Jump to content

User talk:Sandstein

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by NancyDrew418 (talk | contribs) at 17:26, 9 October 2018 (→Deletion of Streamdata.io: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.
  • 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


Article Deleted: Duke Greenhill

I was saddened to see this article was deleted. I felt I made a compelling argument on the talk page for preserving the article, although it appears that argument may never have made it to the talk page.

The subject of this article is "notable," as defined by Wikipedia (significant and reliable coverage). The subject has appeared as an "expert" and/or "thought-leader" in reliable external publications like Fast Company, HBR, The Telegraph (U.K.) and many more. His marketing and advertising bio is captured in numerous reliable sources and his film work is backed up by IMDB.

Furthermore, the article had been revised recently to be even more objective. There is no question that the article is non-promotional.

Why should it have been deleted? What are the steps to having it restored?

Thanks for your time and consideration, Sandstein.

Cheers, Iago Iago1608 (talk) 19:26, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Duke Greenhill was deleted because of consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duke Greenhill. What are the three best sources that in your view make him pass WP:GNG? Sandstein 20:37, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best three arguments (including sources) supporting WP:GNG for a :Duke Greenhill article are the following: (1) THE TELEGRAPH[1]: A top-circulated daily newspaper across the U.K. features the topic as a contributing and quoted expert. The Telegraph is RELIABLE; the content is SIGNIFICANT, and it's INDEPENDENT. By publishing feature articles in which the topic is an expert source, The Telegraph is endorsing the topic's notability. (2) WP:GNG states: the "availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability." A collection of links exist supporting the topic's notability as a filmmaker. The topic (or his work) have been covered in three of the top entertainment industry publications, Variety[2], Playbill[3] and Hollywood Reporter[4]. The topic's work is available on AmazonPrime[5]. There's also a Wikipedia article about one of the films[6] the topic executive produced. (3) This collection of links supports the topic's notability as a marketer and writer. The topic is a contributor to Fast Company [7], Mashable[8], HubSpot[9], MarketingProfs[10], Luxury Society[11], and the Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review[12] — all INDEPENDENT, SIGNIFICANT and RELIABLE, and all publications that by choosing to publish the topic's content are also endorsing the topic's thought leadership and notability. Iago1608 (talk) 20:55, 29 September 2018 (UTC)Iago[reply]

TL,DR. Just the three best sources, please, in the form of hyperlinks or {{cite news}}. Sandstein 07:31, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In that case: (1) https://blog.hubspot.com/agency/author/duke-greenhill (2) http://www.playbill.com/article/tony-winner-cumming-joins-cast-of-indie-film-shifting-the-canvas-com-150297 (3) http://fashion.telegraph.co.uk/news-features/TMG9694181/Burberry-entrenched-in-the-digisphere.html Iago1608 (talk) 00:15, 2 October 2018 (UTC)Iago[reply]

@Iago1608: I decline to restore the article. (1) is self-published, (2) is the most minimal of passing mentions, and (3) is also not about Greenhill, but about the fashion label Burberry, and Greenhill is quoted a few times in the story. This is clearly not the kind of substantial, independent coverage that could be the basis of a well-sourced article about Greenhill, see WP:GNG. Sandstein 10:07, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]


References

  1. ^ http://fashion.telegraph.co.uk/news-features/TMG9694181/Burberry-entrenched-in-the-digisphere.html
  2. ^ https://variety.com/2011/film/reviews/zenith-1117944315/
  3. ^ http://www.playbill.com/article/tony-winner-cumming-joins-cast-of-indie-film-shifting-the-canvas-com-150297
  4. ^ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/zenith-film-review-30131
  5. ^ https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004W3L54Q/ref=atv_feed_catalog
  6. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenith_(film)
  7. ^ https://www.fastcompany.com/3019721/slaying-the-dragon-and-other-ways-to-create-killer-content
  8. ^ https://mashable.com/author/duke-greenhill/
  9. ^ https://blog.hubspot.com/agency/author/duke-greenhill
  10. ^ https://www.marketingprofs.com/authors/1107/duke-greenhill
  11. ^ https://www.luxurysociety.com/en/articles/contributors/duke-greenhill
  12. ^ https://the.hitchcock.zone/wiki/The_Gay_%26_Lesbian_Review_Worldwide_(2007)_-_Art_Memo:_Rebecca:_How_a_Lesbian-Inflected_Movie_Got_Made

In Win Development

Would it be possible to email me a copy of the article prior to deletion? I think it may potentially be appropriate for Wikipedia if rewritten from scratch. feminist (talk) 19:41, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Feminist: At https://pastebin.com/4HMjEUKc. Expires in one week because of copyright. Sandstein 10:32, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. feminist (talk) 13:30, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Topic Ban Question

