User talk:Sphilbrick

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #108

Thank you for your input

Thank you very much for your input. I was trying to write an Article about a surgery and I needed a link to different types of bone grafts. Thanks again. Your pal - BennyK95 - Talk 20:12, October 7 2009(UTC)

Please consider signing this proposal

Hi SPhilbrick, a number of editors have been working on a proposal regarding the renaming of the Climatic Research Unit hacking incident and they are now in the process of working with people individually to try and garner support for this proposal. I've reviewed their proposal and have decided to lend my support and signed my signature. Can you please review their proposal and if you are willing to support and defend it please add your name to the list of signatories. If you have comments or concerns regarding the proposal please feel free to discuss them here. The goal of this effort is to find a name that everyone can live with and to make that name stick by having a strong show of unified support for it moving forward. Thanks. A Quest For Knowledge (talk)

Talkback Isolde2000

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Isolde2000's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nice cookies!

Talkback

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_January_21#Government_Rose_Garden.2C_Ooty.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CSD Talkback - Ezhuks

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Ezhuks's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for the heads up.

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Golgofrinchian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Feedback

Hi Sphil. If you have a moment, I would appreciate your feedback on this. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I will take a look shortly. Last week was an intense week, almost no WP, but this week should be back to normal.--SPhilbrickT 11:15, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Fermin Gallegos

Hi Sphilbrick. Regarding Fermin Gallegos, I tagged as G3 the article and all the related articles/templates/categories. I suppose it depends on one's definition of "blatant" but it quite clearly is a hoax so it made sense to delete all the related pages simultaneously. Note that it was already sent to AfD and deleted as G3 (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fermin Gallegos). I believe it's blatant enough: we're talking about a 15-year old kid who supposedly has three albums with Sony Records (including one that was certified as gold), owns his own record label and has worked with top-notch producers yet generates 0 relevant hits beyond a MySpace page, a personal page that says "check out my biografy [sic] on Wikipedia" and a YouTube audio clip that will convince you that he should replace his laptop's built-in microphone. Note that the G3 tag I placed on Fermin Gallegos was removed by an anonymous editor. I can send all this to AfD if you think it's the only option but it feels like overkill. Best, Pichpich (talk) 12:55, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks like I may have been too casual. I merely glanced at Fermin Gallegos, thought it was a long standing article, and missed you were tagging the whole bunch. Meeting calls, will address after meeting.--SPhilbrickT 13:03, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok great. There's a trail of the pages I tagged because of the Twinkle warnings on User talk:ZacAlexis so it will be fairly easy to retag for AfD if you think that's still the best choice. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 13:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Plus, someone untagged Fermin Gallegos before I looked at it. No, I'm fine with CSD, as I said, I didn't see a CSD tag on the main article, and thought you were tagging a template derived from a legitimate article.--SPhilbrickT 13:31, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

RfA advice to candidates

I've answered your main points on the essay's talk page, and addressed your suggestions. On The potential side project: I think it would be extremely useful for us(either us, the community, or us, you and I) to identify a canon. Pick out 20-30 RfAs to illustrate key points. I'd already thought of doing something like this but considered it to be a longer term exercise and less pressing than getting a basic advice page up and running. I have lots of footnotes in the essay that point to typical examples and diffs. However, I'm still open to the idea and if you have time to go ahead and draw up your 20 - 30 examples, I'll go through them to avoid me duplicating the effort, and I'd probably cherry pick some of the diffs in them too and put the whole into an essay-style wrapper. What do you think?
BTW, just as a matter of interest and remembering our very first early discussions (we've both successfully got the mop since), do you think my essay would have helped you if it ha&d been available at the time? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

On the side project, while I'm still interested, it truly is a side project. Your advice to review past RfAs is solid, whether or not we provide guidance, so I see the "projects" as proceeding independently. At such time as we might do the side project, it will be simple to link in to your advice when it happens.

