User talk:Orangemike

Wokai (organization)

Hi OrangeMike, it looks like you removed a substantial # of the external references that i had made but now the page is in jeopardy pending external references. I commented on talk page & will make some further changes I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Wokai, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks!

Greenplum deletion without discussion

Greenplum page deletion:

Orange Mike - it appears you have deleted the Greenplum page without discussion.

This is a significant company in many respects, handling the world's largest databases currently in the Petabytes of data scale for customers including MySpace, NYSE, and many others. It is also a world-wide company of significance in China, India and throughout Southeast Asia (Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia).

The company is also the first to have pioneered an open standard with Google's MapReduce that combines SQL processing with unstructured analysis that scales to 1000's of processors.

Greenplum is one of the top three commercial providers of data warehouse database software.

If you have issues with the content of the page, one of the contributors will work it out with you, but I believe you should re-instate the page immediately pending such a discussion.

Luke Lonergan (talk) 04:42, 18 September 2008 (UTC) — Luke Lonergan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

There were no such assertions of notability in the article. In addition, there were very few citations to reliable, impartial third-party sources.

Also: what parts of our conflict of interest policies do you not understand, Luke Lonergan, Chief Technology Officer and Co-Founder of Greenplum and primary author/editor of the article in question? --Orange Mike | Talk 16:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

And exactly how does this justify your deletion of this article without discussion?

If you prefer, I will have someone else provide arguments to the same effect as part of the discussion related to deletion of the article, but that would presume there is a discussion.

Luke Lonergan (talk) 05:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Maximgr (talk) 09:47, 1 October 2008 (UTC) I also agree with Luke Lonergan. Greenplum has a significant impact on today's database technologies. Look, for example, at blog of Curt Monash, a leading analyst and strategic advisor to the software industry: http://www.dbms2.com/2008/08/25/greenplum-is-in-the-big-leagues/

I strongly believe that articles about companies/products of even smaller importance are not to be deleted from Wikipedia.

Deelete too speedy!

Wow. I just created the page for Twelve Canoes. I got the speedy delete tag, immediately put the hang on tag there and began to type a justification on the talk page as requested and before I could save it, the article was deleted by you. What's the point of the hang on if you don't hang on? We're talking maybe less than 5 minutes. --Mat Hardy (talk) 00:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Good intentions and noble motives do not create notability Gee. Thanks for the patronising message on my talk page. But the hang on tag is there precisely to allow for an appeal. You obviously hadn't bothered with the appeal since the article was deleted before I had saved the justification message on the discussion page. It seems like over-zealous deletion is your particular kick in life, judging by all the above messages. There was no time allowed for me to put in citations or any further explanation. --Mat Hardy (talk) 00:42, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
If you Google 12 Canoes you get quite a lot of returns for it, mainly from international film review sites etc. As to why I hadn't included further evidence of notability straight off, that is kind of the essence of my complaint. I never got the chance. Articles here can't be complete right from their first save. I laid out the gist of the article and saved it. While I was going back to start adding in citations I got the Speedy tag. I immediately went into the talk page to request a hang on (as the tag suggested) and before I could save that, the article was gone. Total elapsed time maybe 5 minutes. THIS is what I'm bitching about. I have no problem with the due process of articles for deletion, as long as its applied with common sense and allows the chance of reply. --Mat Hardy (talk) 03:51, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

12 Canoes is a seriously notable Australian Movie - made by and of native Original Residents, and has received massive International acclaim. I suppose it has gone unnoticed in the USA media, that sort of thing is normal. FoolesTroupe (talk) 23:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to undo your deletion, but if we drop in the following refs, I think the article should be fine.

