User talk:Phil Bridger/October 2007 – December 2007

This page is an archive of past discussions for the period 24 October 2007 – 31 December 2007. 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.

Welcome!

Hello, Phil Bridger, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Lra drama 10:44, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Prema Sai Baba

Comment-The article Second Coming is addressed as a concept, the Prema Sai Baba IS tagged WP:Bio on the discussion page and is treated as such in the language; the photo of Sathya Sai Baba presumed to be born as the next incarnation has been removed and the Infobox was deleted. This article is masking as a biography of someone yet to be born.---Iconoclast Horizon 14:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

I totally agree with what you had to say here: Speedy deletions too speedy.

It is really frustrating. --Imagemonth 15:37, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

November 2007

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, which wasn't included with your recent edit to Ryanverse. Thank you. MBK004 22:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Vatican Publishing House

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

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Skate&Create 00:06, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Vatican Publishing House

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Vatican Publishing House, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. A ecis^Brievenbus 20:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Jack Clemmons

Dear Phil, thank you for your input about Jack Clemmons. He is literally in dozens of books and documentaries. When I get a chance I will type in some of the books. If you get a chance, can you also please give us your input about Nur Ali Elahi on the talk page of [1]. I have listed dozens of references on the talk page from 1910-2006 that documents his name. He was born in 1895 and died in 1974 and dozens of years after his death someone is trying to change his name. We badly need someone with your knowledge of Wikipedia. The person who is trying to change it has no history on Wiki and only makes edits to that page. Thank you for your time!

Reply

I see your point. However; most of those pages are created by users who just signed up. If I know that notability has really no chance of being established, I will mark it for speedy. Anything else, I'll leave. Thanks jj137 (Talk) 20:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Note: This is a reply to this. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your advice, I'll keep it in mind. You're pretty new yourself, I notice. Avruch ^Talk 02:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

The rest of this discussion is here. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:41, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Deleting

I know what wiki is about, i've been here since '02. I only tagged those articles two times because I tagged them with the wrong tag the first time. I tagged those articles because they are nowhere near notable. There are no stubs on one, and on the medical devices one, there were no sources.Metal Head (talk) 19:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Context is here. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Theodore Theodorsen Relativity Theory

Not quite obsession, but verging that way - partly because I was initially so sure it was a hoax. I wonder who Gacolla is, who has put so much effort in - there's real obsession! I don't know if you've read Nevil Shute's "No Highway", but Theodorsen reminds me of Mr Honey, a brilliant scientist who also has peculiar ideas about the Great Pyramid etc; when a crisis comes his organisation's opponents drag that up and suggest his aeronautics work can't be trusted, but his boss says no, the best scientists have enquiring minds that don't stop enquiring when they leave the office. I shall try to track down first publication, and put a three-line paragraph in TT's main entry, so that his relativity work will have left one small ripple. Incidentally Alternatives to general relativity is an impressively long list - plenty of others have tried to knock Einstein off his perch! JohnCD (talk) 21:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Relevant discussion is here. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:50, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The enemy???

The comment that you left on User talk:ArielGold about the Big Pig Jig AfD. I've no idea why you would think that I might see you as the enemy, and just for the record I don't. In fact, just for the record, I don't see anybody here as the enemy (although I would have to say that I don't count those such as User:Folk smith who indulge in racist personal attacks as friends.

Was I a bit "bitey", possibly I was. Possibly if I was there again, I'd do things in a different way.

However, let us just rewind to the start of my involvement. Here we had a recreation of material that had already been deleted FOUR times, and which had been protected from recreation under its original name. The article as it stood when I nominated it for deletion was eminently deletable, and indistinguishable from the hundreds of other nn articles that get zapped every day.

I certainly allowed myself to become a little terse, when it became clear that all efforts to point User:Folk smith at WP:V WP:N and WP:RS were being ignored. He claimed to have read and understood them all, whilst simultaneously affecting not to understand what the problem with the article was. I'm only human, and whilst I always try to be civil, it can be difficult to remain all sweetness and light in such a situation, particularly when it became apparent that I was talking to somebody who showed all the signs that he believed that a man in his position knows what is and is not notable, and doesn't need to read documents to find out.

I went into this affair with two objectives;

To either improve the article to a standard where it could be retained or remove it
To educate the editor to do things properly

I hope the end result achieves those objectives.

Mayalld (talk) 13:22, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Mindless banter

Next time you have something to add why don't you address it the the person that has the Obsession. BTW. T.T son is a close friend and I can't find any reason you would have anything to say unless you were a scientist that could prove him wrong. GPA (talk) 21:35, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Tips Productions

Notability is not merely a matter of stating a claim of importance. The Wikipedia standard for notability is citation in secondary sources. See WP:CORP for more information on the standard. The article Tips Productions fails to cite a secondary source. Specifically, it fails to do so to establish its claim of importance. Deletion is proper.Bsherr (talk) 16:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

context Phil Bridger (talk) 19:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

My mistake completely. Thanks. Bsherr (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

AFD Correction

Thanks for the informing of that link. Rudget.talk 17:23, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Extremschrammeln

Could you please provide evidence that the band has appeared on major labels? Thank you.Hoponpop69 (talk) 17:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Kayla Nebeker Karhohs

I do believe that the suggestions you made is good, and that will not upset others. I will edit the sentence in question. Thank you for the suggestion. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Zalmay Shah

While I agree that the ref doesn't need to be online to be citable - do you feel the article establishes that Shah is individually notable, or do you simply feel it's not clear-cut enough to delete based on a prod?

