User talk:Bjelleklang

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Please note that unless otherwise stated, I will reply on your talkpage!

This page does not contain all previous posts, please see the archives in the box to the right ->


Wikidata weekly summary #98[edit]

Hey there -

I've been helping the band Discipline - - on their Wikipedia profile. How can I help make this site more relevant? They don't tour often, but they are playing a show this October in Central New Jersey. I can probably find reviews of their work. What else might you need?

- mike,  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Progscape (talkcontribs) 22:32, 26 February 2014 (UTC) 

Rejection of my submission[edit]

Dear Bjelleklang,

I tried to give every reference. Please tell me, why my submission is rejected.

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikikaviivek (talkcontribs) 15:09, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #99[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #100[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #101[edit]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Oded Maimon[edit]

Please explain what do you mean by

"reviews of his books to establish notability, as they aren't independent of the subject. For the article to be accepted and notability to be verifiable, you need non-trivial and independent sources"

why books' reviews are considered dependent? Can you give an example what is considered to be independent or non-trivial.

Looking on many other biographies of professors in Wikipedia - I find many other with even less resources.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC) 
Replying here and to the IP in question. Sorry for the bad wording, I've updated the decline reason. But basically you need something other than reviews and his own books to establish notability, so the review result is the same. Also, the next time you want to ask a question adding the link to the article would be nice as I'm amongst the least active reviewers but still had to look through my contribs to find the article in question. Bjelleklang - talk 19:43, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #102[edit]

Heleen Mees[edit]

Can you please protect the Heleen Mees and Willem Buiter articles? (talk) 20:52, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Done. Bjelleklang - talk 22:44, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, is this necessary? Mees was not sentenced, the charges are set for dismissal. Why accept an edit that obliterates all her other achievements and only highlight the false accusations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmwz3hm (talkcontribs) 00:39, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a nasty place. The charges against Mees are set for dismissal. She has not been convicted, she did not plead guilty so she therefore can not be sentenced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmwz3hm (talkcontribs) 01:03, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #103[edit]

skilled group page[edit]

your turn to edit the page Mr slavery supporter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K of the net (talkcontribs) 14:00, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #104[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #105[edit]

Heleen Mees[edit]

When can the Heleen Mees article be unprotected? -- (talk) 03:03, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Parature Article Rejection[edit]


You declined my submission for an article for the company known as Parature, citing lack of notability and/or reliable resources. I was hoping you could clarify which sources you considered unreliable; I found other sources, but after talking on the IRC with other editors, they recommended I look for others. As such, I found sources such as the Washington Post, Washington Business Journal, Techcrunch, and the Wall Street Journal, instead. I also tried my best in the Awards section to use the official website of the organization who issued the awards whenever possible.

The main reason I am trying to get this article submitted is that Parature was acquired by Microsoft recently (as stated in the text of the article) and I am trying to update this article so that it can be linked to in a list of Microsoft acquisitions, as well as display the most current information about the company. I understand that it was rejected previously because it was not stated what the company does (leading to confusion and the impression that it was a call center of sorts); however, I have tried to state as clearly as possible in my edits that it is a software development firm which creates, sells, and implements customer service software using a SaaS (Software as a Service) model.

If there is other information I can provide, please let me know. If this is an issue with sources, can you please tell me what is wrong with the sources I cited.

Thank you for your time,

kim2jy (talk) 18:32, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #106[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #107[edit]

Following up on Mike (progscape) message regarding the discipline article[edit]

Dear Bjelleklang,

I see on Feb 22, 2014 Mike of reached out to you about how to improve the page below to make it more relevant

I am interested in the same article.

Have you given Mike guidance on how to prove the article? If not, can you let me know?

What would help make the article and subject more relevant for Wikipedia readers?


