User talk:Ocatecir: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 22:45, 3 January 2008

Leave me a message • Leave me an email • Archives

Please read!

I reply to your message here, for the sake of keeping discussions un-fragmented — I suggest temporarily watching this page.
Please be civil when contacting me, just tell me what I did calmly and I will honestly look into it.
I archive this page periodically. Sometimes I may archive a post that I haven't replied to! So if I accidentally archive a request that I didn't perform, please remind me to reply.
Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.

Jason Frenn

Hello,

Perhaps, the article entitled, Jason Frenn was deleted due to the fact that it didn't indicate the importance of its placement.

It was assumed that the content was, in and of itself, worthy of placement. Given the demographical shift in US population and the fact that Jason Frenn is a North American, hardly any evangelists born of Anglo parents communicate in Spanish via television, radio and in massive events.

To date, there is no US evangelist who speaks to as many Hispanics on a daily basis.

After reviewing the article, can you please indicate what would be necessary in order for the article to be approved?

Thank you for your consideration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.46.176 (talk) 05:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just establish notability in the lead paragraph (see WP:LEAD) and make sure all the sources show using <references />. Also, please format the article to Wikipedia's Manual of Style. 18:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

In regard to the raven riley article

Clearly the broken link should be removed http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Web_Exclusive_Features&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=279571

As I read it, the official raven riley page at myspace is exempt from your policy of linking to social network profiles, so I followed your admonition and have educated myself.

However, i truly don't understand why the JayManCash link is in there, that is simply a pure advertising link, the "fact" that Riley is a "part-owner" is a meaningless designation and you shouldn't allow them to exploit it for advertising purposes. I would say the same thing about "EvilMotion" pictures, which even though they make movies that Riley stars in, you don't see similar treatment for other celebrity biographies. 76.23.159.88 (talk) 17:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we do. If she is part owner then it is relevant, it is not a meaningless designation. She states so in an interview, so it is relevant to a biography about her. The avn link just needed to be updated, which I have done. You seem to be searching for things to remove from this article. You'd be a more productive editor if you'd search for more sources to include in the article. — Ocatecir ^T 17:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As opposed to how I "seem" you might stick to the facts. Thank you for updating the broken link, but you are incorrect; Ms. Riley never states anything about her "part-ownership" of JayManCash. It is stated without source by one of the interviews. But, whatever, I would also point out that all relevant information in reference #3 is repeated in reference #4 - which discusses not only evil motion pictures but also the first movie Succubus, leaving no need for link #3. The JayManCash is linked externally fro the body of the article. I would refer you to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links#Points_to_remember

"External links should typically not be in the body of an article. Include them in an "External links" section at the end or in the appropriate location within an infobox."

I would also suggest that the JaymanCash link is inapprpriate under points 5 and 7 from this section of the external links page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided

5 - Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services. For example, instead of linking to a commercial bookstore site, use the "ISBN" linking format, giving readers an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources.

7 - Links to sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content.Pastepotpete (talk) 19:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

crossfit

i'm very new to the wiki land and am trying to sort out what is "worthy" of wiki and what isn't.

logsitall is a site that has 7000 crossfit workouts recorded, and hence produces stats on best and worst performances for each workout - as such i was thinking that this would be in ok addition to external links on the crossfit page.

Am i completely off base?

216.57.121.8 (talk) 22:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)vermontskiclimb[reply]

Including that is called linkspam, external links should speak more about the topic that can't be covered because of copyright or space concerns. You can look at WP:EL to see what should and shouldn't be in the external links. — Ocatecir ^T 23:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! for the education. I've read the info - and i think i get the gist of it. Do you mind if i ask another question? there are entries for facebook, myspace, youtube, etc. which talk about the history of the business, etc. Is it appropriate for me to create an entry which talks about the business logsitall.com? Vermontskiclimb (talk) 15:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only if its been written about by reliable 3rd party sources. Here are some links that explain Wikipedia's policies for article inclusion: Your First Article, Notability guidelines, Verifiability, and No original research. — Ocatecir ^T 16:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

xDanielx's RFA thanks

Click that-a-way to open your card! → → →

Jackass 2.5

In regard to your message, I propose we revisit the Jackass 2.5 issue next week, prior to the release generating significant traffic, when we know for sure whether this is a new movie or a rebranding. Jrclark (talk) 22:31, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Read Me

