March 2008

The Sound of Reason

Sorry I am new to this and I did read the guidelines, I'm a bit confused about what you meant when you said the contents don't match the subject. The sound of reason is the name of the band I wrote about. --4min4 (talk) 21:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't apologise, there are an awful lot of guidelines and it is confusing at first (in fact not just at first!) But now I'm confused - I don't think I said "the contents don't match the subject", and I did understand that "The Sound of Reason" was the name of the band. The speedy-deletion tag I put on said: "It is an article about a band... that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject"; that is, the article didn't show that the band was notable as defined in WP:MUSIC, which has a long list of "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" - released two or more albums on a major label, had a charted hit on a national chart, made an international concert tour, subject of multiple non-trivial works from a reliable, independent sources... Read WP:MUSIC again, and if you think the band does meet that standard, then write the article again making clear how it does, and giving references so that your sources can be checked. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete

so should I go back and delete the afd tags and replace with {{db-author}} ? Granite07 (talk) 22:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, someone has already done that for you, and the pages are gone; I just let you know how to do it, in case it should happen again that you want to get rid of a page you created. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How was my edit to andy mccallin vandalism and the page on damian dillon is all fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ledybo (talk • contribs) 17:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Riaan Manser

I have added some more info to the Riaan Manser page. I think it deserves to be on Wikipedia, it is an interesting historical fact.Christianpunk (talk) 17:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK - when I tagged the page for speedy deletion, there was only a single sentence and no supporting references. Since then, more information has been added, making it clear the subject is notable enough not to qualify for speedy deletion, and another editor has taken off the speedy tag. So you don't need {{hangon}} any more, and I've removed it.

Another time, it is best not to put an article in until there is enough of it to make clear it is a serious article: unfortunately, a lot of people put in articles that are one trivial line or otherwise unsuitable, and as one way of weeding them out, the "New Pages Patrol" looks at them as they come in and tags ones that look unsuitable. You can prepare an article off-line in a word-processor like Notepad, and try it out in the sandbox, until it's ready to go in. Another possibility is to put {{underconstruction}} at the top of a part-finished article, which will protect it for a few days. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

In my Egypt book, Dier el-Bahri is spelled differently, that's y I goofed, sorry about that, and that other Dier el-Bahri Di-something, I didnt make that...someone did, I just made one today, the Dier el-Bahri, the one that I goofed on, IM A NEWBIE, SO IM NOT REAL GOOD AT THIS... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aresurkas (talk • contribs) 19:05, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of new Baird Jones page

JohnCD -

The proto-article that I created on Baird Jones meets the criteria for notability as I interpret them, and was primarily meant as a starting point for other editors to expand upon. Please "google" Mr. Jones to reaffirm his significance; The New York Times does not write article-length obituaries about unknown persons. As a matter of fact, I was shocked when learning of Mr. Jones' recent untimely death to discover that Wikipedia does not already have an entry for him; I have read entries about numerous lesser-known subjects that happily persist on this forum.

As an example, I deliberately included a link to Mark Kostabi's wiki-page. Front and center is a picture of Mr. Kostabi with . . . Baird Jones. It makes Wikipedia stronger when it is possible to cross-reference individuals, places, and events that are included in the content of other entries. Otherwise, users such as myself must just scratch our heads and wonder about those mentioned with no corresponding entry.

Thank you.

Asingleton-green (talk) 22:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of Wikipedia's problems is that encouraging everyone to contribute means that a steady stream of unsuitable articles pours in, many on an "I'll finish it when I have time" or "Perhaps someone else will improve this" basis. As one way to filter them, the (informal) New Pages Patrol looks at them as they come in and flags unsuitable ones for admin attention. So it is important that a new article is full enough to make clear that it has at least the potential to meet Wikipedia's standards.

I didn't actually delete the article on Baird Jones - I flagged it as not, in my opinion, indicating notability, and then an admin looked at it, agreed, and did the actual deletion. So I can't now see it but, as I recall, it did not provide any references, which are an important way to establish notability. "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject."

If you want to re-create the article, my advice is: read carefully the guidelines on Notability, Notability (people), Verifiability and Reliable Sources. The guide to writing Your_first_article is helpful, too. Do any necessary googling to find references. Write your article again, and don't actually put it in until it is complete, including references. If it is challenged, put {{hangon}} at the top, and give reasons on its talk page.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JohnCD - I understand that you might not have deleted the Baird Jones page that you flagged for speedy deletion personally, but I never had the chance to {hangon}. Please see the associated link: [[1]], which I had no part in creating. Shouldn't it be incumbent upon you to do even a minor web search before passing judgement on who is notable and who is not? With all due respect, I doubt you or I or several thousand of other Wikipedia entrants will ever achieve the level of notability that Baird Jones achieved. Which administrator deleted his page? I can put it up again, but I am extremely frustrated by what seems to me to be a broken process. I am no vandal (nor hun, nor visigoth), and the instantaneous deletion of a legitimate contribution to your community was, a mon avis, wrong. Please reply and explain why I am misguided. Thanks.

Asingleton-green (talk) 03:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Consider that new articles are created at a rate of more than one a minute, and that Wikipedia editors are unpaid volunteers on just the same footing as yourself (except for a small proportion, also unpaid volunteers, who have extra duties and powers as administrators). I don't see why you should expect other editors to do your research for you. From the link you now present, it seems that references to establish Baird Jones's notability are available, so that an acceptable article about him could be written. Fine - go ahead and write it. Or, as pointed out on the search page, you can put it on a list of requested articles and someone else may pick up on the idea; but you can't demand that they should - an article gets written when someone is interested enough to do the work.

Nor do I think you can really complain of a broken process: the pages you must have gone through on the way to creating your article set out Wikipedia's requirements very clearly - quote:

"You can create this article:

Read Wikipedia:Your first article.
Gather references to the source(s) of your information.
Create the page including your references."

...and "Your first article" starts with 8 tips to consider, of which nos. 3, 6 and 8 concern references again.

The article you put in was deleted, not because we assumed its subject was not notable, but because the article didn't indicate his notability. However, the notification you got told you why, and gave a you a name to complain to; if you now put "Baird Jones" into the search box and click "Go", and on the next screen under "You can create this article" click "Create the page", you will get to a screen which (after again referring you to "Your first article" and to the need for references) shows you which administrator deleted the article, when and why. You can complain to him, but I think you will get much the same answer as this.

You may have a point that the speedy-deletion process is rather too speedy, but in view of the rate at which new articles appear, a regrettably high proportion of which are unsuitable (and a surprising number libellous), some form of input filter is necessary; and speedy deletion is not necessarily the end of an article.

I hope that as a result of all this you will rewrite the article with sources and we will end up with a good article on Baird Jones. Then I think the process will have worked correctly. The alternative would have been for me to flag it "notability doubtful" and "lacks references", when it might well have lingered on in that state, or been nominated for deletion later. There is a "Wikiproject notability" who work to try to improve articles like that, but their current backlog is over 15,000. Better for you, who are the one interested in Baird Jones, to get the article right in the first place. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will try to follow your advice.

Asingleton-green (talk) 20:41, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam warning for Insurepink

Care to elaborate as to how this version constitutes spam? I agree that the original article was promotional material, but I tried my best to rewrite it in a neutral tone. I'm not particularly committed to the article so I don't feel like fighting over it, but it seems like its worth at least getting some debate over before deleting. I'm not sure if it's notable enough to keep, but I think the spam tag here is way off. Fightindaman (talk) 17:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was suspicious of Insurepink because it had been speedied six times already: Lowey100 (talk · contribs), a single-purpose account, kept inserting it, got blocked 24 hrs, carried on, got blocked a week, inserted it again the day that block expired, was indef-blocked at 16:57 today, and within five minutes the article was back again from you - this began to look like an organised campaign and my first thought was that you must be a new sock of Lowey100. However I see that you are an established editor, and that another user has taken the spam tag off: it still looks like an advertisement to me, but I won't edit-war about it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whytegold

Hey,

What is wrong with the Whytegold entry? I'd be grateful if you could put it back up, it's all true information.

