User talk:WikiDan61

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

Please post all new discussions at the END of the page, to allow for easier chronological tracking! Thank you! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Contents

message from electric pony[edit]

I know it wasn't important but did you have to delete it? I just wanted it to be my dream. I also spent hours typing it!!

Unable To Change Text[edit]

First of all I apologies for making random changes in the text. Earlier I made all the changes with unregistered editor and joined wikipedia few days back only to get the answer of my query. Earlier I had to change DOB of my partner's name Hitansh Kataria because of the reason the date entered was wrong . But then I came to know that it is not allowed to the users like me to change this kind of information. Although that page is deleted now and he got another page with the name "User:Hitanshk/Hitansh Kataria". Then I tried to edit few more text on another pages but I wasn't able. This is the reason I decide to contact you.

I have few more questions like as per the policy of wikipedia we need to give give reference links for the edit which we make , but on which parameter you used to decide that the link is reliable.

feel free to reply me anytime

Well, User:Hitanhsk/Hitansh Kataria has been deleted, so I can't see the page history to know what the problem was. But in general, facts in Wikipedia need to be verifiable, which means they must be referenced with a reliable source. There is an entire article (at WP:Reliable sources) that defines what sources are reliable and what sources aren't. In general, the more editorial review which a source exercises, the more reliable it is considered. So personal blogs, not reliable. The New York Times: reliable. Wikipedia pages, unreliable (because anyone can edit them to say whatever they want. I hope that helps. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 00:40, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

uploading a picture an article[edit]

i need to upload a couple of pics to the article abhijeeth poondla — Preceding unsigned comment added by Priyatham.ms (talkcontribs) 19:57, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

See Help:Uploading images. Be sure to read the parts about Free Images (preferred) or the limited use of Non-Free Images. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:01, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

hi there, i added a image in the wikipedia commons and tried to set up the link in abhijeeth poondla page , but it says i cant add the image and only few has the power to do so like Autoconfirmed users, Administrators, Confirmed users.please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Priyatham.ms (talkcontribs) 00:41, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Apparently you added two images, both of which are clearly professional publicity shots of Poondla, and therefore violate Commons' copyright policies. They have been identified for deletion. It will not do to add the files to your article only to have them deleted again. If you have a picture of Poondla that you yourself have taken, you may upload that to Commons, but not his published publicity photos. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 03:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Hey, thanks for tagging Scary Movie 6(Flim) for speedy deletion. I saw the article and my first reaction was to nominate it for AfD, and I really just forgot that CSD applies for blatant hoaxes as well. Satellizer (´ ・ ω ・ `) 11:30, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Joanna Ng[edit]

Updated my user page. Please take a look to see if this version meets Wiki copyright requirements. Working on other updates.

Awesome! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Museme may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • '''Musematic repetition''' ("repetition of musemes"<ref name=Middleton1990/>{{rp|269}} is simple [[Repetition (music)|

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:23, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Desire Street (a film by Roberto F. Canuto & Xu Xiaoxi) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • prostitution, homosexuality, lesbianism or bulling at a young age, themes that can be seen as [controversial.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:49, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Fu;ll professors[edit]

at major german universities are very likely indeed to be notable, and at the very least it certainly indicates enough of a claim to significance to pass WP:CSD. I've therefore removed your speedy on Bernd Bruegge. DGG ( talk ) 04:10, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

References[edit]

Hi WikiDan61,

Thanks for feedback and heads up! This is my first Wiki page, so it's all quite new to me. I'll find more references.

Marte — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marte Grette (talkcontribs) 14:46, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kasepalli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anantapur. 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) 09:04, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

humanity protecting party deleted. wrong decision. re consider please.[edit]

humanity protecting party deleted. wrong decision. re consider please. dumindu gen secretary humanity protecting party contact me via facebook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dumindu111222 (talkcontribs) 19:03, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't have access to the deleted article to re-evaluate it because I'm not an administrator. The reason I gave when I nominated the article for deletion is that it did not provide sufficient context to identify the topic. In otherwords, you created an article with a title, but without enough content for anyone to know what specifically the article was about. Also, because I'm not an administrator, I can't undelete the article. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:05, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Tri Rismaharini[edit]

Dear Dan,

Saw that you removed all text from this article and made it a redirect. Why? Thanks, Hansmuller (talk) 19:14, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

The version that existed at the time of my redirect comprised an unsourced BLP. As such, it was subject to eventual deletion. Also, it made several claims that could not be verified (such as winning a UN award as "best mayor"). The city of which she is mayor is relatively small, and her only claim to any notability appears to be that she is its first female mayor. Overall, I believe the article was destined for a deletion process in any case, so I redirected to the city for which she is mayor as that is really the only verifiable fact we have about her. Feel free to revert if you'd like to improve the article that was there. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:33, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

So it was a kind of informal deletion. I can't resist: in general I would prefer not to arbitrarily make an unwanted article a redirect, but instead give authors - i'm not one of them in this case - a chance in a deletion procedure. I agree with "sources needed". By the way, Surabaya appears to have over 3.1 million inhabitants ("relatively small"?), this city article links to her and she has a sourced article on Bahasa Wikipedia. As you do not object, perhaps i revert and improve. Cheers, Hansmuller (talk) 11:49, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

As you wish. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:31, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dan, i added two references. Can i remove deletion tag? Thanks, Hansmuller (talk) 12:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:18, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of John Baker (singer)[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article John Baker (singer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I'm declining speedy deletion, but I'm still not 100% sure this singer passes WP:BAND; editors have a week to object.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sorry for the template. Bearian (talk) 20:49, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Stanley Stangren[edit]

Dear WikiDan61,

I understand your concerns about the person.

There were exhibits of his art in Europe, I have a flyer from one of it in Germany. One of the galeries in New York City is launching an exhibition of his works of art this fall. Also the Brooklyn Museum of Art in New York is planning an exhibition of his artwork (paintings, watercolors, jewelry). The book "Holocaust paintings" was published with his works of art, the link to the store where it is sold is provided.

He mostly was creating his pieces of art for himself, he wasn't pursuing selling them. After his death, his artwork and jewelry went to beneficiaries, will be auctioned and exhibited. His works have a great look, style and high quality. When his art will be introduced to public, it would be great if everyone could read consolidated information about his life and work in one source and it will draw attension to the article in the Wikipedia.

I would love to provide photos of his art, unfortunately I'm newly registered and have to wait till my account will be confirmed. His works of art have very high potential and they are expected to sell for high price.

Please advise.

Thank you!

