User talk:Sandstein

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: [[example article]].

If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Start a new talk topic

The last rendition of an article prior to your deletion

Base-2 scientific notation has been deleted -- 05:08, 2 May 2012 -- by you. Is there any possible way to get a copy of that article, the very last rendition of it prior to your deletion?

In my gross naivete and based on some reference within all those notes about the page, I thought we had until May 22 before the final judgment. There were changes made on May 1 that we did not copy somewhere else. I still believe there are enough encyclopedic references within obscure academic journals to justify our simple approach -- five high school geometry classes were involved! Original research? I don't think so, and I am quite sure that it is all out there somewhere. The conceptual frameworks are all just too basic. Notwithstanding, is there a way to recover that last rendition of the article? Thank you.

BruceCamber (talk) 12:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A copy is available at [1], but will expire in a day because of copyright/attribution issues. Sandstein 20:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 April 27

We cleared one day, Sandstein. Let's pat ourselves on the back. I left one open--Big D. Thanks for taking care of it. Drmies (talk) 04:46, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome - have a nice weekend. Sandstein 12:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I passed the (music) Notability and you deleted my article

As per the Big D Kuwaiti Rapper article on wikipidea how can you delete it if it passed the(music) Notability rules? your deletion was a error! As per your rules in the notability I came across a sentence that said a musician may be notable if it meets at least "one of the following criteria": you claimed "ONE" the criteria's stated "published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles" and I had a newspaper article “Big D - Kuwaiti rapper promotes positive message (Article – Via Arab Times)", If you want it in PDF format, “Click Here" I also have another reference which is www.kuwait-music.com which the website owner was interviewed by BBC and his website was nominated the leading website of music in Kuwait VIA ARAB TIMES I’m honored to say they featured me in their website too “Click here to view my User profile on Kuwait-Music.com” which was "online versions of print media" "Kuwait-Music.com is legit according to BBC click here "BBC News- Musicians in Kuwait struggle with censorship, Kuwait Music" and watch the video. Also according to ARAB TIMES newspaper article, "Kuwait-Music.Com Helps Bridge Cultures - Via Arab Times" So I guess your deletion was a ERROR, because I had more the one notable reference! You just deleted me because everyone said delete and Nobody reads my sources! I request you re-open my page. Regards, Big D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big D Kuwait (talk • contribs) 11:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you refer to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big D Kuwait. Sorry, but no. As you say, "everyone said delete". Wikipedia is based on consensus, and as the person who closes the discussion I have to follow that consensus, no matter whether you or I agree with it or not. Sandstein 12:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay sounds reasonable but since you mentioned the consensus of the people, everybody noted that my article was to be userfied too, breaking a persons spirit like that is not cool, at least you could of used the consensus of the people to userfiy it like all the admins noted, So when I can gather reliable sources that meet more of the music notability rules we could re-post my article and get accepted in the future. I guess the best solution and the least you can do for my 1 month of hard work is to restore the data and userfy it and in the future when I gather more reliable sources to get accecpted then I could submit it to Wikepdia.

P.S they all said to delete it before the ARAB TIMES article I got the notable source only 3 days before you deleted the article and the article was available for a month that is why there are so many people that said delete.

I'll userfy the article, if at least one other editor is interested in retaining and improving it. I'll not restore it for you alone, as per WP:COI#Autobiography writing one's own article is very much frowned upon here. Also, please sign your talk page messages, per WP:SIGN. Sandstein 12:57, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be my wife? or does it have to be a admin? and do I edit it in my sandbox? or does she copy and paste my old article on a user page and improves it? Big D (talk • contribs) 1:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Some previously established Wikipedia editor who is interested in the topic and, naturally, is not related to you or acting on your behalf. They can request that the deleted article be restored to their userspace where they can improve the article and, if they think that the problems identified in the deletion discussion are fixed, request consensus to restore the article to mainspace at WP:DRV. You yourself, per WP:COI, should not normally edit the article about yourself. Sandstein 13:56, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Caucasian Albania article level sanctions appeal

Dear Sandstein, please be aware of this request at WP:AE: [2] I believe in the light of consequent SPI results it is time to review the remedy imposed on this particular article. Further information is available in my appeal. Best regards, Grandmaster 10:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ASMR page

Please restore the ASMR page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_Sensory_Meridian_Response ). This is a real sensation that many people experience. I never knew what it was called until very recently and since learning about it I've been able to trigger it nearly on demand. I hope other people can learn about this sensation so that they will also be able to enjoy it more and the wiki page is one possible vector for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mylon (talk • contribs) 15:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the community discussed this and decided otherwise, in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response. Sandstein 15:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I count 8 votes to keep among maybe 20. For something that returns over 9000 results on Youtube alone I think there's something noteworthy to be said, even if the name lends it a very pseudo-scientific air that could be misleading. The link I included in this comment suggests a topic's inclusion into Wikipedia seem very inconsistent.--Mylon (talk) 15:45, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Can you please reconsider the deletion of the ASMR page? There are several communities dedicated to inducing this phenomena. There are devices manufactured and sold to induce it. There groups dedicated to finding research on the topic. As the above commenter mentions there are over nine thousand videos on Youtube which appear when you search for "ASMR". There is no doubt that this topic is notable, and worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. 62.254.76.153 (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Our deletion process is not a vote; the strength of argument is taken into account. Here as there, the number of search results is not relevant; rather, coverage by reliable sources is, as explained at WP:GNG. Random websites, blogs and videos are not reliable sources because they have no editorial oversight. Sandstein 18:07, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, not enough research was done before the arguments were made. There is a radio station dedicated to the phenomena - yet this seems to be held to a higher standard than insignificant genres of music. There is an ASMR day, which is every bit as legitimate as other made up days. There are news articles in major (editorialised) publications. This certainly needs the guidelines for notability for a phenomena of this kind. Please do not sideline this community without good reason.