User talk:Ged UK/Archives/2011/February

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

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: March 2010 Calama earthquake

The article was recreated under this new title. It was deleted as 2010 Calama earthquake (see discussion). The other earthquake article, July 2010 Calama earthquake, is also non notable, and should be deleted under the same reasons. Diego Grez (talk) 22:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I've deleted the March one, and PRODded the July one, as there isn't a speedy category that covers earthquakes. If the PROD is removed, it'll have to go to AfD. GedUK  07:41, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Okay! Thanks --Diego Grez (talk) 15:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

rollback

Hey, thank you for the reviewer rights, I was wondering whether you would be willing to give me rollback rights... there seems to be multiple articles recently where editors are making many nonconstructive consecutive edits and I've been having to find the last good edit and manually copy paste the correct text in.. Also, perhaps you would be willing to issue some sort of protection to the Planned Parenthood article? A few editors are insisting on adding edits which constitute undue weight while an IP address accuses me of bad faith by trying to get everyone to achieve consensus before re-adding the controversy section (which included mention of NAZIs and was the length of the rest of the article combined, probably longer)... WikiManOne 19:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done I've given you rollback rights. Please be careful with it, it's ONLY to be used for vandalism, not undoing a string of edits. Twinkle would be better for that, if you're using firefox.
 Not done I've not added the protection, as there's quite a few constructive IP edits as well. GedUK  20:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you Ged UK, I will only use it for vandalism. Fair enough, let's see if we can move that article towards consensus without starting an edit war... WikiManOne 20:13, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Your post on my talk

We all click things accidentally - I've done it myself accidentally on Twinkle, and to be honest, I like to be informed what outcome my actions have, so it doesn't bother me having that sort of post. Thanks :) ConconJondor (talk) 21:32, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

It's actually the tone of that message that I don't like. There wasn't really anything wrong with your tag, it's just vandalism fitted it better. Thanks! GedUK  21:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
To be honest, I assume good faith by default, regardless of the tone that I perceive: I've been involved in too many arguments because something that has been said over the internet looked like it wasn't intended to come across with good faith. ConconJondor (talk) 21:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
That's a great attitude! I wish you all the best :) GedUK  21:46, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks :), the same to you :) ConconJondor (talk) 21:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion Meshcherts people

Hi, I'm replying to you about the proposed speedy deletion of the “Meshcherts people”. First of all, you should know that the author of this article is one of the sockpuppets of the user Daniil0299, who is constantly creating multiple hoaxes in Russian Wikipedia and adding misinformation to the existing articles, often about Catholics in Russia. Meshchera was a Finnic tribe, which assimilated to Russians and is now regarded as their ethnographic group. However, everything that is written in the “Meshcherts people” article is a complete hoax, which can't be supported by any sources and has already been deleted from the Russian wiki. Therefore now I'm returning the speedy deletion template and expecting you (or another sysop) to delete this fantasy. --Glebchik (talk) 22:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there were Finno-Ugric tribe Meschera and lived in Meschera Lowlands. It is assimilated. Now mescherts peopele is sub-ethnic group the Russian people. As it is not surprising, but we are in the majority of Greek and Roman Catholics. I myself Russian, but belongs to this sub-ethnic group and I the Greek-Catholic.
PS: Who is daniil0299? --Kazimir Močalkin 08:51, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, this is not a blatant hoax. This needs a wider community discussion. I will take it to AfD on your behalf. GedUK  07:47, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Well, for those familiar with Russia it is blatant. You should better have let a person familiar with the topic assess the article. --Glebchik (talk) 07:59, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I agree, so that's exactly why I've taken it to AfD already. You can comment there. GedUK  08:01, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Here's the link for the AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meshcherts people. GedUK  08:51, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