Matt — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:56, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

RE your review of the draft that you reference at…You wrote "From the contents and the sources cited I'm not convinced that the band is notable. Yes, they have released some records, been on tour and played at festivals, but there is still no evidence as far as I can tell that they've received any coverage outside interviews, tour info and reviews." Can you give a hypothetical example of what might rise to the level of notability for inclusion? The article sites sources, several that are verifiable online, so I suspect that is not the basis of the rejection for notability. The article cites another wikipedia article that specifically references the band. There are no publicity stunts; it is all just music press. Would additional critical acclaim raise the article's notability? For example, would the addition of the following help (this from June 2014): "There is no doubt in my mind that one of the most important bands to come out of America in the last 25 years is Discipline." —Kev Rowland, Amplified Magazine, Number 135, June 2014 (New Zealand). …Any guidance you can provide is appreciated.Disciplineband (talk) 08:15, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Heleen Mees "pending review" procedure[edit]

I am not familiar with how "pending review" works. I would like to undo IP's four edits to the Heleen Mees article. Am I supposed to wait until IP's edits are reviewed/accepted? (It appears to me that all four changes have gone through.) Who is in charge of reviewing the edits? Can the reviewer deny an edit from being posted?

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

--TheCockroach (talk) 04:12, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I undid my revert of IP user's edit (where he/she deleted Mees' birth name from the infobox without a reason in the edit summary) because I don't understand how the "pending review" process works and don't want to mess up the Heleen Mees article more than it has been already by users,, Kinker020, and Bilbao86 reverting/edit-warring. --TheCockroach (talk) 04:20, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

I haven't used it much myself, but if you review PC, there should be a form at the top of the diff asking you to accept or revert the changes. Undoing/rolling back works just as well IIRC. Reviews can be done by any established editor, and acceptance or reverts will be added to the page history as with any other edit. Bjelleklang - talk 07:34, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello TheCockroach - I'm Anupmehra. Heleen Mees article was recently protected to make [live] changes only by auto-confirmed users, because of edit-warring between several editors. However, the protection was removed barely after 6 minutes by admin Bjelleklang, for he/she misunderstood the request made to him or request protection page.
Pending changes protection enables only a group of editors to make live changes to the protected page. It may be set as, "[edit=autoconfirmed]" for users belonging to "auto-confirmed" user group or [edit=reviewers] for users belonging to "reviewer" group. Other people are able to edit these pages, but changes do not go live, until reviewed by the some editor belonging to a particular group, protection is set for. Hope, it does help. If not, feel free to open the request. Good luck! Anupmehra -Let's talk! 07:50, 28 April 2014 (UTC) Note: I reached here following "Category:Wikipedians looking for help". Just realized it is on another person's talk page not the requester talk page.

Wikidata weekly summary #108[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #109[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #110[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #110[edit]

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #111[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #112[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #113[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #114[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #115[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #116[edit]

A question[edit]

Could you explain what makes this entry better than the one I purposed?

Many thanks, PA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Afour (talkcontribs) 12:07, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #117[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #118[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #119[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #120[edit]

Invitation to WikiProject TAFI[edit]

Today's Article For Improvement star.svg
Hello, Bjelleklang. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's articles for improvement. Feel free to nominate an article for improvement at the project's Nominated articles page. Also feel free to contribute to !voting for new weekly selections at the project's talk page. If interested in joining, please add your name to the list of members. NorthAmerica1000 17:08, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #121[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #122[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #114

Wikidata weekly summary #123[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #124[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #125[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #126[edit]

Belle Knox AFD #2[edit]

The second AFD for Belle Knox has been overturned and relisted. As you commented on the original AFD, you may wish to comment on this one as well. As there have been developments and sources created since the time of the original AFD, please review to see if your comments/!vote are the same or may have changed. Gaijin42 (talk)

Wikidata weekly summary #127[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #128[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #129[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #114[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #131[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #132[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #133[edit]

Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews[edit]

Hello Bjelleklang. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.

The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.

If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)

If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.

Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.

I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).

       Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #134[edit]

Deletion review for Qaster[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Qaster. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 12:53, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #135[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #136[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for December 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pir Aaqa Ghulam Mujaddid Sarhandi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hijrat. 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) 09:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #137[edit]

Shraddha Sharma[edit]

Hello Sir,

You Said - Please avoid adding information that cannot be directly attributed to a reliable source. Youtube is not such a source.

