wish to comment there. --Kudpung (talk) 12:54, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw and I think you have it sown up, nothing I can add to your sterling work. --Triwbe (talk) 12:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Asheville FM page

Hi For some reason my page was deleted within hours of me putting it on and I would like to understand why. Asheville FM is a legitimate radio station, fully licensed with ASCAP & BMI. We have been broadcasting since Sept 2009. I included our website which has additional info to verify everything that I wrote. Please let me know what else you need to justify its existence. I have read all of the tutorials on creating a page Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebigern (talk • contribs) 14:58, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

need help

I made a mistake. a. I want to set now "Ekram Ahmed Lenin" instead of "Ekram Ahmed Lelin" in his Biograpy profile. Even I want to see the change in catagory lists.

b. I also uploaded Ekram Admed Lelin.JPG in http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ekram_Admed_Lelin.JPG that I want to change as "Ekram Admed Lenin.JPG"

How do I fix it? Can you please help me ? Mrkshahin (talk) 22:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ekram Ahmed Lenin

Can you please retrieve this page of "Ekram Ahmed Lenin" from deletion ? I am really getting less hope and lost my faith to Wikipedia because peoples here work as administrator who delete the articles without justify it. The writer ""Ekram Ahmed Lenin"" has written seven books in Bangladesh and please see the cover page of one book http://covers.openlibrary.org/b/id/6670577-L.jpg I am trying to include his all books in Wikipedia. Wikipedia team may ask me for resources for verification or give me scope to bring those proof they required. I should not write or contribute anything from today either it is not resolved. Please solve it.Mrkshahin (talk) 18:46, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Hi - I was wondering about the new article I submitted on Tissue Hime.

Mongrol23 (talk) 21:22, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Doug Billings

I put a db-bio tag on the article, but since it was removed by another editor, I had to go the afd route. Corvus cornixtalk 22:10, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, even with an afd tag on it, the author put a hangon tag on it, which I removed, so if you think the db is appropriate, could you re-add the hangon tag, please? Corvus cornixtalk 22:11, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Where does it say that? A candidate for CSD remains a candidate until either the CSD is no longer applicable (e.g. claims notability) or and admin decides yea or nay. CSD is not a PROD. --Triwbe (talk) 22:15, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A CSD can be removed by anyone, for any or no reason whatsoever, so long as it isn't the original author who removes it. Corvus cornixtalk
Where does it say that ? --Triwbe (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The creator of a page may not remove a Speedy Delete tag from it. Only an editor who is not the creator of a page may do so.. Corvus cornixtalk 23:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But it says nothing about not restoring the CSD if you disagree, and if there is a content dispute then there are proceduers for that. Restore the CSD and let an admin decide, it's what they're (not) paid for. I would also accept the decision of any editor of good standing. --Triwbe (talk) 00:03, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Rogelio dela paz

Hello Triwbe. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Rogelio dela paz, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 10:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you got it wrong, I didn't tag that page, I only replaced a CSD removed the page creator. You should inform User:Burhan Ahmed. --Triwbe (talk) 12:03, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're quite right, sorry about that, Mind you there's not much point in restoring an incorrect speedy tag. even if the creator shouldn't have removed it. ϢereSpielChequers 12:09, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is every point. The CSD guide is quite clear, the page creator should not removed a CSD placed on his own article. If we do not respect this simple process of validation the CSD's become a joke and so does Wikipiedia. --Triwbe (talk) 12:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

Speedy deletion of Berrymans Lace Mawer

Hello - I have just created a new page for my firm, Berrymans Lace Mawer but it has been marked for deletion. Is there any text that you suggest I remove so that this page is not deleted? I have amended this so that it is not advertising for the firm. Many thanks.

NatalieKingBLM (talk) 11:22, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arcanepunk

Hi Triwbe,

I've found a reference for this article. I don't know if it's accurate.

Radecave le Scribouillard (talk) 14:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nemrud

Hi,


"Fails WP:MUSICBIO since they have not had a charting single or album. I admit it is difficult to judge because ghits are imprecise in this case. If some one can show they pass then OK, but I could not. Triwbe (talk) 11:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)"


I edited the page including references. Can you pls have a look and advise? Also Nemrud's has the album "Journey of the Shaman" and released by Musea in 2010. Octane79 (talk) 12:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


Possibly unfree File:ACP-EU logo.png

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ACP-EU logo.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Acather96 (talk) 16:06, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Triwbe! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

The Signpost: 7 November2011

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

Proposed deletion of Yaesu FT-221

The article Yaesu FT-221 has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.Template:Z78 -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 06:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

The Signpost: 09 July 2012

The Signpost: 16 July 2012

The Signpost: 23 July 2012

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

The Signpost: 13 August 2012

The Signpost: 20 August 2012

The Signpost: 27 August 2012

The Signpost: 03 September 2012

The Signpost: 10 September 2012

The Signpost: 17 September 2012

The Signpost: 24 September 2012

The Signpost: 01 October 2012

The Signpost: 08 October 2012

The Signpost: 15 October 2012

The Signpost: 22 October 2012

The Signpost: 29 October 2012

The Signpost: 05 November 2012

The Signpost: 12 November 2012

The Signpost: 19 November 2012

The Signpost: 26 November 2012

The Signpost: 03 December 2012

The Signpost: 10 December 2012

The Signpost: 17 December 2012

The Signpost: 24 December 2012

The Signpost: 31 December 2012

The Signpost: 07 January 2013

The Signpost: 14 January 2013

The Signpost: 21 January 2013

The Signpost: 28 January 2013

The Signpost: 04 February 2013

The Signpost: 11 February 2013

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Triwbe&oldid=538022700"