Galinamf (talk) 17:13, 16 July 2014 (UTC)galinamf

Your claims of Stangren's notability listed above are not included in the article (other than his published book, which is somewhat meaningless as lots of people publish books -- that alone is not notable), nor are they mentioned in any of the sources you have provided. Of the claims you have made (a showing in Europe, a gallery in New York and an exhibition at the Brooklyn Museum), only the Brookly Museum exhibition might be considered a sign of true notability. If you can provide reliable sources to verify the claims you have made, or to demonstrate that Stangren has been the subject of multiple instances of signficant coverage in independent sources, there might be hope for this article. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:19, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello from Peaceful Peaceful[edit]

I am grateful to my honorable friend that you helped me, I will always pray for you for the moral support, Thank you very much.--Peaceful Peaceful (talk) 13:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Alhaj Baymorad Qoyunly[edit]

I've removed the unsourced ethnicity, but I can't source his name - the alternative name "Murad Quenili" can be sourced. Move? Request move first? I don't have a lot of confidence in this new editor. Dougweller (talk) 14:37, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd vote move. Given that the "Quenili" name is the only validly sourced name, the move should be uncontroversial. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Cowboy Classical Music[edit]

Could I keep the page, if I take out the, "Poll"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DocHoliday1881 (talkcontribs)

You'd need to provide a reliable source indicating that this is an acknowledged genre of music, and not just something you made up. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:10, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

LCCC page[edit]

Although some of the wording may sound promotional of Lehigh Carbon Community College, the info is correct. I know because 1 I'm a student there and 2 if you look at their site lccc.edu all the data matches up. If you want, I can reword some of it but just because the person didn't write it properly does't mean all these accomplishments and details listed aren't true. But I'd like to talk to you more about that. Please respond. Thanks

Quamby Estate[edit]

Hi WikiDan61 Please advise why you requested the speedy deletion of the Quamby Estate article. It was referenced and is factually an iconic piece of Tasmanian history. Thanks, kirstyaiks

Well, it has been a while (I apparently nominated this article on 3 July, so almost three weeks ago), so I actually have no recollection of the article itself, but the reason I gave at the time of the nomination was that the article was blatantly promotional rather than neutrally informational. Quamby Estate may well be an iconic piece of Tasmanian history, but we can't have advertisements for whatever its current purpose is (be it a hotel or conference center or catering hall or whatever). If you would like to write a factual article about the historic significance of the place, that would be great. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:15, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi WikiDan61 It would be great if you could let me know why places such as Necker Island and Hamilton Island feature history and current use as resorts and function facilities yet the Quamby Estate article only included reference material. Hamilton Island is very promotional. Thanks ______

First of all, whether or not either of the articles you mentioned are promotional or not is irrelevant: the existence of other bad articles on Wikipedia is not a valid argument against the deletion of the current bad article of interest. Secondly, I have no idea whether the articles you mentioned are bad or not, because you did not provide links, and there are two different Necker Island articles, and at least two different Hamilton Island articles as well. Thirdly, I can't speak to the deletion of your article because I do not recall what it said. Perhaps if you recreate the article as a userspace draft, I can give you the feedback you are looking for. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:26, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi [[User:Winother attempt and removed anything that could be considered promotional. Please let me know if I am on the right track now. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirstyaiks (talkcontribs) 04:56, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Better (as I recall -- I don't actually have the original for comparison). I would remove the words "iconic" and "prestigious" in the opening paragraph: both of those words are laden with value-judgement that has no place in a neutral article. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 10:57, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks WikiDan61. I have made that change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krisyaiks (talkcontribs)

Nicely done. With your permission, I'd like to help you with some of the formatting issues in the article. (I would not think to edit another user's sandbox without their permission, short of some greivious policy violation.) WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 22:18, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes feel free to format as you please WikiDan61 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirstyaiks (talkcontribs) 22:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Math Team[edit]

Hello dear WikiDan61,

My page was deleted. Please let me know why and what can I ho to restore it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex375037 (talkcontribs) 16:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Provide evidence that the company has been the subject of significant independent coverage in a reliable source. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:58, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

removed contribution[edit]

Hello Dan61

I see you did remove one of my contribution. With regards to the con artist list the person I listed is a con artist, and has been judged for fraud multiple times within the uk, it is only fair he should be listed with a list of famous con artist. What I posted was completely true, and without any violation.

Could you please amend this back to what it was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olga.jovanova (talkcontribs) 14:15, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I removed your edit because you made a serious accusation about a person based on a source that Wikipedia does not consider reliable. Wikipedia has very strict rules regarding living people and how we write about them. You will need a source that is more reliable than ripoffreport.com to verify the facts you have stated in order to allow them to be included. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:45, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, WikiDan61. You have new messages at Nitinkhanna's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for July 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Barry Gutierrez, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Filipino. 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) 10:34, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Notice[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Legal threat at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T.R. Threston. Thank you. Hasteur (talk) 11:12, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

LGBT Supporters[edit]

Hi WikiDan61 I totally understand the reason for you to delete this artical.I'm those kids' homeroom teacher and I hope that I could protest for them. As you may know, LGBT is still a restricted topic in China mainland. I actually got fired for openly supporting LGBT. I wish that you could notice that the LGBT Supporters is the FIRST high school LGBT society in China.

Wish you have a good day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apricis (talkcontribs) 17:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't know about the state of LGBT support in China, but I can imagine it is still quite a taboo topic, and I'm sorry for that. But what you've described is essentially a one-man campaign at a single school. This does not meet the criteria for inclusion at Wikipedia. When the campaign takes off and becomes more widespread, enough to garner significant coverage in independent sources, we'll have the basis of an article. I hope that time is soon, but it is not now. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:08, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

My Article[edit]

Hi WikiDan61, I am new to the English wikipedia, I don't think the article should be up for deletion due the many article I found that doesn't meet the criteria either. I notice a bad article for Young Cartoon, and this article Paul Bates has minor roles but still pass without any reliable source link to the page. This article Brittney Wilson has one simple references same as the one I submitted in mine from the same database. If my article up for deletion their should be too. I believe you should Keep this article, I have more reliable sources. I think you should reconsider the Prince Richardson article, I have followed the guide line for my articles, theirs didn't. Thanks Iranmichealswiki (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:11, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion[edit]

I did not remove the AfD tag, I just improve the article with minor notes. Can you help me understand why you submit my first article for deletion? As I written in my previous talk above, why my article is up for deletion when these basic articles I pointed out. These articles listed here Brittney Wilson, Paul Bates, and Young Cartoon needs to be nominated for deletion as well. This is my argument, I have written this article in GOOD FAITH, please explain --- Iranmichealst@lk 23:56, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

It has already been pointed out to you that the existence of other bad articles is no reason to retain this bad article. If you wish to nominate those other articles for deletion, you are free to do so, but make sure your argument is based in actual Wikipedia policy. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 02:03, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 7[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kimberly Marshall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chen Yi. 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) 09:03, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Just saw that you've done great work in patrolling and nominating problematic articles for deletion, reporting and resolving copyright issues and other useful maintenance work to improve Wikipedia.

You should consider running for adminship!
Tom Morris (talk) 22:40, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 22:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Rhode Island Republican Party[edit]

Hello, I am writing in regards to the recent changes of the Rhode Island Republican Party page changes. I work with the party and we are simply trying to update our page to mirror that of the Rhode Island Democratic Party. We mirrored their page nearly word for word and added all of our 2014 candidates, current office holders, and seat break down as well as stances on issues, exactly how the democrats have it. I am wondering how come they are able to have their page up and running, but ours keep getting deleted and undone?

Thank you Jaridweaver (talk) 15:37, 11 August 2014 (UTC) Jarid

Well, actually, no, you didn't do it "exactly as the democrats have it". You quoted your party's platform verbatim from the party website, which is a copyright violation. It is also an attempt to use Wikipedia as a soapbox to promote your own position. The Rhode Island Democratic Party page uses cited quotations to briefly and verifiably indicate that party's positions. As for the slate of candidates and office holders, I can't speak to that: I didn't revert those changes. However, you need to understand that the Rhode Island Republican Party page is not "your page", it is a Wikipedia encyclopedia article. Your organization is free to express their positions on their own website, but you are not free to use Wikipedia to promote those positions. Please also understand that your position within the RIRP constitutes a conflict of interest. You need to follow Wikipedia's guidelines when dealing with topics in which you have such a conflict. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:44, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

I'm new to Wikipedia and I'm working on a musician page for Haas G.

