User talk:Amatulic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Please use my talk page rather than emailing me.

If I left a message on your talk page, please reply there. If you initiate contact here, I will respond here.

Put new messages at the bottom. I will not notice them at the top.

Fresh set of eyes[edit]

A pic used to illustrate food and wine pairing in the Merlot article

Hey Amatulic, I'm taking Tomas' advice to seek out a fresh set of eyes about what is going on at the Merlot article. Essentially we have an editor who objects to any images that have a wine bottle involved--even the image to the left that was previously in the article. While I've been trying to work with him to encourage him to replace the images with better free-use alternatives, he prefers to just cast bad faith accusations of advertising and is now threatening to go on a POINTy deletion rampage through all of our wine articles. While there is another editor involved in the discussion that I feel is more amendable to working towards a middle ground in finding acceptable images, I'm becoming more concerned with the behavior of this other editor now that he feels "fueled" by the partial agreement with his POV by another editor. AgneCheese/Wine 18:00, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Actually, his POINTy deletion spree wasn't a new threat from him. I forgot about this edit summary. AgneCheese/Wine 18:24, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I have to agree that in most cases, an image works just as well without a depiction of a wine label. Wikipedia is not to be used as a publicity medium, even if that publicity is unintended. In articles that aren't about specific wines or wineries, if a wine label is present in an image, the bottle should be rotated to obscure the label partially. Particularly in the picture you included, just the wine glass would have been sufficient although the wine label is somewhat out of focus (and I must say, whatever gooey concoction is on the plate sure looks unappetizing to me; maybe a plastic cup of white Zin would be more fitting there).
One compromise that might satisfy everyone is to apply digital blur and contrast reduction effects to the label and continue using the existing image. For example, in my image File:Jug wine refills.jpg in which the labels were unavoidable, that's what I did: I hazed the labels out to the point where one cannot identify my uncle's winery. I also made sure the image was fairly low-resolution. One can digitally obscure the labels (using blurring, contrast effects, resolution reduction, or a combination) so that they don't look purposefully obscured yet the brand remains unidentifiable. Any "offending" images could simply be re-uploaded to the same name instead of being deleted. That might be a solution that satisfies all parties in the dispute. ~Amatulić (talk) 02:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
I would be completely amicable to that compromise. As you know, I am one of the most ardent anti-spam wine editors out there so I have no worries or objections about blurring the winery name or what not. I just don't have the technical skills to do that (though I've already tried my best with some of the pics I edited and re-added). My objective is to have fully developed articles that are illustrated with relevant free-images. The key details for me are the color of the wine in the glass, the identification of what the wine is (Merlot, Chard, etc) and the wine region. The winery name can be cut out or obscure in whatever way. That is 100% A-okay because the winery is wholly irrelevant IMO. I was just working with the best of what I had with the best skills and avenue at my disposal. I would be thrilled to death if Drmies or NewTestLeeper were willing to work with me to implement this compromise rather than go on a wholesale deletion spree that leaves our wine articles unillustrated and less developed. AgneCheese/Wine 03:31, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
I can try my hand at obscuring logos and winery names, although I won't be fast. My first day on a new job is tomorrow and I expect I'll be swamped with that as I get up to speed. ~Amatulić (talk) 03:48, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm totally fine with that because I know that in the end the articles will be better off. There is no deadline or rush on my part. I just hope that NewTestLeeper will cool down and not go on his mass deletion spree across a broad swath of wine articles. That's my only worry. :/ Best wishes with the new job. I know it can be both an exciting and stressful time. AgneCheese/Wine 03:54, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Dix Township, Ford County, Illinois[edit]

Occasionally edited, not frequent. Lower to PC-protection? --George Ho (talk) 08:53, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Done. Sorry for the delayed response. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:11, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Last one[edit]

Since I prefer not to edit war, i'd appreciate if you use any of these sources to dispel any controversy:

  • Mystical Dimensions of Islam - Page 34, Annemarie Schimmel - 2011: "Jesus, the last prophet before Muhammad according to Koranic revelation ..."
  • My Soul Is a Woman: The Feminine in Islam - Page 22, Annemarie Schimmel - 1997: "... Mary, or Mariam, the virgin mother of Jesus, who was the last prophet before Muhammad"
  • Islam in Iran - Page 7, I. P. Petrushevsky - 1985: "Whereas in Islam's teaching 'Isa al-Masih (Jesus the Messiah) was human; he was one of the great prophets and the immediate predecessor of Muhammad..."

