User talk:Kku/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

A link you added went to a disambiguation page

Hi. You recently added a link to Hierarchical_classifier, making classification a link. I'm guessing you just made the word a link and saw that it wasn't a dead link. The link goes to a disambiguation page. I think it's always a good idea to check where you link to rather than just making something a link. It can often be a disambiguation page or point to something you would never in a million years think it did. Or perhaps you meant to link to the disambiguation page which I think there is a policy saying its in generaly not encouraged. I'm going to change the link to make it point to something more precise. Although, figuring out where to point it has made me realize how absolutely abysmal that article is right now. Ye Gods it sucks. I've been reading about Machine Learning so I thought I might try editing it but I'm not completely sure what the article as written is even about. I think its a classification algorithm, where you give the program a bunch of features and categories and it determines which document (or other types of data) belongs to which category or categories. And also, some algorithms can actually discover categories. But the stuff about vision and other parts isn't really consistent with that. Vision is nothing like this kind of classification. For one thing there are modular independent layers to vision: edges, surfaces, shapes, 3D, domain objects, etc. And those layers behave in very different ways (the way you recognize an edge is very different from the way you combine edges into shapes). Sorry, getting off topic. If you have any ideas what the article is about or replies to any of my other rambles above feel free to reply back. Cheers. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 01:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, MadScientistX11! I am by now well aware of what your concerns are (I did also browse through the discussions). Sorry for leaving the classification link un-dis-ambiguated, that shouldn't have happened. As for the quality and the substance of the article itself... well, I am not sure. I already had a good mind to shorten it, move it to hierarchical classification and give a few truisms about the topic in the intro, moving the "classifier" stuff down to a more obscure position. But then I came across your thoughts and reservations. Sure enough, the intersection of "h. c.fier" and "h. c.fication" in google scholar is tiny. But are we really talking about fundamentally different classification approaches? Not sure up to this point. "h. c.fication" would at any rate make a more appropriate article candidate. -- Kku (talk) 06:41, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of DM Petroleum Operations Company

The article DM Petroleum Operations Company has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:33, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of DECIDE

The article DECIDE has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:37, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of US Nuclear Corp

The article US Nuclear Corp has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Corral Petroleum Holdings

The article Corral Petroleum Holdings has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of International Conferences in Central Europe on Computer Graphics, Visualization and Computer Vision

The article International Conferences in Central Europe on Computer Graphics, Visualization and Computer Vision has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:48, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Are you leading a crusade? Do you have problems understanding the relevance of economic networks? Are you bored? Are you unaware of thousands of fandom articles on WP? I hope I can help. -- Kku (talk) 05:49, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Explanation

I am sure you'll not find the mass listing above enjoyable, and I apologize for that. However, in my opinion, all of the above articles fail WP:GNG. If you can expand them adding references and arguments showing notability, please feel free to remove the prod notice. You can also just remove it, and we can hold a wider discussion about those topics at AfD. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:51, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

You are quite right. I observe that your crusade appears to concentrate on my contributions and - in particular - on economic players and advocacy groups in touchy sectors and environmentally highly debatable. I challenge you to prove that you a) as a sociologist arecompetent enough in economic and environmental matters to be able to judge for yourself (beyond superficial indicators) how the articles in question could be (ir)relevant and b) that you are not in a conflict of interest and neutral enough to do so. I have rarely seen such a massive attack from even the worst non-inclusionists. Explain yourself. -- Kku (talk) 10:09, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of WarXing

Hello, Kku. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, WarXing, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

edit the page
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Mduvekot (talk) 11:14, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

done. redir. -- Kku (talk) 11:47, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ströer

The article Ströer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:28, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for prodding. -- Kku (talk) 12:30, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Plastic Pollution Coalition

The article Plastic Pollution Coalition has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:32, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for prodding. -- Kku (talk) 13:32, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sofidel Group

The article Sofidel Group has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for prodding. -- Kku (talk) 13:33, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of AquaFed

The article AquaFed has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks for prodding. -- Kku (talk) 14:40, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Adaro Energy

The article Adaro Energy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:39, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks for prodding. -- Kku (talk) 08:42, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Four in One (composition)

The article Four in One (composition) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:40, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks for nothing. this was obviously challenged blindly, considering the comparable other monk compositions articles. -- Kku (talk) 08:59, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bundesverband der Pharmazeutischen Industrie

The article Bundesverband der Pharmazeutischen Industrie has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:33, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks for pointing out. done. -- Kku (talk) 13:39, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Insecticide Resistance Action Committee

The article Insecticide Resistance Action Committee has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:41, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks for prodding. -- Kku (talk) 14:14, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Re: style and content

Hello, Kku. You have new messages at Talk:For the Birds (film).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

this fixed itself long ago. -- Kku (talk) 06:03, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Karl Kummer (politician)) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Karl Kummer (politician), Kku!