Regarding whether it would have been helpful to read when I decided to go for it, yes, but one of the things that resonated with me is that I did many of the things you suggest. I do see it as a good list of helpful advice; one of the challenges thought, is that it is best read by someone a year away, not a week away.--SPhilbrickT 14:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Lev Berg

The work is called Основы климатологии. It appeared in print in 1927 and was reprinted in 1938. The term "основы" literally translates as "foundations" but may also be translated as "principles". Cheers. --Ghirla^-трёп- 18:35, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, makes sense.--SPhilbrickT 18:38, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:RFA2011

Task Force news: Recent updates include basic minor changes and condensing at the main page, additional comments on the main page talk page, a new project sub page and talk for Radical Alternatives, and messages at Task force talk. A current priority is to reach suggested criteria/tasks for clerks, and then to establish a local consensus vis-à-vis clerking. Please remember to keep all the project and its talk pages on your watchlist. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Cross-Harbour Bus Route 914

Yea. Bottom line is that it depends on who looks at it. I'd say that the majority of articles like that will be deleted under A7, but I have not done a study. With my editor hat on, I usually choose a speedy A7 when it seems clear that the article is not notable. The reviewing admin can delete, decline deletion, or if they agree but don't think that they can support the speedy, they can list it as a {{tl:prod}}. I will not be hurt if you decline. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the response - I'm a bit involved in some work stuff, so will look into it later.--SPhilbrickT 18:44, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

please undelete SwissGroove

Please undelete the SwissGroove article. I would like to rework the article. I am not sure what was on there before so it would be helpful if it was undeleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naaron (talk • contribs) 12:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Is this something I deleted? I just looked at my last 500 deletions, and I don't see anything by that name.--SPhilbrickT 13:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I found it. Deleted by Chase me ladies last December. Please check with the deleting admin first, if he isn't around, get back to me and I'll look into it.--SPhilbrickT 13:09, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

SwissGroove undelete

The original page was Swissgoove. It was renamed to SwissGroove. The SwissGroove page appears to have been deleted by you. If i am wrong forgive my ignorance, I am new to this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naaron (talk • contribs) 13:52, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Ah yes, Swissgoove was deleted by Chase me ladies, but SwissGroove by me. I'll take care of it now.--SPhilbrickT 14:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done It is now at User:Naaron/SwissGroove, where you can work on it.

Howard M. Guttman

Dear Sphilbrick:

Several months ago, you were very helpful to me when I was trying to create an article for Howard Guttman. A few weeks ago, the article was declared an orphan. I have been trying to de-orphan it, and have some good ideas, but have run into difficulties.

I went into an article on Frances Hesselbein because Howard Guttman contributed a chapter to a book edited by Frances, and it is listed in her article. I listed Howard and all the others authors who contributed chapters, some of whom are very well known in the field of management development. First, I tried to highlight Howard's name and create a link to his page. I got a message saying that the page doesn't exist. I then highlighted the names of several other notable authors, including Jim Champy (James A. Champy), Noel Tichy, and Dave Ulrich. In each case, I was told that the wiki page did not exist, although I had just visited it and copied the URL. I would like to create links from this list not only to Howard's Wiki page, but to these others.

Am I doing something wrong? Can you help?

Thank you very much, Dale Dalecorey (talk) 15:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I will look into it shortly.--SPhilbrickT 16:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what you did wrong. I just successfully wikilinked Howard M. Guttman. I'll do one more, and try to describe exactly what I did. Perhaps you could try again, and tell me exactly what you did, and between us, we can figure out what you did wrong.--SPhilbrickT 16:14, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I just wikilinked Noel M. Tichy. Steps

1. Click on the edit button next to the section,
2. Highlight the name with the mouse
3. click on the Wiklink icon in the editing toolbar(if you have one, if not see below)
4. add an edit summary e.g. "wikilink"
5. Click on preview button to make sure it looks OK
6. Click on Save page button.

You might not have the editing toolbar. If so:

1. Click on the edit button next to the section,
2. add left square brackets [[ before the name
3. add right square brackets ]] after the name
4. add an edit summary e.g. "wikilink"
5. Click on preview button to make sure it looks OK
6. Click on Save page button.

Dear SPhilbrick: You are the best! Thank you so much for creating the links. I reviewed your directions, and successfully created a link to the page of another chapter writer in the Hesselbein article, Edgar Shein. I did have the toolbar, but I was clicking on the icon of a chain, then inserting the URL of the Wiki page there. I didn't know you could just type the word wikilink into the edit summary. I'm learning slowly! Thanks again, Dale 66.82.9.54 (talk) 15:30, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Failing at my attempt to cite references

I have added the references but the page still has a warning that there aren't any. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Lasar Mars is a friend of mine and I am trying to help him with this. He personally wrote every word on there and the same text appears on his personal web site. Is his personal web site not a considered a reliable source for references? Thank you in advnace for the help!!!!! Opus27 (talk) 12:06, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

His personal site is almost certainly not considered a reliable site. It is generally allowable for certain types of non-controversial information (how the name is spelled, place of birth, date of birth. etc.)