Maddox, Garry (September 8, 2008), "Now locals can paddle their own canoe", The Sydney Morning Herald

Tan, Zona Marie (August 9, 2008), "12 Canoes goes live", Inside Film

Also, I hope you don't feel like I'm stalking you, since I've butted in a couple of your actions recently - I just have your talk page on my watchlist and I like to save articles when they can be saved. Also, when doing a search regarding A7 deletions, I recommend using a service like Google News or other news search - it often turns up good results where a standard search just churns out Myspace, blogs and the like. -Chunky Rice (talk) 23:58, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

My tiredness - correction - 10 Canoes was the original Movie - 12 Canoes is a development OF that which is highly notable. Orangemike - I intended you no disrespect. On the Help Desk "Over Zealous Uncontrolled Rapid Deletion Thru Ignorance" section I have stated things in a more lengthy manner (including the massive number of informative Google returns on this website) regarding this article. Ignorance is not a crime, NOR is pointing it out - except in US Politics and Wikipedia, The Fount of All Internet Knowledge, perhaps :-). FoolesTroupe (talk) 00:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

On further investigation, 12 Canoes is actually the sequel to 10 Canoes. They're just using a multimedia platform instead of a pure cinematic feature film. --Mat Hardy (talk) 00:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for looking closer guys. FoolesTroupe (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 08:35, 30 September 2008 (UTC).

Vandalyze

My goodness, did you bother to read this? My first impression about you was that you were a super-sensitive 12 year old with a trigger-happy finger. After reading through your bio, I came up with a slightly different view: you didn't read or comprehend the importance of my suggestion. I will continue pursuing this and, if you wish to discuss it with me, please contact me via my user page @ Wangtopgun. I offer full disclosure about myself, my background, various careers, etc. I suggest you read before you hit the DELETE key, because you may be missing a gem. All the best, Dean Garner —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wangtopgun (talk • contribs)

Notification

Fourth notice

Hello, Orangemike. You have new messages at User_talk:IRP#VORTICES.
You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{newmessages}} template.

HELP! Why was Kinetico deleted?

Hi, Can you please help us to understand why the Kinetico page was deleted? We attempted to create this page due to the request from consumers who are attempting to validate Kinetico as a company using Wikipedia as a source. We wanted to provide our customers with non-promotional information about the company in a forum that could be edited by their peers (much like some competitors have done). Please advise on how we may get this page back up. Thanks in advance -- we appreciate your help. Senojttam (talk) 20:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

College Humor

Don't you think it makes more sense for College Humor.com to be the default when you search for College Humor on Wikipedia? As great as the magazine was, it hasn't been published or relevant for 70 years. I think it's the right thing to do. Mcoogan75 (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I know it probably appears as recentism but I think if we honestly ask ourselves which one truly defined the name, it's a no-brainer. When people think CollegeHumor, they think the site not the 30's out of business magazine. Shouldn't that impact which one is the default? Mcoogan75 (talk) 17:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good! Mcoogan75 (talk) 17:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The Black Aftermath

Im sorry to be rude but please leave it on there i was writing information as u deleted it, please either put the page back or send me the page so i can write the info and reupload it thanks, i am not happy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamieostrich (talk • contribs) 19:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Earthquake/GA1

Why did you delete this? I performed a GA review, which is held at the appropriate subpage. Please undelete. the editorofthewiki (talk/contribs/editor review) 10:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The parent article was Talk:Earthquake. See Talk:Mary Meader/GA1 for an example. the editorofthewiki (talk/contribs/editor review) 22:03, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Brightly colored shoes

Beats me. Probably deleted some brilliant page about fecal matter or a game he made up this weekend or something. You know how wiki drama is. But you're welcome. Obviously no need to beat around the bush with this one. - Vianello (talk) 00:11, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

User:InnocenceMatters

Now has a new username to add the same info: Justiceisaboutthetruth (talk · contribs). Thanks, Grsz^X 04:34, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Advice sought