Wikipedia editor Prof tpms just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

To reply, leave a comment on Prof tpms's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

dont have one yet. still. -- Kku (talk) 06:03, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Unverified images

Hi. You uploaded Image:Borromeanrings.png but did not list any source and/or copyright information on the image description page. Please mark it either as GFDL or public domain. See Image copyright tags for more info. If the image was uploaded in error or cannot be licensed for use on Wikipedia, please add it to images for deletion. Please note that images without copyright information may be deleted in the future. Thanks. RedWolf 02:31, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

Also, please tag the description page for Image:Hemoglobin.jpg. See my comment on its discussion page about copyright concerns. Thanks. Kbh3rd 03:19, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

this fixed itself long ago. -- Kku (talk) 06:04, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Image:Funnelsmall.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Funnelsmall.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

this fixed itself long ago. -- Kku (talk) 06:04, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Energy in Africa

Template:Energy in Africa has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:11, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

ok. -- Kku (talk) 12:49, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of YAPP Automotive Systems

The article YAPP Automotive Systems has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:34, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks for prodding. -- Kku (talk) 13:39, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of European-American Business Organization

The article European-American Business Organization has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:39, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for prodding. I will certainly contribute to relevance discussions. -- Kku (talk) 15:22, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of OpenGTS

The article OpenGTS has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:46, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks for prodding. maybe you have a point in this case. -- Kku (talk) 15:26, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Classification of Types of Construction

The article Classification of Types of Construction has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:47, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

thanks for prodding. -- Kku (talk) 15:26, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Scythe picture

Thanks for uploading Image:Scythe.jpg. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) Thanks so much, – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 00:52, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! How about Image:Funnelsmall.jpg? -- Kku (talk) 15:27, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Human disturbance listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Human disturbance. Since you had some involvement with the Human disturbance redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:16, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of International Advertising Association

A tag has been placed on International Advertising Association, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SamHolt6 (talk) 13:30, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

This is outrageous. You didn't give me more than a few seconds to react. This is definitely out of line with any WP policy that I know of. I request resurrection in my user space at the very least. -- Kku (talk) 13:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. You should note that the deletion notice posted above and on the deleted page both say, following the bit you quoted, However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. It's unfortunate that you didn't get much of a chance to challenge the page, but the fact is that if your objection was The IAA is an advertising association giant, going well beyond any boundary that you appear to be aware of. Correspondingly, it plays a significant global role... I would have still deleted it. The article was promotional and you have to demonstrate notability, not expect us to do the research. I deleted your article because

it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation, press releases, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the organisation claims or interviewing its management. You gave more than 20 "references" but the first two were to the IAA website, not an independent third-party source, and the others didn't support the claim that those companies were members of the IAA, they were just links to the company's main website, which had no mention of the IAA. Note that references should not be bare urls either
The evidence for notability seems to rely on unsourced or self-claimed "facts" such as IAA is the only international organisation representing all three pillars... 26 corporate members[2] and 4000 individual members from over 70 countries.... you tell us nothing about the number of employees, funding or expenditure. It doesn't even seem to have an office from what we are told.
it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: successful practices in international advertising... IAA is the only international organisation representing all three pillars. These unsupported claims and the lack of any information about the organisation itself seem to be just promotion rather than an encyclopaedia article
Not a reason for deletion, but what's the point of Wolfgang J. Koschnick: Standard Dictionary of Advertising, Mass Media and Marketing. de Gruyter, S. 229 ? It's not readily accessible to the large majority of readers, it's not used as a ref, and there is no indication of its significance
If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. In particular, if you work directly or indirectly for the organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly. Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by the company you are writing about, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Kku. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Kku|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message. Note that this is not an accusation, but a query which you need to answer

If you post an article it will be assessed as it stands. If you don't want that to happen, you should write it as a draft. I'm aware that this is not your first article, but nevertheless you might do well to read this guidance, seeing the large number of prod notices on this page. I'm prepared to restore the deleted text to your user space, but you first need to reply to my COI query and also you should satisfy yourself that you can actually find genuine independent references to support your text.