It may well be all true but still not suitable for Wikipedia, which is an encyclopedia not a business directory or advertising service. You should read the Business' FAQ and the guidelines on Conflict of Interest, Advertising and Notability (organizations and companies). JohnCD (talk) 19:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your point, but what if I want to make it an encyclopedia article. The page gives information about Whytegold like all the other company pages. I have no promotional schemes or offers. Could you tell me which parts dont comply the the rules? That'd be really helpful. Thanks

The best advice I can give you is already there in the Business' FAQ. See especially the sections headed:

Remember, too, that one of the ways Wikipedia differs from a business directory is that if your company has an article you don't own it, and cannot prevent other people from editing it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

thanks for welcoming me, and also i understood what you said in my talkpage. Dsr2008 (talk) 23:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not As Good As Us

I'll do the necessary work to get the page on properly, but is there any way I can get my original text back? It wasn't War And Peace, I admit, but I wanted to save it :-( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paustin (talk • contribs) 13:39, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can contact the admin who actually deleted it, Jmlk17 (talk · contribs), or any admin in Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles. Ask for the article to be restored into your user space for you to work on. But make sure the band meets the criteria in Notability (music), and that your article shows how they do, with references from independent, reliable sources, or it'll just be deleted again. One other thing - when you leave a message on a talk page, it's a good thing to end it with four "tilde" characters ~~~~ - the system automatically turns that into a "signature" with your username plus the time and date - like this: JohnCD (talk) 15:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fa Real (Artist)

Hello, I would like to ask if I can keep my page for the time being...? Averageguyfromdereksforum (talk) 19:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a ~~meganerd~~ admin; but nobody can give you a "free pass" for an article that doesn't meet Wikipedia's requirements. It won't stay unless the subject meets the standards of notability set out in Notability (music), and the article provides references from independent, reliable sources. Also, if it's about you, you need to read the guidelines on Autobiography and Conflict of Interest. The point is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory or an advertising medium or a social networking site. Sorry, JohnCD (talk) 20:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh. Thanks anyway Averageguyfromdereksforum (talk) 20:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brazil (band)

I changed my vote on an the AFD I started. Felt I should let you know. I still feel it is horribly weak on the sourcing, but they got it in on a technicality. -Optigan13 (talk) 22:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know - I'll look at it again in the morning. Seems there are more sources than appeared. It looks as if it'll stay anyway, even if I don't bother to change my vote. JohnCD (talk) 22:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Patrolling

Can you keep an eye on the Hazrat fatimah article, the creator keeps removing the tags instead of letting due process take place. I tagged it as nonsense because a) one would have though that a daughter of Muhammad would already have an article, and b) it starts off in the present tense and uses the past tense later on. I've left a note on the creators talk page about the process. Mjroots (talk) 11:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK - it seems to have gone, but I'll keep an eye in case it comes back. JohnCD (talk) 13:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

I did not block the IP, as the vandalism stopped Diff. You could bring the topic up on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or just wait and see what happens next time, your choice. Jeepday (talk) 13:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait and see - they seem to have gone quiet. JohnCD (talk) 16:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Maloney

Hi JohnCD, Didn't intend the entry as a personal attack. The inspiration for the entry is actually in the room right now, and we're editing it together. It's a fairly common, and growing, term among Annapolis locals, particularly in the downtown area, between the ages of 25 and 40 and something that a number of us would categorize as worth entry into Wikipedia...as it is referenced, like any good cultural term, worldwide. I personally can trace it's random usage to folks in California, Hawaii, even Prague in the Czech Republic and troops have used it in Afganistan. So if this doesn't fit the standard of content for Wikipedia, please let me know. Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Wes Sims —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaibash09 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some funny friends, Mr Maloney has... I have put on your talk page the more friendly welcome paragraph you would have got if I hadn't thought it was an attack. Read the guidelines it points to, particularly about verification from independent, reliable sources; also about how Wikipedia is not that keen on neologisms and is particularly not for things you made up one day. One other thing - when you leave a note on a talk page, it's considered polite to end it with four tilde characters ~~~~ which the system automatically turns into a timed and dated signature - like this: regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

page deleted

can you tell me why you deleted the page i was trying to put on wikipedia? i placed it yesterday, but left a link and it was deleted. As i found out, the link might have been a problem, so I didn't put it this time. And its not an advertising! There are general information about the products and how they work and it is only for further knowledge and as an example for readers that I mentioned a specific product. Can you tell me what should I do? Thx Harshy (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)Harshy[reply]

Even without the link, it was still promotional. You will find advice on contributing when you or your company have an interest at the Business' FAQ. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to put it again. Do you know how to unblock the title for the future? I try to work on it. Thx. Harshy (talk)Harshy —Preceding comment was added at 12:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The title isn't blocked: if you enter it in the search box and click "Go" you will get to a screen on which you can click "Create the page". But read the advice on those screens, especially the Guide to creating your first article, and read the Business' FAQ carefully, or the article will just be deleted again. If any part of your motive is to promote your company or its products, even indirectly, Wikipedia is not the place to do it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate the Help

JohnCD, Thanks for your help last week, I really appreciate it. I know from your talk page that you aren't looking for Wikipedia to take over your life, but I was wondering if you'd be interested in writing and submitting the article that I was tying to post. I've read the guidelines and believe that my article conforms to the standards, yet I know I have little hope of successfully posting this article. The link to the article is User:David.a.gelman/Mobivox Draft.

The reasons why I believe this article belongs on Wikipedia can be found on the talk page of this link, but essentially they boil down to the fact that this company utilizes several “hot” telephony technologies and is unique in the combination of these technologies. If you disagree I would greatly appreciate hearing your reasons why. If you simply do not want to write it, would you mind suggesting someone who might. As a note, I've posted on the talk pages' of several relevant articles asking if anyone would be willing to write this article but have yet to see anything come of it. David.a.gelman (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to write the article or put it in myself (and it would have no special protection if I did), but I would like to help because you are going the right way about it. I'll do some looking around and try to advise you, but it may take a few days, so don't stop your other efforts. JohnCD (talk) 18:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eyesore

You PROD'd this article. An IP removed it and I thus listed it for deletion. Just thought I'd notify you. Take care! Scarian ^{Call me Pat} 23:05, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll have a look at it. JohnCD (talk) 09:56, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Brian Heaton page

How does this meet the criteria for speedy deletion? It may not have been long, but Heaton is a GOD in the goalie equipment world and deserves an article -- it certainly could've been expanded on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beijing goalie (talk • contribs) 15:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason was WP:CSD#A7 "An article about a real person... that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant." You know he's "a god", but the article didn't say that - it just said he designs goalie equipment, and some goalies use it. Write the article again, giving more detail of why he's significant, and references, and you'll have no trouble; but don't put it in till it's complete enough to make it clear the subject is notable. You may feel it should have been left to see whether it would be expanded on later, but an awful lot of two-line articles get put in that won't - see a discussion further up this talk page headed "Speedy deletion of new Baird Jones page" here for just this same discussion. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help, I will try the article again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beijing goalie (talk • contribs) 20:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Martin Watts page

This page is of a real player who plays for Plymouth Argyle. Maybe you should do some research before just assuming! —Preceding unsigned comment added by T3wbaca2 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why complain to me? I haven't done anything to that page. Click the "history" tab at the top of it, or look at the message about it on your talk page, to see who tagged it. JohnCD (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intereffectuality

Hi, JohnCD! I've userfied User:JohnCD/Intereffectuality. Feel free to do as you will with that. Since it's not spam, you're not likely to get any flack if it lies around. Hope that helps - and happy editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There ya go :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say db-u1 it. As "vandalism and/or hoax", it's not likely to be missed. Unless you feel there's something in the history of the article that might prove useful some day? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What did you want to check about my article on intereffectuality? Can I get a copy of the page and the talk page somehow for my own archives? When I am not working like crazy I may repost with more references to show that it is not a hoax. Right now as you might understand given the accusations that have been made, I am a bit dispirited. Thanks so much. --Chakira (talk) 01:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't expected the article to disappear so quickly, I wanted to read it once more; and after spending the afternoon speed-reading Reimagining Textuality to confirm that it made no mention of "intereffectuality", I was interested to check the page history to see which editor had put the book on the reference list (you, in fact). I see you have already got the article disinterred into your user space. By all means submit it again, if you can produce real references that will stand checking. Also, on a point of Wikipedia style, read the guideline Avoid weasel words: unsupported statements like "Some scholars point to... ", "some critics have said... " and "Famously, one proponent said... " are frowned on. Which scholars, what critics, which proponent? Where? When? The verifiability policy means that is the sort of thing references should be able to confirm. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New policy proposal that may be of interest

I'm tapping this message out to you because you were involved at the AfDs of Eve Carson or Lauren Burk. Following both of these heated debates, a new proposal has been made for a guideline to aid these contentious debates, which can be found at WP:N/CA. There is a page for comments at Wikipedia talk:Notability (criminal acts)/Opinions should you wish to make a comment. Thanks for your time, and apologies if this was not of interest! Fritzpoll (talk) 15:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'll take a look. JohnCD (talk) 16:17, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

matt schroeder

Hello,

I am trying to use Wikipedia as a teaching tool for my 5th graders who are just starting to learn to use the Internet for research & my page keeps getting deleted, please advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Comet580 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Create a page here User:Comet580/Sandbox with whatever you want. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 22:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a serious project to create an encyclopedia: the Matt Schroeder page I tagged was more or less nonsense, and there is no way we could let it stay in. If you just want to let your students practice typing something in, you could use this private sandbox page User:Comet580/Sandbox which Calvin 1998 has set up for you: let them put what they like in that, and no harm will be done. But they could also learn something useful by reading and understanding the Introduction and the Guide to creating your first article, and seeing if they could create something which actually meets the requirements to stay in Wikipedia. I'm afraid it's bed-time where I am, but user Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) has offered help if you need it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 22:56, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Comet580