List of The Angry Video Game Nerd episodes‎

Can you revert the last edit, it violates WP:EL CTJF83 07:59, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Inevitably, when protecting a page, the admin will almost always protect on the wrong version. This is a protection to let consensus form. As the current position isn't harming anyone (BLP violation etc.) I'm happy to leave it on this version until the consensus discussion finishes. GedUK  08:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Obviously, you protected [user]'s version because you are both [Nazis|Communists|Freemasons|Right-wing extremists|Liberal wackjobs|radical Feminists|Zionists|Scientologists|Professional Anti-Scientologist|anti-Zionists|anti-American|American]—deny it all you want. :) duffbeerforme (talk) 15:50, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Well, I'm not American, for one! :p GedUK  21:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, That one went too far. :\ duffbeerforme (talk) 14:08, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
Haha, don't worry, i've been called worse :p GedUK  10:56, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ged UK. You have new messages at Cindamuse's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GedUK  11:37, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Benihana

Hi, thank you for protecting Benihana. But I'm sure they are going to delete the lawsuit section after it's unprotected. ( Because they keep deleting it without any discussion. ) Regards, *** in fact *** ( contact ) 15:33, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

I expect you're right. We'll deal with that if it happens. GedUK  15:35, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, *** in fact *** ( contact ) 15:43, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Wyse

Uh, I was just about to decline the CSD G11 on this one when you deleted it. The company is pretty famous (I mean, everyone has heard of Wyse terminals =) and the article's tone was fairly obviously not as spammy as to warrant a complete rewrite (per G11 criterion). Care to reconsider the deletion? --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 16:18, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

I deleted it as A7. I've never heard of them, but more to the point there wasn't really anyting in there that indicated notability; no RS, which considering the article's been around for 6 years is remarkable. If you're confident though, feel free to restore it. GedUK  16:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
"Never heard of them" is not a CSD criterion. "People don't seem to work on the article" is not a deletion criterion, much less a speedy deletion criterion. The whole reason speedy deletion process exists is that we can delete material that is uncontroversially considered wasteful. If an article has existed since 2004, there is going to be controversy unless that deletion was done out of absolute necessity - and currently, that sort of necessity is only applied to BLPs. People already complain about lack of transparency and arbitrary use of admin tools in Wikipedia, and this sort of stuff does not look very good in my opinion. Please restore it and at least make stuff got through the deletion process if you're unsure whether a company that produces 9 million google hits is notable. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 16:37, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
(Sorry for spam and especially sorry for slightly cranky ranting) Just edited to add: I will restore it myself. But still, I'd really wish people'd pay a little bit of attention sometimes. All the best, anyway =) --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 16:39, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
I never said whether i'd heard of it was a CSD criterion, you brought that up. All that article really says is that it's old. I stand by my deletion, but if you think it's just a question that nobody bothered sourcing it for 6 years, then fine. GedUK  16:46, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
I happened upon this situation through a series of encounters I've had with the editor that tagged the article for deletion, User:Jcalamity. In GedUK's defense, I could see how, based on the state of the article, there would be some question as to its sourcing (or lack thereof). wwwwolf is correct, though, that folks especially familiar with thin clients are almost certain to have heard of Wyse (for better or for worse), although that obviously does not, in and of itself, establish notability. That being said, I think the real problem here is that it looks to me like User:Jcalamity was tagging Wyse either in retaliation for his or her spam article (10ZiG) being deleted, to prove a point, or both. That account has been a subtle single-purpose spam account (see overlooked thread here) that looks to be on an increasingly disruptive trajectory. It's sad that we don't have a more coordinated system to deal with these sorts of issues, as wp:wpspam and wp:ani are often woefully understaffed or too-drama-focussed to delve into long-running refspammers and artspammers like User:Jcalamity. jæs (talk) 20:16, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Australia-India relations

Having unprotected Australia–India relations based on the IP editors rather self-serving description of the reason given for protection, you will keep an eye on the article and pitch in to monitor nationalistic POV pushing edits, wont you? -- Mattinbgn (talk) 01:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Already am. GedUK  08:19, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Mylai Tenner

Respected Ged, I have created a page with title "Mylai Tenner" contained no copyright material but it is deleted without any notice to me. Kindly inform me the things having copyright issues and give me chance to recorrect it. Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeesolz (talk • contribs) 13:25, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Zeesolz, there are a few key points:
  1. The version I deleted was an almost word-for-word copy of this page.
  2. The other version contained huge chunks of text from his work, which is obviously also a copyright violation.
  3. Additionally, both versions were very spammy/advertorial and were trying to sell him and his work.
  4. There is also no indication as to why he is notable by wikipedia's standards. There need to be third party, independent reviews or reports of him and/or his work.
  5. You were notified on your talk page each time the article was nominated for deletion
I hope this helps clarify while the article was repeatedly deleted. If you create a sourced version of the article in your userspace, it can then be moved to the encyclopedia proper, though this is no guarantee of future inclusion. GedUK  13:35, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you help out with a rogue editor?