Note that I've protected the article title due multiple recreations, but that doesn't stop you editing in user space and then requesting unprotection when it's ready Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:29, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

The notability of the association is contentious? Cannot believe this. Anyway, as for your main point: I have NO COI whatsoever. My interest is solely in laying open international influencer networks in the industries. I cannot help but notice that so far this has very unsteady if any grounding in en:WP. Thank you for your kind consideration. -- Kku (talk) 14:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Kku, note that it's only by chance that I saw the message above. If you want me to see a message, either post it on my talk page or alternatively leave a message on this page, but start it with my user name, User:Jimfbleak and sign it with four tildes ~~~~ when you post it. That will trigger an alert to me

Thanks for the COI response

On the notability point, it may well be notable, but we don't just take that on trust, we need referenced facts. I delete many articles because they do not prove notability, are promotional or both

I'll shortly restore the text here Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:38, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Energy efficiency

Please note that energy efficiency is a disambiguation page, and you should not be linking to it directly. Instead link to one of the articles listed on that page – whichever is most appropriate depending on the context. If it is unclear which is the best article to link it to it is best not to add the link – with a few exceptions links to disambiguation pages should never be added to articles.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 09:09, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, John. I am aware of the situation. In the affected articles, it is a first small improvement when they would otherwise be devoid of any references to the lemma. Incidentally, the disambiguation page only lists articles that emphasize different aspects of the same idea, so no real harm is done by misleading the reader into an entirely different domain. I am more than willing to disambiguate step by step afterwards. -- Kku (talk) 09:14, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Such links to disambiguation pages are not an improvement; they are an error, and the WP software treats them as such, with DPL bot tagging any disambiguation page with too many incoming links, and advising a user that adds such links, as it has advised you in the past. I am glad that you plan to fix these, but in future it would be less work for you and other editors if you did it at the same time as adding the link.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 13:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Actually, in this case I would opt for another alternative. Looking more closely, I now very much doubt the "disambiguation page" status of the article in question. It is NOT about different concepts, but instead about different aspects of one concept (basically the physics aspect about degree of energy loss in energy conversion). Are you with me? -- Kku (talk) 14:02, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

It is a DAB page. You might be thinking of efficient energy use – someone proposed moving that to energy efficiency (see the talk page) but that failed. But right now there is no article at energy efficiency, the articles it lists cover the concept and various aspects of it. Links should go to those articles, not to the DAB page.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 17:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I know exactly what I'm thinking of. See above. You do appear to take things a little to cast-in-concrete-ly. Please to have a look at the pages varied and quite controversial history. As of now, I prefer to think of it as a pseudo-DAB. -- Kku (talk) 18:35, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Abandoned vehicle

The article Abandoned vehicle has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. E Eng 20:46, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Abandoned vehicle for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Abandoned vehicle is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abandoned vehicle (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Nominated for deletion by another user. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:52, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Category:Sugar industry in the UK has been nominated for discussion

Category:Sugar industry in the UK, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shyamsunder (talk) 10:01, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Coway Co concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Coway Co, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Kku. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

RE: Customer Relations

I do believe that customer relationship deserve an article in its own right. Customer relations is everything from interactions between a salesperson and a customer in a store to online customer service and even emails sent out by companies to its customers. I do not believe, however, that I am qualified to write an article about it. I can write a little but it'd be like 200 words at best; I have never actually written an article on wikipedia before. AI coolTIM (talk) 13:07, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

If you do not write, how come you are so eager to delete? On a more serious level: So long as CR is something that managers believe has actual existence and must be managed(!), CRM is the best description for the phenomenon and the general concept there is. Otherwise one could easily list the phenomenon under social interaction - which of course is not what you would want, either. -- Kku (talk) 13:13, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

write an article

I wanna write an article about the social media girl named katie slay can you help me Thecloestar (talk) 15:45, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your confidence in my powers. But since I have no idea whom you are talking about, I would guess: no. -- Kku (talk) 16:29, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Coway Co

Hello, Kku. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Coway Co".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 00:02, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Addition of thefamouspeople.com to Internet celebrity

Hi Kku. I ran across your addition of thefamouspeople.com to Internet celebrity [1]. There have been concerns of it being spammed, and doesn't appear to be a reliable source per Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2017_May_29#The_Famous_People:_Reliable.3F. I've gone ahead and removed it. If you disagree, let's discuss it. Thanks. --Ronz (talk) 21:40, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Famous people stuff is ALWAYS, by its very nature, unreliable. I don't really know whether to object. On the one hand, the link was only meant as an indication of the volatility of the scene. On the other, this is certainly an interesting part of the entire story. Think about it. -- Kku (talk) 06:53, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Business solution listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Business solution. Since you had some involvement with the Business solution redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 14:10, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Body care