~~This user did not make the edits that he's been warned for, see his contribs. I don't know what's going on, and most likely neither does he. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 23:17, 19 March 2008 (UTC)~~ Never mind, apparently if a page you created is deleted, that edit is removed from your Special:Contributions page.[reply]

Dentyl pH

I contest your request for speedy deletion of Dentyl pH. Jomsborg (talk) 11:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK; it read like an ad to me, but you did just the right thing by putting {{hangon}} and your reasons, and I see that the admin who considered it agreed with you and has let the article stand. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

chester health and fitness

sorry i supose i dont no how to make this how it shld be to be able to be included in wikipedia. How do i delete the entry? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Basicwebsite4u (talk • contribs) 16:14, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about deleting the page, it will soon be gone anyway - if you like to hurry it up, you could put {{db-author}} at the top (squiggly brackets not ordinary ones) which asks for it to be deleted. For advice on how to do things here, look at the links in the welcome paragraph at the top of your talk page. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Attacks in the article Alex sidor

I have responded, like you said, on my talk page. In case you missed the change, I put this here to remind you. I wish to get this matter behind me. --Freiberg, Let's talk!, contribs 21:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Himnisfier Syndrome

I saw the AfD and put in my two cents. Can't imagine it is anything but a hoax. Cheers. CiTrusD (talk) 10:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contact

I am rarely logged on en-wiki, so I just noticed your message. Sorry, but mainly, I am on cro-wiki, and please if you need me in future, just leave a message on my croatian page, ie. I have a link on my english one. Thanks and sorry. --Billy the lid (talk) 12:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC) (Armchoir on cro-wiki)[reply]

Check

JohnCD, please see my message for you on my talk page. Thanks. David.a.gelman (talk) 13:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for not picking it up sooner - I have only just adopted this strategy of watching recipients' talk page for a response to mine, and tend to forget. Fuller response on your talk page within a day. JohnCD (talk) 14:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On Bagh (word)

Dear JohnCD, I do realise that Wikipedia is not a dictionary! If you had looked where the entry is linked to, you would have noticed that this entry relates to Bagh-e Ferdows (at least at present, since I intend to create entries on Bagh-e Jannat, referred to in Bagh-e Ferdows, and Bagh-e Rezvan). As I indicate in the latter entry, Ferdows already means Garden, or at least contains this notion already implicitly. The question arises as to the meaningfulness of such a word as Garden Garden, or something similar. It is for this very reason that I created the entry Bagh (word). I hope that this convinces you that I did not create the latter entry through being misguided as to the nature of Wikipedia. If I have indeed succeeded in convincing you of this, then may I hereby request you kindly to remove that hateful deletion tag from the entry? Kind regards, --BF 23:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are fully entitled to remove the PROD notice yourself, and I see you have. I am not entirely convinced by your argument - the difference is well described in WP:STUB: "A dictionary article is about a word or phrase; an encyclopedia article is about the subject denoted by that word or phrase" - and Bagh (word) is definitely about the word; but maybe the links you propose make it interesting enough... I will not pursue it to AfD, though someone else might. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 08:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear JohnCD, thank you for your kind message. Yes I did remove the tag once I realised that several hours after I wrote to you, nothing had happened. As for what various guidelines may or may not say, my style throughout my entire life has been that I never read such things as manuals, guidelines, etc., absolutely never. I only rely on what I consider to be common sense. The question that I asked myself before setting out to write that entry was: how many people coming to the English Wikipedia know the meaning of Bāgh, and of these how many of them have the 17 volumes of Dehkhoda in their possession to seek the meaning and the geographic spread of the word. Please note that Dehkhoda Dictionary is an encyclopaedia as well as a dictionary so that what one finds in Dehkhoda Dictionary often cannot be found in ordinary dictionaries. Aside from all these, if one looks at place-names in such countries as Pakistan and India (amongst others), one sees that many place-names carry the word Bāgh. So, in a sense the entry that I created serves a wide range of interests, rather than the interests of a small minority of people. I expect that in time the entry will be expanded by people who know the cultures and traditions of these other places more than I do and more than is described in Dehkhoda Dictionary. Rests me to thank you for your understanding. Kind regards, --BF 14:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Knocknobbler

...is back as Knocknobbler. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 15:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So it is; and so is his spam add-on to Dog warden, which I have reverted again. Knocknobbler is not quite such blatant spam this time; may as well run its PROD-and-then-probably-AfD course, then if it comes back again it can be speedied G4. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The knocknobbler, I recall seeing the earlier spam version of the page, but could not recall who the creator was. I was just wondering how you determined that the user also created the previous version of the page. Is there another kind of log available which keeps a record of a user's contributions to a page which has since been deleted? Thanks! --- Taroaldo (talk) 17:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I remembered, because I saw and speedy-tagged the first version. Once a page has been deleted, the only way to check its history is to ask an admin to undelete it and its history into your user space for you to look at. If you have a suspicion about the creator, his talk page may show warnings about earlier versions, as in this case here. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I think I'm a bit sleep-deprived right now. When I looked at the page before, I must have read CobaltBlueTony's March 26 tag twice and missed the March 24 tag. Sorry for the trouble <sheepish grin>. Cheers. --- Taroaldo (talk) 18:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Christopher L Johnson_ Speedy Deletion

Please don't delete this. The reason's for my request are as follows:

1. I wrote this about myself, because i am hoping that my real parents will find me again 2. I want my it teacher to see this. 3. I want a publisher to see this and hopefully ask for a book deal, i just want to be a writer. 4. I Want people to like me, i want friends.

these are my only requests and you can delete it after 1 year i just want people to see it and hopefully then they will want to be my friends.

Thank you for you Co-operation Adark876 a.k.a Christopher L Johnson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adark876 (talk • contribs) 22:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, and I do sympathise with what you want to do, but that simply is not what Wikipedia is for. There are a lot of social networking sites like Myspace and Facebook where you can post notices about yourself and try to attract people's attention; but Wikipedia is not one of them, it is a serious project to create an encyclopedia, and we can only keep it that way by having clear rules about what subjects we allow in. For people, those rules are set out in the guideline on Notability (people). Have a look at Facebook or Myspace, or look at Wikipedia's article List_of_social_networking_websites - I had no idea there were so many. Good luck, JohnCD (talk) 22:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Reverting page blanking

Hi. Thanks for the advice on this. I wasn't too sure how I should deal with it. I'll keep it in mind for future reference and remove the user warning from his user talk page. Cheers Paul20070 (talk) 12:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read, very urgent

Hello, I am looking to find for an old friend called Paige Livingstone, I was searching the internet and saw she had a wiki page, do you know her personally? My name is Reece Hanrahan, I am 16, and go to UCA in Middlesbrough, if you do know her, and know her MSN Hotmail address or MySpace, could you give it to me? I just want to talk to her because I havn't for ages My email is Reece_Hanrahan4eva@hotmail.com hit me back —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.4.10.123 (talk) 23:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't know her. It seems there was an article with that name, but it has been deleted; it looks as if it was a nonsense article, so it probably wouldn't have helped you. If you do a Google search, there seems to be someone with that name who has a profile on Bebo - that might be your friend? JohnCD (talk) 09:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

April 2008

Lee Thomas Holden

He there. You inadvertantly warned CesareDunker (talk · contribs) about the speedy deletion tag, when the actual user who created it was Lee hldn (talk · contribs). FYI. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 19:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did warn Lee hldn (talk · contribs) correctly; somehow I must have issued the same warning again to CesareDunker (talk · contribs). These db-persons flood in so fast... Thanks for sorting Cesare out. JohnCD (talk) 19:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

steve st. john

understood, please delete Steve St. John entry —Preceding unsigned comment added by Radarhifi (talk • contribs) 21:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

16 Wit Mac Dre and 16 Wit Dre

Not sure of the notability, the the user seems to have created to identical articles. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 21:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you're asking me? I steer clear of album/song articles, as I don't know much about that world, and as far as I can see such notability rules as we have are not much enforced. I guess one of these is a mistaken title - perhaps ask the author which he wants to keep? JohnCD (talk) 21:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Hadziluk

Thank you for pointing that out. I have deleted the page. Jon513 (talk) 14:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sure thing

I will post constructive information and not vandalize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.179.36.108 (talk) 13:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Auteno.com

Auteno.com is a auction house like ebay, lauriz and hood.de and so i want to let all users to know something about auteno.com i am a user an buyer in ths auction house and everytime when i talk with freinds the say that they do not find information about this auction house. That is the reason i want to open an topic to discuss and pressent a other company like ebay —Preceding unsigned comment added by Desichbinich (talk • contribs) 09:54, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not an advertising service. The article is written in a promotional way and cites no independent reliable sources. Read the guidelines in the welcome paragraph on your talk page, particularly the Business' FAQ and the guidelines on Advertising and Conflict of interest. The article has a further problem - it is a direct copy of the company's web-site; for copyright reasons Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from web-sites - more detail in the copyright warning on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 10:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ben schumin