Hey Orangemike, I am seeking your opinion as I recall you as having a pretty reasonable POV amidst a pretty heated content debate a while back. To sum up, months ago I came across a BLP of someone I hadn't the foggiest idea who they were. Did a little research and became increasingly apparent it was a self promotional job. Tagged for potential COI and let it sit. Recently happened to come back to it and saw no significant changes that improved the sourcing so I thought it could at least stand going up for an afd. Afd got closed as a keep despite an attempt to bring some actual policy discussion into it [[1]], talked to the admin that closed it and just got a "consensus was reached" and I could take it to deletion review if I wanted. Looking at deletion review it seemed kind of pointless unless it was some kind process fluke so I figured whatever but thought I would at least remove the material and sources that were clearly self-published explain why and updated the improvement tags. So a couple days ago someone comes a long and essentially restores everything back to it's previous state with no explanation. I reverted and again cited the relevant policy behind it only to find it all back the next day with the comment my edit was overzealous. Saw it easily escalating so today posted a note on the 3RR board making it clear I was not reporting a violation as much as trying to bring in some other voices on the issue as we were both about to hit our 3 edit limit. Before I even finished posting an admin I find a message on my talk page stating WP:SPS is not relevant here and was out of line for reverting the other person's edits. Interestingly he left no message for the other user and reverts it to his last version. Then another admin responds to my 3RR post and basically says something to the effect "I was already about to ban him for edit warring over the past few days because he hasn't made any other recent. Now I confess may not be able to spend as much time editing on Wikipedia as much as I'd like but wasn't aware the amount of articles you edit played into whether you get banned or not. What I do try to make an to do is read up on the relevant policies and guidelines before taking any action and thought I was accurate in citing WP:SPS and WP:SELFPUB # 3 and WP:BURDEN yet no one seems interested in providing any reasoning behind their actions. Am I missing something here? Thanks. Tmore3 (talk) 06:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nteulogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nteulogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Kozakken Boys

I noticed that you speedied the article Kozakken Boys about a month ago. I can't view the deleted content from this account, so I was wondering if you could copypaste it to my user talk page. I'm confident that the article did qualify for A7, but being Dutch I also know that the club in itself is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Aecis·(away) ^talk 12:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

In that case the link was incorrect. The Kozakken Boys are in the Saturday Hoofdklasse B, one of six divisions/leagues of the Hoofdklasse, the highest tier of amateur football in the Netherlands and the third tier of Dutch football in general. The club is also a regular contender in the Dutch cup (were beaten by Ajax after extra time in the second round last year). Aecis·(away) ^talk 13:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the e-mail, I'll write an article that makes the notability of the club clearer :) Aecis·(away) ^talk 14:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping clean up Matt Hazard article

I'm still really new at the process of starting an article from scratch, so I'm sorry if I left things a bit sloppy in there. I really do appreciate the time you've taken to help though, so I just wanted to say thanks for that. Sorry also if I directed any earlier anger at you, I very much felt like everyone was telling me I was doing it wrong, and no one was helping to fix it. --Blinkstale (talk) 01:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Part of the trouble psychologically is that many of us here are committed to truth and verifiability, whereas viral marketing is based on elaborate deliberate hoaxes and lies of the sort we associate with the Soviet Union and other totalitarian systems. It smelled to us like you might be trying to spread that viral marketing campaign to Wikipedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:34, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

That's fair, but I did do my best, outside of citing every last article in the first draft (which I guess I'll have to do before I ever press the submit button ever again), to make sure you guys all knew it was a character in a real game based on a fake history. I just don't see it as much different from Star Wars IV being the first released, so it took me by surprise how poorly people received the idea of an article about it/him. But yes, I understand now why you, in particular, without thorough proof, thought the way you did and took the action you did regarding said article, and I hope that means everything is cleared up so that the article can finally get some life. --Blinkstale (talk) 01:40, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I could use an admin's opinion on Seraphic Trust Bank

Hi OM!

This isn't really relevant to you as such, but you're an admin I've spoken to before and I figured I'd like to get an admin's opinion on whether this is important or not...

I've come across an article, Seraphic Trust Bank, that was created on the 22 September by an editor who's created/edited nothing else. The article's claims don't match the claims made on the company's website, and I've tagged the article as such. However, I'm slightly more concerned about the company itself is legitimate: the website cited on the article is UK website (.co.uk), but the company appears to be based in Virginia. A google search lists a different website (.net) with an identical home-page, but the links are broken. My gut tells me the company is a phishing scam, but I don't know how to verify that.

Could you take a look at the article (and the accompanying website) and let me know if any further action is needed?

Cheers,  This flag once was red  02:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

PS. The irony of two wobs investigating what claims to be a private bank is not lost on me... ;-)

Thanks a lot - hoax makes sense.

Cheers,  This flag once was red  02:19, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Cmack444

I think he and Iamblubba (talk · contribs) may be socks; they're posting the same thing. HalfShadow 04:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

KCBC-KOCHI

On the ball a bit there weren't you?, i'd only tagged it about a minute before. Nice job.--Jac16888 (talk) 04:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Dfenders

Hey Orangemike,

This user offered to change his username in his unblock request. Just wanted to make sure that you think that would solve the issue.