Thanks. Nons3r (talk) 07:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

You are missing the point. MOS:ISLAM is Wikipedia's guideline regarding how we present articles on these subjects. In such articles, we do not refer to Muhammad as a "prophet"; at most we refer to "the Islamic Prophet Muhammad" but only when such disambiguation is absolutely necessary. We don't refer to Jesus as a prophet either. Therefore, it is inappropriate to imply that Wikipedia regards these individuals as prophets by putting this information into an infobox. ~Amatulić (talk) 13:30, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Alcohol and health[edit]

Hello, Amatulic! Am I remembering correctly, that you were one of the people who dealt with the problem of alcohol related articles by David Hedlund? Sorry for my faulty memory; I can't remember who all contributed to fixing the "Alcohol (drug)" article, and I can't go back and look because the page has been deleted so its talk page is gone. If this is a subject of interest to you, I just discovered another one: Alcohol and health. It was called to my attention by a new addition someone added (which is also problematic). But then I noticed the section "Pregnancy and alcohol" which is horrible: it cites a single study instead of a review article, and mis-states the results of the one study it cites. Then I looked at the article more generally, noticed its strong anti-alcohol bias and general incoherence, and had a hunch it was David Hedlund's work. Sure enough, it turns out he contributed most of the content, much of which is copied from other articles. I'd appreciate it if you would take a look and maybe discuss on the article's talk page. The first question is: can the article be fixed, or would it be better to simply merge any salvageable content to some other article and then nuke it? Also, who else should I contact about this? Thanks for any comments! --MelanieN (talk) 18:48, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

The original "Alcohol (drug)" page wasn't deleted. It was moved to Draft:Alcohol (drug), along with its talk page, because it has salvageable content but couldn't remain in main article space.
I had started looking at other articles David Hedlund touched, and remember coming across Alcohol and health and realized it would be a significant effort to clean it up and re-merge content back to more appropriate places. Then I got a new job which has significantly limited my Wikipedia time to minor gnome work. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:24, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, that's helpful! I learned from that (draft) talk page that this article was originally spun off from Alcoholic beverage. When I have a little more time I'll go through the article section by section and analyze what has to be done. I understand about your new job, you are excused! 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 23:57, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

amanda eliasch[edit]

why was the Amanda Eliasch page deleted? unfair and incorrect — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:28, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

I didn't delete it, I restored it and then it was deleted again. The page's deletion log shows pretty clearly that it was deleted for copyvio and promotional reasons. Take it up with an admin who did delete it, and if you are not satisfied, take your case to Wikipedia:Deletion review. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:47, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Link removed because external[edit]

Hi Amatulic, you remove the link of ThinkingRock from the Getting Things Done article because it was external only, which I understand. Could you help me to re-instate the original wikipedia ThinkingRock page which was written by an independent author? An administrator deleted it as in his opinion, there were not enough external references. I would like now to add these references but I need the original page back. I have tried to contact that administrator without success.

ThinkingRock is a product similar to the ones listed as software implementations and I find it unfair that the other software are listed but not ThinkingRock. ThinkingRock is one of the rare implementation which is multi-platform with the security to be able to keep the data on desktop and not in the cloud.

Thank you for your help.