To be honest I don't get why User:Geo Swan didn't remove the prod days ago. For the amount he has typed on the talk page, if he had one more source for the article and typed two more paragraphs then I would have moved on by now!Ga rr ie 21:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm certainly having involved discussions with one other contributor... if that make a controversy then I guess this is a controvertial deletion! Ga rr ie 22:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Sanjay Ghose

In regards to removing the db-bio on Sanjay Ghose... did you simply do a google and see the name a couple of times and then decide to remove the db? Every one of the "Background" links lays no mention of the name Sanjay Ghose. There is not one citation or reference. Every Google link with this name was for a different person. It is a common name. How can you justify saying "has indications of importance/significance". In future, please look into an article more before removing tags. I'm going to AfD it now. --Pmedema (talk) 18:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

December 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles that you have created yourself, as you did with Crossbite. If you do not believe the article should be deleted, then please place {{hangon}} on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. — Yavoh 19:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

AfDs

Since you were the individual who removed the proposed deletion templates, I respectfully ask that you submit your opinions on whether or not the articles should be kept or deleted on their deletion discussion pages. You may find the nominations here and here. Thank you. Cheers, CP 00:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Mike Huckabee Merge Proposal

Please comment on merging Mike Huckabee controversies into Mike Huckabee here [[2]] Jmegill (talk) 09:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Craig Morris Article

Thanks for supporting the notability of this musician. I will be expanding the article later today and including additional sources as to prevent further confusion.--Manderson198 (talk) 17:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Tom Perrin

I noticed your edit summary on Tom Perrin. What is the blindingly obvious notability. He looks like he played Rugby in Australia for some team called the "Wallabies" and was mentioned once in what looks like a compendium of players. Am I missing something here? I'll watch here Mbisanz (talk) 22:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Just take a couple of seconds to click on the link to Wallabies in the article and you'll find the answer. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Okey, I'm an idiot, thank you for suffering a fool to live :) Mbisanz (talk) 22:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Saeed Bin Nasir

So the stub says he was on a team, but never played a Test series. Aren't Test series the Cricket equivalent of major leagues? Would we really have an article on a guy who was on a roster for a team, but never took the field? Mbisanz (talk) 10:52, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Test matches are international matches. First class matches, of which Saeed bin Nasir has played 87, are the equivalent of major leagues. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Okey, that makes sense then. And 87 matches would make him notable to me Mbisanz (talk) 10:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Ghazala Mahmud

This might actually be a case where a DRV would be needed, although that would be contingent on there actually being sources. Asserting notability allows an article to escape an A7 deletion, but in order to survive AFD, it needs to cite sources that show that notability. --Core desat 22:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Jayashri Ramnath

Thanks for adding sources to Jayashri Ramnath. I am not too well-informed on that genre, and nothing in the article led me to conclude that she was quite notable. Now it is better. If you find the time, could you clean up the article, making it more like an encyclopedia article and less like a resume? Thanks! Happy editing, Goochelaar (talk) 15:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Uthium

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Uthium. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- ALLSTARecho 10:50, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I did include an edit summary. Please read it, and WP:CSD, rather than throw patronising templates at me. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Joburg Art Fair

Hi Phil, thanks for removing the deletion tag from Joburg Art Fair. Hopefully the significance of the article is now clear. laurens (talk) 12:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Ghillie Dhu

I still can't find the context of the article. Any links? Sources? Dekisugi (talk) 16:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

"Context" does not mean links and sources. The context I added was that this is a figure from Scottish folklore. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Well yes, if you're a scottish. I'm not (and probably millions of other wikipedia readers) and we have WP:V & WP:NOR for everybody. Dekisugi (talk) 16:51, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I don't understand what you mean. I removed your {db-nonsense} tag because the article was clearly not patent nonsense as defined by WP:CSD#G1. I then reworded it slightly to give context. That doesn't mean that it is any more my responsibility than yours to expand the article further and provide sources etc. I simply made it clear that this article does not qualify for speedy deletion. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

hangons

When you remove a speedy from an article someone else wrote, please remember to remove the "hangon" tag also. otherwise it will still be listed in the category for speedy deletions. We do it that way because people who write the article when they add a hangon often simply replace the speedy with the hangon. DGG (talk) 22:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I usually do that. I presume you were referring to Izzatullah Wasifi. I missed the hangon tag there because it had been put at the bottom of the article. Thanks for pointing it out - I'm sometimes a bit quick to criticise others when they don't do things by the book so it's good to be reminded that I'm fallible too! Phil Bridger (talk) 23:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Jimmy Toner

Seeing as you seem to know more abou British sports than I do, is this fellow notable for the sport he plays: Jimmy Toner? Thanks. MBisanz 09:28, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Definitely notable - Leeds United and Dundee are top-level clubs in England and Scotland. I'll rewrite the article as in its present state it seems to be as much about his late wife as about him. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)