Cheers - Revolving Bugbear 20:21, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Milwaukee politics

Hey, noticed your recent reversion on Milwaukee, Wisconsin... I was going to say that, based on looking at the diffs the IP's version did seem more concise and possibly more NPOV (although strangely, looking at the section as is now without the red words, it doesn't seem so bad, go figure) (And I'll grant that the IP's edit summary was definitely not particularly civil). Anyway..

My main comment here, the reference to "Emily's List" there on the importance of the primaries is broken. I'm new to the area, and so wouldn't have a clue where to find a suitable replacement source, so I thought I'd throw a heads-up your way. (Also, not sure what "Emily's List" is, but I have to wonder if it really satisfies WP:RS?) Best, umrguy42 21:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The Woodcreek Faction

The reason for deleting this post was???? I am just a fan of the troupe so please do not give me the basic answer of duplication with no changes. I saw the original post and made very specific changes, even citing sources. I understand the willingness to keep things neutral. All of the data in that article was thus so. It seems to me that your quick action & willingness to delete the article shows the direct opposite of neutral. - Tinebsen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinebsen (talk • contribs) 20:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC) I don't agree with you on this but you have all the power don't you? Reminds me a lot of our current President. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tinebsen (talk • contribs) 20:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

vCPM

Hey Orangemike,

I apologize. I didn't realize that wikipedia didn't have a place for concepts. I guess I will return when the term vCPM is more widely used throughout the online video industry. Unless you have any suggestions as to how it may be a good fit for Wikipedia as is...

Thanks again for your explanation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesserogo (talk • contribs) 21:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

R3 does not apply to

Tenenbaum when it redirects to Tannenbaum. Not only is it far from a misnomer, the Tannenbaum article includes people with the name Tenenbaum. Best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

New user

Hello, Mike. Does this new user account seem legit to you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rmvnegativelinks56 I saw it on recent changes patrol, and my radar is going off. Your thoughts? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:44, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick action. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for all the help with deleting my subpages. You are fast!    Juthani1   ^tcs 20:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Rob ihasz

Hi, I nominated and you speedy deleted a new article, Rob ihasz. That was based on its state when I saw it. But I suspect that it may have started as a valid article which a quick vandal got to before I saw it. I was just going back to look at it when I discovered that you had already deleted it. If it's not too much trouble, would you take a look at it, and restore it if appropriate? I apologize for not checking first, but it was a brand new page created by a brand new user which was vandalism when I saw it. Thanks, MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:09, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for checking. When I saw in the history that an IP had gotten to it before I tagged it, I just wanted to make sure, since you had deleted it before I got a chance to see the original. I've changed the author's talk page (which had my speedy deletion vandalism notice) to reflect that the article failed to establish notability. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:14, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

T-Minus

Hey Orange Mike,

I see you deleted the page I created for T-Minus 321. I totally understand guidelines regarding new articles a bit better now after you shared the UpAndComing article. I appreciate you applying a valid description as to why you deleted it. I previously attempted to start the article and it was quickly deleted by another user with a pretty poor reason/answer for its deletion. When you get a moment, could you point me in the direction of an article that states when a new artist-related article is worthy of inclusion? I'd appreciate it. Lagrandem (talk) 22:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Jared Barton

After the author re-added the article, and it went back up RfSD, the author removed the db, and added hangon. I re-added the db tag, and then talked to the author. After talking to him on the talk page, I decided to allow him time to make it notable. I prodded it, hopefully he can do it (WP:ASG.) Feel free to overrule me. -- Matthew Glennon (^T/_C\^D) 00:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

• No need to appoligise to me. :) Doesn't matter to me at all. Although, thanks for pointing out WP:ATHLETE to me, I'd never read that before. Have a good one. -- Matthew Glennon (^T/_C\^D) 13:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Sharon Howarth

Hi Orange Mike,

You deleted Sharon Howarth (Green Party candidate for Toronto-Danforth) for lack of demontrated notability. Since then, two things have happened. She's appeared on television in connection with a minor scandal reported nationally involving Jack Layton, a leader of a national party in Canada, and she's just appeared in the The Star (major Toronto newspaper) today as possibly the greatest threat to Jack Layton's seat ... ahead of the Liberal candidate, who would normally be the obvious challenger.