Please excuse my bumbling Good Faith errors. I simply have no idea how to approach this Topic ban. The last edit I made to the Su-25 article was almost one year ago. I changed the engine type from "R-195" to "Soyuz/Tumansky R-195". The edit wasn't contested, and is still in place. It didn't connect to the WP source properly, and I'd still like to fix it. The next edit I was trying to make (one year later) caused some differences of opinion, so I spent quite a bit of time searching for consensus on the Talk page. All in Good Faith, and with respect, as anyone can see when viewing the page. Several editors agreed, and some disagreed. So I didn't make any edits to the article. Was I banned for joining the discussion on the Talk page? I always thought that's what the Talk Page was for. I'm not sure how my discussions required such an extreme Topic Ban, and since you endorsed the Topic Ban, I'm appealing to your advantageous position to help me understand the reason for such a wide-ranging Ban, with a view to setting things right. Since the reason for the topic ban wasn't provided (other than not understanding), I'm at a disadvantage when appealing. Santamoly (talk) 19:46, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There has been ample discussion of your ban and I have nothing to add to it. Sandstein 20:34, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your brief reply. Since you were at the center of the discussion, and nothing was discussed. I was hoping that you could shed some light on the ban. I've never heard of anyone being banned for a Good Faith, civil, polite, Talk Page discussion. Since nothing was communicated to me concerning mistakes or errors or lack of Good Faith, I was hoping that you might have some insight. It would help me in formulating an appeal. Santamoly (talk) 22:32, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have any insights to share. Sandstein 10:08, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for undeletion of Emerald Mine

I saw too late that the article was nominated for deletion. I have added now two reviews in the german Emerald Mine article of which one states that it has outstanding graphics and excellent sound (no score is awarded in the tests from that magazine), and the other was a Classic of the month review which awarded a 85% yesterday-score which would have been a Hit-award if Amiga Joker (the largest german Amiga game magazine) existed already at the release of Emerald Mine. So this game is notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koren (talk • contribs) 21:37, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that I forgot to sign my request. Koren (talk) 18:56, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What are these sources? Sandstein 21:19, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Commercial German printed computer magazines from the 80's and 90's. As english is not my native language, please write a more detailed question if that is not the answer you expected. -- Koren (talk) 22:18, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here are the links ASM - Aktueller Software-Markt, Amiga (magazine), Amiga Joker -- Koren (talk) 22:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Link to the German Emerald Mine article. -- Koren (talk) 22:33, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lordtobi, Izno, PaleAqua, and Ferret: As AfD contributors, what is your view? Sandstein 09:02, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The German Wikipedia page has the same flaw, which is that it lists the entire series, while all sources (the three listed above) only talk about the very first game in that series. That said, if these sources were used to just create an article for the first game, I'd be fine with that, but undeletion would just cause the poorly written and unsourced series article to return. Re-creation with new content is probably the better option here. Lordtobi (✉) 09:10, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see this showing enough notability. Two platform specific magazines of the era did a review, and zero coverage outside of the platform or since. Those sources could be used at the developer's page to mention the game in a sentence or two. This will never leave stub status, so just merge it there. (I know opinions differ greatly in this area, but if more sources later turn up, it can be unmerged). -- ferret (talk) 11:54, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I like it when we get foreign sources! That said, I tend toward ferret's POV. I was pretty sure that Lordtobi was going to include a games list on the developer article, so that would be a start. I would generally oppose an undeletion. --Izno (talk) 13:16, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I can add one more source for the second part, and two for each the third and fourth game of the series. (Let me see if I find the time this weekend to add them to the German article.) Never thought this would be so complicated, so I will probably throw in what I find. And the C64 version is not worth mentioning, so this effectively an Amiga only game. Let us talk again soon when I added the reviews. -- Koren (talk) 19:04, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have added now all the sources I know of to the german Emerald Mine article. Please look there (I don't want to copy all the links here again), it provides now a good coverage of all parts. -- Koren (talk) 23:03, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Still a comment about notability: Emerald Mine has got one Hit-award [in ASM] and reached the yesterday-score for another one [in Amiga Joker]. If such a game is not notable you can just delete 80% of all video games articles here. -- Koren (talk) 23:10, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And as for coverage since then, there's an article in the Amiga Future (table of contents here) but I don't have that magazine and the magazine is too new for a scan to show up in the www. -- Koren (talk) 23:45, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Koren: Based on the comments above, it seems that even with your sources there is no consensus to include the article. I'll therefore not restore it. Sandstein 16:21, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I have listed the article on the request for undeletions.

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 October 7

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2018 October 7. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Koren (talk) 21:43, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball?

Are you a baseball fan, Herr Sandstein? User:Germanboi87 is working on a draft. If you have any books on your bookshelf about the history of baseball in Germany, I'm sure he'd love to have those titles. (I came here because I borrowed the code of your Babel box to put on his user page; he's from Neuenburg am Rhein but I don't know if, like you, he speaks French and/or Schwiizertüütsch.) Dr Aaij (talk) 04:31, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I know nothing about baseball, sorry. Sandstein 21:18, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Streamdata.io

Hi,


I was recently told our wiki page for our company, Streamdata.io had been deleted. You are the admin in this case. can you please tell me why or how I can get it re-listed? Any help would be appreciated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Streamdata.io

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sandstein&oldid=863256584"