Jump to content

User talk:Largoplazo/Archives/Archive 20

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22→Archive 25

Female privilige (sic), etc.

The author of the article has been creating quite a number of new articles that barely rise above the level of gibberish, e.g., Fish collar, Fortunate 400, Fast-ripening rice, Kherson oat, Reverse therapy. All are ill thought out, poorly written, and probably non-notable. I know from experience that Splendidworld12 won't listen to a word I say, so I'm wondering if you could have a few words with him about his creations.32.218.152.232 (talk) 03:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

I had concerns about Reverse therapy and Female privilige (even ignoring the spelling error in the latter), but I see no problem with the others. How is Fish collar gibberish? It suffered from a failure to say what a fish collar is, but I fixed that instantly upon checking one of the sources provided.
I saw the PROD tag you've placed on Siberian tomato, where you stated "not notable; we don't have articles for each individual variety of a plant". I haven't checked for indications of notability, but there is no general rule that we don't have articles for each individual variety of plant. If a variety is notable, then we certainly do support an article. We even have List of tomato cultivars, which points to a whole bunch of articles on varieties of tomato alone. Wouldn't it be surprising if Wikipedia didn't have an article on the Beefsteak tomato by now? Or the Braeburn apple? The Bosc pear? —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
You misread my brief justification for the prod. It says "for each individual variety"; it doesn't say "for any variety". Beefsteak tomatoes are notable, as their article explains; Siberian tomato does not explain why it is notable. Other edits by this editor:
  • Fish collar as it currently stands is a very heavily redacted version of the original posted by Splendidworld12, a good share of which was a copyright violation:
[removing copyrighted text]
  • Reverse therapy is non-notable pseudo-scientific gibberish.
  • Fortunate 400: "These riches have come from capital gain, and the rich keep making more money."
  • Gaspare Carpegna: "The mother was a sword. ... Cardinal Carpegna firmly held the vicarage until death, for over forty years, well below the following five popes..."
This editor has been engaged in hit and run article creation - putting together slapdash articles that are random, ill-conceived, poorly written, and probably non-notable, and then expecting other editors to expand the articles and do the clean-up work on them (e.g., Talk:Fish collar, Talk:Fortunate 400, Talk:Fast-ripening rice, Talk:Kherson oat, Talk:Female privilige, Talk:Reverse therapy, Talk:Siberian tomato). A significant amount of editing has been required on many of them (e.g., [1], [2]).
Is this the kind of content you think should be in Wikipedia? Is this the manner of contribution you value? 32.218.34.11 (talk) 14:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
I chose between two ways to read your PROD justification. The reason I didn't choose to read it the way you now say you meant it is that I assumed you intended for it to be relevant. While pointing out that not all topics in the classification X merit an article would be a relevant response to a claim that an article should be kept because it's in classification X, no one had made that argument. To say that an article on a topic in classification X should be deleted because not all articles in X should be kept is a logical non-sequitur, and yet you gave that as a rationale. That's why I chose to assume, instead, that you were simply misinformed.
Stop twisting my words. What I said was that the article needs to demonstrate its notability. Period. 32.218.34.11 (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Golly. I read, and you wrote, "not notable; we don't have articles for each individual variety of a plant". I don't see a period after "notable". I see a semicolon, followed by "we don't have article for each individual variety of a plant". I'm not twisting your words. I'm now interpreting them exactly as you just told me to interpret them. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Regarding Fish collar: I don't understand. If there isn't a copyvio there now, then there is no copyvio problem. What's there now is a comprehensible stub. I also find other sources supporting a finding of notability: [3], [4], [5].
Are you intentionally trying to appear dense, or what? As already stated, what's there now wasn't written by Splendidworld12. It was written by subsequent editors who removed the copyright vio and heavily reworked the awkward writing. 32.218.34.11 (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
As already stated, "as it currently stands is a very heavily redacted version of the original posted by Splendidworld12, a good share of which was a copyright violation:". By which I understood that perhaps the very short text that's there now was what was left after the copyrights had been removed. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
On the other hand, if the previous contents were a copyvio, and what you've written above is a reproduction of the same text, then you've committed a copyright violation by posting it here to my Talk page, don't you think? Please tell me if you have a legally sound basis for believing that not to be the case, because otherwise I'm going to have to WP:REVDEL my own talk page.
You seem to think you're so smart about copyright, so why don't you know about fair use? 32.218.34.11 (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
It's fair use if you do it, but not if he does it? —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
If you have doubts about the notability of any given article, take it to AFD. In the case of any article that is verifiable, about a topic that is notable, that isn't a copyvio and that doesn't contain BLP problems: If the article is short and shallow, that's a WP:STUB, and there isn't anything wrong with it. If the article isn't well written, then tag it for maintenance. If some of his articles do warrant deletion, that doesn't have any bearing on articles that don't; and, in addition, he will probably tire eventually of having so many articles deleted. —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
You know perfectly well that this isn't about a single article; it's about a pattern of troublesome editing. But see no evil, eh? 32.218.34.11 (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Re this (which I just got through addressing) but especially re "Are you intentionally trying to appear dense": Excuse me, but you came to me asking for help. After considering what you were asking for, I found that I don't agree with your evaluation of the situation. You are under no entitlement to have me see things your way, and I am under no obligation to see things your way, let alone to help you with your request that I don't happen to support. And for this, you think you have any business abusing me? This conversation is over. Don't come back. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Please be a bit patient with editing a new article