Hi Ged,

Could you take a look at Anasuya Sanyal -- specifically, the history of that page, and the talk page of the editor that is removing the copyvio templates? He/she has been blocked once for copyvios, and now is creating more pages that are word-for-word copies of that TV station's website. I'm heading into 3RR if I restore the template, but it's a blatant copvio.

Thanks Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 13:56, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done I'll go through the rest and clear up. GedUK  14:00, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Champion, thank you. By the way, the "Click here to leave me a message" link at the top of this page might be broken? It says that only admins have permission to do that. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 14:06, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
AAHHHHHH! THAT'S why people kept creating on that page! I couldn't work that out, and ended up having to protect it. Thanks, I'll fix that! GedUK  14:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Mylai Tenner IssueZeesolz (talk) 17:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Respected sir you have deleted my written page 'Mylai Tenner', Sir Mylai Tenner is an inspirational writer and he is very famous amongst the youth, I request you to see his books 'Empowering quotes for women', '7 steps to a better first year of college', 'I was Just like you' etc. Kindly review it. Regards Zeesolz (talk) 17:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

I've explained further up, last time you asked. GedUK  20:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:18, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Shanings

Hello give me one good reason for deleting Shanigs ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Immediatesale (talk • contribs)

Have replied on your talk page. GedUK  07:38, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Semi-Protected on Timor-Leste national football team page

Hi, Can you help to put semi-Protected page on Timor Leste National Football Team page. There's a lot of Vandalism and people keeping adding false data and info.Im not sure how to put Semi-Protected page that why i asked you because you have recently done that. Andy4190 Talk:Andy4190

Declined There's not really enough there at the moment, and there are a lot of constructive IP edits, so I'm reluctant to protect at the moment. It's difficult to tell what you think is vandalism; is is the badge issue? If it's something more, it would be helpful if the players that should be listed were cited properly, then it's easier to work out what shouldn't be there, and whether people are making inappropriate additions.
I don't mind you asking me here, but the place to ask is WP:Requests for page protection, where several admins patrol. GedUK  08:56, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Kaveh Farrokh

Hi, There is a BLP issue and an RFC in here about Kaveh Farrokh. Regards, *** in fact *** ( contact ) 07:45, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