Get your nose out of my life —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodandhonestwhig (talk • contribs) 16:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flight Options

John, My first article (Flight Options) was deleted yesterday, I'm still a rookie at effectively using wiki. How can I adjust this article to get it up without it being tagged for deletion? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks -Simms —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmsimmers (talk • contribs) 14:41, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of guidance available, in fact a confusing amount. Good places to start are the Business' FAQ and the guidelines it will lead you to, particularly those on Advertising and Conflict of interest, and the guide to writing Your first article. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of BYU Ph.D. Prep track

I admit that the original post to this page was not very good. I was planning on improving it. Here is an improved version of the Ph.D. prep track. The page was deleted because it was not considered "notable." I think it is "worthy of notice" and the American Accounting Association agrees. The Prep Track is being heralded as a potential solution to the critical shortage of accounting PhDs. As such, it is "worthy of notice." You will notice that a reliable source (the American Accounting Association gave the program an award (they are an independent organization from the program) and that it has been mentioned in their newsletter (see here. There is objective evidence concerning the program based on where graduates have gone and where they are now, and there is objective evidence of its existence (it is referred to on the Marriott School's webpage under the accounting program (see here) and by the awards and other metnions. Under the description of notable organizations, the prep track fits several of the criteria. It is not small. It is a non-profit organization that has a national/international scope (it has placed students in Spain). It has longevity--been in existence since 1994 informally and formally since 2000. It has received internaional recognition from the American Accounting Association. Based on this evidence, the page is notable and deserving of an entry. Please unlock the page so I can include the text listed below. BYU Accounting Ph.D. prep track is part of the masters of accountancy program designed to train prepare accounting students to enter into a Ph.D. program upon finishing their Master in Accountancy degree. As of 2008, accounting academia is suffering from a significant shortage of accounting professors and is projected to face even more significant shortages in the future.^[1] The BYU Ph.D. prep track has been recognized as one possible method for increasing the supply of accounting Ph.D.’s to lessen the effect of this shortage.

History of Ph.D. Prep Track

The Ph.D. prep track began unofficially in 1994 by BYU accounting faculty member Doug Prawitt. Doug noticed several students who had a desire to enter a Ph.D. program but had very little idea what earning a Ph.D. entailed. To better prepare these students, Doug suggested classes they take before entering their program and educated them on life as Ph.D. student. This early program served to help nine students prepare for accounting academia. The program began in greater earnest between 2000 and 2001, as Doug required application to the program and more formally recruited students into the program. In 2002, seven students finished the program and entered Ph.D. programs. Thereafter, the program has placed between four and nine students each year into Ph.D. programs across the country.

Results of Ph.D. Prep Track

The Ph.D. Prep Track has been highly successful placing students into highly regarded accounting research institutions including: Arizona State University, Carnegie Mellon University, Cornell University, Duke University, Emory University, Indiana University, Michigan State University, Northwestern University, The Ohio State University, Stanford University, University of Arizona, University of Chicago, University of Georgia, University of Iowa, University of Michigan, University of North Carolina, University of Pennsylvania, University of Southern California, University of Texas, University of Utah, University of Washington^[2]. Individuals who have gone through the Ph.D. Prep Track and gone on to finish their Ph.D.s have likewise been successful in placing at highly regarded accounting research institutions^[3]. The Ph.D. Prep Track was recognized by the American Accounting Association with the prestigious 2007 Innovation in Accounting Education Award ^[4]. One of the benefits of the program is that graduates of the program are highly likely to continue in a Ph.D. program and not drop the program once it has started. Between 1994 and 2007, 51 students graduated from the program and entered a Ph.D. program. As of 2008, 49 of those students were still working towards the completion of a Ph.D. or had graduated and taken a job as an accounting professor.

External links

Information page about Ph.D. Prep Program at BYU

I'm afraid I can't unlock your page, because I am an ordinary editor on just the same footing as you. When I have time I help with "New Page Patrol", looking at newly arrived articles and flagging any that seem to need attention. When I saw yours, I tagged it as promotion and put on your user page a welcome message with useful links and an explanatory note. Then an administrator working down the list of tagged pages looked at it, agreed, and deleted it. I see from the deletion log that the page was created and deleted three times, and it was then "salted" - protected to prevent re-creation. You will need permission from an admin, perhaps one of the two who deleted it, before you can re-create the page.

Before you ask permission, I urge you to read carefully the Business' FAQ and the guidelines on Conflict of Interest, Neutral Point of View and Advertising to which it will point you. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertising service or even a notice-board. An admin will probably need to be convinced that your article will comply with the guidelines before he will allow you to re-create it.: One last point - when leaving a message on a talk page, it is useful to end it with four tilde characters ~~~~ - the system automatically converts them into a signature with time and date, so that the recipient knows who the message is from - like this: JohnCD (talk) 11:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Hiller credibility

You deleted my Steve Hiller wikipedia under section 997pi which totally not constitutional. As a member of the Martians, the band fool, Steve Hiller was very influencial. Your credibility as a member of the wikiNation is suspect. In conclusion, I leave you with a quote to ponder...

"Do you understand that the world does not revolve around you and your do whatever it takes, ruin as many people's lives, so long as you can make a name for yourself as an investigatory journalist, no matter how many friends you lose or people you leave dead and bloodied along the way, just so long so you can make a name for yourself as an investigatory journalist, no matter how many friends you lose or people you leave dead and bloodied and dying along the way?", Derek Zoolander —Preceding unsigned comment added by L130115 (talk • contribs) 15:12, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriel Levin

The page, wroten in that way, looks like a joke or a big mess. It is also the e-mail address and an e-mail content of the author ... Is it permitted ? I know that for "credits" it's used the talk page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.18.159.132 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page needs improving, but it doesn't qualify for speedy deletion. I have tidied it up a bit and moved the "permissions" bit, which doesn't seem to me necessary, to the talk page so that it is preserved.

The acceptable reasons for speedy deletion are actually quite restricted - read WP:CSD. If you are putting a speedy tag on, it is best to use one of the standard ones, like {{db-person}} or {{db-spam}}; if you can't find one that fits, it probably means the page doesn't qualify for a speedy. Also, deletion should be a last resort, used only if there is no way an article can be improved to be useful - read WP:DELETE. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Post-transcriptional regulation

I removed the copyright violation information from this article and left just a stub. This is a major topic in genetics and molecular biology, and it is very surprising there is no article on the subject in Wikipedia already. I asked on the administrator noticeboard for an administrator to simply close this debate. Please just withdraw your request for AfD from the article so as not to spend any time discussing the issue. --Blechnic (talk) 00:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD already closed by the time I woke up this morning (I'm on UTC+1). The article didn't seem to me salvageable, and indeed it seems nothing but the title was. Perhaps you would look at the article 5' flanking region copied (with some modification) from the same source by one of the same authors. Can that also be saved? JohnCD (talk) 09:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brendon Burns

Can you please delete the prod. Brendon Burns is notable and is almost certain to win the Christchurch Central seat. I note that Nicky Wagner has an article even though she has stood for that seat on several occasions and lost. Bactoid (talk) 09:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the PROD notice you will see that you may remove the PROD template yourself "if you improve the article or otherwise object to its deletion for any reason." I would then probably nominate the article for deletion under the Articles for Deletion process. There are good reasons for the precedent in WP:BIO#Politicians that being a candidate does not confer notability (otherwise Wikipedia would become an election hoarding for every election). As far as Nicky Wagner's article goes, it says she holds a seat in Parliament; but anyway, read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. JohnCD (talk) 10:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nicky Wagner holds a seat because she is on the party list as is Brendon Burns. He is guaranteed a seat even in the unlikely event he loses. I will most likely be removing the prod since a) I don't want to have to go through the process of putting the article back later in the year and b) it's a stub (ie. a work in progress). Bactoid (talk) 10:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mud Mud Ke Na Dekkh Mud Mud Ke

With your PROD of Mud Mud Ke Na Dekkh Mud Mud Ke, is it possible to go straight to AfD? I just get this funny feeling of Déjà vu thats all. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 12:16, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would certainly have been possible, but PhilKnight evidently had the same feeling of Déjà vu and has speedied it WP:CSD#G4. JohnCD (talk) 15:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, saw that soon after I left the message. I'm sure this happens all the time, but that was just a too weird of a title to forget so soon. Have a great weekend. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 00:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greta Wodele

I am disapointed to see my small contribution on Greta Wodele deleted. She is regularly on CSPAN. She is mentioned in the Wikipedia article on Washington Journal. I think a living person who appears rehgularly on a serious program like Washington Journal is worthy of mention.