Obviously, you have more Wiki experience, and I'd be happy to work together to get this page done the way Mr. Evans would like it done.

It looks great except he does wish to use his stage name Haas G (aka Fantom of the Beat) for this page. Are you able to assist me with changing it back to Haas G, but still keep the rest of the formatting?

Please advise.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LockedFocus (talkcontribs)

Mr Evans' preferences really play no part in this. This is a Wikipedia article, it is not his personal webpage. If you can provide reliable sources to verify that Evans performs under the name Haas G, I would support a move back to that title, but without such a reference, we (the rest of the editing community) have no way of knowing that that is the proper name for the article. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:47, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

The word "source" in Wikipedia has three meanings:

   the type of the work (some examples include a document, an article, or a book)
   the creator of the work (for example, the writer)
   the publisher of the work (for example, Oxford University Press).

Mr. Evans is a creator of the work which is verifiable. I am gathering the necessary citations in their various digitized forms. Here is a link to a published list of work under the name of Haas G: http://www.discogs.com/artist/232729-Haas-G

Again, thank you for your contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LockedFocus (talkcontribs) 16:09, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

@LockedFocus: you've misunderstood the Wikipedia reliable sources page. When it talks about the three definitions of a source, it is talking about the source of the information you have provided. I.e. did you find the information in a magazine article, or in a published book, or in a review published on a website? Wherever you found the information, that is the source of the information. Now we need to establish if that source is reliable. Most published magazines would be considered reliable sources, because they have an editorial staff whose job is to check the articles prior to publication to assure that the facts are correct. Most reputable websites operate under a similar editorial review process. However, most personal blogs do not; there is no editoriaal review, there is just a person writing whatever they like, and this makes such a source unreliable. I have no dispute that Evans has created the works which have been credited to him. My only request is that we have a reliable source to tell us that he performs predominantly under the name Haas G. (Frankly, the information I have contradicts that: he is mostly credited as Hassan or Fantom of the Beat, and has not performed under the name Haas G for over 20 years.) WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:20, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


He has not performed under Haas G for over 20 years, however that is the page I was working on because he still performs under that name when in association with the U.M.C.'s. Because the U.M.C.'s have not performed in over 20 years, there is limited digital information because the internet wasn't prevalent during their era. If you please allow me the consideration of gathering this information as I try to build the article while learning how to use Wikipedia. I see that I have a 7 day grace period based on the terms and conditions of Wikipedia. I am aware, and I am diligently working on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LockedFocus (talkcontribs) 16:27, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

You have your seven days (I did not tag the article for deletion; that was another user). I will also be searching for valid sources for this article. Clearly, Evans (under all of his various names) has been a known player in the hip-hop scene over the past 20 years. We'll find the sources needed to keep this article from being deleted. And because the page was moved, if a person searches for Haas G, the still arrive at Evan's page, so there is no loss of visibility. All I ask is that, if we are to move the page back to the Haas G title, there has to be verifiable evidence (and not just the subject's own desire) that he is best known under that name. I don't see such evidence, but since you appear to be connected to him (and because of that, you should read Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy), you may well have access to better information. And know that the information does not have to be available online. If you have archive copies of magazines with interviews or reviews, they can be used as sources too (as long as the magazine was regularly published and should therefore be available to others who wish to access a library and retrieve them). WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:35, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


Thank you! I am reading all of the information which you link - so I just read through the COI. I am not being paid, and I am a neutral party. While I do have a connection with the artist, I have been asked to approach this from a research point of view and will execute this project accordingly and free of bias. I appreciate your help because I want to learn more about how to create articles in the most professional manner possible. I also appreciate your help with advice on other resources. I am digging away for more substantiating information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LockedFocus (talkcontribs) 16:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

A good place to start would be in the archives of Billboard to see if you can verify the chart positions of The U.M.C.'s two hits. Any press on that duo's breakup would also be good. Finally, any reviews of the hits he has had as a producer which clearly identify his role would be super. We can probably use discogs.com as a source for his discography, but not much else. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:45, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

They recently had an interview on Sirius XM. I am not sure how to reference this, but his name is listed as Haas G there. Is this considered a verifiable source? http://www.rapisouttacontrol.com/tag/haas-g/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by LockedFocus (talkcontribs) 16:50, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

It sounds like a good source to verify that Evans currently prefers to perform under the name Haas G. As a primary source, it probably can't be used to verify much else in the article, but I think we can take it as proper verification of which name the artist prefers to use. I'll update the article with the proper reference. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:55, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, that's great. One step at a time. Does that mean that the title of the article will go back to Haas G rather than Carlos Evans? I understand that it redirects. I am just wondering if this resolves that issue. I will continue working on the other issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LockedFocus (talkcontribs) 17:02, 11 August 2014 (UTC) --LockedFocus (talk) 17:04, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I've moved the article back to Haas G, and corrected all of the incoming links (links from other Wikipedia pages to this one) to link to the proper title. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:07, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

Hi, thanks for you support. I wrote the biography of William Guillen Padilla, I added as necessary to no erase it. --Cesarg92 (talk) 20:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


How do I create multiple sandbox pages[edit]

Hello WikiDan61,

I want to create multiple sandbox pages in addition to the default User sandbox page. How do I do it?

@Mckmckmt: You can create pages in your userspace with titles other than "sandbox". For example, you can create User:Mckmckmt/This is a second sandbox, or User:Mckmckmt/Track Winstall, or any other title you like. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 04:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

just dropping in and saying hey[edit]

howdy. just wanted to drop you a line. i'm relatively new to wiki. any help in the ways of the wise would be greatly appreciated. good call on the invented term for speedy deletion.

InvisibleDiplomat 16:16, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The College of Chicago[edit]

Hello WikiDan61. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The College of Chicago, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools. Thank you. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

... it was however highly promotional. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 18:52, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree that WP:CSD#A7 specifically exempts educational institutions, but I will continue to argue that for-profit, adult-oriented "schools" such as this one (or, in general, any "art institute", "language school", etc) are not included in that linked list and fall outside of the exemption. I know: I'm tilting at windmills. Call me Quixotic! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Treating certain types of schools as businesses (in which case they would be subject to WP:CORP) is a good idea and should definitely apply to private schools, in my humble opinion. But them's the rules Face-grin.svg §FreeRangeFrogcroak 20:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't know that I'd claim that for all private schools. Lots of private elementary schools, high schools, colleges and universities are legitimate education-providing institutions. But it's a stretch to apply the "school rule" to every organization that provides instruction at any level, including adult art schools, language schools, test-prep organizations, etc. But alas, we have what we have. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Industrial tourism
added a link pointing to Jack Daniels
Stoddard King
added a link pointing to Jackson, Wisconsin

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Gwen Graham[edit]

Hello: I'm hoping you can help me out. I came across Gwen Graham and decided to nominate the article for deletion because I think it fails to satisfy the criteria laid out in WP:POLITICIAN. It seems she's "just a candidate" and the reliably sourced coverage of her is all due to her campaign. Anyway, when I tried to nominate it for deletion, it came up that you had actually (apparently successfully) nominated the article for deletion in February 2013. It looks like the article was then re-created in August 2013. I'm not sure if you can nominate an article for deletion a second time, or why this article was re-created after it had previously been removed. I'm not too familiar with deletion protocol here. Anyway, since you'd previously nominated it, I was hoping you could give me some guidance on what the next step should be. Perhaps the article meets notability requirements now that it didn't before, or perhaps it needs to be deleted once again. Champaign Supernova (talk) 02:11, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I've renominated. It never should have been restored from WP:DRV anyway. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 02:43, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! I've never done a deletion nomination round two. Time for this old dog to learn new tricks :) Champaign Supernova (talk) 04:16, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Page being marked for deletion[edit]