Claire — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaireLem (talkcontribs) 11:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Please read the replies to your post at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#ThinkingRock. The article was restored 3 days ago to your user space at User:ClaireLem/ThinkingRock. Please continue to work on it there, and do not move it back to main space yourself.
Becaause you have a conflict of interest regarding this subject, you should not be contributing content about your company or product in main article space. At the top of the article in your user space, you will see a button to submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation when you believe the article is in compliance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, particularly Wikipedia:Notability. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:04, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


Moved to Talk:ChexSystems where it belongs

Your submission at Articles for creation: User:Marcosvr/ProMetic (August 22)[edit]

AFC-Logo Decline.svg
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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.

and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.

~Amatulić (talk) 16:49, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Just a note that I have moved this notice to User talk:Marcosvr, along with your signature and timestamp. Sorry if you are not happy with that, feel free to revert. Face-smile.svg Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 11:38, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, that's weird. The tool must have figured I was the author since I did some clean-up edits before declining the submission. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:04, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

You appear to have a conflict of interest[edit]

No, I have not association with

Please don't jump to conclusions. I read the site, yes, and I find it to be a well-informed site with suitable writing style and tone.

Why did you remove the links?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by FrankZappa14 (talkcontribs) 2014-08-23T15:26:05‎

Your sole purpose on Wikipedia is to add links to This is obvious based on your own contribution history, and strongly suggests that you have some association with the site.
Also, this is a blog site, and blogs are generally to be avoided as sources except in special circumstances. Particularly in this case, the whole site including the blog is designed to sell consulting services. Wikipedia is not to be used for publicity or promotion purposes.
I suggested to you on your talk page that WP:RSN is the proper place to discuss the reliability of that source. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:11, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dorri Olds[edit]

Hello Amatulic…Thank you very much for the comment on the (rejected) submission I made on Dorri Olds. You mentioned the award she won, which is in fact noted on the New York Press website:

I am wondering if this might be sufficient (or at least help) for an article on her, noting she is not just known for a single event.

Your input is greatly appreciated! Thank you!Minusminority (talk) 22:33, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

That's a nice piece, but it doesn't do much to convince me that she's known for more than a single event. She won a writing contest and her essay was published in a local-circulation publication. Is that a notable award, or something nationally recognized? It also says at the bottom that her work has appeared in some regional magazines and some books. That's fine, but her work appearing in other publications doesn't help either, because her own works do not constitute coverage of the person. For someone to be notable we need to see coverage about her.
If she were a "high profile" individual, then WP:BLP1E would no longer apply. Right now she seems to be low-profile. Wikipedia:Who is a low-profile individual offers some clarification of the distinctions. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick reply, Amatulic…I appreciate your help - - and will do more work when time allows…(Also, want to mention that though NY Press was local publication in New York City - it was widely circulated and notable ( …Once again, thanks!Minusminority (talk) 00:41, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Minusminority (talk) 00:43, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, you're right. No problems with the notability of the publication. However, even if she published a piece in the New York Times, which has wider circulation, it still wouldn't be coverage about her. The New York Times has plenty of reporters who write for the paper who aren't notable either, by Wikipedia's way of defining it. "Notable" doesn't mean "famous" or even "well known". For Wikipedia, notable means significant coverage about the subject in verifiable and reliable sources. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Coconut Article Corrections[edit]

All changes to the Coconut Oil article are discussed and justified in the talk section. Please explain why you reverted these corrections when there were errors in the existing piece and my corrections were based on scientific research data that was properly cited in the talk section. I removed the erroneous statements, so there was no place to cite in the article itself. Blonz (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2014 (UTC) ER Blonz, Ph.D.