Bobagem (talk) 16:09, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for helping fix the Wolfeton Manor article. I have no idea how I found it, but it looked like it was worth saving. Collect (talk) 20:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

NN TOY?

What the hell does "NN Toy" mean? --Drvanthorp (talk) 06:33, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Daughter of Bilitis / SF

Hi, this sentence has been challanged during Good article nomination:
"Members of science fiction fandom (including Forrest J Ackerman) were involved in the foundation of early groups such as the Daughters of Bilitis, a lesbian rights group."
I vaguely remember you're adding it. If it came from you, do you remember the source? The histories of the organisation i've read don't mention anything about SF at all, so maybe it is in a Sf source?

For now i've removed it, so it wont hinder promotion, but would be nicer to include it with a source. Thanks!Yobmod (talk) 10:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, forgot to mention it was in Homosexuality in SF. I saw there is a print source in the Forrest J Ackerman article, but didn't know which part of the sentence in there was cited (that he helped with publishing and/or is an honorary lesbian :-) ). I'll add it with that and the ladder source. thanks!Yobmod (talk) 09:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

AIP

What source do you have that lists the size of political parties? The article cited on the AIP page to support the claim doesn't even mention party size. --Fredrik Coulter (talk) 15:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Transverse Business Solutions

Please restore this article. It is a neutral article written about a new innovation in the telecom industry.

Here are sevral reference articles that support the notability of this new and innovative business model.

[2]Billing and OSS World: Transverse Business Model Full of blee(p)

Liviu Cangeopol

Please explain why this page is not meeting the standards of Wikipedia? I have more references but I don’t understand your comments. This guy has tons of references on the Internet. Reliable references from newspapers and books. Please email me at danafree122@yahoo.com

[3]TMCnet:Transverse Announces Company Launch and Intros First Open Source OSS Platform

[4]Wireless Week: Transverse Debuts as Open Source OSS Provider

Thanks, Gillyharris (talk) 20:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_October_10#Template:Dynasty_character

Since you decided to speedy delete the template, I closed the active discussion on Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_October_10#Template:Dynasty_character. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Delete Criteria

Hi! I noticed that you removed the speedy that I had added to Channel M Breakfast (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Channel_M_Breakfast&diff=244872218&oldid=244870947). I'm kind of new at this - I'm trying to help where I can but I could do with some hints once and a while. Basically, here I was wondering if you could clue me in as to why that was a bad speedy, and what makes a good speedy? My understanding was that A7 provides for speedy delete for any kind of real life person/organization/company etc that has no indication that its subject is important. Was this not the case for the article in question, or was there something else I missed? Thanks for the help! Maethordaer (talk) 02:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Got it. I hadn't thought about the product as a category, so that's helpful to know. Thanks! Maethordaer (talk) 02:46, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

User:RockManQ/RfA Opinions

Could you perhaps restore it, please. It was an accidental tagging by me. Sorry to cause an inconvenience. RockManQ ^(talk) 03:05, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Yay, Thank you. RockManQ ^(talk) 03:13, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Nicasio Borges Page Deletion

Hi: As you deleted this page because you did not knew the person could you please send me all the information of the page to info@artedeloeste.com This was valuable information but seems it was not valuable enough for wikipedia. Dissapointed completed of wikipedia, dont thinks of it as a source of information but its a big blog who people have fun deleting other people posts. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enbob (talk • contribs) — Enbob (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Wikipedia:Unsuccessful searches (2002-07)

You deleted this as G6, but it had previously been deleted and was just restored by another admin. You probably didn't notice that, for this is therefore not uncontroversial maintenance to remove it. It could be argued that it [provides a useful historical record of Wikipedia. I have accordingly restored it to facilitate matters, but of course you can take it to MfD. DGG (talk) 14:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I found it while checking through some deleted contributions. As far as I can tell, it seems to have been an automated log of unsuccessful search results. I can think of no reason that it should be inaccessible to non-admins, which is all deletion does. In fact I'll move it to a subpage of Wikipedia:Historical archive. Graham87 04:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Deletion in error: "Works by the U. S. government are not eligible for U. S. copyright protection."