A page I made (republic of keig) was marked for deletion for an unkown reason/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by MicronationGuy2000 (talkcontribs) 16:35, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

The reason is not unknown. As the note on your talk page indicates, it was tagged for deletion under Wikipedia critera for speedy deletion #A11: a subject that appears to be about something made up by the article's author or someone they know. In this case, the article was tagged because the "Micronation of Keig" appears to have been made up by a single person (who, according to the micronation's entry on Wikia, appears to be the same person behind the creation of the Austrar Islands, another unknown micronation whose Wikipedia articles was deleted). Topics to be covered at Wikipedia must have been the subject of multiple instances of significant coverage in independent media. Since no one else has ever heard of or written about the Republic of Keig, I (and the deleting administrator) concluded that it was just something someone had made up one day and decided to use Wikipedia to spread the word. That's not what Wikipedia is for. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:09, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

GOCE July drive and August blitz[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2014 backlog elimination drive wrap-up
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Participation: Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the 40 people who signed up this drive, 22 copy edited at least one article. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: We reduced our article backlog from 2400 articles to 2199 articles in July. This is a new month-end record low for the backlog. Nice work, everyone!

Blitz: The August blitz will run from August 24–30. The blitz will focus on articles from the GOCE's Requests page. Awards will be given out to everyone who copy edits at least one of the target articles. The blitz will run from August 24–30. Sign up here!

Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Famous Last Words (band)[edit]

Dan, I have restored and then declined your speedy. I don't like it, and the article is horrible, but generally a band is deemed notable if they have two records out on a notable label, which these guys do, apparently. What I hate about this is that a label is deemed notable if they have a couple of notable bands, so the entire notability thing is totally circular, but it is what it is. Drmies (talk) 21:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree -- doesn't make a lot of sense, but da rules iz da rules! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:47, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

SPI[edit]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that when you moved the article from Dr. Kelly Bowring to Kelly Bowring, you helped a serial sockpuppet undisclosed paid editor who was trying to avoid detection. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:17, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

And how was I supposed to know that? I saw an article with a bad title, and I moved it to a good title. If the creator is a bad actor, it will get caught wherever the article is. I'm not sure I like the tone of your post, which sounds somewhat accusatory. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 02:56, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, actually when you looked at Kelly Bowring, this is what it would have said "A page with this title has previously been deleted. If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below. 21:59, August 15, 2014 Anna Frodesiak (talk | contribs) deleted page Kelly Bowring (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban: see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Newzealand123)." I'm sure you missed that unintentionally, I was letting you know. I have a lot of respect for your contributions to WP. With that said, the Emad Rahim article is another case where you are helping an obvious violator of the Terms of Use [1] regarding non-disclosure of COI/paid editing. I am being factual here, let's not talk about "tone." Logical Cowboy (talk) 03:12, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
But I didn't look at Kelly Bowring. I simply moved the existing page. If a page existed at the target location, the page move would have failed and I would have investigated. But no page existed, so the page move was accepted. As for Emad Rahim, I am simply working within Wikipedia guidelines. I don't believe the article should be kept, but I believe that if it is deleted, it must be done within the existing guidelines. I have been too much of a deletionist in the past, and I suppose I still am now, but I am also cognizant of relevant policies and want to make sure we're not deleting articles for the wrong reasons (or no reason at all). And yes, let's talk about tone, because we must always assume good faith. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 04:24, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for your reminder and explanation as to the Neutrality policy. My apologies. It just seems like so many entries are skewed against Shurtleff. Mshirecliff (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, he does seem to have gotten himself into some hot water. However, as no convictions have yet been achieved, I think it best to mention the issue as briefly as possible to avoid giving it undue weight. I'll address that. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

my biography[edit]

why i cant have biography ? , and human like dan bilzarian can have ? , why you delete it ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aurelijusveg (talkcontribs) 19:35, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Dan Bilzerian is a famous poker player about whom much has been written. You are not. Wikipedia has critieria for inclusion, and articles that don't meet them are deleted. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Safe Driving Day[edit]

In answer to your question, the obvious targets would article on road safety or on Eisenhower himself. That said, I am not convinced this does fail NEVENT since the event was repeated and the coverage lasts for at least two years. James500 (talk) 20:52, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Contested deletion[edit]

We are asking for a cooperation and organizational consideration for the page not to be deleted! We own the legal info's and the rights for the artist to be published on wikipedia as he is always searched for a more info. Wikipedia would be a good help to let his fellow countrymen know. Thank you!!

- April Rey Gonales (talk) 04:11, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

First of all, aren't you Tyler Haiden? As I recall, the page (now deleted) listed your name as Haiden's birth name. If so, you should know that Wikipedia discourages people from writing about themselves. Secondly, the article was not deleted because of copyright issues or anything similar; it was deleted because it did not give any indication of how Haiden meets the criteria for inclusion. Not everyone gets to have a Wikipedia article; only people whose accomplishments have garnered notice from independent sources. Show us evidence of such independent coverage, and your article might be allowed to remain. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:13, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: GSIC,Rajesultanpur[edit]

Hello WikiDan61. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of GSIC,Rajesultanpur, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context. This is a school in Uttar Pradesh in India. Thank you. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 05:31, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Christ the King Church, Jog Falls[edit]

Hello WikiDan61. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Christ the King Church, Jog Falls to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 14:18, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey.[edit]

Thnx for the notice. i am not familiar with the ways of wikipedia and i didn't mean to cause scandal. I do live within the federation of and i saw that the material on this page was lacking in depth and perception of our reality. that is why i chose to share. i thank you for your discipline and will be more attentive to the texts that i post in the future. Could you also tell me exactly what part of the text you are referring to? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tritone Crisantemo (talkcontribs)

Thanks for understanding. Feel free to expand the article in your own words, and without trying to promote the organization. Also, please do not use Wikipedia as a soapbox from which to promote your organization's views. Neutral information, based on reliable sources, is always welcome. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:18, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
As for which part of the text I'm referring to, I would point out that the entire text that you added to the page appears to have been copied verbatim from the organization's own home page. That makes it a copyright violation. Also, since organizations create web pages to promote themselves and to promulgate their ideas, that makes the content inappropriate for Wikipedia whether or not it is a copyright violation. What we want, instead, is encyclopedic content about the organization, its history and achievements, as reported in reliable, third party publications. There are six bullet points in the Welcome message on your user talk page. Read the linked articles and learn what it is we're trying to do here at Wikipedia. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

National Fitness Hall of Fame[edit]

If you think what you did was bad, I almost dinged this with a {{db-copyvio}} for this site (which the latest version was!) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:51, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Yep. Jumped on the Twinkle button before looking at the page history. Ooops! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:52, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I did chuckle at someone dishing out a CSD template to the WikiProject Editor Retention's Editor of the Week. Never mind, I'm sure Blofeld will see the funny side. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:59, 26 August 2014 (UTC)


Transpositional modulation[edit]

Hi Dan.