I will look to see if I can make the references work. You have successfully add a link to the bio. FYI, the message that there are no references is manually added, it does not disappear automatically when you add a reference. In theory, it will be removed when someone later comes along and sees there are references, although our procedures could be improved.--SPhilbrickT 12:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I fixed one list of tracks, see what I did to fix the other one. However, there are established ways to present tracks. I suggest you look at another musician to see how it is done. If you can't find one, let me know, and I'll point one out.Oops, sorry, not a track listing. This list should be bullets, I'll make the fix.

Much of the material is copy pasted from his website. That is not allowed, even if he gives you permission. It should be rewritten in your own words.

The structure needs work, check out Article Layout.

The reference is working fine, but you will need more references, and some that are from reliable sources --SPhilbrickT 12:34, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Help!

Its me again, I am making a page about Alicia Marek now. I need help making the chart that says all films and television works can you help me? I have a few sources like http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1673976/ http://resumes.actorsaccess.com/aliciarachel

They say alot about this person.

I put the article at User:Stickulus/Alicia Marek

Thanks! Stickulus (talk) 01:09, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I won't be able to help directly, but I will provide a couple suggestions.

Tables are a royal pain.

I have created some. For example, I created the tables in USA Women's U18 and U19 teams. However, I don't use the wikimarkup myself, I create the table in Excel, then use a tool to convert them to Wikitables. Even then, there's a fair bit of work to get from one to the other.

The problem is that this approach creates a table in a format I select. I can get away with that in articles about women's basketball, because no one established a standard (some exceptions, but I follow them). When it comes to listing film titles and move roles, there are established styles for the tables, as you probably guess, because it looks like you copied part of one.

However, I have never worked on an article about someone in that industry, so haven't learned the standard styles, and never plan to.

What you can do:

Check out Help:Table

In fact, the tool I use is the first one in the list in Help:Table#External_links

If nothing else, that will give you some insight into how tables work.

My next suggestion is related to one you may have partially tried - find another article with such a table, and copy the entire code, then make whatever changes are needed. It looks like you grabbed the beginning of the code, but I think it would be easier if you grabbed an entire table. Pick on that is too long, as it is easier to remove rows than to add rows.

Another possibility is to visit Wikipedia:WikiProject Film, find one of the editors who hangs out there, and ask them for help. They may be able to help you directly or point you to someone who can. Someone there must know how to fill out one of those tables and can help.

If that doesn't work, post a question at the help desk. They are very prompt, and while they are more apt to point you to resources, than actually do the work, some might jump in and help with the specific task. You can go to Help desk and look for "If you can't find an answer, click here to ask a new question"--SPhilbrickT 01:37, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

WIF-LA

Creator (who has COI issues) notified. Harley Hudson (talk) 01:11, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks--SPhilbrickT 01:12, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Re:CSD nomination

Well I've notified the user but it seems that someone beat you to it and removed the page. Probibly best because the page was a bit of a wreck of coding compared to the other one. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:54, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Not surprised, it was a mess, but I like to let people know before I delete something, so thanks for the notification.--SPhilbrickT 12:08, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Noq's talk page.
Message added 12:09, 28 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

can you undelete the my article?

it was deleted 21:40, 25 May 2011 I am trying to write an English article on Piguaquan master Wang Zhihai. Few English references on Pigua masters exist. I am trying to link to him on the Piguaquan page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haozwang618 (talk • contribs) 06:28, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done I moved the article to User:Haozwang618/Wang Zhihai. It needs references, particularly in support of Notability. Please do not edit the red link in Piguaquan to point to a user subpage; wait until the article is sufficiently improved that it can be moved back into main space.--SPhilbrickT 12:08, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 13:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at ConcernedVancouverite's talk page.
Message added 23:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

9/11 conspiracy theories - building 7 deletion

I've responded to your message on my talk page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ghostofnemo#My_preliminary_observation_on_the_911_conspiracy_issue Ghostofnemo (talk) 00:01, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I've replied again on my talk page. Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:19, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I've replied again. Ghostofnemo (talk) 02:35, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Europa-Institut

Hello, I made a mistake, I put the tag for removal into talk page instead of the page itself. Can you please repair that? I mean, move the article from talk to article page? Thank you very much. Sorry for the confusion.Cimmerian praetor (talk) 11:43, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Cimmerian praetor (talk) 12:19, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I believe there was no talk page at the beginning, so I think that it is all done ok now. Once more thank you. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 12:21, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, good. Glad to help. --SPhilbrickT 12:22, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