I see from the Deletion log that articles with this title have been deleted twice before, but if you think you can show that she is notable according to Wikipedia's standards for entries about people (explained in Notability (people)), you are welcome to try again. If the article is to stay, you will need to include references from independent, reliable sources. There is more good advice in Why was my page deleted? and in the guide to creating Your first article. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:23, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted

It is deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael2346 (talk • contribs) 20:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Bitti Babu

A tag has been placed on Bitti Babu requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't actually create that page - I userfied the first version of it, put {{db-r2}} on the resulting redirect, and left a note for the originator Bitti007 (talk · contribs) to say that he could re-create it but should first read WP:BIO and WP:AUTO. He went ahead and over-wrote the redirect with his autobio. I have copied your speedy warning to his talk page. JohnCD (talk) 10:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted page

FYI Benedictitus is a real disease. Although i found it strange when i wikipedia searched your name all i came up with was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dooshbag —Preceding unsigned comment added by Damagedpanda (talk • contribs) 12:24, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nessesoryism

I replaced your 'prod' tag on this article with a speedy tag. The last line of the article says that this 'belief' has one follower, leading me to believe that the whole thing is a prank/nonsense. Tnxman307 (talk) 14:53, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me, if you can make it stick. I didn't think {{db-nocontext}} really fitted, and I have found some admins think that {{db-nonsense}} should be restricted to "lk'j8^er#!h%bgl*wjk" and the like, not anything where the words have a coherent meaning. I am thinking of proposing a new speedy category for things blatantly made up one day - neologisms, drinking games, joke religions - which have to be PRODded now. That would cover this nicely. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree. There's the gibberish-type nonsense, and then there's the nonsense into which people actually put some thought. While commendable for creativity, it's still basically nonsense. If you do propose such a tag, let me know, as I would support it. Tnxman307 (talk) 15:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry. Lack of notability established - delete okay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.212.161 (talk) 19:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 2008

EBay hoax

I have protected your version until after the auction ends, at which point I will delete it. Thanks, Black Kite 23:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Speedy Category Proposal

I thrown in my two cents on your proposal for a new speedy category. Again, I think it's a good idea and at the very worst, you've at least put the thought into people's minds. Good luck! Tnxman307 (talk) 23:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

about poo2nty

i'm sorry that you think this is inappropriate.. but you don't know everything. it's true. please keep it on. i beg you mercy man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Collinson (talk • contribs) 14:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this is your life isn't it? wanna meet? ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Collinson (talk • contribs) 14:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At least I have better things to do than make up nonsense articles. JohnCD (talk) 14:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undertow (webcomic)

I added the TWC and buzzcomic ranking, in both cases it is among the top 100, so this would seems notable enough.Wandalstouring (talk) 13:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, agreed - I tagged it because, as it was, it looked just like a hundred other self-promoting entries for new web-sites. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: User talk:SpecialRightTriangle‎ (attack warning)

Question, if I look at SpecialRightTriangle‎ (talk · contribs) I don't see the edit that you are talking about in your attack warning on his user page. According to his user contributions, he as only made one edit to Tom Hanks. What is the scoop? IP4240207xx (talk) 22:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The attack was in the page Mr parsons which was deleted; once a page has been deleted, edits to it no longer appear in the user contribution record, though admins can still see them. JohnCD (talk) 08:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The vampric editor and Patrick Flanagin

I see Yes, two more. Did not see a block notice and confused one of the more recent socks with that one. User:The Limit Is Me and User:Lampireslayer69 appear to be socks of User:Lampireslayer666. This has been deleted 5 times now. I think I'll protect Patrick Flanagin, as blocking seems ineffectual. Thanks for your help. Cheers, Dloh cierekim 16:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Socks blocked and page protected. Thanks again. Cheers, Dloh cierekim 16:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello John CD —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marquiseyancy (talk • contribs) 16:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism

Hi JohnCD. Sorry to meddle with your talk page, but I guess you didn't quite like all these slaughtered cat pictures lying around :) Greetings, Bakabaka (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, thanks, feel free to remove dead cats from my premises any time! I'm glad we've got that one blocked, even if only for 24 hrs, and his friend seems to have given up after uw-4. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi just

put only official charts!!!!

go acharts.us...you will see violet hill —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.93.170 (talk) 15:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks!

		RfA: Many thanks
		Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 06:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

marrsball (speedy deletion)

sorry about that. Its actually got nothing to do with me at all. Someone mentioned it to me and I couldn't find i on wikipedia. So i thought i'd add a couple of lines. Didn't realise it was a problem. My bad.

But yeah, deletion is cool if its a problem.

Splooj (talk) 13:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Epicaricacy was not a content fork

Articles on distinct but related topics may well contain a significant amount of information in common with one another. This does not make either of the two articles a content fork. As an example, clearly Joséphine de Beauharnais will contain a significant amount of information also in Napoleon I of France, this does not make it a fork.
— Wikipedia:CFORK#Related articles

Idiot.151.197.116.67 (talk) 01:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:NPP

thanks for the advice regarding speedy deletions.I'll be sure to check ou the links you gave me. Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Userboxes 15:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles

Should I go ahead and nominate the articles for speedy deletion? Since I'm the original author of them and want to have the articles deleted on good faith? (Also, to protect the "reputation" of the places named in the articles) T.W. (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Normally, the way to ask for your own article to be deleted is to blank it and put {{db-author}}, but in this case, since others have edited the article and the AfD debate is under way, I'm not sure that would be right. I suggest you leave each article, and the AfD notice, as they are, but right at the top add {{db-author}} and just under that {{comment|principal author requests deletion - see AfD debate}}. Then the admin who looks at it can see what's going on and decide what to do. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I've done just as you suggested. I hope this helps and I'm trully sorry about the whole situation and the confusion of it. I'm just deeply hurt at the hoax accusations most of all, and would rather have the articles deleted completely than their truth being questioned like that. Thanks again! T.W. (talk) 18:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 20:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

West Midlands Barbershop Harmony Club

I was trying to raise people's awareness, for thousands of people in the UK would be interested in Barbershop but there are no clubs listed with their own articles on here. I was planning to do this. If you give me chance, you will see that I am writing basic knowledge on clubs in the UK, just like their are on American Clubs.

Quite ironic, that you delete mine, but let Vocal Majority spread propaganda about theirs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barberman12 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles have to meet Wikipedia's requirements, particularly: is the subject of enough general interest for an encyclopedia article? That is summed up in the word notability, and the requirements are explained in the guidelines Notability and Notability (music). Notice also that references are needed from independent reliable sources, and that if you are a member of the club you should be aware of the guidelines on Conflict of Interest. If you take all that into account, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to produce an acceptable article about the British barbershop scene. The guide to writing Your First Article is helpful. As regards Vocal Majority, their article seems to me to meet notability requirements, but anyway, read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Local artists

I would like to write about some local Hampton Roads artists. I'm not having any luck uploading images to these pages. Can you give me help?Donwatsonart (talk) 19:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing to realise is that Wikipedia does not accept articles about anyone or anything: subjects have to be of enough general interest for an encyclopedia article. The Wikipedia term for that is notability, and the requirements are explained in the Notability guideline and in more detailed ones such as Notability (people). The next thing that many new contributors have difficulty with is that Wikipedia does not publish original work - everything must be backed up by references from independent, reliable sources. The guide to writing Your First Article is a good source of advice, and so is The Five Pillars of Wikipedia. I would also recommend looking at some existing biographies of artists, to get a feel for what other people have done; if you look at WP:FA and WP:GA, the lists of "Featured Articles" and "Good Articles", for biographies you should find something to go on. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have just now read your question again and see that it was about uploading images. I hope all the well-meant advice above will be useful, but for images see WP:IMAGE and WP:UPIMAGE. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Yes, I wans't quite sure how I was to do it (I saw User_talk:androo123) so I thought you had to put User_stub. Thank you for correcting my error. Androo123 (talk) 22:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

San Francisco Music Box

I am writing for more details regarding why the San Francisco music box page that was deleted. I am new to Wikipedia and as this is my first post I am not sure why it was deleted. The San Francisco Music Box company was founded in San Francisco in 1978. The water globes and music boxes the company carries are traditions and treasures that Americans still love to collect and purchase today. There is a lot of history involved in the company and many people across the United States still hold great interest in these items. If I have in some way misrepresented the information please indicate so. My attempt was to simply explain the history and story behind how the SF music box company was started and where and how the company still functions today, 30 years later.

I do not understand how this is blatant advertising and that of J.Crew and hundreds of other vendors that are shown in the encyclopedia are not?

Please advise, thank you.

Sfmusicbx (talk) 14:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(reply on his user page)

June 2008

Seapals

Hi! I was the one who made the Seapals things(if you search seapals). I really don't understand why it should be deleted. Just like they wrote about webkinz(which are virtual pets and made by Ganz) why can't I write about Seapals? If I have done anything wrong please tell me and I'll make sure to fix it!