Hello. Thanks for reverting my blanking and redirecting of your new Body care page to Skin care with a helpful edit summary of your position. I see you've now added a bit more content, and that's all fine with me. However, I do think you will need to work on this article a little more if it is to remain in mainspace and not be proposed for WP:AfD or merging. It doesn't seem to me to offer much that's new or notable as a term that a 'See also' section at Skin care couldn't offer. I'll pop back in a few weeks and see how you've got along. In the meantime, can you fix the DAB links and redlinks in it, and add some genuine content to clearly establish notability as a broad, discrete topic? Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:51, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for thanking me. I'll see what I can do! -- Kku (talk) 13:00, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Body care

Hello, Kku,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Body care should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Body care .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletcontent than at orion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

TheLongTone (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

People are lacking patience nowadays. -- Kku (talk) 16:20, 25 Januanry 2018 (UTC)

Rather than making intolerant comments here and at WP:AFD, maybe next time you should consider using your sandbox to pull an article together, and only put it on mainspace when it contains worthwhile content? Going via WP:AFC might be sensible, too, as you'll get helpful feedback without the frustration of having your efforts immediately undone.

I'll be true to my word and not !vote for at least a few days yet, now that someone else has put it to AfD. But I'll need to see some better content than at present, sorry.

BTW: As someone who has worked professionally in the field of Biodiversity Action Planning for the last 6 years, I was quite pleased to see you'd created two quite good new page on Biodiversity loss and Dark diversity - the latter term not being one I'd encountered before. What a contrast!Nick Moyes (talk) 00:56, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

I have very strong feelings against the twitchy "reactive" mode that rules in some places in WP nowadays. Some people appear to hang around just for the thrill of being able to demonstrate their knowledge of assumed eternal WP rules and their immediate enforcement. I would probably have retained a slightly more positive attitude towards deletion notices were it not for the sh..load of stardom, fandom and trivia that persist undebatedly and appear to constitute the gist of a "valid" article today. Stubs, on the other hand, are under ever-meticulous scrutiny, never mind if they come from experienced users. How often have the seemingly impartial voters for the deletion of correct, neutral, if not entirely complete articles dirtied their hands in trying to cautiously improve some buzzword-list-infested article lately? Well, I have. And more than once. Accusing and pointing has always been a pastime of an idle few. I do not approve of this at all. Go ahead with what you deem necessary. I will try to ponder more fruitful things in the meanwhile. Oh, and: A heartfelt thank you! for the praise of biodiversity loss (which started out rather meekly as well, if I remember correctly)-- Kku (talk) 10:03, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
15	Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act (talk)	Add sources
345	Body composition (talk)	Add sources
205	Carbofuran (talk)	Add sources
181	Master of Architecture (talk)	Add sources
5	The Pesticide Question (talk)	Add sources
14	Henderson State Reddies (talk)	Add sources
56	Pollinator decline (talk)	Cleanup
30	Agricultural spray adjuvant (talk)	Cleanup
115	Environmental toxicology (talk)	Cleanup
171	Electronic cigarette aerosol and liquid (talk)	Expand
455	Foreign relations of North Korea (talk)	Expand
1,259	Glyphosate (talk)	Expand
366	2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
290	Health effects of wine (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
648	Pharmacovigilance (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
68	Landfill liner (talk)	Merge
22	Marginal employment (talk)	Merge
104	Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (talk)	Merge
96	Entomopathogenic fungus (talk)	Wikify
682	Polyvinyl acetate (talk)	Wikify
183	Inclusive fitness (talk)	Wikify
5	Heuristics and sports (talk)	Orphan
20	Plant Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR) (talk)	Orphan
5	North Simcoe Landfill (Site 41) (talk)	Orphan
52	Maximum Residue Limit (talk)	Stub
20	Restricted use pesticide (talk)	Stub
6	Analog robot (talk)	Stub
36	Bioherbicide (talk)	Stub
16	North Korea–Switzerland relations (talk)	Stub
12	Anthophorini (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:56, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ―Mandruss ☎ 12:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Wikilinking

Would you, please, mind to take care yourself of the numerous links you introduced to the article Academic games? Please, disambiguate them in your own sphere of action instead of leaving a bot claiming about them. That is, please check links you introduce in your edits for their appropriate target. Thanks. Purgy (talk) 12:28, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