Hi largoplazo, thanks for the correction on Muisca numerals, but I was in the middle of editing. Can you please be a bit more patient with such a correction. I have incorporated your change after the edit conflict. Thanks, Tisquesusa (talk) 05:58, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Languages of Nepal

I just ran across your copyright issue at Languages of Nepal. World Heritage Encyclopedia, and its myriad of clones, is an attributed copy/mirror of Wikipedia. Look for the link to the "citational source" on the page; that's their (very poor) way of license attribution. Further info at my notes page here. Kuru (talk) 14:36, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Muar (town), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Goreng. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Hudson County Sheriff's Office

Thank you for your edit. However, with respect to copyrighted material from our now-defunct website, the material belongs to the Hudson County Sheriff's Office, of which I am a duly authorized agent. As such, no copyright violation exists.

Hi. Please see the guidelines on donating copyrighted materials. There's a procedure to follow for this. Also, even when the addition of copyrighted material is authorized, (a) the material still has to conform to Wikipedia's guidelines; (b) other authors may make appropriate edits to it, just as they may to all text in all articles; and (c) you understand that the text, either in original form or as subsequently modified by others, is available for others to use outside of Wikipedia under the terms of Wikipedia's copyright terms.
By the way, please see the guidelines on editing content over which you have a conflict of interest. Largoplazo (talk) 02:26, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

URu2Si2

I've turned URu2Si2 into a sensible stub, FYI. -- 120.19.181.150 (talk) 13:13, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

That looks great, thanks! Largoplazo (talk) 15:15, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

sh (digraph)

I’m not upset that you subtracted the French section, but don’t you think that there should be some type of description on the page saying something like, ‘This is an index of languages that use sh natively?’ Because otherwise, sooner or later somebody is going to repeat my mistake. --Romanophile (talk) 04:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

I understand your point but I think it's fairly clear what's intended. To understand it otherwise would imply that every single language that has borrowed or that might borrow in the future a word from another language that has "sh" in it should be included in the article. In other words, every single language with a Roman-based alphabet that doesn't forbid the borrowing of words with "sh" in them. I don't think most people would interpret the inclusion criterion that way. Largoplazo (talk) 10:09, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Our Institution is reputed institution

Sir,

Our Institution is a reputed institution in Pondicherry no Puducherry. So we are creating a page for our Institute — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdineshbabupdy (talk • contribs) 08:53, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello. Wikipedia articles have to be about topics that meet Wikipedia's notability guideline. You should read through the general notability guidelines and the guidelines specific to schools and see whether you can demonstrate that the school meets any of the notability criteria given in either of those places. If you can, present your findings at the deletion discussion, which is being held at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christ Institute of Technology (CIT). The final decision (which won't be made by me) will be based on that discussion. Largoplazo (talk) 09:30, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