You have a message

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Whpq's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at Mephistophelian's talk page.
Message added 13:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Meph^talk 13:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Rollback Right For User:Stickulus

On the page that you can see if you qualify for rollback rights it says you can ask an administrator for these rights. Thats why I came to you. I know you from working on a few articles together and I know you can help me with whatever I need to qualify for rollback rights. A little about myslef is that I have been using Wikipedia actively for quite a long time, a good 4 years. I just made this account recently since I did not want my IP address to be shown publicly and I wanted to be able to work on more Wikipedia pages rather than those I was limited to without an account. I have only deleted a few vandalisations I plan on removing many more in the future. One thing that would for sure help me would be Rollback Rights. With Rollback Rights I Could Remove Vandalism from articles with ease and get far more done in a day rather than having to do it manually. I hope you can hep me with this and Thank You!

Yes, I have the authority, but granting rights is not an area where I've specialized. There are some rough guidelines, I don't know if they are written, but you can infer them by looking at the recent requests for rollback in Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions. Note that most who received it had a 1000 or more edits. Note Qantasplanes did not get it, with 650 edits. The key is not so much the raw edit count, but the number of vandalism edits.

It is good form, when doing any edit, to use an edit summary. If you ever decide to try for admin, this is something people will look at. Anything less than 100% for major edits is cause for questions. You are at 12%. You should start by making you use an edit summary for every edit. (I help make sure this happens by going to user preferences, editing, and clicking the box that warns me if I forget to enter an edit summary). When you are using edit summaries regularly, make sure your vandalism edits either have the word "vandalism" in them, or use "rv" for revert vandalism. Then it will be easy to see how often you are reverting vandalism. I looked at your edits, and didn't see any marked at vandalism. I'm not saying there aren't any, just that it isn't easy to find them.

If you look at the list of people who asked for rollback, you'll see that the most common reason for turning it down is not much evidence of reverting vandalism. That's all it is good for, but it is easy to revert vandalism without, it so I'll give you the same advice that has been given others. Do 50-100 reversions of vandalism, make sure they are valid, make sure the edit summary indicates it is vandalism, and ask again.

By the way, do you see the note on your user page talking about vandalism? It is in a box, and floats off the page because you started it with a space. Remove the space, and it will look better.

Good luck and keep editing.--SPhilbrickT 12:16, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the Tips, I will be sure to take them all into consideration and I will begin devandalising pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stickulus (talk • contribs) 05:03, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Anthony Stabile

Hi, I think the page was previously deleted can you check? It could fall into G4? I checked the history of the article the first edit here was copyed from the other website here, then the bot tagged it he re-edited to change some of the article. Could this article fall into the recently created articles for speedy deletion A10? --Vic49 (talk) 14:58, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it was deleted before, but by Prod, not AfD nor CSD, so I don't think G4 applies. There is. You mentioned a10, but that would apply if there is another existing article covering the same subject, which doesn't seem to apply. I'm going to follow up with a note to JamesBWatson, who deleted the earlier version. I have to go on a business trip, so may not be able to follow up promptly.--SPhilbrickT 15:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Actually CSD G4 applies only to pages deleted as a result of deletion discussions, and excludes previous speedy deletions, as well as PRODs. (That is irrelevant in this case, but I thought it worth clarifying to avoid future mistakes.) The fact that it may well have been copied back to Wikipedia from another site which copied the Wikipedia article is of no importance: what matters is that it is a repost of a Wikipedia article which was deleted by PROD. It seems to me that the person who reposted it has in effect belatedly challenged the PROD, which they have every right to do. There is the question of attribution of contributions, which can be dealt with easily by restoring the deleted history of the article, which I shall do. That will leave the question of whether the reasons given for deletion in the PROD are valid. Either the editor who placed the original PROD or anyone else can take the article to AfD if they think those reasons are valid. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:26, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Good point that G4 doesn't apply to prior CSD. I know it didn't apply to prior Prod's and did to AfD, but didn't think through CSD. It's mostly a moot point, clearly in this case, but in general, if an article was properly deleted via CSD, the original reason still applies, and there's no reason to use G4.