Aye man.. I put in a big burst in Fall but it's become too frustrating, and that's without even being in any real arguments recently. I daresay if I was stranded on a desert island with a pile of coconuts and a wi-fi connection I'd be all fired up, but I've got tons going on elsewhere and there's no point in denying that the battle against cruft is being lost.. there's a ton of great editors out there but a lot of them spend too much time philosophising in projectspace and not getting dirty in the trenches. Hope you're good and looking forward to the holidays, I'm back in Scotland for a couple weeks from Friday :) Deiz talk 14:02, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2girls1cup

Thank you for standing up for 2girls1cup. I don't know if you wrote it or not, but thanks for showing BVeda how prevalent the viral video is in our society. I don't know if you've actually watched the video or not. The article doesn't really explain exactly what happens in the video, unlike the other shock site articles, but I'm glad someone did write an article about it. I was actually quite surprised at how much media attention it was getting. The website talks about the attention from VH1 and I read about it in Washington Post Magazine and there are all the YouTube videos, but I didn't know that other parts of the media knew about it too. VH1 never talked about goatse! Thank you for showing how a single viral video can change the world (not to forget The Spirit of Christmas). ForestAngel (talk) 12:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I really feel like I am changing the world with this one :) — Ocatecir ^T 15:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Servcorp deletion

Hi Ocatecir

Can you please tell me where I can find my last submission of the 'Servcorp' article? I would like to add references, etc to it so that it can be retained on the site.

Also, are you able to give any tips on how the article can be improved so that it isn't deleted in the future? I thought I met the guidelines of NPOV and unfortunately I couldn't figure out how to do the reference thing quick enough to prevent the article from being deleted so please let me know if there is anything else I need to consider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shelleyc (talk • contribs)

Thanking you!

I deleted it because it didn't have a claim to notability and didn't meet WP:CORP requirements. You can see all the notability requirements for businesses there. — Ocatecir ^T 14:31, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fenchurch (clothing)

Can you undelete Fenchurch (clothing)? I do not think this should have been deleted under WP:Speedy as it did not meet the criteria. MRSC • Talk 16:03, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it did meet the criteria. It was an article about a company that made no claim to notability and had no third party sources. A7. — Ocatecir ^T 17:22, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article had been speedied before and the speedy was contested, it was contraversial and should have gone to AFD if anything. MRSC • Talk 17:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it could have, but the fact that it's been 6 months since the deletion and only the article creator seems to have a problem with it makes it uncontroversial to me. The article isn't salted so it can be recreated if third party reliable sources are found and notability is established. There wasn't much to begin with. — Ocatecir ^T 17:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

2nd XMonad AfD

Hi: you previously contributed to/edited the 1st AfD discussion about XMonad. XMonad has again been nominated for deletion; as you previously edited, I thought you would like to know. (I have also contacted all the other non-anon editors.) If you no longer care, please feel free to ignore this. Thanks. --Gwern (contribs) 02:04 24 December 2007 (GMT)

Eric the Midget

Hi. You semi-protected Eric the Midget here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eric_the_Midget&diff=prev&oldid=181554957

It's since been repeatedly vandalized (by single-purpose accounts), and could do with a registered user to put it back. In the absence of any better evidence I would guess that the one you semi-protected is probably the one to aim for. If you felt like having a look at it, thanks, great.

Thanks and best wishes

Long-dead ex-user 82.45.248.177 (talk) 22:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 127: / Line 127: @@
 ==2nd XMonad AfD==
 Hi: you previously contributed to/edited the 1st [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xmonad|AfD discussion]] about [[XMonad]]. XMonad has again been nominated for deletion; as you previously edited, I thought you would like to know. (I have also contacted all the other non-anon editors.) If you no longer care, please feel free to ignore this. Thanks. --[[User talk:Gwern |Gwern]] [[Special:Contributions/Gwern | (contribs)]] 02:04 [[24 December]] [[2007]] (GMT)
+== Eric the Midget ==
+Hi. You semi-protected [[Eric the Midget]] here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eric_the_Midget&diff=prev&oldid=181554957
+It's since been repeatedly vandalized (by single-purpose accounts), and could do with a registered user to put it back. In the absence of any better evidence I would guess that the one you semi-protected is probably the one to aim for. If you felt like having a look at it, thanks, great.
+Thanks and best wishes
+Long-dead ex-user [[Special:Contributions/82.45.248.177|82.45.248.177]] ([[User talk:82.45.248.177|talk]]) 22:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)