NPP / AfC

Hi. Just a reminder that in just over a week at Wikimania there's going to be a cross-Wiki discussion about the systems of control of new pages. This is a round-table rather than a presentation or a lecture. On the agenda are reforms to the new article reviewing systems and ways to help new users better understand our content policies. If you are going to Italy and would like to take part, please check out the conference schedule, and I look forward to seeing you there. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:03, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Chak Phullu

Sorry to interrupt you, I just don't understand what kind of hindi is that; I poorly understand hindi, and find this nonsense. Hopefully someone who knows hindi better than me may help this case sort out. - INVISIBLE-Talk! 14:56, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

I could have been mistaken about what you meant. But I have seen people tag articles for deletion as nonsense because they were in another language. Anyway, India probably has languages and dialects that are closely related to Hindi, and there are Hindi derivatives in other countries, so if it looks at all like Hindi, it's possibly one of those. Well, probably not one from another country, since the article is about someone or something in Punjab, but it's something to take into consideration. Largoplazo (talk) 15:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
It's been 30 minutes I'm trying to translate. It is quiet difficult, I'm leaving and unwatching it! Cheers! - INVISIBLE-Talk! 15:22, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Hi, my name is Sam Hemming and I created a Wikipedia page for the author Dillon McFarlane, and signed up with the username DillonAlan. I have referenced many of his books and his IMDB and believe this makes him notable. Please keep the page up as he deserves it like every other author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DillonAlan (talk • contribs) 21:52, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

@DillonAlan: Hi. The article doesn't convey any encyclopedic significance for him, in my estimation. More importantly, I ran a Google search on him and didn't get the impression that he meets Wikipedia's notability requirements that article topics have to meet. Though there could be substantial coverage of him in reliable sources independent of him meeting the general notability guidelines, I didn't find any through Google. He doesn't meet WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NACTOR (appearing in what appears to be a privately made short film doesn't convey notability; neither, on its own, does inclusion in an indiscriminate database like IMDB).
As for your user name, you cannot use another real person's name. I'm going to submit your account for blocking, though you're welcome to request a name change and continue editing under the new name. Largoplazo (talk) 22:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Deletion

Then please delete Dillon's Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DillonAlan (talk • contribs) 22:55, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Largoplazo,

I'm Enochjd11, I'm currently working on an artist article named 'Enoch-Jude Danquah'.

I've just received a good number of emails regarding the article that I have submitted. Which, in that case it's being nominated for speedy deletion as we speak.

Help!

With warm regards,

Enochjd11 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enochjd11 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. I'm sorry, but I nominated it for deletion because I don't think Enoch-Jude Danquah meets Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines. Article topics have to be notable which, for an actor, means meeting criteria given in the general notability guidelines or specific guidelines pertaining to entertainers. If you feel you can demonstrate that he does meet any of the notability guidelines, you should bring that up at the deletion discussion. By the way, this isn't speedy deletion, which doesn't involve a discussion.
Are you Enoch-Jude Danquah? Your user name implies that you are. If you are, you should now that Wikipedia strongly discourages writing about yourself. If not, then the name is misleading and you'll have to change it. Largoplazo (talk) 00:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

RASEI

Hi, I noticed that you removed the {{Db-a3}} that I added on the article RASEI - just a heads up that looking at the author's contributions he probably intended to redirect to Renewable and Sustainable Energy Institute so I did that for him instead. GSMR (talk) 21:22, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I was figuring on doing that, but when I started typing "Renewable and Sus..." into the search box, autocomplete came up with only "Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews", and I didn't think to check the full title anyway in case the article was (as it indeed is) brand new and not yet indexed by the autocomplete engine. Thanks for picking up on it. Largoplazo (talk) 21:32, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Simio

I noticed that you nominated the Simio article for deletion. Which got me to take a look at the page history, and I noticed that it was AFD'd two days ago. I was wondering if you might be interested in rolling things back to that. (I would do it myself, if you're cool with it, but I'd rather not touch the article.) Guettarda (talk) 20:08, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