Cpwkw (talk) 15:00, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For something to have an article in Wikipedia it has to be of enough general interest to be worth an encyclopedia article. The Wikipedia term for that is notability, and it's explained in the article Notability and more detailed ones such as Notability (people) for biographies and Notability (web) for web-sites. The best test is whether other people have written about something - that gives independent sources. My opinion was that Seapals weren't notable enough, but that's only my opinion - an administrator would have to look at the article and agree before it was deleted. You did the right thing by putting a {{hangon}} tag (it should have been in curly brackets, but I've corrected that for you). Now put your reasons for keeping the page on the article's talk page. You can point to the "webkinz" article as a comparison, though I should warn you that What about that other article? isn't always accepted as a defence. The best way to improve the article would be to find some independent reference to Seapets, not just the company's web-site, and add that as a reference. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay.Thanks for explaining anyways! Cpwkw (talk) 16:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other SeaPal articles for reference other than the company's website:

Virtual World News: http://www.virtualworldsnews.com/2008/06/russ-berrie-q1.html Virtual Pet Insider: http://www.virtualpetinsider.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44:seapals-games-available-at-launch&catid=11:seapals&Itemid=38 Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/feb/17/virtual-toys-online-friends-the-latest-trend/ Digg: http://digg.com/odd_stuff/Sea_Pals_by_Russ Toy Directory Monthly: http://www.toydirectory.com/monthly/newtoys/slideshow.asp?product_id=17814&company_id=0&category_id=55 Plushie Magazine / Beckett: http://www.beckett.com/plushiepalsforum/default.aspx?g=posts&t=1705312

Not to mention the number of Ebay auctions for the product, and other online stores that sell the product. I think there is enough buzz out there to make this a valid wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.152.124.116 (talk) 02:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Washington Times and Virtual World News ones look fine - create the article again with references and you should have no problems. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haunts (band)

I can't decide on Haunts (band) either. They dont have a major single, but "some" feable press coverage. --Triwbe (talk) 15:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It claims major radio coverage, Not CSD. I would tag it and leave it for now. --Triwbe (talk) 16:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree, not speedy material. JohnCD (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My talkpage

Thanks for replying to that editor. If you'll notice, I did tag for speedy deletion another article he/she had created. That may have been the reason for the posts on my page. I still believe the articles which were created are original research, so if they somehow end up at AfD, let me know and I'll give my $.02 there as well. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 21:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I just removed the post directly above mine, as it appeared to be vandalism. Let me know if you would like it put back. TN‑X-Man 21:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

tray-hoyt-sheeler theory/durating

Thank you for your speedy responce you may delete the theory if you wish I understand that you dont publish orional work and I do want you to know that once we are published and have reputible verifiable sources we will be back ready to post our theory on the website. Also with the deletion of the page on the word durating this is a word we are trying to coin becasue we made this word to stand for somthing in our theory durating=moving across the axis of time. We do thank you thought, and understasnd the problem with the creation of the page on our theory. As I said before we will be back and with sources and verifiable references.

No problem. The article will disappear in five days, or sooner if you like to put {{db-author}} at the top (double curly brackets) which means "author requests deletion". You are welcome to bring it back when you have references - read the guidelines on Reliable sources and (for "durating") on Articles on neologisms. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Deletion

Done. But I don't know how to sort them together so I just put them all in AfD. Cheers! Chimeric Glider (talk) 19:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reference

I put a reference on Fire magick will you see if it is Good enough? thanks a lot. --Condalence ( 16:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know - depends whether "www.spellsandmagic.com" is considered a reliable source. I am not Authority - just another editor who sometimes does New Page Patrol looking at incoming articles. I am rather doubtful about this series of articles you seem to be starting which are little more than dictionary definitions of different colours of magic with almost no information, and I was thinking of nominating them all for deletion with the suggestion that unless there was more to say they should be notes in a general article on magic. Do you expect to find enough sourced information to make proper encyclopedia articles of them? (See WP:STUB for the minimum standards expected). There is a WikiProject Neopaganism - why not consult them and see what they think. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes,of course i'm going to find information on these. I'm going to try to get other Wikipedians to help improve it. How long do i have to improve them. I still have researh to do. I'll see about the wikiproject neopaganism. I'll do my best. Thanks a lot. --Condalence ( 16:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I was going to do is create a few articles to see how it goes. If they get deleted then i'm going to go ahead and put all of them in Wikipedia's requested articles. I'm just trying to improve. --Condalence ( 16:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally best to wait to put an article in until you have enough material to make it clear it's going to be a worthwhile article; that reduces the risk of its getting speedily deleted, as is likely to happen if you put in a basically empty article in the hope that someone else will improve it. You can prepare the material off-line in a word-processor, or make yourself a user page (you can create one by typing "User:Condalence/workpage", or whatever title you like, in the search box) and work on the article in that until it's ready to go. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All right i'll do that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Condalence (talk • contribs) 17:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Sunshine Getaway

Not Advised are a similar band and have a wikipedia site, could you tell me why they have not been "speedily deleted" and we have been tagged. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Camster5000 (talk • contribs) 09:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See What about article X?; but in this case I think you're right, they have been tagged "notability doubtful" since April and I don't think they qualify either, so I have tagged them too. The requirements for a band to have an article are in Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles. JohnCD (talk) 10:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SellingCR

Hi, I'm troubled by the speedy deletion tag added to the SellingCR article i'm in the process of creating at the moment. I'm working on a company profile about a company that my cousine started to help promote costa rica and provide real estate information. I don't understand why this is different then the NuComm International article I started before or articles on business such as eBay. Granted eBay is much larger it should be allowed on the same basis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lhalbert (talk • contribs) 20:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a business listing directory or a vehicle for any kind of promotion. Articles have to be of enough general interest for an encyclopedia article: the Wikipedia term for that is notability, and the requirements are explained in the guideline on Notability and in more detail in Notability (organizations and companies). Articles need to be verifiable from independent, reliable sources - a company's own website does not count as independent - and such independent references are the best way to demonstrate notability. There is also the point that articles must be written from a neutral point of view, and so people are strongly discouraged from writing about themselves or their own companies, because of the conflict of interest involved. For more advice, read carefully the Business' FAQ, in particular the sections headed:

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob mccauley

Hi, I removed the speedy tag from Jacob mccauley because it did assert some notability (won an award in 2008). You might want to prod this or send it to AfD. Karanacs (talk) 20:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Double A

Hi. You recently deleted a page that I had posted about a company called Double A Kebab. While I am unsure of the reasons for the deletion of this page, I am even more intrigued as to why wiki pages about companies such as 'Pukka Pies' are allowed?

I hope that you can be of some assistance in helping me understand the reasons for the deletion of this page.

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldsnodden (talk • contribs) 10:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See my answer to a similar question under "Selling CR", two items up in this talk page. The Pukka Pies article cites a number of independent references; but see also the guideline What about article x?. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Jol tyler elizalde

A tag has been placed on Jol tyler elizalde requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. -Toon⁰⁵ 11:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't actually create that - I userfied it to his user page with a note explaining about notability, and tagged the resulting redirect db-r2; then he came back and restored it. It should go, anyway. JohnCD (talk) 11:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, well that message was generates automatically by twinkle... I haven't really followed what has gone on here, but I apologise if this was sent to the wrong talk page! -Toon⁰⁵ 17:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. JohnCD (talk) 18:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why?

Thats my name! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sthuf (talk • contribs) 18:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are writing about yourself, the best place is your user page. Before writing about yourself for an article in the main encyclopedia, you should read the guidelines on Notability (people) and Autobiography. JohnCD (talk) 14:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Riviera Nayarit

I was posting some information about Riviera Maya, but in a confusion, I created an article called Riviera Nayarit (both are mexican traditional beaches). That's why I erased the erroneus information that I've posted earlier for Riviera Nayarit! --MBO2008 (talk) 19:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the understanding. Bitdefuser (talk) 15:58, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Symphony Membership Page

Whoever you are, your comments do not reflect the opinions of the Omaha Symphony Musicians or the Omaha Symphony Association. You do not have the privilege to represent this magnificent orchestra in any capacity that I know of. While your inflamatory statements may be corroborated by published reports, the only sentence relevant to our beloved musicians is the first one. The balance of your "facts" have nothing to do with membership.