Me - but in the this case, there is a source b'cos this person become a popular b'cos of it. so some of the information must be there like her youtube channel and some of the information about it.

you said - lease avoid adding information that cannot be directly attributed to a reliable source. there is no need to list every little thing she has appeared on.

Me - Sir, I respect your review, response and rules. but here my opinion is that if we're not putting the information than there is no wikipedia. wikipedia made from the little little information. A single word has definitaion in the wikipedia. but why not, there is no need to list every little thing she has appeared on.

You said - The Windsong festival doesn't list her in their lineup, so in other words her appearance there is likely to be minor, and thus just another gig not really worth mentioning.

Me - She performed there, there is a video outside in youtube while she is performing at windsong. Sir, this gig or appearance is make the artist's life, they are living on these things.

you said - Keep the article short and to the facts for now, she simply hasn't done a lot worth covering (yet),

Me - Sir, She became celebrity b'cos of that cover, there are too many artist like Austin Mahone, justin bieber. in their wikipedia page, there are little details available on it. where are they came from, what's their first video on youtube. so why not for her ?

you said - As mentioned before we have a strict policy on biographies at Wikipedia,

Me - Sir, I respect the policy. I respect your review, response for this. Thank you very much for that.

One request, Just read once again that i previously uploaded information. It's not wrong information but it's the little-little information that makes her an artist.

Thank you once again.

ℳ§ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meetrockin (talkcontribs) 05:44, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Shraddha Sharma[edit]

Hello Sir, Thanks for your response and support. i read the WP:UNDUE, WP:RS and BLPs. Now I edited once again with proper reliable sources and other detailing which in the reliable sources. there are little information and some of the numbers too but it's according to reliable source. it defines that how she will become the celebrity. I didn't used unreliable source or assuming something. Hopefully, now you approved fully source page which i edited. Thanks for the guide me.

and i want to ask something about Shraddha's picture,, i don't have any copyrighted picture,, so how can i bought the copyrighted picture from the web-site ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meetrockin (talkcontribs) 19:51, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ruby Duncan, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages University of Nevada and Tallulah. 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) 08:58, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Request on 09:11:20, 19 December 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by CD33[edit]

Hi Bjelleklang, I don't really understand why it is not st170e to review our article. He has assisted us through the whole process of article creation, citations etc. and we also implemented his last suggestion (inline citations) for having the article published on Wikipedia. Now it is again somebody else to review the article and the whole process starts from the beginning... Thank you for your help.

CD33 (talk) 09:11, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

New Edit[edit]

Dear Bjelleklang, I do not understand why you are deleting my changes. It is quite obvious I am in history for being with Tony Curtis. If you look him up on Wikipedia Tony Curtis (by himself) I am also included in his history. Why can I not have my own page? There are other people less famous than I am with a page. I do not understand why Andrea Savio cannot be easily connected to Tony Curtis, and therefore the reason beyond my own film career why I am famous for this. That alone should make it notable. Why are you trying to erase my history as if it doesn't exist? How can you do that? It does exist. This is frustrating to me. I am not making a big deal about being famous if that is what you think, it is just a fact of history. Therefore it is notable. I will look for more references such as Life magazine. Might take a while to do so. I have magazines dated back to when I was with him. I will photograph them and submit. Thank you.Andrea Savio (talk) 01:15, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #138[edit]

information???[edit] (talk) 08:14, 21 December 2014 (UTC) hey, I submitted an article on kashmiri elegy and the draft was deleted with this comment, 21:52, 20 December 2014 Bjelleklang (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:KASHMIRI MARTHIYA (ELEGY) (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of Now the article quoted has also been written by me,so i am not sure,do i need to credit myself or what?

Hi. I'm sorry for deleting your draft, but when nothing is mentioned in the original text I have to assume that it is copyrighted, and thus delete the copy found on Wikipedia. If you are the copyright owner of the article and want to donate it to Wikipedia, please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Keep in mind that the text still have to pass the requirements on Notability, verifiability and use of neutral language in order to be accepted as an article. Please review the instructions found on the page on donating materials and please let me know if you have any questions related to this. Bjelleklang - talk 12:36, 21 December 2014 (UTC)