As I just commented in the Afd, I think it's so blatantly spammy, and always has been, that it doesn't need to go through a full discussion. Largoplazo (talk) 20:10, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
You're probably right. I hadn't noticed that the student version re-created an article that was previously deleted, or the long history of problems with the topic. Guettarda (talk) 20:26, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Jack Evans page

FYI, I've made a request for permanent pending changes protection on the page, since it looks like Evans making vandal edits to his own page has been a recurring theme. Marianna251TALK 15:15, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, and it's been a surprising experience. Largoplazo (talk) 15:38, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alisa Kolosova, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Needs English sources

Template:Needs English sources has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —S Marshall T/C 20:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Gavin Plumley

Came across this guy when doing some work on Monmouth School alumni. His page was created by two users, User:Gajp81 and User:Hotelchantelle. Neither user has a Userpage, nor do they have any other edits. I strongly suspect it's autobiographical. The article links to only one other Wikipedia article, namely Monmouth School. The first three hits on Google are his website, his twitterfeed and Wikipedia. Lastly, the references don't go anywhere near supporting the text. As an example, the final para. lists 9 venues he has lectured at. The reference, there's only one, supports the last of these only.

You put this up for deletion in November last year but I can't see what happened to it. I really don't think it meets Notability Guidelines. I'm sure he's a lovely guy but he's just not prominent.

I'd be interested in your thoughts. KJP1 (talk) 17:08, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't remember that article in particular. I may not have even have any particular thoughts on him at the time: my only action was to flag him for BLPPROD, on the grounds that, at that moment, he was a living person and the article had no sources. I do agree, looking at the history, that it's an autobiography. The author, with initials GAJP, is probably Gavin Plumley, and an editor with a different name restored his text only a few minutes after he deleted it, and worked from there, giving me the impression that he could be the same person. And, given that the footnotes are all affiliated, your point is well taken, But I have no special tie to this article. I may check for sources in a bit. Largoplazo (talk) 20:40, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Appreciated. I've left a message on the article's Talkpage which may, or probably may not, elicit a response. After that, we'll see. It's tough for these freelance writers, and I understand that a Wikipedia entry can help, but if they're just not notable, they're just not. Best. KJP1 (talk) 22:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marcia Dangremon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vitória. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:34, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

"Needs English sources"

I'm not sure it was clear to you why that TfD (which I didn't participate in) went the way it did. Yes, we have maintenance templates that go beyond "fix this problem or the article may be deleted". The problem with this one is that it misrepresented policy; no article here "needs" English sources and they're not even "preferred". The template actually could have been speedily deleted without discussion per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#T2. It might have been a frustrating and irritable discussion, but I'm surprised there was one at all.  :-) Our maint templates are about improving the content, or improving the quality of the sourcing, and "cites sources written in my preferred language" has nothing to do with source or content quality. Hope this helps.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  01:29, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish: I appreciate your making the effort to explain it to me. However, unless I am absolutely crazy, your statement that English sources are not even "preferred" flies in the face of the sentence on the policy page WP:V that says "However, because this project is in English, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance" [emphasis mine].
As for the part about "needs", (a) I acknowledged that point when it was expressed in the discussion; (b) it was only a defect in the name of the template, the text of which conformed to policy; and (c) if the name of a template is its only defect (which appears to be the case here, since you mentioned two defects above, and I've already addressed the one about "preferred"), then the appropriate way to deal with it is to move it to another name, not to delete it, no?
As far as I can tell, regardless of its name, my purpose for the template was fully in alignment with and in pursuit of explicitly stated policy. What am I not understanding? Largoplazo (talk) 03:41, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't being very precise. There's no general preference for English over non-English sources. Yes, if we know for a fact that English Source A and French Source B can be used to source the exact same point and are of equal quality as reliable sources, we'd prefer the English one, but not if the French one was better. However, it would be necessary to have and examine both sources to be sure of such a comparison, which necessarily means we would already have the English source on hand, and simply insert it, obviating any need for such a template. The template served no purpose because it presupposed that a) the sources in the article now are insufficient and b) that equal or better English-language ones must be available, and thus calls for a search to go find them. The "English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance" rule is only logically applicable when that search has already been performed, because of the "when" clause. It's a cart-before-the-horse issue. The circumstance comes up so infrequently (usually with regard to non-English sources that are also available in an English version that the original citer didn't know about, or general press reports about an event that first appear in non-English media then show up in English-language major news sources a bit later after the newswires get humming) that we don't need a cleanup template for it. The template, despite your narrow intent for it, would almost always be applied in a way that is anti-policy, to demand English sources when none are required, to cast doubt on notability of an Japanese or Brazilian or Botswana or whatever topic because someone can't read the source material for it, etc. Anyway, I don't think you did anything "wrong", it's just that not every single phrase in policy needs a template about it, especially if it's apt to be misconstrued because it has far narrower applicability that it might seem to at first.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  05:21, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Article