Your negative comments are a disservice to the hardworking musicians and staff. Take your personal opinions and grind that axe somewhere more relevant. Remember, the world can see your personal opnions and comments and that is the opinion they will form about our orchestra. I am reporting your disrespectful comments to the Symphony staff all the musicians that I know and will urge them to do whatever necessary to stop your negative representation of our musicians. Shame on you.--Phnole86 (talk) 19:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The comments you are trying to remove from the article are not mine, they are those of the Omaha World-Herald, here, correctly cited. Further reply and warning on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 19:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These are reflections of your personal opinion and have no place here. Think of what you are doing to our musicians!!--Phnole86 (talk) 20:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are not my opinions, they are statements quoted, accurately, from the Omaha World-Herald. I have no opinions about the Omaha Symphony Orchestra, and had nothing to do with the article, as you can see from the edit history, until I saw you start to delete bits of it with no explanation. If you have valid reasons for wanting to change the article, I suggest you explain them, with your sources, on the article's talk page and try to reach agreement with other editors, because if you continue the sort of edits you have been making - unexplained deletions and alteration of figures - you will be blocked from editing. JohnCD (talk) 20:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Omaha Symphony

You will be one of the reasons why the Omaha Symphony fails. --Phnole86 (talk) 00:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey JohnCD, quick note to say "thanks" for taking this on. I will interject with more citations and material late today, and attempt to address the various issues this anon IP has presented. • Freechild'sup? 14:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to let someone with local knowledge and interest get involved - I know absolutely nothing about it, I just saw an unexplained deletion flash by on Recent Changes and followed that up. JohnCD (talk) 21:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial Communications Centre

Hello there,

I have got a message for my article that it would be speedly deleted from wikipedia.

First of all, I am not promoting anything and I only want to inform people of the next generation of Internet.

Second of all, my company is CCC UK LIMITED and the title that I choosed for my article is not the company name neither a product name.

Therefore, I would highly appreciate if you could leave my article to be on wikipedia.

Best Regards,

Arash —Preceding unsigned comment added by CCCUKLTD (talk • contribs) 16:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are still writing about your own company, which is strongly discouraged because of the conflict of interest involved - articles must be written from a neutral point of view. For more advice, read carefully the Business' FAQ, in particular the sections headed:

What you can do if you object to speedy deletion is to put {{hangon}} on the article just below the db tag, and put your reasons on the article's talk page. To help you, I have done that for you - now an administrator will read what you have written before he decides. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notification tag

I removed the notification because I added the tag on the article and had already added the notification on the user's talk page. --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (^Talk!/_Cont.) 21:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - there were edit conflicts going on and she was past final warning anyway - I reported her to AIV and she's been blocked 31 hours and both article titles salted. JohnCD (talk) 22:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good job! --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (^Talk!/_Cont.) 22:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken.

I do think I can get my point across with help. I am a first time submitter, and to Wikki's guidelines I am sure the arcticle was poorly written, no sources cited, and out of step as far as how I layed it out.

Clinton Strange --ClintonStrange (talk) 19:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that what you have is an original idea, and encyclopedias aren't in the business of publishing original ideas. No Original Research is one of Wikipedia's three key content policies. (The other two are Verifiability and Neutral Point of View). So I'm afraid Wikipedia is not the place for what you are trying to do.

A tip about layout - don't leave leading spaces at the beginning of a line, that's what makes it go all funny. It's worth using the "Show Preview" button to see if you've got an edit right, then you can change it if need be before finally clicking "Save page". Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never been accused of that before :)

I had an original thought. Thanks. Perhaps a dictionary is where I need to take this...

--ClintonStrange (talk) 20:11, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you have another problem - there isn't any English "language authority" who could change the language for you - unlike the Spanish "Royal Academy" who purport to control that language, though I think they are generally fighting a rearguard action against Spanglish rather than proposing changes. In English somebody, I forget who, said "any noun can be verbed", and I think if you say to your clients "you're over-detergenting" they would know exactly what you mean. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kinross services

I notice you have marked the Kinross services page for deletion. I would encourage you to investigate the pages of a number of other UK motorway service areas as shown in the Moto Hospitality template at the bottom of the Kinross services page. Others have added pages about other Moto service areas in the UK and for the sake of completeness I believe that the handful of missing services areas should also be included. If you feel that Kinross is not notable then neither are any of the other service areas already present on Wikipedia.

I strongly feel that if a list of motorway services is on Wikipedia in the first place then it should be a comprehensive list. For this reason I would encourage you to undo whatever actions you have taken to delete this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nau03144 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, actually, I don't think the other motorway service areas are notable either, and per WP:WAX the existence of some non-notable articles is not a good reason for creating more. Maybe someone will in due course get round to clearing them out; I PRODded this one promptly in the hope of saving you wasting your time on more. In support of my view, I would cite Notability (places and transport), Wikipedia is not a directory and Wikipedia is not a guidebook.

You ask me to "undo whatever actions you have taken to delete this article"; if you look at the PROD template you'll see that anyone, including you, can remove it if you "object to its deletion for any reason". So you are fully entitled to remove the PROD. I would then probably take the article to AfD, and we could see what the community thinks. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see where you are coming from on this. I have read the articles you have linked to previously. Thank you for bringing these things to my attention - as you know I'm pretty new to this. It does strike me that under these guidelines there must be vast quantities of non-notable pages on Wikipedia.

However, even after reading the relevant information, I would still be disappointed to see Kinross services removed from Wikipedia in this manner. Letting this one article slip away without further discussion would not achieve a great deal. I feel that the question of the notability of individual motorway service stations is wider than just this one article and consideration should be given to their notability as a whole. In your eyes they are not notable, in mine I would consider them to be notable enough to merit inclusion. I know it's the All or Nothing argument that we are advised to avoid, but it certainly appears to this Wiki-newbie that unless you are willing to challenge the notability of this entire category then you would be achieving very little by removing a single article.

As a slight aside, I feel that it would be essential that someone judging the merits or otherwise of this article should be from the UK. I have no idea what nationality you are as your user page gives little away, but since the English language is widely used elsewhere in the world there is a distinct likelihood that you are not British. If that were true, then I would suggest that perhaps you may not be a suitable person to judge the notability of individual motorway service areas. If you are British, then this point is utterly irrelevant! Nau03144 (talk) 04:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your very reasonable response. I had already decided that, although you had not removed my PROD from the article, I would remove it myself because PRODs are meant to be for uncontroversial deletions, and you had raised an objection. So I have done that; I am undecided whether to take it to AfD, and will think about it while I am away for a couple of days and let you know. PS - I am indeed a Brit, all too familiar with motorway services, have used Kinross, and before I retired was a regular for breakfast at Membury Welcome Break. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome messages etc.

Hi. I've recently become more involved in new page patrolling, which has meant a dramatic increase in the number of (hopefully correct) prods and CSD's I'm flagging. I've come across a fair few situations where my "I've flagged something as yours to be deleted" message is the first thing on their talk page and, thinking about it, this seems a bit harsh for new editors. Are there any standard welcome message templates I should be putting there first before dropping the bombshell ? CultureDrone (talk) 09:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Answered on his talk page). JohnCD (talk) 10:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) CultureDrone (talk) 10:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THEN CAN U TAKE THE EDIT PART OFF —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.140.212.195 (talk) 16:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Ritter

10th time is a charm. Salted. Thanks for the heads up. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 19:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Perfect Apathy

Hey...why is my music project "My Perfect Apathy" not wikipedia worthy? -michael sandefer --message originally place on user page by Apexigod (talk · contribs) 17:17, 9 July 2008

Because it doesn't meet the notability requirements of Notability (music), and because you have a conflict of interest in writing about your own project. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Perfect Apathy

Well, it has notability now. I'll be adding more to it in a little while...and honestly, you are telling me that since I made my own my perfect apathy page and not say....a buddy of mine..you are going to delete it?

That is absolutely ridiculous. I may not be famous, or have a record on a national chart YET...but I've made history, appeared on national radio broadcasts and had articles written about my music.

so technically, I belong here. Mike-C (talk) 00:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)apexigod[reply]

Welcome Break

John,

I wondered if you would mind having a look at the Welcome Break article and giving me a little feedback on it. I have substantially modified it over the last few days and as I'm new to this game I hoped maybe you could let me know how I'm doing. It was a very poor article before, I hope I've brought the standard up a little bit.

Thanks. Nau03144 (talk) 03:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RIG/Andrew Roberts/Stefan Roberts

Hi JohnCD, thank you for your feedback and your offer to take the articles to AFD. While I am regularly contributing to Wikipedia, I have very little experience with the deletion and AFD processes. Therefore, if the articles gets contested before tomorrow's deadline, I will take you up on your offer.

If this is going to be a confirmed hoax, it was a rather good one. I am still not sure myself if someone put a lot of effort into it, or if it is just poor citations.

Again - thank you for your offer. HagenUK (talk) 07:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for moving this on to AFD for me. I was looking through the policy, but it read like a japanese manual to the uninitiated ;-)

HagenUK (talk) 20:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your help! It is greatly appreciated! HagenUK (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confused messages from Unites (talk · contribs)

LOL!!!!

OOOPS, i forgot signiture.... @@@@, ooops! Unites 15:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC) (Unites 15:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)) not @@@@!!! LOL!

I can't be arsed (oops, asked) reading all them professional articles about rules of Wikipedia!! too long, make it nice and simple, not 6 billion words!!! oops that's the population of the world!!