Sounds like we are in the "right" position G12 isn't appropriate, and someone can AfD is they so choose.--SPhilbrickT 16:53, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

StickerYou

Not sure why our page was deleted. A previous "deletion" tag was refuted and no consensus was reached to allow deletion of the page. Not sure why, just a few days later, my page was deleted. Stickers fan (talk) 14:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

The reason it was proposed for speedy deletion is that it appeared to be a blatant advertisement, rather than a proper encyclopedic article. I agreed with the assessment so deleted it. I just took a look again, to see if I was too hasty, and I still feel it qualifies for deletion.

If you would like more information,let me know; I'll start by pointing out that it had no qualifying references. (A reference to the company website is acceptable in some cases, but does not "count" in terms of establishing notability.)--SPhilbrickT 15:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

So, what can I change so that the page no longer seems like advertisement, and does meet the qualifications to establish notability and be considered a valid page? Stickers fan (talk) 16:17, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

If you read Wikipedia:Notability, you'll see one of the keys is to find references satisfying the following (see the link for more details):

If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list.

--SPhilbrickT 16:36, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

re Theatre Bizarre

Thanks for your comments and decision. I am just getting started on new page patrolling. Greenmaven (talk) 22:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Help With An Article

Hello My Name Is Stickulus. I Would Greatly Appreciate it if you would glance at and maybe even give me a couple of pointers or help me on an article I am Making. I Believe I Am about 3/4 done. you can see the article at User:Stickulus/Diandra Luker —Preceding undated comment added 03:20, 17 June 2011 (UTC).

I can't at the moment, but I can find some time later in the day. I'll fix the broken reference. In the meantime, think about Wikipedia:Notability.--SPhilbrickT 12:32, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

TT-talkback

Hello, Sphilbrick. You have new messages at TreasuryTag's talk page.
Message added 16:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

╟─TreasuryTag►sundries─╢ 16:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Midtown Village

There are articles about malls and shopping centers all over Wikipedia. What's unnotable about this one? --Ttownfeen (talk) 20:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

You have it backwards. What is notable about this one? If you can point out another article about another nondescript mall that isn't notable, propose it for deletion.--SPhilbrickT 20:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I did a very brief review to see some examples of Malls that are in Wikipedia. As you may know, their existence isn't a valid reason to keep Midtown Village, but it is a starting point for comparison.

The first one I found (by searching for the word Mall" is Queen Street Mall. It has 26 million visitors a year, and the article has a number of references (not enough, IMO), one of which is clearly a reliable source. I think this one could use some help from an editor, there should be more references.

The second one is Northgate Mall (Seattle). I see eleven references, and a bibliography with over 15 items listed. This one earned a tag noting it needs more references.

In contrast, MidTown Village consisted of three sentences, no assertions of notability and zero references.--SPhilbrickT 20:16, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

It might have had all the things you were looking for if you hadn't deleted it two hours after I started the stub. I guess we'll never know now. --Ttownfeen (talk) 20:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

If you want it in your user space, where you can work on it without attracting the deletionists, let me know, although I moved a dozen such articles in the last few days and most have not bothered to improve them. I'm an optimist, though, if you're the exception, let me know.--SPhilbrickT 20:58, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Sure. -Ttownfeen (talk) 21:12, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. See User:Ttownfeen/Midtown Village --SPhilbrickT 22:18, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Bad G8 of a non-trivial talk page of a merged and redirected article

Hi Sphilbrick. Coming here from an MfD. A deletion of yours has been mentioned, Talk:Horror comics in the United States, 1947–1954, "23:48, 18 June 2011 Sphilbrick (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Horror comics in the United States, 1947–1954" ‎ (G8: Page dependent on a deleted or nonexistent page)"

I don't believe that G8 applies to a page redirected somewhere, and further, deletion is inappropriate where there is a history behind the redirect (it was merged), and especially where the edit to redirect is justified with reference to the talk page "18:46, 20 May 2011 Farpointer (talk | contribs) (27 bytes) (This was supposed to be merged back on April 22, according to the long discussion on the Horror comics Talk Page. Don't know why no one has done it until now, so I'm volunteering to do it, according to the agreement on the Talk page.)"[1]. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done--SPhilbrickT 12:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

St Andrew's

Thank you! Amandajm (talk) 06:58, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Courtesy notification

Hello Sphilbrick, I just wanted to let you know that, per this request, I've just userfied This Week in Tennis, because I think it's an article that might have potential; however, I've informed the author that he should contact you before moving the page back. Cheers. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 13:56, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Hope it happens. I've userfied several articles in the last week, not one has yet had any meaningful progress, so while I support the approach, it has been disappointing in terms of results.--SPhilbrickT 14:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Task force WP:RFA2011 update

Hi. As of 20 June: More stats have been added on candidates and !voter participation. Details have been added about qualifications required on other Wikis for candidates and RfA !voters. Some items such as clerking, !voters, and candidates are nearing proposal stage. A quick page`link template has been added to each page of the project. Please visit those links to get up to speed with recent developments, and chime in with your comments. Thanks for your participation.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 07:57, 20 June 2011 (UTC).