deleted article Darby House retrieval

Could you please provide to me a copy of Darby House article, a disambiguation page, which you apparently just deleted? I suspect the page may have been a disambiguation page that i created, as I see that there are multiple Wikipedia-notable places named Darby House or close variations that are NRHP-listed and are notable. Those would make for a valid dab page. I am thinking the page should simply be restored to mainspace, but for the moment could you just please restore it for me by email to me or by posting in my userspace. Thanks. --doncram 00:17, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I've restored it to User:Doncram/Darby House. The issue was that is was a dab page that didn't link to any articles; all the articles were redlinks. GedUK  07:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Ah, well, in fact there is policy/guideline that redlink entries are allowed on dab pages (see MOS:DABRL), as long as they are valid article topics (e.g. NRHP-listed places) and supported by a bluelink to an article such as an NRHP list-article that shows the redlink in context. Further it has been sorted out that a dab page of all valid redlinks is okay. Further, note that i, or perhaps you, could easily create a minimal stub article for one of the current redlinks.
I'll restore the article to the dab page Darby House. If you wish you can take it to AFD or raise it further, e.g. ask at Talk page of WikiProject Disambiguation, but i assure you this is the practice, and that it is appropriate practice. Did you delete any others?
Actually it would be better if you would restore the article with its history, too, but i won't complain further if this is settled. --doncram 12:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I see the history was included in the version you restored to me, thanks. Further thots: having a dab page even if all redlinks serves the purpose of informing editors who would start one of the articles, that they should not do so at the base name, because there are other valid uses of the name. Also it serves the purpose of helping in disambiguation, in helping editors replace mentions of places named Darby House by more specific names, in usual process of dablink fixing in NRHP list-articles and town articles and other articles that might refer to any one of these redlinks. Note that requires having the dab page in place, so it can be determined they are linking to a dab page and the multiple links to the dab page can be given properly different fully disambiguated names. It defies reason to delete the dab, likely leading to an editor starting an article at the base name, unaware of the other uses, and then requiring move of that article and creation of the dab page (which you would then agree is valid because then it includes a non-redlink item). Best to just have the dab page set up. Note, the NRHP-listed places included in the dab will all get articles soon enough; NRHP article creation continues at a steady pace. Hope this helps. --doncram 13:47, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
A disambiguation page that doesn't link anywhere is pointless in my mind. And while MOSDABRL says redlinks are fine, I wasn't aware of a policy guideline (and it's not in MOSDABRL) that says a entire disambiguation page can be just redlinks that have existed for 10 months.
Anyway, I didn't delete any others. Perhaps you should raise the issue with Station1 (talk · contribs) who tagged it in the first place. GedUK  13:57, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
No reason why you or i or anyone would understand the point of everything that is necessary for an encyclopedia, but there is point to having this, which i have sort of tried to explain. Yet another reason to have the dab page existing is to allow for other items to be added to it, as i just did add about some Darby Houses in England.
If it happens that this one did not get any corresponding articles created in ten months, that is just random chance, it does not change the fact that most such dab pages will have articles created in reasonable timeframe (but note there is no timeframe requirement, and note most NRHP editors are usually starting articles off of geographic lists or other interest lists, not working through dab pages). I agree it is not stated in MOSDABRL, but the appropriateness of having these was consensus of some discussions at WikiProject Disambiguation and perhaps elsewhere. I have done most of the building of the system of dab pages covering NRHP-listed places and there are some other all-redlink ones. About Station1, i don't see a tag in the article's history (i suppose that was lost) but i expect Station1 was involved in the past discussions. Station1 does have views about dab pages involving NRHP entries in disagreement with mine from time to time, and usually Station1 does notify me if there are fixups to be made for NRHP entries in a dab page. Anyhow, thanks, probably enough on the topic. --doncram 14:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:20, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

AIV

Hi there. here you denied my request because the editor did not edit since final warning. The final warning was given 09:27, 14 February 2011. The editor made at least two more on February 16. This is probably my fault for putting another final warning on the page on the 16th. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 13:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Oops! My bad! I missed that the first final warning was the 14, I thought you'd warned them twice on 16. Blocked. GedUK  13:30, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. I should probably stop making final final final warnings. --Muhandes (talk) 15:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Phineas and Ferb Season 3 Page

I have references now for Season 3 so can you please unprotect it so I can add the new episodes that will air in March and I can't create a page unless I'm not an admin. - Alec2011 (talk) 02:38, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

If you create the sourced version in your userspace (like User:Alec2011/Phineas and Ferb, then if they're OK I'll move it over. Please don't copy straight from places like TV.com, because they're not reliable, and it would be a copyright infringement. Thanks. GedUK  08:07, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
I added to the page here (User:Alec2011/Phineas and Ferb). The references are from MSN.TV a trusted source that's been used on Wikipedia all the time and of course is a reliable source for Wikipedia standards. - Alec2011 (talk) 03:04, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 Done now at Phineas and Ferb (season 3). GedUK  07:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

WC 2007 to 2007 Cricket World Cup

Could you possibly move this back as well, for the same reasons as you moved 2011 back please? It will not let me for some reason. Thank you. O Fenian (talk) 09:11, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done That was tiresome. (not your notification, I mean the unnecessary mopping! GedUK  09:19, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Grand Miramar Club and Spa

Hi

You recently deleted our newly published article about the hotel I work for.. Grand Miramar Club and Spa. I read the citation you gave for the reason the page was pulled, so I'd like to work within the reasons given and keep the page up.

Is there a way to recover the article so we can adjust it to the requirements you gave?

