Jump to content

User talk:Wiki0709: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
m Signing comment by Emperordarius - ""
No edit summary
Line 127: Line 127:
SuperAntiSpyware is a known anti spyware program. I gave references, screenshots and information. Why do you keep deleting it? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Emperordarius|Emperordarius]] ([[User talk:Emperordarius|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Emperordarius|contribs]]) 20:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
SuperAntiSpyware is a known anti spyware program. I gave references, screenshots and information. Why do you keep deleting it? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Emperordarius|Emperordarius]] ([[User talk:Emperordarius|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Emperordarius|contribs]]) 20:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: I tagged it for deletion on one occasion; I am not an admin so did not delete it. The article was [[wp:spam|spammy]] in that it was peppered with [[wp:peacock|peacock]] terms and contained marketing info such as the feature list of the two versions. [[User:Ros0709|Ros0709]] ([[User talk:Ros0709#top|talk]]) 20:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
: I tagged it for deletion on one occasion; I am not an admin so did not delete it. The article was [[wp:spam|spammy]] in that it was peppered with [[wp:peacock|peacock]] terms and contained marketing info such as the feature list of the two versions. [[User:Ros0709|Ros0709]] ([[User talk:Ros0709#top|talk]]) 20:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


: Thanks for your answer, but other programs such as Visual Studio have a comparison of editions, and no one tagged it for speedy deletion. Anyway, if I removed the comparison and just put the technologies used along with the critical reception, would it be fine? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Emperordarius|Emperordarius]] ([[User talk:Emperordarius|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Emperordarius|contribs]]) 20:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: Thanks for your answer, but other programs such as Visual Studio have a comparison of editions, and no one tagged it for speedy deletion. Anyway, if I removed the comparison and just put the technologies used along with the critical reception, would it be fine? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Emperordarius|Emperordarius]] ([[User talk:Emperordarius|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Emperordarius|contribs]]) 20:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Revision as of 20:45, 4 September 2008

Please leave me a message
Note that I will respond here rather than on your talk page.

FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=STARS_methodology&oldid=197488843

Smile!

Hi again...

My article is kind of short, and yes I am acctully thinking right now that it is a little dumb...

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gomalan Brass Quintet

Dear Mr.Ros, I would like only to say thank you for the number of messages I've recieved from you about my contributions. Yes, I was writing about a music group where I am one of the members. But first, I was adding the PURE translation of the ITALIAN wikipedia site: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gomalan_Brass_Quintet And second, there was a missing internal link from the brass quintet page of the english version. I have written nothing but history and links. No comments about our activity or if the Gomalan Brass Quintet could be better than others. In my country that means CENSURA. And it was present only during a REGIME, not in internet or on a FREE enciclopedia. Thanks again. Have a good day. Marco Pierobon—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gomalanbrass (talkcontribs) 13:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, please. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia anyone can contribute to, but that does not mean there aren't any rules. No-one is censoring you; you have a website of your own and you can put what you like there. But you do not own Wikipedia - if you want to use Wikipedia's website you have to abide by their rules, and you broke many of them. I didn't even apply those rules; I did alert the admins that the rules were being broken and the messages you received were to let you know. You had the chance to rectify things but chose not to.
If you still think you are being censored answer me this: why can I not add an article about myself on your website?
Ros0709 (talk) 14:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the this web page is wikipedia.org, and not ros709.org. I don't understand why the same rules are in the reality different from country to country. I repeat. The SAME article was accepted in Itali's wikipedia and not here, thanks to you. Other groups have the same page. I do'nt understand. Who are you? But you're rhight. You have the thruth. Bravo. Ciao. Marco Pierobon—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gomalanbrass (talkcontribs) 13:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I repeat, I did not decide the rules. Take your anger out somewhere else. Ros0709 (talk) 19:12, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you propose to delete this article. The person is a renowned scientist in China, and a member of prestigious Chinese Academy of Sciences. If you want to delete this article, you need to delete other few hundreds of articles about academicians of CAS as well. Please do re-consider it. Ramtears (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still waiting for your response. Ramtears (talk) 18:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I responded at Talk:Shen Tianhui. Ros0709 (talk) 18:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A little outdent from me: Lack of sources is never a reason for a CSD as long as the article holds several claims to notability. In those cases either a {{unsourced}} tag should be added, or the article should go to WP:PROD or WP:AFD if a quick search does not give any confirmation of the text in the article.
Not trying to criticize here though, just passing on some friendly advice i have also been given in the past :). Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 18:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are right; I failed to register sufficient notability. I have removed the CSD and added tags for now. Ros0709 (talk) 18:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good call