Unites 16:01, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

reply?

are you even gonna reply??? ???? oooops! (~ ~ ~ ~) not @@@@, oops ????, NOOOOOOOOO!! (~ ~ ~ ~) finally! NOOOOOOO!! Unites 16:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

If you "can't be arsed (oops, asked) reading all them professional articles about rules of Wikipedia" you'll just find that your articles get deleted; and sooner or later you'll be blocked from editing. To put the three content policies in a few words: anything in Wikipedia must be backed up by an independent reliable source; Wikipedia doesn't publish original ideas (that was the problem with your article Economy of the Universe); and everything has to be written from a neutral point of view - no soapboxing. JohnCD (talk) 16:13, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote for any other readers who can't be arsed to read the rules: he was indef-blocked even as I was writing the above. JohnCD (talk) 12:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oaaa

Got it; it's the ‘O‘o‘a‘a, a.k.a. Kauaʻi ʻŌʻō. Redirecting. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 11:14, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done! JohnCD (talk) 11:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting exercise: ""Oaaa bird"" -> Ukrainian catalogue ref [2] to TLS article -> Justin Quinn poetry anthology [3] which provided better spelling and typography "O'o'a'a'", enough to find Latin name Moho braccatus [4], which redirects here to Kauaʻi ʻŌʻō. Phew. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 12:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Songs of Scotland

Hi John. Thanks for that. I thought it was probably also a good idea to move American Folk Songs to a more specific title, so I have now done that. Hope this is all right. TheRetroGuy (talk) 12:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I see that at Wikipedia:Wikiproject Albums#Style it says "When there is no other encyclopedic use of the album title, the article should reside at the normal name, e.g. London Calling, not London Calling (album)." But I still think that for "Songs of Scotland" it was a good idea to add "(album)" - there might well be another article with that title, even if there isn't now. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

... and now I see someone else has moved it back. Oh, well, let's not edit-war. I've changed the link from Jo Stafford back again. JohnCD (talk) 12:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly I notice there are a few entries for both Songs of Scotland and American Folk Songs at AllMusic, so I guess we'll probably end up having to disambiguate if articles are created about them. TheRetroGuy (talk) 13:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ERP Vendors

Hi,

I've read over the notability issues with the 2 ERP vendors that I wrote things about. Here are a few articles online that talk about both of them.

These articles talk about Slingshot: [5] [6] [7]

This article is about Vormittag: [8]

I believe that these articles help support the notability of both of the companies.

The reason that I posted these up were because I am currently searching for ERP software for a company, however the company i am looking for can not afford / do not want to go with the larger companies (all of which are already listed). Figured I would post up a few companies that i found that other people may be interested in.

Let me know what else i can do to get these companies posted. I also had a few other companies I would like to get up there because they are slowly helping me to make a well educated decision.

Tdelles09 (talk) 01:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The three for Slingshot are all press releases by the company or its parent Celerity, and press releases are specifically excluded in WP:ORG#Primary criterion. I don't know about IncBizNet, but it looks like a place where businesses post profiles of themselves, in which case the Vormittag one also wouldn't count. What WP:ORG is looking for in "significant coverage in secondary sources" is evidence that people independent of the company have thought it interesting enough to write about. The thing is, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and tries to avoid turning into a business directory that simply lists every company in the world. So my advice on how to get company entries in is, read WP:ORG carefully and search for independent material about the company. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Hey. Thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look around sometime (if it is deemed these guys are fully worth my time to look at as an ERP Vendor) to see if there are any good third party articles about them.

Thanks for the info.

Tdelles09 (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The musical parody

An article that you have been involved in editing, The musical parody, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The musical parody. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:09, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Untitled F.C.

You may wish to comment on a recent sockpuppetry case I have opened Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mido z05, you may well wish to oppose given the statment made by the alleged puppet at the bottom but it would also appear that the comments made could confirm meatpuppetry? I'm not sure but given you were the opener of the AfD I thought you'd it appropriate to inform you. BigHairRef | Talk 19:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm inclined to leave it be - it looks as if it's just another supporter piling in. If lots of them appear we may have to put {{notavote}} on the AfD; but if, as seems likely, their page goes, I guess they'll lose interest and go away. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Come on be fair guys. you are deleting a page that has no violated anything and compared to other pages is more reliable and make more sense than half of them. Take it into consideration there is nothing wrong with the page. Keep it! Please! all we are trying to do is create a page that informs the public of our team to get more support and fans. This will help us gain popularity and then it will follow your criteria. But how is that suppose to work if you don't post our page. Please think about it i worked hard on the page and don't believe it deserves to be deleted. Mido z05 (talk) 20:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(replied on his talk page. JohnCD (talk) 21:06, 23 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]

The Group

Thanks for your nice comment Thats rather hurt full when it's not my fault i can't spell because i am dyslexic aswell the reason why there isent a few topics is becuase the website is currntily been rebuilt as we speak and aswell the forum is been cleaned up which is been needed.

I hope you can understand thius but i may just withdraw my account with wikipedia for the continue ness of which you keep deleting mya rticles when there true which really is rather down heartning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Titanicboss (talk • contribs) 20:56, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that - I've removed those words from the AfD. (Have you tried a spell-checker? They don't catch everything, but I find they do catch most of my mis-spellings). I'm afraid being true isn't enough to get an article into Wikipedia - it has to be about something of enough general interest for an encyclopedia article. The Wikipedia term for that is notable and it's explained at Notability and other guidelines linked from there. Also, an article has to be verifiable from independent reliable sources. So I'm afraid an article about a small, newly-started group like yours is not likely to make it. One other tip - when you post a message in a talk page, it's a good idea to end it with four tilde characters ~~~~, which the system turns into a "signature" of your user-name and the time and date like this: JohnCD (talk) 21:10, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ever feel like a salted Pulmonata?

Thanks for realizing what my primary concern is, that the articles should be quality, and someone's awards for quantity are second to the writing of the encyclopedia. It seems obvious to me. But I keep having to fight people over this. --Blechnic (talk) 05:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS This is about a comment you made on the AN/I thread about user W. Will and a remark made to me about my posting my concerns twice on AN/I. --Blechnic (talk) 06:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are too many good and even excellent young editors at Wikipedia for me to say that someone should be allowed to write crap just because they're using Wikipedia as their babysitter. --Blechnic (talk) 21:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redemption Hill

Ok maybe i added ' Clarissa ' to Redemption Hill's teen names or whatever but , why did you change the thing about Aaron Lambert , it's all true.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Em&Cj (talk • contribs) 18:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a playground, and it's important that it is accurate. So when I see edits by a contributor with a record of putting in false entries, and the first one I check is false again, I can either spend a lot of time checking whether any of the rest happen to be true or, if the others don't add much of importance, the safest thing to do is revert the lot. JohnCD (talk) 19:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kai Kasiguran

You tagged Kai Kasiguran for speedy deletion. Soccer players at the Major League Soccer level are usually notable. --Eastmain (talk) 22:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I read the sentence "Kai was drafted by the Chicago Fire in the 1st round (12th overall) of the 2008 MLS Supplemental Draft" to mean he had been called up into the squad but not yet played - I recall several AfDs along those lines. I'd better stay away from American sports that I don't understand. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Perfect Apathy (continued)

Hello. I noticed that you have been involved with this article in the past. I tried to explain to its creator/subject what he needs to do in order to bring it in line with Wikipedia's guidelines, but his reaction was a bit hostile. A week has passed without any change to the article, and I'm not sure what the next move should be. Any ideas? – SJL 06:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Sigh!) I was relieved to see that you were looking after this. Still, my turn again now; the next thing is to take it to AfD, which I have done here, and get other views, so he can see you and I are not a conspiracy but just reflecting the community's standards. JohnCD (talk) 11:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. I figured that was the next step, but I wasn't sure. I actually think that the article could meet the criteria for inclusion if rewritten and properly sourced, but the author seems unwilling to take constructive criticism. – SJL 15:53, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't think so, even stretching WP:MUSIC to its limit; anyway, the community view was clear, and the closing admin evidently reckoned it was still a speedy candidate, or else that WP:SNOW applied. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MBG Expense Management

I added some references to MBG Expense Management, and I do not think the tone of the article is unduly promotional. You may wish to review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MBG Expense Management. --Eastmain (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't think it was unduly promotional - my comment was, no indication of significance. I'll look at the references and maybe reconsider. JohnCD (talk) 21:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

^ "Assessing the Shortage of Accounting Faculty". Retrieved 2008-04-09.
^ "University's where Individuals Received their Ph.D." Retrieved 2008-04-09.
^ "Current Faculty". Retrieved 2008-04-09.
^ "Innovation in Accounting Education Award Winners". Retrieved 2008-04-09.

[1] "Assessing the Shortage of Accounting Faculty". Retrieved 2008-04-09.

[2] "University's where Individuals Received their Ph.D." Retrieved 2008-04-09.

[3] "Current Faculty". Retrieved 2008-04-09.

[4] "Innovation in Accounting Education Award Winners". Retrieved 2008-04-09.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]