You failed to use an edit summary to describe what you were doing or why. You did this twice, and you were reverted twice. Talk:Coconut oil contains disagreement about your removal of the statement and accompanying citation. In such cases, it is better to discuss the issue than engage in an edit war, as you seem to be doing. See WP:BRD for guidance. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Help for editing page[edit]

Conversation moved to Talk:Achraf Baznani (photographer)


Hey, just giving you a head's up just in case. I've nominated ContentBridge for deletion but I'm kind of worried about the assertions the original article creator was making on the article's talk page. They're a paid editor but I think that their COI is getting in the way of their editing when it comes to this article. I'm not asking you to participate in either the talk page or the AfD, but I would like for you to kind of keep an eye on this editor for a while. I've tried talking to them about the various issues on the article but they essentially replied that the article should remain "as is" and that they didn't see why the sources were unusable to show notability or why (for example) that the staff member section would be seen as promotional and give the staff undue weight. That really, REALLY concerns me since that kind of makes me think that their COI is too great to really edit neutrally- especially since they were trying to say that someone being quoted in a Variety article shows notability for the company. (They argued that since he was asked, that means he is important, which means that the company is notable since they asked him because of the company.) Again, just asking you to keep an eye on things in general and at most, just try to give the editor some advice. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 10:52, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I had a look at some other articles created by this editor, also for pay, and I think those could use some extra eyes, too. Personally I don't have time for this right now... --Randykitty (talk) 08:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)


Redirected Parx Racing to the proper article, Parx Casino and Racing. Should solve the problem of the newbie who keeps redirecting it to his/her userapsace. It's a plausible redirect, so hope that ends the problem!  ;-) Hope that helped! Montanabw(talk) 20:47, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Request on 14:53:52, 11 September 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Marcosvr[edit]

Hi Amatulic,

Sorry to take up your time but would you mind allowing me a copy the Prometic Life Sciences draft so that I may fix the issue and resubmit it?

I asked Revent and he suggest I ask the administrator which I think is you?

Many thanks for any help Marcosvr (talk) 14:53, 11 September 2014 (UTC) Marcos

@Marcosvr: FYI, that draft was moved to Draft:ProMetic Life Sciences. Since I'm not an admin, I can't actually look at the deleted draft, but the copyright violation was a press release... as I remember, the 'description of the company' was taken directly from there. Even if a section of text is copyrighted by the subject of the article, it still cannot legally be reused unless it has been released to the public domain or under a WP:Compatible license. You can get a copy of the draft from the administrator who deleted it and resubmit it once the issue has been fixed. Revent
I cannot restore a draft that is a copyright violation.
I would email it to you, but you don't have an email address enabled here. You can set that in your user preferences. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:21, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Clarence N. Hickman[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Clarence N. Hickman at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Edwardx (talk) 10:06, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clarence N. Hickman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bell Telephone. 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) 09:13, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

List of 12 step groups discussion[edit]

Howdy Amatulic. A experienced editor has proposed to change the standard for inclusion of List of twelve-step groups from being a list of wikipedia articles, to being a list of 12 step groups (without the necessity of having an article attached to the entry). The discussion is currently on the talk page. I am contacting you because you have participated in the maintenance of that article. If you have no opinion, please feel free to disregard this notice. Cheers! Coffeepusher (talk) 05:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Hólmbert Friðjónsson[edit]

...has ended up as a redirect to itself. You know the history and can probably disentangle it better than I can. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 20:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Oops, I thought I took care of that last step. All that needed to be done was revert the last edit. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Belmond La Samanna[edit]

Hi Amatulic. I wanted to check with you whether adding the following 3 citations for the captioned Wikipedia page would resolve the notability concern?

Thanks for your advice. Laurashaikh (talk) 21:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)Laurashaikh

The first one you cite above is basically a travel guidebook. Their purpose is to provide comprehensive information on the subject matter. This is routine coverage, analogous to a wine review in Wine Spectator or a restaurant description in Zagat.
I don't know what to make of the second one. An architectural firm with a review of a resort? They seem to be referencing (or reproducing) an article from the Robb Report Vacation Homes publication, so I don't know why that source wouldn't be cited directly. In any case if Vacation Homes is in the business of profiling resorts, then that would be routine coverage also.
The third one is an artist's own web site, and the page features his gallery that happens to be located at the resort. That doesn't constitute "coverage" in the spirit of WP:SIGCOV. The source clearly isn't independent of the resort, and independence is required.
Therefore, I do not believe these sources resolve the notability concern.
Finally, I must ask, what is your connection with the subject of that article? Your contribution history suggests an association. You are required to disclose any association publicly, and you agreed to do so when you accepted the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. You seem to be engaging in paid advocacy, public relations, or marketing, so please read WP:NOPAY also.
Please put a conflict of interest disclosure statement on your user page User:Laurashaikh. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:56, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Hólmbert Aron Friðjónsson[edit]