I responded to some of your questions regarding transpositional modulation.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RFman2211 (talkcontribs)

Yep, saw and responded. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Transpositional Modulation[edit]

WikiDan61:

While I appreciate your opinions and the reviews which you have provided on TM, your research into the background patents is nearly irrelevant to the modern TM methodology. The earlier patents in the 1980's and 1990's done by Gerdes are not even close to the nearly 20 ea international patents filed and presently pending on Transpositional Modulation. I extend the warmest welcome to you, if indeed you live within the United States, to come see it function first-hand, even using the spectrum analyzers in the labs here in Tucson to test and analyze anything you desire about the TM PCB's. I will say that you are getting warmer, regards your description of harmonics but you're not quite there yet. We have had, under NDA, senior RF engineers from research institutions, government and industry visit the offices and labs as entrenched skeptics, and all have left understanding the methods and believing its disruptive nature and the "out-of-the-box" thinking that developed it. To date we have not promoted any method or product of TM Technologies, Inc. and any articles you may have read are certainly not generated by TM Tech. There will be articles released in September and the company website will provide more insight, but still not the specific manner of operation of TM.

Most new technology is doubted and regarded as dubious until it is understood. I only wish we could publicly post the more than 20 ea confidential papers on TM which we possess but that is not in keeping with prudent commercial business sense. I would however offer access to them to you in a confidential manner unless that is violative of the Wikipedia framework.

Sincerely AZ Eng14 (talk) 21:23, 26 August 2014 (UTC) AZEng14 - CEO

Unfortunately, until the technology has been submitted to peer-reviewed journals, any description of it here has to be considered unverified and subject to removal. We can have an article that describes a tentative new technology, but nothing that can make any claims as to its efficacy. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:51, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Office 365[edit]

Hello WikiDan61,

I have read Wikipedia for years and donated, but have never edited. Any advice you can offer would be greatly appreciated.

Could you please let me know how I could go about properly updating/sourcing this?

Microsoft has:

  • confirmed this to media July (see winsupersite.com/office-365/microsoft-announces-major-changes-office-365-small-and-midsized-businesses).
  • confirmed it at WPC (Worldwide Partner Conference held in Washington DC in July). But we cannot share the private parter documentation...
  • updated their website with the new plans.

How could go about properly sourcing this?

I haven't eaten yet so I was planning to eat and then add the Enterprise plan information, as well as details about how Microsoft purchased Skype and are now offering Enterprise Voice with the Office 365 E4 (Enterprise 4) plan.

Could you please offer me your advice?

Best regards, Conrad — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seaside Software Solutions (talkcontribs) 12:49, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

My advice would be to source your changes to an official announcement by Microsoft at their website, or to a reputable magazine that has reported these facts. Your own blog, claiming that it is sourced to a page that does not mention any October 2014 pricing changes, is not a reliable source. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:55, 27 August 2014 (UTC)


Update

Hello WikiDan61,

Can you please take a look now and let me know what you think:

  • Updated Sources (was able to find three sources on Microsoft's site with announcements and product details).
  • Added information for all of the plans (Small Business, Midsize Business, and Enterprise).

That editor is quite a challenge. Whew!

Thank you very much for your help and advice. Please take a look and let me know your thoughts.

Best regards,

Conrad

Seaside Software Solutions (talk) 16:05, 27 August 2014 (UTC)Seaside Software Solutions (starting to get the hang of this editor, but wow, not easy)

@Seaside Software Solutions: Yes, the editor is a bit challenging for new users. You might want to check out the tutorial. I've formatted your updates to Office 365 to match our manual of style. The next challenge is to pick a new username; your username violates Wikipedia's username policy. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:08, 27 August 2014 (UTC)


Hi WikiDan61,

Some questions:

  • Am I supposed to "edit" this talk page entry to respond to you?
  • Yep. After I created the user ID I realized that I should have used my own name. I tried to change it but couldn't figure out how. I'll try again.
  • Could you please tell me why was my blog article removed from the references? I spent quite some time assembling this information and it should be accurate. I am a partner so I have news to report. The blog entry also has references.

Thank you WikiDan61!! Conrad P.S. I wish that I had more time to do this instead of my normal job!! Ha ha... Thanks again! Seaside Software Solutions (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2014 (UTC) Seaside Software Solutions

Yes, the easiest way to respond to this conversation is to edit this section of my talk page. I'll always receive a notification whenever anyone has edited this page, and since we began the conversation on this page, I prefer to keep it on this page. As for your blog being removed as a source, I did that for three reasons:
  1. It is not a reliable source. Your blog is your blog; we have no way of knowing what, if any, editorial controls are exercised there. For product announcements such as you are writing about, preferred sources are either releases from the company itself or published reports in reputable magazines.
  2. Your blog did not provide any verification above and beyond what was available directly from Microsoft.
  3. The addition of your blog as a source, added by you, could be construed as a form of spam, an attempt to drive traffic to your site.
In order to change your username, go to WP:CHU. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:21, 27 August 2014 (UTC)


Hi WikiDan61,

Ok, sounds good. Thanks for all of the help. The article should be good now!

I submitted the user name change request.

Have a great afternoon and thanks again!!

Conrad (soon to be ConradS) Seaside Software Solutions (talk) 16:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)Seaside Software Solutions


Hi WikiDan61,

"Codename Lisa" rolled everything back. Called it vandalism. I give up. I'm not doing it again.

In the immortal words of quail mail, "Sorry it didn't work out" (get it?)...

I think that you provide an excellent service. Thank you for all that you do.

Best regards, Conrad

178.48.241.208 (talk) 16:11, 28 August 2014 (UTC) ConradS

Actually, she did revert your edits (and my formatting), but only so she could incorporate the updates into the existing table format. So, the information is there, in the nice visual format that was originally in the article. Don't give up so easily, but also remember that we don't own any of the things we write on Wikipedia, and they're always subject to updates and improvements by others. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


Hi WikiDan61,

Received your messages. I couldn't log in that day because my ID was in the process of being changed (trying either Seaside Software Solutions or Conrad S received a ID does not exist error).

It's not an issue of owning content or not desiring improvement. It's an issue of trying to contribute and having that first effort (which took a full day) responded to by deletion and being called vandalism. Left a bad taste. If she wanted the table updated she could have asked me to do it or indicated that she was going to do it, not just delete the entry (and then re-add it to the table as her work). If she had such a genuine concern she would have updated the content, which has been out-of-date since 2011.

People like you could convince me not to give up. I'm impressed by your ability and approach, in contrast to being a bit horrified by the approach of another. Certainly wasn't the best way to welcome me to the community..

Hope that you enjoy the weekend.

Best regards, Conrad

ConradS (talk) 21:43, 29 August 2014 (UTC) Conrad S

Ken Getz[edit]

Hey WikiDan61!

I have updates for Ken Getz's Wiki page. Is it possible to add them here? Each time I update, it looks like everything reverts back to the original page that was created.

Looking forward to hearing from you! Precipice711 (talk) 13:08, 27 August 2014 (UTC)Precipice711

Hi WikiDan61!

I just realized that all of my work has been deleted each time I update because it looks like I'm copying and pasting from another source. I created a word document with all of the edits about Ken Getz (he's the Founder of the non-profit that I work at). So I have been copying and pasting but from my own work, approved by Ken Getz himself to be added to the Wikipage! May I keep the edits even though I'm copying and pasting from my own word document off-line? Or do I need to type everything in verbatim?