Thanks Grand Miramar Club and Spa Puerto Vallarta

 Done restored to User:Vallartafan322/Vallarta. GedUK  14:56, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

ANI

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Chasetwomey.2FZoro_Tools. Corvus cornixtalk 18:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

My speedy decline was fine. There's no need for me to wade in at ANI or the MfD. GedUK  14:57, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion declined

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Bobby Barr, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Armbrust Talk Contribs 07:00, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help and a question

Hi Ged, Thanks for the help moving the page User:MikeCaspar/Caspar_Computer_Services_Inc. around. I'm wondering, is it appropriate for me to clean up my talk page on my own and remove the warnings and messages there ? I'm talking about this page User_talk:MikeCaspar MikeCaspar (talk) 13:51, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that's fine. If you delete them, it's presumed that you've read them. GedUK  14:36, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. MikeCaspar (talk) 14:38, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:41, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Bree Michael Warner

Hi Ged UK

I had a question regarding the deletion of the page Bree Michael Warner. I was disappointed to see that although I sent a request to find out what additional information was needed to rectify the situation, my talk requset was unanswered and the page simply deleted. I'm not entirely sure how IMDB can be viewed as an 'unreliable source' as almost ALL Actors listed on Wikipedia list it as a reference and sometimes sole reference. Has wikipedia changed their policy and if so why is there not a published list of sources that have been deemed 'unreliable'? In addition to the sites listed, there were additional ones including TV Guide, Fandango etc, USA Today etc... The 'notable significance' as displayed with Actor pages on Wikipedia seem to be based on their television and film appearances so I'm a little unclear what distinguishes one from the next? If you look at an already existing page for the Actress Rachel Miner you will find there were far less references and external sites listed however the page remains. As mentioned in my previous email, there are hundreds of listings that come when one google seaches "Bree Michael Warner". In addition the editor of Haunted TV Series page even acknoledged Bree Michael Warner as a primary cast member which was accurate. If it is the need to have another source publish the article, than can a publicist or similar representative do such? I disagree with the deletion and am hoping for your input. thank you for your time.

Breewarner (talk) 16:48, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

IMDB has long been considered an unreliable source because it's user generated, same as wikipedia. The sources you provided demonstrated they exist and what they've been in, but not why they're notable. Publicists aren't independent. What it needs are reviews. If they were in there and I missed them, I apologise.
I'm happy to restore it to your userspace if that helps. GedUK  19:41, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Another editor asked me about this on my talk page. I told him that as the deleting admin it's your call (I also advised him of WP:AUTO and WP:COI) and I think incubation is the best course of action at this point. However, after reviewing the article, I don't think it was an A7 candidate as significance was clearly asserted and it wasn't spammy enough for G11. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
I home you don't mind but since you have already offered to userfy this I went ahead and did so. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 04:31, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you everyone for your help! It looks like an impartial editor might be taking a look at it and tweaking what's necessary? I saw that it was userfy'd to a different editor's workspace, which is great and totally unexpected. So appreciate the swift response. And thank you to user Michael Q Schmidt, for jumping in like that! Nice to meet you! Let me know if I can be of any assistance. RMPhillips (talk) 13:34, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm quite prepared to admit I think I got this one wrong, but glad that we've moved on :) GedUK  20:39, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Tarique Mustafa's Page Deletion

Hi Ged UK, I just re-created a page named "Tarique Mustafa" and it has been deleted again. The reason is that you think that he is not a notable person. So I have a few questions regarding to this deletion. First, I want to be clear that I am not an employee of or Tarique Mustafa himself. I am just a graduate student who is doing a research on DLP and I knew him accidentally by Google Search. I already had a chance to contact and had some discussions with this person. And I think that he is notable enough for me to write an article about him. Maybe he is not a "notable" engineer like Bill gates or Steve Jobs, but he is the one that developed DLP into the next generation and he received an award from Frost and Sullivan for his job in 2009. I am the one who is working in this field so I know how hard it is. I do not try to advertise for Tarique Mustafa and his company but I do not agree with your deletion reason at all. I am very new in Wikipedia so would you help me how to avoid my article being deleted? Thank you, -Vinh Tran

here is the link about his rewards. http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/nexTier-Networks-Receives-Frost-Sullivan-Award-for-Excellence-in-DLP-Technology-939648.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heomap1983 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ged_UK/Archives/2011/February&oldid=1143532806"