I was a bit startled that such elementary terms as Buyers market and Sellers market did not seem to exist nor redirect to anything. But indeed, the apostrophe makes all the difference. Good call creating the redirect; it may have been a redundant article, but it is certainly a plausible typo (With me already being an example for that) Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 17:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:-) Apologies for not getting to let you know on your talk page before you got to me; discussion with another editor intervened. Ros0709 (talk) 18:00, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem whatsoever. It was a good call to redirect it, so it does not really need any form of explanation :). Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 18:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to catch you before you started on Buyer's Market. :-) Ros0709 (talk) 18:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know that you cannot prod a recreated article, as the recreation itself constitutes a challenge to an eventual prod. I have listed XPanel at WP:AFD. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XPanel. -- Blanchardb -MeMyEarsMyMouth- timed 19:40, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simple. The challenge to the prod does not have to be explicit (i.e. removing the tag), nor does its rationale need to be valid. It is better to send an article directly to AfD when you see it substantially edited after the addition of a prod tag, even when the tag itself is left untouched. It is a matter of assuming the author's intention when he obviously wants the article kept.
Besides, chances are the article will be gone much sooner this way. -- Blanchardb -MeMyEarsMyMouth- timed 19:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Bisignano

Was it necessary to remove the deletion tag? You could have read the article... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Antivenin (talkcontribs) 17:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our notes crossed; I explained at User_talk:Antivenin#Josh_Bisignano. Ros0709 (talk) 18:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For your note. Much appreciated. Cheers, JNW (talk) 22:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, and good luck with the patrolling. You may find Twinkle of use to you, especially for AfD nominations. (As an aside; I saw and was amused by your user page. Regrettably, I think it could apply to me also!) Ros0709 (talk) 22:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you go back a few months, you will see that the page once proudly displayed philosophy, work, and barnstars. Besides it being an unmitigated self-advertisement, it also attracted far more negative attention, i.e. vandalism. Things are quieter now...Thanks again, and keep up the good work. JNW (talk) 22:44, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have removed the {{db-r3}} tag you placed on Sir Bruce Forsyth, because I felt someone might actually search that way. If you still think it should be deleted, please re-add the tag. Thanks, LegoKontribsTalkM 00:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you have contested it I have taken it to RfD. I am concerned that as Bruce Forsyth is not a knight having that redirect would give the impression he was. Ros0709 (talk) 09:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent reversion

Thank you for the attention to detail that led you to revert a recent edit of mine on an AfD discussion. You are correct that in general, closed XfD pages should not be edited. However, in this case, I was the closing administrator and the edit just adjusted an inadvertent grammar/punctuation error in the closing statement. This minor adjustment to my closing does not change the substance of the discussion or of the closing rationale, and therefore my view is that it should be allowed to stand. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are quite right and I apologise. For some reason I had misread the diff and seen it as a modification to one of the !votes. Ros0709 (talk) 21:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem at all. Thanks for all your efforts. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SuperAntiSpyware

SuperAntiSpyware is a known anti spyware program. I gave references, screenshots and information. Why do you keep deleting it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperordarius (talkcontribs) 20:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged it for deletion on one occasion; I am not an admin so did not delete it. The article was spammy in that it was peppered with peacock terms and contained marketing info such as the feature list of the two versions. Ros0709 (talk) 20:29, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for your answer, but other programs such as Visual Studio have a comparison of editions, and no one tagged it for speedy deletion. Anyway, if I removed the comparison and just put the technologies used along with the critical reception, would it be fine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperordarius (talkcontribs) 20:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]