Thank you!! Precipice711 (talk) 13:12, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

That's because you're going about things the wrong way. You're copying material from other websites and copying it directly into the Ken Getz Wikipedia article, which is forbidden. Your claim that you are copying the material from your own Word document is misleading: the material can be verified to have been previously published on the web (here and here, among others). You need to write in your own words. Also, you need to keep in mind that Wikipedia is not here to promote Mr Getz' career, but merely to report in a neutral manner about his life and accomplishments. Given the edits you've made so far, I'm guessing that you are updating this page on behalf of Mr Getz himself. If this is the case, please read Wikipedia's policy regaring conflicts of interest. If Mr Getz is paying you to update his Wikipedia article, please read the Terms of Use, especially as they apply to paid editing. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:22, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Further to my reply: the issue is not the act of cutting and pasting -- we don't care if you type your article elsewhere and then cut and paste the content into Wikipedia. The issue is cutting and pasting from other previously published sources. Once anything is published on the Web, there is a legal presumption of copyright, unless the source page explicitly waives copyright by publishing the material under one of the free licenses that is compatible with Wikipedia's own free licensing structure. There are ways around this restriction, but it's not worth it because the material copied from other websites is almost always too promotional and in the wrong tone (an informal tone, using the subject's first name, instead of the Wikipedia standard of using surnames only, etc.) to be of any use to the encyclopedia. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to reply and explain, WikiDan61. I am a newbie to adding on Wikipedia. I was not aware that this was a bio previously written for the Tufts page. I am happy to paraphrase this -- although is it possible to place it here and cite the Tufts page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Precipice711 (talkcontribs) 14:00, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

You cannot duplicate the Tufts page merely because you have cited it. You still need to write the text in your own words. Also, Getz' biography at the school at which he teaches would be considered a primary source. These are not strictly disallowed, but secondary sources are preferred. I.e., tell us what others have written about Getz, not what he has written about himself. This brings me to a second point: you mentioned in an earlier post that your text has been "approved by Ken Getz himself to be added to the Wikipage". Getz' approval is irrelevant; Wikipedia is not a social website where subjects get to control the content of articles about themselves. Wikipedia is edited collaboratively, and other editors can and will come and change what you have written after you are done, for good or ill (as long as it is validly sourced). As long as these future edits are within Wikipedia's guidelines, neither you nor Getz gets to control this process. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:07, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Deletion Notice[edit]

Here is a source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/russo-ukraine.htm. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vysotsky2 (talkcontribs) 19:47, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that you had added that. I'm still not convinced that the general usage has come around to call this conflict a war yet. A single source choosing to use that name is not the same as general usage, and your attribution to the start of a war with a particular event can only be considered original research. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:54, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I disagree with the deletion proposition. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. There are enough evidences that Russian forces and Russian directed paramilitary engaging consistent acts of war inside Ukraine. And that direct warfare is going on between the Ukrainian military and Russian forces and Russian directed paramilitaries send over the border with Ukraine. This isn't an opinion but these are facts.

It is not that because Russia is trying to conceal it's war effort (because it would be an violation of international law) that we should ignore facts and evidence. The claims that this war is an internal Ukrainian rebellion is only supported by Russian official statements and some Russian press. By ignoring facts en evidence and instead following official Russian statements and Russian controlled media for naming this an internal rebellion, we are participating in Russian propaganda. Sending troops and heavy military equipment over a border and conquering with the use of force at least 7 border-villages with these troops and equipment without consent of the invaded country is a clear act of war, and not an incursion. Occupying villages is not part of the definition of an 'incursion' but is part of the definition of 'war'. And it is considered an act of war by international law. As an encyclopedia we should use correct definitions and naming and not rely on hesitating media naming. Similar acts of war by Russia inside the country of Georgia are named the 'Russo-Georgian War' on wikipedia. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War) So these act's of war conducted by Russia in Ukraine should be called the 'Russo-Ukrainian War' --Niele (talk) 01:38, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

@Niele: I don't disagree with the fact that there is a conflict between Russia and Ukraine. But the term war has a very specific meaning. Neither side has declared war on the other, and only one source has chosen to call it a war. Reliable sources are still calling it a conflict. The arbitrary line in the sand as to when to say the conflict became a war is the invention of the article's author, and as such is a disallowed piece of original research. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 02:50, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Changes to Office 365 article[edit]

Hi.

I don't know what you and User:ConradS are trying to do in Office 365, but it certainly isn't an improvement. All I am seeing so far suggests either vandalism or a very ill-advised folly. Nevertheless, I do give you the benefit of doubt and will be glad to hear what you have to say in the article talk page.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 22:33, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

@Codename Lisa: He is updating the product offerings based on sources published by Microsoft. I'm just trying to help him format the changes. If you disagree with the changes, feel free to revert and discuss at the talk page. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 23:34, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
To expand, he made a change based on a source that he himself had published, and I reverted that. As you can see from the conversation thread above (where he is named as User:Seaside Software Solutions), I suggested that he needed to find reliable sources for his changes, and he did. So then I helped him format his changes. I would recommend that the new offerings be reformatted into the nice table that existed before, but I didn't have time for that kind of editing at the time the changes were made. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 23:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, but I must really start protesting about being pinged twice in the row by the same person. (You get the to be the first to receive this protest.)
Okay, I see the discussion. I have already reverted; I will open a topic in talk page.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 01:26, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Definition of War[edit]

If the concern is between the use of the word "war" and "conflict," then wouldn't the War in DonbasWikipedia Article be conclusive in that regard? --Vysotsky2 (talk) 04:41, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

@Vysotsky2: The fact is that we already have an article on the 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine. Creating a new article on the Russo-Ukrainian War is a POV fork, a creation of a new article with the specific goal of pushing a particular point of view. This is discouraged. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:07, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Sam Pitroda wiki page[edit]

Please explain why you are undoing my edit. I am very confused. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam.pitroda (talkcontribs) 15:49, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

As I have explained on your talk page, your edits are removing validly sourced information and replacing it with unsourced information that is also non-neutral and self-promotional. As an editor with an apparent conflict of interest, you should avoid editing the article directly, but rather request any changes of factual errors at the article's talk page. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:51, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

IS IT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO MARK NAMES/PHRASES TO CROSS-LINK OR DO YOU DO THAT?[edit]

You asked whom I was addressing in my question about creating cross-links. I was addressing anyone who knows the inner workings of Wikipedia and would care to explain that to me. Since you picked up the question where I wrongly placed it (knowingly, but not knowing what else to do), I guess I was addressing you. Thanks for the reply. (The article in question is the one posted a couple of hours ago entitled "Edmund Fuller.")

I see that the code for the blue format is "" before and "" after, but I presume that this controls the font color only and does not create the software that actually makes the link. But do I need to point out to you in some way what links are needed. or might be needed if the corresponding article exists (which in most cases I did not investigate)? I am guessing that your organization will handle that sort of thing routinely with no further action on my part. As a new contributor, I'm just not sure where my responsibilities cease.