Thanks Largoplazo.

I am new on Wikipedia Talk page. Gradually learning the rules. I will improve the article with more sources in a non-personal way.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibeabuchilaz (talk • contribs) 16:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

That's excellent, thanks! And welcome. Largoplazo (talk) 16:36, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Please Suggest changes to the page: ShieldSquare

I am making wiki pages for small companies in my city for free. So can u not delete my pages? Benrkumar (talk) 12:57, 22 September 2016 (UTC)benrk

Hi. If they are small companies, they may not meet the standards for inclusion under Wikipedia's notability policy. (You may be thinking in terms of using Wikipedia as though it were a directory of local businesses, but it can't be used that way. Each article's content and inclusion are judged on their own merits.) I recommend that you read through that policy and the general notability guidelines and guidelines for companies and organizations before proceeding so that (1) for companies that do meet the criteria, you can save yourself trouble by demonstrating up front, by citing appropriate sources, that they are notable and (2) you don't spend time creating articles about non-notable companies because they are likely to be deleted, especially if you make no credible claim of significance for them. Largoplazo (talk) 14:43, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
If you feel that you can argue for the notability of ShieldSquare, the place to do that is on the discussion page, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shieldsquare‎‎. Largoplazo (talk) 14:45, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Clairy Browne

Why did you mark a page I'm working on for deletion? Sugartruck (talk) 01:22, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

As the message posted to your talk page indicates, it had no content (other than an empty infobox) fifteen minutes after it had been created. Typically, articles already have at least a sentence or two when they are first created, explaining briefly what the topic is; if there's nothing in an article fifteen minutes or so after creation, it's likely to have been abandoned.
There's no problem, though: If I was mistaken, and you do intend to create an article, you're more than welcome to do so. Just be sure to put something of substance in it up front, even a sentence, to say what the article is about. Largoplazo (talk) 02:49, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your understanding :) I realized I had mistakenly not used Draft (it's been a while). I was thrown off because the Infobox was blue and I had coded it for a solo singer (yellow). I am working on a proper draft now. Sugartruck (talk) 06:49, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Abby Weiss

A tag has been placed on Abby Weiss requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

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. Jerod Lycett (talk) 11:20, 5 October 2016 (UTC)


Speedy deletion nomination of Roozahang.com

Hello

Roozahang.com is the first website in Iran that provides a search engine for visitors to do a "Subject" search on books. Look here. I think this page should not be deleted. This site can help everybody who likes to know which books have been translated from other languages into persian.