Thanks for sorting the history merge on this page. --nonsense ferret 22:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

inre Casey LaBow[edit]

I am working on a better version of the poor unsourced stub that you had to A7 speedy back in November 2012. I'll invite you to take a look before I take in to mainspace. Cheers, Schmidt, Michael Q. 10:23, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Looks much better -- however, as a biography of a living person, the article won't last long in main space without references showing coverage in reliable independent sources. Also it isn't clear from the draft, which part of WP:NACTOR is satisfied by the subject. Her past roles don't appear to be significant although I am unfamiliar with The Twilight Saga and her role in it. ~Amatulić (talk) 13:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
The Twilight Saga is a pretty big deal film-wise, though I admit to personally being bored with it. However, her recurring roles in Part 1 and Part 2, and enough other principle roles have her meet meet WP:BIO though WP:NACTOR and enough media attention to meet WP:GNG. BUT the draft is no way ready yet and I ain't done yet by a long shot. Like I wrote above, I'll invite you when ready. Just wanted to let you know. Face-smile.svg Schmidt, Michael Q. 22:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
In that case, I'd say the draft will be ready if you can add a few reliable sources as references. It's certainly a lot better than the deleted version. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Reliable sources added. More to follow. Thanks. Schmidt, Michael Q. 00:07, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Could you keep an eye...[edit]

I am about to go away for a couple of weeks. Could I ask you to keep an eye on two items at REFUND which might need follow-up?

Thanks, JohnCD (talk) 17:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Will do. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. George Farah is done, only Christopher Wright to look out for. JohnCD (talk) 07:56, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Huh. Apparently he posted a reply just minutes after I had checked the page yesterday. Thanks for catching it. I'll monitor the Christopher Wright section. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:35, 23 September 2014 (UTC)


Hi, Dear Amatulic I just want to ask about my page Beijing DeTao Masters Academy that you deleted due to some copyright reasons. Is there anyway I can restore this page? and how should I do it? Please help! Much appreciated!Detao (talk) 05:22, 23 September 2014 (UTC)-

Pages with copyright violations cannot be restored. Because much of the material came from the web site, there would be no reason or benefit to restoring a page that duplicates material elsewhere.
You can certainly try to write it again without copying existing content, or you can write to WP:OTRS to grant irrevocable permission to use that content if you are the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, see WP:CONSENT for a legal template and email address to use.
Your username suggests that you have a conflict of interest with the subject of that article. You might want to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for guidance, and disclose your conflict of interest on your user page, as you agreed to do by accepting the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of service when you created your account. If you want to re-create the article, I suggest you use Wikipedia:Articles for creation to submit your article for review, which is the appropriate venue for authors with a conflict of interest. ~Amatulić (talk) 07:14, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Alright, seems a bit complicated, but I'll definitely give it a go. Thanks a lot!--Detao (talk) 07:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Hi, Amatulic I am really thankful to you for considering my appeal and giving me a chance by unblocking my wikipedia account.

Well in case of getting a mentor I would like you to be my mentor and help me out in contributing to wikipedia.

Thanking you once again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noormohammed satya (talkcontribs) 09:30, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Looking for an opinion about South Beach Diet[edit]

Hi Amatulic, I came across your account while reviewing discussions on the Atkins diet Talk page. I've been working with editors to try to make improvements to the South Beach Diet article, but we seem to have come to an impasse. Since this is a similar topic and you say you enjoy commenting on content disagreements, I thought you might be interested in reviewing the discussions (there are a few) on the Talk page. As I've noted there, I am working on behalf of the South Beach Diet and I am avoiding making any edits to the article myself.