Thank you. CAH-phd in MI (talk) 18:10, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

@CAH-phd in MI: It is your responsibility to create the cross-links (here at Wikipedia, we call them Wikilinks). And you are correct, they are made by entering the name of the article you wish to link to between square brackets. So
[[Edmund Fuller]]
becomes
Edmund Fuller
a link to the article in question. You can also create "piped links", a link that says one thing, but links somewhere else, so
[[Edmund Fuller|your new article]]
becomes
your new article
If you click on that link above, you'll find yourself back at the Edmund Fuller article. Now that you know how they work, you need to know what to link. Generally, it is a good idea to create links to any concept that might not be immediately understood by a general reader, or to articles about other notable people or places mentioned in an article. Look at other articles and see what links exist in them for a general idea.
For a full explanation, please visit Help:Link. Good luck. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:18, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Invention[edit]

WikiDan61: Thanks for the compliment. I agree about "Inventors." What seemed to me potentially useful, though, was to add Fuller's book to the "Further Reading" section of that article--which I have done. As you can see, I'm an incorrigible fixer-upper (aka editor). I have used Wikipedia a fair amount in my own research and writing, so it seems only right to pay it forward (or back, as it may be).

Another question. It appears that I am expected to have a "userpage." I went to the instructions on how to set that up, and was told to type something in the space provided. But I have no idea what sort of text they want. CAH-phd in MI (talk) 17:19, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

It's not mandatory to have a user page, but many Wikipedia editors do. Generally, it's a place to describe yourself as it applies to your work at Wikipedia. In your case, you appear to have a PhD: I would describe your degree and your specialty, as well as your interests. I've used my userpage to document my accomplishments withing the project. Look at other userpages to get ideas, and have fun. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:00, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Nawab Akhunzada Muhammad Asaf khan[edit]

No problem Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:06, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

POV editing[edit]

I have edited the newly created article Qualitative Military Edge in a sensitive manner to correct a conflict with the article's point of view (POV). I have informed the editor/creator of my edits and have asked for feedback. Since you have been active in editing this article just as I have been, I wanted you to let me know if I have fundementally changed the meaning of the article. I also added more references. Contact me if you would like.

bpage (talk) 01:56, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Revoking deletion of the article on the Scrum Body of Knowledge (SBOK Guide)[edit]

The recent article I wrote about the Scrum Body of Knowledge (SBOK Guide) got deleted.

I am ready to remove the reference to the Yahoo Finance section which seems to be promoting a book. But the remainder of the article is well-written and discusses the Scrum framework (which is a framework used for delivering projects). There are multiple citations, references and images. There are no copyright violations and all the content is verifiable. The book is authored by 18 co-authors and subject matter experts(including me) and edited/reviewed by 26 persons who are experts in their field. My objective with this article was not to promote or advertise a book - anyways, this book is freely available in multiple websites. But my objective was to provide information about this framework which I believe will benefit readers interested in this framework. If you allow me to edit the article and remove sections which are considered as advertising, I will definitely do that.

Please let me know if you can undelete this article so that I can do relevant edits to ensure that it does not look like advertising or promoting a book.

Regards, Tridibesh Satpathy Satpathyt (talk) 15:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

@Satpathyt: The article did indeed discuss the Scrum framework in detail, but that was unnecessary, because Wikipedia already has an article on Scrum. The parts of the article that actually talked about the book were blatantly promotional of the book rather than being merely factual. The fact that you appear to be the books author (based on the Yahoo Finance press release link that was used as one of the references) indicates that you have a significant conflict of interest related to this topic and should not be the person to create an article on this book. Finally, I am not an administrator, so I am unable to restore the deleted copy. You are free to contact any of the adminstrators on this list to request a copy of your article. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:57, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
@WikiDan61: Thank you for your suggestions and guidance. I will see if I can get a copy of the article from Wikipedia. I had put in significant effort to create the article and it came as a surprize that it was so quickly removed from Wikipedia!

Best Regards, Satpathyt (talk) 16:39, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it is often the case that newcomers to Wikipedia have their efforts erased to their suprise. You would do well to read the links in the Welcome message on your user talk page to learn what Wikipedia is about and how best to contribute. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 16:41, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Full Crate may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • url=http://blog.22tracks.com/about/|website=blog.22tracks.com|accessdate=04/09/2014}}</ref>) Together with dutch dj/producer FS Green, he compiles a monthly tracklist on ''22tracks'' for the

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:44, 4 September 2014 (UTC)


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ajay Thakur may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • include 4 gold medals and one silver medal at international events, including winning Gold at the [[Kabaddi at the 2007 Asian Indoor Games|2007 Asian Indoor Games]. He has currently participated in

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:52, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Black Robe Syndicate[edit]

I was forced to leave the page and when I returned to cite the cases, I found it gone. Please explain

You also have the "Texas Syndicate" and many others that are no different than what i have placed. Please explain. The people here in the South and in many other parts of this country are suffering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackrobesyndicate (talkcontribs) 18:48, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

The Texas Syndicate is a well-documented gang, and the article cites several reliable sources to back this up. Your article about the Black Robe Syndicate was unsourced and served no purpose but to disparage the judges of the State of Texas. Unsourced allegations of this nature amount to libel and are not tolerated at Wikipedia. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:02, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ber, Rajasthan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hisar. 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, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Kingdom and Peopledom[edit]

王國 is Kingdom.

民國 is Peopledom.

--真田適幸 (talk) 14:08, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

@真田適幸: Peopledom is an obsolete word in the English language, no longer in common use. The common term in use among English speakers is Republic. Peopledom of China and Peopledom of Korea are not terms any English speaker is likely to search for, and is therefore are invalid titles for redirect pages. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:15, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your feedback on my "Coalition Building" proposed page. My intentions were not to promote Bartell & Associates, but to promote a local movement in San Diego. Hopefully, it will be approved once I can change the text to be more specific to what the coalition/s entail. Thanks once again, for your time in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bianca Aimee (talkcontribs) 22:23, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Robert J. Marzano[edit]

Hi there. I inadvertently deleted a significant edit you had made to the Robert J. Marzano article. I reverted a number of edits made by a recent editor, and yours was tucked into them. Please let me know if you are able to restore your edits. I revered back to a clean version because the recent edits were made by an employee paid by Marzano, and were almost entirely sourced by self-published articles. Thanks, and sorry to inconvenience you. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:29, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

@Magnolia677: No problem. My edits were mostly just formatting issues regarding the new changes. If those changes are reverted, my formatting isn't needed. Thanks for the heads up. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 02:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Milton Harrod II Wiki[edit]

Dan The wiki is being created by a public relations company based in Maryland not the subject himself. It Is not being used for social networking and does not violate the terms of wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mharrodii87 (talkcontribs) 13:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Milton Harrod II Wiki[edit]

Dan The wiki is being created by a public relations company based in Maryland not the subject himself. It Is not being used for social networking and does not violate the terms of wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mharrodii87 (talkcontribs) 13:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mharrodii87: There are so many things wrong with that statement that I'm not sure where to begin. Let's start with the fact that you have named your account Mharrodii87, indicating that you probably are Milton Harrod II, but you claim that you are not, which is a misrepresentation prohibited by Wikipedia's username policy. Let's continue with the fact that you admit to being a public relations firm creating the article on behalf of Mr Harrod, a fact not disclosed on your user page, which violates Wikipedia's policy on paid editing. Let's conclude with the fact that the article in question is tagged for deletion because you are clearly testing, and have not yet created any valid content for the article. If you would like to test Wikipedia's editing environment, please do so in the Draft: or User: namespaces, not in the main article space. (I.e. create a page at either Draft:Milton Harrod II or at User:Mharrodii87/Milton Harrod II. You may test at those locations to you heart's content. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

D.J. Science College[edit]