I am possibly not yet done. Thanks for noticing! -- Kku (talk) 13:24, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Please, finish your beginnings in due time (mind the timestamps). I put a copy of my request to the thread mentioned above at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. Purgy (talk) 14:14, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Impatientience does not help. But: Done. Thanks anyway. -- Kku (talk) 11:02, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Category:Trade and professional organizations has been nominated for discussion

Category:Trade and professional organizations, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:31, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Mind shaping for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mind shaping is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mind shaping until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Daask (talk) 13:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta

The 2017 Cure Award

In 2017 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 02:46, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

No space before ref tags

There should be no space before ref tags (per, e.g., Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:Footnotes) as you added here and I cleaned up. Thanks, Biogeographist (talk) 15:49, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Template:plastics

Hi Kku, I saw that you added the template in the article commodity plastics. Thanks for that. I realized thereby that High-performance plastics are missing in the template. Could you add it in between Engineering plastics and Plastic film? Minihaa (talk) 20:16, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the hint! -- Kku (talk) 11:48, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Coombes Valley

Hi there. I was just looking at the article Coombes Valley RSPB reserve and the photograph you've just added, File:Coombes.valley.dale.jpg. Having visited the site a few years ago, I don't recall any such rocky hill as shown in your photograph and I can't make it tally with any aerial photographs of the site, which show the valley as wooded, with no exposed rock. Is this definitely a photograph of Coombes Valley in Staffordshire? Dave.Dunford (talk) 10:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

The one to the east of Stoke-on-Trent. To the best of my knowledge, yes. Went hiking with a friend there a couple of years ago (2003). It was wooded alright. As for the rocks, they sometimes tend to be grown over - as is the partially case with the one in the pic. Frankly, how did you identify it to be limestone from the photograph? The picture appears to have been removed anyway, doesn't it. -- Kku (talk) 11:42, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:Advocacy groups by continent has been nominated for discussion

Category:Advocacy groups by continent, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 17:46, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:Advocacy groups by continent has been nominated for discussion

Category:Advocacy groups by continent, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 19:40, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

IOTA

Please read this notification carefully, it contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

A community decision has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to the blockchain and cryptocurrencies. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.

General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Articles on this cryptocurrency have been deleted multiple times in the past via AFD. If you create an article on this topic without reliable sources or proof of notability you will be topic banned. Cryptocurrency specialist websites are not reliable sources. If you violate WP:COI, you will be blocked. MER-C 11:17, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Thank you for threatening me. I am well aware of the war that went on. You might want to note that IOTA received attention by the major German computing journal iX recently. I do not mean to produce marketing blurb. Please have a look at this: Draft:IOTA (technology) when you are in doubt about my intentions. -- Kku (talk) 11:56, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

You might not intend to write a marketing blurb, but if you repeat the claims of the project (including roadmaps) or cryptocurrency enthusiasts without independent analysis and proof of notability, you're effectively doing exactly that. Many crypto projects are delayed, unfit for the intended purpose, fraudulent, unfeasible, and/or lack technological or economic merit. The general sanctions regime was imposed, in part, to stop touting of cryptocurrencies and ICOs. There is zero tolerance for promotional content or behavior in this topic. MER-C 16:34, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Noted. Thanks. I'll let it rest until either "zero tolerance" has softened or I find -certainly- more respectable all-anglo-saxon articles. -- Kku (talk) 16:39, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing

Hello, I removed the whole career section of Erin M. Schuman as it was too closely paraphrased of the blurb here - many sentences were copied fully. See the copypatrol to see the comparison or click on the ithenticate link there. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:20, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

I just checked Draft:IOTA_(technology) and it contains whole-sale pargraphs copied from the ieeee document. Is this something you regularly do? If so, please let me know of what pages have issues - because that is a very serious problem - see WP:COPYVIO. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:28, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Kku, can you explain how this came about? You have almost 40000 edits, I can't imagine that you aren't aware of our copyright policy? If there are any other articles where you might have copied material directly from the source(s), would you please list them, here on this page? That would be helpful; it'd also be helpful if you would give it priority over any other editing projects you may have. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:29, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers Apart from those two there's also [2], [3], and [4] from some digging through their new page creations. From what I've seen definitely appears to be a widespread issue in their contribs unfortunately :( Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:49, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Oh my. I did not have a chance on Friday to properly clean up. Sorry for that. -- Kku (talk) 08:34, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Kku. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:IOTA (technology) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:IOTA (technology). Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 22:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Beckhoff group