To give you a brief rundown of what's happened thus far, I began by preparing a new draft of the article, but after receiving feedback from other editors, I realized there was not consensus for that. Since then, the focus has been on improving individual sections, most recently with a discussion about the History and theory section. As you'll see, there is a difference of opinion concerning what information should be included in that section and, more broadly, the entire article. I'm reaching out to you and one other editor and I'm hoping you can take a look and weigh in if you have time. I realize that the discussion jumps around a bit, so I can try to clarify any threads that are difficult to follow. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 14:41, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Devil Dub[edit]

Hi there, you speedy deleted Devil Dub, which existed for more than half a decade, under A9 ("Music recording by redlinked artist and no indication of importance or significance"). Well, at least four of the musicians on the record have articles. They are (former) members of bands such as Guns N' Roses, Primus and Praxis. Also, the album has a bunch of positive reviews, showing its significance. So why speedy deletion and not at least AfD? (talk) 18:32, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

The article credited the album to the band "Ben Wa". The length of time an article has been around isn't a concern, we have millions of articles here and only a few hundred active administrators. Bottom line, if the band doesn't have an encyclopedia article, then the album won't have one either. Feel free to write an article on Ben Wa that would survive deletion, and I'm happy to restore the page. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:42, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I still don't understand, but here you go: Draft:Ben Wa (band). (talk) 20:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Nicely done for a submitted draft.
The reason this is necessary is because, if I restored it, someone else would come along and quickly delete it again due to having no band article.
I made some tweaks to the draft. It's pretty weak in sourcing. There is disagreement on whether the Wikipedia community considers Allmusic as a reliable source, going by archived discussions at WP:RSN. And Silicon Valley Metro is a local publication, not regional or even national. You also have a quotation with no citation, which would never be accepted. The saving grace might be the fact that the band had two releases by a reasonably notable record label.
If a reviewer approves it then I'll restore the album article. We'll see. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:32, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
The URB quote is referenced via the Goldberg article. I also changed back the record label, because it is in fact "Records" and not "Recordings". I will include a few other alrticles. (talk) 20:41, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Allmusic and MTV disagree with you. The proper name of the record label is Black Hole Recordings. See
Sources disagree on whether "Black Hole" is called "records" or "recordings". Some sources like Barnes & Noble simply call it "Black Hole". I can find no evidence of a record label ever existed with the name "Black Hole Records". As far as I can tell, that's just a record store in California.
That said, the Black Hole Recordings web site doesn't mention the album. If there is a website for the alternate name, that would be useful for verification. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:47, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I somewhat just believe my eyes. I also believe musicians involved in the project such as drummer Brain or Ben Wa themselves. No need to disagree with them. Btw.: Discogs even has twelve labels with that name. (talk) 21:45, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
In that case the band may not have been published on any notable labels then. Black Hole Recordings is in the Netherlands. Black Hole Records has had at least two different addresses in Oakland, and I can't find any indication that they produced anything other than Devil Dub, which suggests that it was a vanity label for Ben Wa. I was about to revert those Wikilinks but I see you've already done so. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:55, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Stray Records has a nice catalog with several notable artists. More than 60 albums in about two years is not that bad. (talk) 22:03, 3 October 2014 (UTC)


Added to whitelist here , is it correctly done?--Misconceptions2 (talk) 12:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, it's a good proposal. I'll add my own comments tomorrow. ~Amatulić (talk) 04:16, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Any update?--Misconceptions2 (talk) 12:09, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
There are no deadlines for these things on Wikipedia. However, I have removed the from the blacklist. That doesn't mean the link can be added, though, because it is still blacklisted on meta. I have responded on the spam-blacklist talk page. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:31, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Q1) So what do I have to do now. Do i follwo some sort of procedure to remove it from meta blacklist now? Q2) Another question, I want to blacklist this website:, i see some spam from it and it is also the home page of a fringe islamic sect called the Ahmadiyyah, kind of like Nation of Islam. They have a lot of fringe views their and I have seen it in a number of external links--Misconceptions2 (talk) 20:16, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