I edited it because it was not maintained by the author himself anymore. The page had became outdated. I first tried to edit it but I became confused as he had messed up just to promote his page that's why I redirected his page to my newly created page and as you can see I have inserted a working website link [FB page ;)] which is also maintained by me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZaeemAkhtr (talkcontribs)

@ZaeemAkhtr: But you don't get to just throw away the work of other editors to redirect to your own new page. If the information is outdated, update it. If the process of updating it confuses you, then request the updates at the talk page and allow competent editors to update it. But do not simply throw away other editors' work. Especially when the page you created is invalid because of its promotional nature. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
@WikiDan61: I get your point and I apologise. I am still new to Wikipedia. I never meant to promote Facebook page as in the whole article I never mentioned Facebook page not I requested to like it. I know that the already created page seems legit to you guys but trust me it is not as I am a local. Now I have been blocked from editing the page further so my only request it's that redirection should be removed from my page. Thank you.
The problem isn't that you're promoting a Facebook page, the problem is that you're trying to promote the school. And the page you created isn't your page. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:59, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Proposed Deletion of Matthew Ward (computer scientist)[edit]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that the creator of this article has added one reference to the article which looks fine to me.Please check this article, and remove the proposed deletion tag if you think that the reference is fine.Thanks.--Param Mudgal (talk) 18:37, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Dmitry Kaminsky[edit]

Information icon Hi WikiDan61. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Dmitry Kaminsky, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, under criterion A7 because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks!Wikicology (talk) 20:15, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

@Wikicology: Um, I think you may have mis-templated me there, friend. WP:CSD#A7 clearly does apply to people. Whether you feel that the tag was applied to a person who perhaps does not merit speedy deletion is a different matter. And then, might I suggest you read WP:DTR. Thanks! WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:21, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I never mis-templated you. The article is not eligible for A7. The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. If the claim's credibility is unclear, improving it or its nomination for deletion is a better option. Wikicology (talk) 20:42, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • You have misinterpreted the use of {{uw-csd}}. Some subjects, by their very nature, are not eligible to be nominated for speedy deletion. Schools, books, films, etc. fall under this category. Articles about people are eligible to be nominated for speedy deletion, which is why there is a {{db-person}} template. If you disagree with my nomination, you are free to remove the template, as you have done. But the template you used here specifically states that you declined the nomination because "the criterion or the reason you gave does not apply to this kind of page", and that is incorrect. There may be better options for handling the deletion of the page, but my action was not inappropriate: any claim of significance for this person is razor thin and based on his own press releases. But that's a matter for a different discussion. I also pointed you to don't template the regulars: an essay that basically says it's not necessary to quote policy to users who have a good deal of experience. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:59, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I never disputed the fact that people are eligible for A7. Of course that is why we have {{db-person}}. Am just letting you know that subject will only be eligible if there is no credible claims of significance or importance, which at times might not be supported by RS. However, Its not my edit behaviour to template the regulars. You might need to take the template as a reminder. Wikicology (talk) 22:16, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank You[edit]

Thank you for the improvements that you've made to this article. I would appreciate any and all help that more experienced editors could offer me to remove all errors and issues with this article. Giacomo Farmer 19:40, 11 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giacomofarmer (talkcontribs)

Please Continue To Help Me Improve My Article To AVOID DELETION.[edit]

Please help me improve my article so that it can remain active. I would appreciate all the help I can get. Giacomo Farmer 19:45, 11 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giacomofarmer (talkcontribs)

@Giacomofarmer: I have no belief that your article can avoid deletion, because there are no reliable sources to verify any of the claims made by your article or by the organization itself. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:49, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

MY article[edit]

Hi I do not understand why did you tag my arcticle to be deleted.... All infomation are real... there are plenty articles that are without any references but somehow the didnt get deleted. So I have to ask you, are you just hating? or what is the real reason? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doughdaffy (talkcontribs) 21:11, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Doughdaffy: Your article was deleted because there was no credible claim to notability for the company. Just another marketing firm that has just launched. Wikipedia is not a business directory: subjects covered here must first have been covered in depth elsewhere. When Different Management achieves that, someone will write about them here. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:22, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Erich Akt[edit]

Just letting you know that I removed the speedy deletion template you added to Erich Akt. I can absolutely see why you did it because the article asserted no notability whatsoever but Akt was a Reichstag member for several years and I have now edited the article to reflect that. I think it was more a case of an inexperienced article creator who hasn't got a handle on asserting notability just yet. Keresaspa (talk) 01:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested[edit]

@wikiDan61 Reg. my article today thats marked for deletion. Further to my reasons given already, I wish to say I have no adhoc enthusiasm for this organisation for reason I already specified. You replied I have to change the content, rewrite from top to bottom to seem neutrality. Can you be specific? as I found no promotional bit in my article, but giving details of the works the Org. involved in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sundarpk (talkcontribs) 15:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Sundarpk: Your article was promotional because of the lavish praise it heaped upon this organization. Phrases such as
  • "3-acre lush green serene locale, divine ambience"
  • "‘Sreepeetham’ planned to be a great Seat of sacred Wisdom to propagate the Sanatana Dharma of Vedas and Advaita Vedanta to the masses in simple way to suit present life and times."
  • "Swami is fully aware of the need to strengthen “Sreepeetham” as a shining example of imparting wisdom thru Service"
  • "The innermost desire of Swamiji to serve God through service to Man is being realised through the social service rendered by Sreepeetham under this project"
  • "Having been in the forefront of spreading awareness among Hindus of their pristine Sanathan Dharma, to reach out to vast populace thru print medium a monthly magazine Sreepeetam has been started"
can only be read as promotional. (These phrases were taken from your talk page history, as the actual article in question has already been deleted.) WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:24, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@wikiDan61: Ok so its the problem with Adjectives. If lush green surroundings are exising, is it wrong to write? But with such funny guidelines, Wikipedia seems rushing into condemn non Abrahamic religious places, temples and even people working for them.

Thanks anyways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sundarpk (talkcontribs) 15:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

@Sundarpk: Neither Wikipedia nor I have condemned any temples, whether non-Abrahamic or otherwise. What I have done is pointed out that your article about one particular place was inappropriate. "Lush green surroundings" is a subjective and non-neutral term intended to make the place sound enticing. To write neutrally, one might say that the place is located amid a tropical rainforest. Same meaning, but with less value-laden terminology. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:03, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The Altruism Society[edit]

Why is Wikipedia so dead set on deleting this article. I have stated that I am willing to do whatever it takes to improve the article to meet Wikipedia's guidelines however, I'm not getting the help or support I am asking for help with. I appreciate the edits that you have done in the past to improve the article but I feel strongly that this article does not need to be deleted. I'm trying hard to prevent this from happening so please help me to avoid this article from being deleted. I have seen some terrible articles on this site however, they are not being considered for deletion, and my article is much better than many of them. Giacomo Farmer 18:34, 16 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giacomofarmer (talkcontribs)

@Giacomofarmer: Because Wikipedia has criteria for inclusion, which this organization does not meet. An organization (or any other article subject) has to have been the subject of multiple instances of significant coverage in independent media in order for the Wikipedia community to verify the material contained in the article. As it stands, we have only the organization's own website to attest to the works that it is doing. There is no indepdendent verification of any kind to verify that this organization even exists except on paper. If you can provide that kind of information (rather than trying to fill the article with false "citations" to other Wikipedia articles that have nothing to do with this organization), then you might change a mind or two. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)