As I understand the log entry, you deleted the page "Satire by Vic Morrow" for "G 12: Blatant copyright infringement". As noted on the deleted page, the work in question was produced by a Department of the United States government--this can be verified by viewing the work itself at the link referenced in the page. Furthermore, recall what is published at http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#piu where the copyright office of the U. S. government itself states, "Works by the U. S. government are not eligible for U. S. copyright protection." Therefore, it seems to me that there is no infringement--blatant or otherwise--and that the page should be restored.

I am sorry, if I misunderstood your objection, but based on my understanding, the article should be restored.

mjk (talk) 18:59, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for listening to my arguments and restoring the article (for the time being). Submissions to publishers have been rejected for lack of notability through the ages and around the world. And I can accept this. But I would hate to be thought of as a blatant copyright infringer--so I thank you for your fairness in reconsidering that judgment.--mjk (talk) 07:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Deletion due to lack of reliable source?

OK, apparently you deleted Satire by Vic Morrow because the referenced source is hosted by an unreliable source (YouTube).

1. The work itself--not the provider--claims that it is the product of the U. S. government. This claim (and the title of the work) is embedded in the work at about 3'19" both visually and aurally. There is no copyright claim anywhere--indeed, there can be none for a government work--but there is a clear statement that the work was produced by the Social Security Administration. Is this a Wikipedia Catch-22 that requires copyright proof for works that cannot be copyrighted?
2. How does the posited unreliability of the provider break the assertion of provenance of the work itself?
3. Do you contend that the work is counterfeit? I believe that it meets any reasonable prima facie test of authenticity.
4. I do not believe the work could have come from anywhere; I believe, based on its content, that it comes from the U. S. government, and is therefore copyright-free.
5. Do you think the title is bad? Perhaps "Satire of Last Year at Marienbad by Vic Morrow" is clearer. The words are his own, perhaps "send-up" instead of "satire".
6. Do you think the article is not of interest? The Vic Morrow page was viewed over 200,000 times in 200809. True, Last Year at Marienbad was visited merely 3,800 times last month, but it is a Golden Lion winner. I suspect that there would indeed be interest.
7. "Etc." You have other objections, I see. What might they be?

I greatly respect your efforts to keep Wikipedia the great resource that it is. It is because of the results of those efforts that I wish to contribute to it myself. I feel that I have taken care in sourcing, writing, editing, and linking an article, which in a very small way usefully expands the content.

mjk (talk) 21:31, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Direct Action Weston

Could you please restore Direct Action Weston? Here is a reference which I would like to add to the article: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl-flbprotest0720pnjul20,0,5427184.story -- Eastmain (talk) 02:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• The reference is of a respectable length, and it's from a reliable source, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, so I think the article would pass the general notability guideline. -- Eastmain (talk) 03:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Patna School of Painting

You had deleted the page Patna School of Painting based on - G12: Blatant copyright infringement. Log - [5].

I want to revive the page after necessary modification. I wanted to do so, when the page existed, but was not able to do because of lack of time. Could you please help me to recover the page so that I can modify it to avoid any copyright issue. I want to recover the page, instead of starting afresh, because it contained a photogallery. Manoj nav (talk) 06:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I have received the mail. Manoj nav (talk) 18:47, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Hey, I replied to you over at my talk page, thanks for your concern. --Banime (talk) 22:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Request

Could you please redirect Eshan to Eshan Yi Autonomous County? I couldnt because its protected. Thanks--40fifw0 (talk) 16:35, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

south carolina college of pharmacy

Orange Mike, I submitted the South Carolina College of Pharmacy page to correct something wrong on the Wikipedia site.

If you search for pharmacy schools, it gives you a list by country and by state. The University of South Carolina is listed twice, with a campus at the Medical University of South Carolina and a campus at the University of South Carolina. That is incorrect. USC has no campus at MUSC. In fact, this is like saying there is a Pepsi department at Coke.

The pharmacy colleges at USC and MUSC merged four years ago to form the South Carolina College of Pharmacy, which has a campus at each place as well as one in Greenville. Such a merge has never been done in the history of pharmacy education, which I think is pretty notable.

There are a number of other colleges of pharmacy that do have Wikipedia entries, several with substantially less information than our submission. Please reconsider your deletion or give me more information about how I can improve our submission.

Thanks!

Sccpeditor (talk) 16:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)