Thanks Hshirzadeh (talk) 11:40, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism by Largoplazo

Why do you delete vandalism hint in talk ? Are you think that the Lord of simmering is mayor of vienna ? Or did you add this ? --2001:62A:4:412:F001:9DCA:FB22:EB6C (talk) 18:15, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Because a section on the talk page for States of Austria with a title "Lord of Simmering !" followed by a single word, "Vandalism", is nonsense and doesn't appear to have anything to do with the States of Austria. Therefore, it doesn't belong on that article's talk page. Largoplazo (talk) 18:23, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Stop vandalism pls '--2001:62A:4:412:F001:9DCA:FB22:EB6C (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Removing nonsense isn't vandalism. Adding nonsense is vandalism. I've just placed a vandalism notice on your talk page. Largoplazo (talk) 18:27, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Removing vandalism hint is vandalism--2001:62A:4:412:F001:9DCA:FB22:EB6C (talk) 18:28, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
A nonsense heading followed by the word "vandalism" isn't a "vandalism hint", whatever you think that means. If you think that what you wrote there is meaningful, well, I'm sorry, but it isn't. Largoplazo (talk) 18:29, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

If you read the article you could see that "Lord Simmering" is mayor of vienna. Look at the article first ! before delete talk without reason --Langholz8 (talk) 18:38, 6 October 2016 (UTC) Here is the text that you delete

Lord of Simmering  ![edit]

Vandalism--2001:62A:4:412:D57:40A7:C6A9:DDC7 (talk) 17:50, 5 October 2016 (UTC) Vandalismus bei Wien - benötigt Richtigstellung — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:62A:4:412:F001:9DCA:FB22:EB6C (talk) 18:20, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

  • Did you see vandalism ? (Do you find Lord and Simmering ?)

The nine states (Bundesländer) of Austria, listed alphabetically by name, are:[1]

Coat of Arms State (Bundesland) Capital Governor (Landeshauptmann) Incumbent Party Coalition
Burgenland Eisenstadt Governor of Burgenland Hans Niessl SPÖ SPÖ, FPÖ
Carinthia Klagenfurt Governor of Carinthia Peter Kaiser SPÖ SPÖ, ÖVP, Grüne
Lower Austria Sankt Pölten Governor of Lower Austria Erwin Pröll ÖVP ÖVP, SPÖ
Salzburg Salzburg Governor of Salzburg Wilfried Haslauer ÖVP ÖVP, Grüne, TS
Styria Graz Governor of Styria Michael Schützenhofer ÖVP ÖVP, SPÖ
Tyrol Innsbruck Governor of Tyrol Günther Platter ÖVP ÖVP, Grüne
Upper Austria Linz Governor of Upper Austria Josef Pühringer ÖVP ÖVP, FPÖ
Vienna Simmering Lord of Vienna Kid Curry GWAR SPÖ, Grüne
Vorarlberg Bregenz Governor of Vorarlberg Markus Wallner ÖVP ÖVP, Grüne

I guess every guy expect you find the Lord of Simmering. Not all that your small mind think that s nonsense is nonsense ! Stop Vandalism !

There also isn't a state called Plithia, a state called Zarconity, or a state called Berknis. Are you also planning to add sections to States of Austria reading "Lord of Plithia - Vandalism!" and "Lord of Zarconity - Vandalism" and "Lord of Berknis - Vandalism"? And you could certainly come up with 100,000 more. You seem to think you're explaining the validity of your entry on that page, but you aren't. Largoplazo (talk) 19:01, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Parties and Elections in Europe – Austria (States)

Tommie Grabiec Deletion

Dear Largoplazo

I am contesting the deletion of page Tommie Grabiec.

My reasons are as follows:

1) Tommie Grabiec is a Professional British Actor, well known in the Uk Fringe Theatre circle and Indie-Film circle.

2) You state there is a COI. I don't know Tommie personally, however do know his agent. Originally it was Tommie and his agent who sat down and decided there should be a Wiki page created. They gathered materials and discussed suitable wording for the page.

After you deleted the page yesterday, this material was sent to me. I included similar paragraphs together with my own wording.

I hope this issue can be resolved amicably.

Best Regards

Edward — Preceding unsigned comment added by FutureProf (talk • contribs) 23:29, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Tommie Grabiec Deletion

Dear Largoplazo

I hope you are doing well.

After doing some research regarding similar actors who have a Wiki Page and are at the same level as Tommie Grabiec, I ask that you look at the Wiki page of another actor with a similiar name Tommie Earl Jenkins

If you have a look at his Imdb page here: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1045674/ His website: http://www.tommieearljenkins.com

and then compare them to Tommie Grabiec's:

Tommie Grabiec Imdb: http://imdb.com/name/nm4997973 Official Website: http://tommiegrabiec.com

Then there are great similarities.