A tag has been placed on Beckhoff group 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 company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Cabayi (talk) 16:10, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Beckhoff group for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beckhoff group is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beckhoff group until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Cabayi (talk) 17:13, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Gersprenz Valley Railway moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Gersprenz Valley Railway, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Britishfinance (talk) 10:00, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

The 2018 Cure Award

In 2018 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 17:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Frequent pattern discovery moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Frequent pattern discovery, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Britishfinance (talk) 13:09, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

It's important to add at least one reliable source to your work from the very start - you presumably have a source to hand and are not writing the article out of your head. If it's a page in a textbook, that's fine - just quote the author, title, publisher, isbn and page: it doesn't have to be anything online. There's also a useful template {{under construction}}: while it doesn't offer certain protection from draftification I would hope that a reviewer would leave you a day or two to enhance the article before considering draftifying it. Happy Editing. PamD 13:46, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

A proposed deletion is relevant to you

An editor posted this on my talk page, but since you expanded the redirect into a disambiguation page, you may also want to see it:

The article Violation of law has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 15:41, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

I had originally created the page as an article when I was new, but consensus turned it into a redirect. Later, you expanded it into a disambiguation, and I decided that it was more of a set index article than a disambiguation page, and declared it that. Then Roger 8 Roger proposed to delete it. So yeah. Just informing you. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 17:55, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. To purr is feline, to err is human. I wonder what happens to all valid concepts that are denied by people stuck to rules. -- Kku (talk) 22:40, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

East End Literature

Sorry to be "stalking" you Kku! but I was pleased to discover East End Literature, as I'm interested in British regional literature, and my mother was from the East End. I reverted your edit because the term urban exploration is used here in a difference sense than the linked term. This is another example other poor writing, unfortunately. Can you try copy editing this, if you are able? Rwood128 (talk) 18:30, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Frequent pattern discovery has been accepted

Frequent pattern discovery, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

— Stevey7788 (talk) 20:44, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Can you help me create on article?

Hi KKu,

I noticed you create an article for Pimkie. I am an employee of NA-KD, a fashion company based in Sweden that has significant coverage in reliable sources, which I would be happy to share with you. We are based in Europe, so our press is in English, Swedish and German.

I was wondering if you could help us create an article for NA-KD? Here is the draft page, which is a few months old. I was going to start adding to it today, but wanted to get your input first.

thank you Evan (talk) 11:07, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for you message and your trust. Two things here: 1. I did not create "Pimkie" because somebody asked me to do it, but because I had evidence that we are dealing with a significant brand and a major economic power behind it. 2. If you provided a link to your draft page, I would be willing to review it and give hints, not more, no less. -- Kku (talk) 13:07, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Great, thank you very much for offering to take a look. Here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:NA-KD Any help would be greatly appreciate. Thanks Evan (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi again, just a friendly followup to see if you might be able to assist us with this article. We would appreciate your expertise and guidance. Thank you very much Evan (talk) 12:54, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Alright. First of all, it is remarkable that the draft submission was rejected several times already, before you even asked me. Just a couple of remarks: "The company has drawn similarities with Boohoo, Missguided and ASOS." is a slightly confusing sentence. Do you mean "has been compared to"? With respect to what? You are missing crucial economic data (revenue, turnover [5], number of shops per country, number of employees, overall ranking in the industry as compared to the big players, main brands, supply chain specifics,...). When you give references, it would be better to draw them from economy- instead of lifestyle-centric media. As we are attempting a submission on wp:en, it is less advantageous to have references all in obscure foreign languages from small countries, wp:en admins love it big and comprehensible. Just my two cents. -- Kku (talk) 10:23, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I will add more economic data as you suggested. Evan (talk) 07:13, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gersprenz Valley Railway has been accepted

Gersprenz Valley Railway, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Worldbruce (talk) 22:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear Kku/Archive 1,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.