Capucho

Hi there SPHIL, VASCO from Portugal,

thank you for your help regarding this page move, i think it's more accurate (your summary was 100% what i would have written). However, given that "CAPUCHO" is a term that can lead to other interpretations (monkey, friar), could you reinstate to the original "Capucho (footballer)"? If not, it's cool too.

Keep up the good work, regards - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:53, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done--SPhilbrickT 18:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Tsk tsk

[2] Thanks for chipping in, anyway :) ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 21:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I wanted to show that you weren't the only one thinking it was rude - however, I think I know you well enough that you aren't losing sleep over it, so I'm not planning to extend the drama - however, I'll note that saying something appear rude to me is not something that can be argued with - it may not appear rude to you someone else, but unless I'm blatantly lying, if I say something sounds rude to me, it sounds rude to me.--SPhilbrickT 22:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Well quite. If I could be bothered, the response to that IP would be, "So how come you were able to say authoritiatively above that it wasn't rude if it's just a matter of opinion?" but that would be a desperately boring road to go down :P ╟─TreasuryTag►Clerk of the Parliaments─╢ 22:23, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Great info, Sphilbrick

In reference to the Don Brown wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Don_Brown_(Author)&action=edit&redlink=1)that you flagged for speedy deletion, the opening paragraph is the author's public bio, which can be found here: http://www.zondervan.com/Cultures/en-US/Authors/Author.htm?ContributorID=BrownDon&QueryStringSite=Zondervan. Should I have simply noted that the bio could be found at that external link instead of including the copy on the page? And, if the offer still stands, I would love help in creating wikilinks for the professional life section. Many thanks. 1zigmont! (talk) 16:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

You call it a "public" bio, but it is still under copyright.

(As an aside, the article was flagged because of the wording on this site which means either Harper Collins or Zondervan has violated the other entities copyright, or one has done a poor job of reporting permission. However, that doesn't concern us.)

Generally speaking, material in a Wikipedia article should be written "from scratch" not copied from anyplace else; certainly not from material under copyright, but typically not even if the material is freely licensed. Why? Because the material was written for a particular audience, and not usually an encyclopedia. The style and format is unlikely to match that appropriate for an encyclopedia. (There are some rare exceptions, which I won’t go into unless you want more information, but they don't apply to this situation.)

A a minor point, when you add a note to a talk page, it should go at the bottom. Just click on the "new section" and it will that automatically (unless you are adding to an existing section.)--SPhilbrickT 17:18, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I moved it to User:1zigmont!/Don Brown (Author) and started cleaning it up.--SPhilbrickT 17:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Ourinternet

Hello,

Can you please let me know why my newly created page devoted to Our Internet has been deleted the second time? It was first deleted, but then restored by Athaenara yesterday after our communication. I thought this is good addition to a Web hosting section. And all of the pages there contained very similar information. I'm planning to add more content to it with the time passing.

Thanks,

204.62.13.4 (talk) 06:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I'll look into it right now.--SPhilbrickT 11:54, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I've looked at the page again. In my opinion the original deletion was correct, and I don't see it as a particular close call. I read the response of Athaenara, which did not go into detail about the reason for restoration; I read it more as a - hey I'll give you a chance to work on it" more than "oops, I was wrong". However, that's my interpretation, and I've asked Athaenara if she would like to elaborate.

I'm willing to restore the page to user space, where you can work on the shortcomings. If you are willing to do that, I'll work on the restoration and provide some feedback/. If you think it is ready as is, it wouldn't make sense to do so.--SPhilbrickT 12:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. Kindly restore the page then in the user space so as I can work on the shortcomings before it goes live. You opinion on them are also very welcome!

Bdgls (talk) 12:29, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done. Will follow up with comments on your talk page--SPhilbrickT 12:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Will be looking forward for your feedback then as I'm new to Wikipedia and it's still hard for me to meet all the criterea...

Bdgls (talk) 12:43, 23 June 2011 (UTC)