1. You'd have to make your case at Meta, which is not part of Wikipedia but a global Wikimedia Foundation blacklist. You may have to accept that it may stay listed. In that case, if there is a consistent pattern to use for references, it may be possible to put a pattern-match rule in the whitelist for the purpose of installing in a template. It may even be possible to temporarily whitelist it for template usage and re-blacklist it once the template is done, I am not sure.
2. All you need to do go to the page where you requested de-listing, MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist. The top part of the page is for requests to add to the blacklist. The bottom part, where you posted, is for de-listing requests. Present your evidence as completely as possible for administrators to investigate. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:01, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Update. After exploring the site, it seems that a regex pattern like this:
would likely allow through only the tafsirs in English but not any other part of the web site. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:16, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Robert Eringer discussion[edit]

It looks like you've been pretty busy with administrative stuff. I have a more polished proposal for the Monaco section on the Robert Eringer Talk page if you are still interested/can find the time for that article. Thanks! 009o9 (talk) 04:11, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Actually I've been out all day. I did see your proposal but I haven't had a chance to look at it closely. I will look at it tomorrow; have to go to bed now. ~Amatulić (talk) 04:17, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, should be pretty straight forward. 009o9 (talk) 22:58, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I've revisited proposal for the Monaco section, made some clarifications and tried to remove some wordiness. Can you have a look when you get a chance? 009o9 (talk) 14:59, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

By no means am I trying to rush you, just informing you that I have a clean copy at Talk:Robert_Eringer#Monaco_proposed_III, I've been fussing around with so many clarifications that I'd best provide a clean copy. Hopefully, it will be just a trivial matter of a read-through at your convenience. Thanks!009o9 (talk) 18:30, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Shloime Gertner[edit]

Thank you very much for undeleting the page. I have filled it out with new, referenced content. Yoninah (talk) 23:56, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I've restored the prior deleted history. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:06, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Request on 11:51:04, 13 October 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Marcosvr[edit]

Hi Amatulic,

I been trying to request my deleted page be sent back to me for editing 'ProMetic Life Sciences' and had not luck so far. Can send to me or tell me who I need to contact please?

Thank you

Marcosvr (talk) 11:51, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Generally you would contact the administrator who deleted Draft:ProMetic Life Sciences. In this case, however, RHaworth deleted it due to copyright infringement, so it can't be restored, although the text can be emailed to you. If that's what you want, you need to enable email on your account first. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

South Beach Diet[edit]

Hi again Amatulić, I wanted to thank you again for taking a look at the South Beach Diet discussion. I was wondering if you had any interest in taking a look at the version I had drafted? I would be curious to hear your thoughts about it compared to the current draft. I had proposed it as a replacement a few weeks ago, and received what I'm afraid I consider to be unconstructive comments from LaMona and another editor. I am of course working in tandem with South Beach Diet, however my goal first and foremost has been to write a better Wikipedia article, and I don't think my proposal has had a fair hearing yet. What do you think? Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 14:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

3D Hubs discussion[edit]

Hi Amatulić, Thanks for reviewing my article! I know 3D Hubs well, but I don't have any conflict of interest with them. I'm totallly new to wikipedia (as an editor), I just know some html and I copied the format of the page from wikis of other similar companies. Sorry if some parts seemed overly enthusiastic, hope it's okay now. Cheers, (User talk:Kisg24 09:35, 17 October 2014)

Nadya fatira[edit]

Considering the number of times this has been deleted and recreated, would you consider salting it, as well as the correct title Nadya Fatira? Thanks. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 16:26, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

@G S Palmer: I've salted the lowercase title. I've refrained on the proper-case one, because pasting it into Google Translate seems to indicate some sort of notability, with a record label release as well as singles being used for movie soundtracks. It bears further investigating, but certainly the COI author needs to be using WP:AFC for this. I will suggest it. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:56, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Clarence N. Hickman[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)