Best regards, Urhixidur (talk) 15:15, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Gladly. I do feel (righteously) honored. ;-)

Nomination of World Law Group for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article World Law Group is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Law Group until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Viztor (talk) 19:43, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Payback (loyalty card)

A tag has been placed on Payback (loyalty card), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Cabayi (talk) 11:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Kku, I'm never happy having to nominate an article for deletion when it's been created by a longstanding editor like you - and less happy when I see it's not the first time I've had to do so (User talk:Kku/Archive 1#Speedy deletion nomination of Beckhoff group). Indeed, a look at your article creations shows too many of them deleted, many for falling foul of WP:NCORP. Ignoring the policy isn't working. Please, either argue against it at WT:NCORP and get it changed or follow it. It'll make for a less demoralising time for all of us. Cabayi (talk) 12:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

This is interesting. What aspect of 'market leader' don't you understand? Is it because Germany is too far away? I wouldn't think that this is justification enough for your having to feel unhappy or justification for deletion of an article, especially a speedy one, for that matter. -- Kku (talk) 12:03, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

No, not too far (<200 miles), not that I care how far. The claim you point to is plausible enough that a CSD isn't appropriate (so I've removed the CSD), but it's only supported by a reference on indiaretailing.com which seems to do little more than recycle press releases, and on Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. The FAZ article reads like it could have been written by Payback's PR department - it's just a HOWTO and puff-piece. Personally I still don't think the article is yet solid enough to survive a deletion discussion (avoiding the abbreviation afd when it comes to a German topic) as it still seems to me to fall short of the multiple reliable, verifiable, independent, WP:SIGCOV sources required by WP:NCORP, as outlined in the sections WP:ORGCRIT & WP:ORGDEPTH. Cabayi (talk) 13:17, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

We appear to approach each other's position. Good. The FAZ may have a reputation for being industry-friendly, yet I would not ever basically doubt any information the old battle horse of economic liberalism is printing. Incidentally, I find it noteworthy to say that for quite some time nobody appears to have questioned the PAYBACK India article (which contain(ed/s(?) outright copy-pastes from the company website). Let's be frank: The choice of relevance is always a little arbitrary here. As for the reliability, you may sometime find out that a quite few companies with entries in WP are acting under a veil of secrecy and marketing blabla that gets right in the way of real information. Care to cast a glance? Category:Management_consulting_firms and similar. Yet no-one appears to doubt either their reason for being and relevance. How come? -- Kku (talk) 13:40, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

I wish I had an explanation. A kind of snow-blindness. Like the tolerance for PR speak when celebrities are reported to have "welcomed their" children. Who, in the real world, welcomes their child?? Aargh! Cabayi (talk) 20:09, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Cycling organization

Hello Kku,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username TheLongTone and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged an article that you started, Cycling organization for deletion, because it appears to duplicate an existing Wikipedia article, Cycling club.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the deleting administrator.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|TheLongTone}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

TheLongTone (talk) 12:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

It APPEARS to duplicate another article. Please read carefully. Full fledged associations have little similarity to charming little "clubs" (not just in general usage), although they may have been derived from some. I promise to make the distinction clearer, if you do not interfere for a while. More detail on the talk page of the article. -- Kku (talk) 12:31, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Bicycle magazine for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bicycle magazine is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bicycle magazine until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. A loose necktie (talk) 17:03, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Redirect Barnstar
		Your diligent work in the area of redirect categorization and improvement is duly recognized and greatly appreciated. You are truly one of the unsung heroes of Wikipedia, and we hope you continue to enjoy your improvement of this awesome encyclopedia! Wug·a·po·des 02:40, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Although it did not occur to me that redirects made up the major part of my work, I do feel flattered nonetheless. Thanks, and long live open knowledge! -- Kku (talk) 08:47, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Change to Hierarchical classifier

I noticed you changed the name of the article Hierarchical classifier to Hierarchical classification I saw your edit comment and didn't understand the rationale. Is there some policy I'm not aware of that prefers having articles named after the process rather than the tool? There are a lot of technical articles right now that are currently named the other way such as Inference engine Deductive classifier Integrated development environment I just would like to know if there is a policy that says it's better to name articles about what a tool does rather than about the tool itself or if there is some other reason you changed it. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 16:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

One other point: changing the name of an article is a very non-trivial change. Even if there is a clear policy that supports the change I think it is good practice to first put a comment on the Talk page of the article before you make the change and then wait a day or two to give people a chance to comment. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Dear MadScientistX11, to my knowledge there is no policy. My modification followed the simple rule: "In the xyz classification method, we use the xyz classifier". "xyz classification" is the more common type of lemma in here, so I followed suit on an empirical basis. Other way round: Can you prove to me that "hierarchical classifier" has nothing to do whatsoever with "hierarchical classification"? Then you've proven me wrong, and I will be more than happy to have this reverted. -- Kku (talk) 08:11, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Since I left my previous messages, I did a google search and found that most of the articles had names like "Hierarchical Classification" rather than "Hierarchical Classifier" so I think the change was reasonable. However, I still think the way you did it was not reasonable, that a major change like that should be discussed on the talk page first. But since I agree with the re-naming now that I've studied it more I won't revert the change. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:10, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of T-commerce for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article T-commerce is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T-commerce (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rathfelder (talk) 07:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Payback (loyalty card)