Thank you for your time

Ed — Preceding unsigned comment added by FutureProf (talk • contribs) 07:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Greetings. I looked at that article and felt that Jenkins, too, falls short of the notability requirements, so I've submitted it for a deletion discussion. Sorry. I'd suggest taking a look at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Largoplazo (talk) 11:21, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of my page for 'advertising' or some such nonsense

I point you to your spurious reasoning for deleting my entry for 'because in its current form it serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic' which is exactly what the page for International Migration Institute does yet that has been allowed, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Migration_Institute, why the double standards?

I am in the process of editing the page to add in details about publication theories. I do not expect it to be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GrahamMinenor-Matheson (talk • contribs) 13:06, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

I point you to your spurious reasoning that there's any comparison between the article you wrote and the article on the International Migration Institute. The latter article consists entirely of neutrally stated, externally verifiable assertions. Your article takes the form of a communication from the organization designed to engage the public by conveying the subjective motivations, aims, and purposes of the organization's leadership, none of which are facts externally verifiable by anyone who isn't inside their heads.
Besides that, Wikipedia article topics need to conform to Wikipedia's notability policy. Given that Google turns up no independent coverage for an organization named "academic antidote", I think you're going to have to take the initiative to supply convincing sources sufficient to demonstrate that the organization meets the general notability guidelines or the additional criteria available to organizations.
Re "I do not expect it to be deleted": That sort of imperious talk has no effect around here. Largoplazo (talk) 15:33, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Delete all from my situs thanks.

Yes all my site. Muishadi4 (talk) 22:04, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Why dont you help me contribute to the article i have created — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmcaldar (talk • contribs) 01:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Orgelkids

Hi Largoplazo,

I saw your edit on Orgelkids. The point here is that the (reliable) sources are in Dutch and are given on the Dutch Wikipedia. I did link to that, but perhaps that was not clear enough. Please, tell me how I can fix this problem. Greetings, --Dick Bos (talk) 18:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, @Dick Bos: If the only independent, reliable sources with substantial coverage are in Dutch, then give the Dutch sources here. That's permitted. Also, you should remove the "reference" in the article to the Dutch Wikipedia article (because Wikimedia articles aren't valid, reliable sources), and, instead, post a {{translated page}} template at the top of the talk page. Largoplazo (talk) 18:48, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I've done that. Please check if it's alright now. Greetings, --Dick Bos (talk) 19:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
It looks generally good! Except ... I've replaced the earlier tag with one calling for footnotes in the article, directly sourcing the various assertions in it to one or more of those sources. Largoplazo (talk) 19:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Eddwins Ra Mendieta

Looking at the what links here for Eddwins Ra Mendieta it seems they added that name to a page-not sure though if it is suppose to be a infobox type thing or if it should be removed though. Wgolf (talk) 03:25, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

There was an infobox until today's edits. Looks like the editor messed things up. I don't know whether he realizes it and is planning to fix it. Largoplazo (talk) 03:29, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Okay not sure what to say then, maybe go back before all the vandalism. Wgolf (talk) 03:31, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
True, it was left like that over an hour ago. I've restored it to the October 20 version. Largoplazo (talk) 03:39, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

About 1965 Carnegie Tech Tartans football team

Hi Largoplazo,
I've declined the speedy deletion of this article. I admit I've only had a cursory look for references in reliable sources, but would appear to me that the "Tartans" did play college football in 1965.
Oops, update. I'm struggling to find references that indicate that Carnegie Mellon Tartans football had an NCAA team in 1965.
Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:23, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

@Shirt58: I understand. It just seemed it should somehow be speediable, and it looked as though, regardless of the title of the article, that its core was a personal reflection, a sharing of the creator's personal reminiscences. Largoplazo (talk) 10:34, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Largoplazo/Archives/Archive_20&oldid=1078390462"