Hello Kku,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Payback (loyalty card) for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:09, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Max Langer

A tag has been placed on Max Langer requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Mcampany (talk) 20:38, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

How rash people get when they feel that the form has been violated. Never mind the content, right? -- Kku (talk) 21:11, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: NumFOCUS (November 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AngusWOOF were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please integrate the sources into the article. Also needs a history section and how it came to become notable.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:NumFOCUS and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:NumFOCUS, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:51, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Kku! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:51, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

"Payback (loyalty card)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Payback (loyalty card). Since you had some involvement with the Payback (loyalty card) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Jonathan Haas (talk) 19:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Access to information

See Help talk:Adding open license text to Wikipedia#Updates to the "creating articles" section – problem is that a single POV, contradictory to Wikipedia's WP:NPOV policy, in this case UNESCO's (however respected that organisation is), is used as the basis for an entire elaborate article. And indeed, the links I removed were clearly MOS:OLs. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:27, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Indeed not all. Please try to differentiate. Access to information is usually also central to all groups, institutions and events also concerned about freedom of information. And it's not a triviality. -- Kku (talk) 13:36, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Further, to my surprise, Hacktivismo (which as an organisation surely has less weight than UNESCO), and a few other such organisations, get a separate subsection in the Freedom of information article, while UNESCO isn't even mentioned in that article (nowhere, not in the entire article). As if UNESCO has no views of the topic. This is a situation that needs to be amended ASAP, so I'd suggest to add UNESCO's views on freedom of information to that article, to make that article conform to WP:NPOV. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:45, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to do that. I would try to apply the principle of sparsity and start with a {{see also|<whateveryoudeemnecessary>}} -- Kku (talk) 13:37, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Social network analysis software

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://socnetv.org/, which is not released under a compatible license. GFDL alone is not a compatible license. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, most of your addition had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 01:53, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

I left you a question/remark on your talk page. -- Kku (talk) 10:08, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta

The 2019 Cure Award

In 2019 you were one of the top ~300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a thematic organization whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Current Time TV (Настоящее Время)

You have been around since 2002. How come I need to explain sourcing like you provided in this article is inadequate? I have tagged the article, and I am currently contemplating nominating it for deletion, since sources are scarce. Kleuske (talk) 09:20, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, maybe because you tend towards bureaucracy, whereas I am interested in evolution and completeness. -- Kku (talk) 09:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

So you do not really have an answer and now I have to explain that personal attacks are not an adequate replacement for actual answers? If you were a noob, I’d have overlooked that, but you’re not. So again, how come I have to explain that the sources in that article are not up to standards? Kleuske (talk) 09:39, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

My answer is that a US-controlled TV channel in Russian language is of public interest per se, because of the imminent conflict potential of the entire complex matter. How about we leave it at that and see what comes out of it? Peace? -- Kku (talk) 09:44, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

”Public interest per se” is not mentioned in WP:GNG, so please explain which policy you derive that from. Also, any .gov site is not independent, since it the US government funds the station. And no, I will not leave it at that. Kleuske (talk) 09:48, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Contrary to your previous statements, you appear to be more interested in aggression and escalation than in content and substance. Do you really want to proceed along those lines? Which policy, if you insist, justifies the nth-hundred article on obscure Manga figures in WP? Please stay serious. -- Kku (talk) 09:52, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Experience in mediation and moderation shows that in a situation like this both parties should for a while lean back let some time pass and get back when the temperature has cooled down. -- Kku (talk) 09:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

And again,I need to point out that personal attack are not good arguments. The article, as far as I have checked, fails WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH and hence is liable to get deleted. A plea to just let it go, does not sway my opinion. Sources are substandard and the article does not persuade me the website is anywhere near notable. Also, the article fails to mention some quite basic facts, like US government funding. That’s a very significant flaw in an article about a propaganda site. Kleuske (talk) 10:30, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Quite true. You are cordially invited to contribute in a constructive way in order to stand as visible proof of your deep intrinsic principles. -- Kku (talk) 10:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of IEEE Communications Society

The article IEEE Communications Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. – Fayenatic London 13:49, 20 April 2020 (UTC)