User talk:Redvers

Redvers is male • gay • married • a socialist • a vegetarian • Welsh • an atheist • and takes life at five times the average speed 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Don't post your images to Commons. Why not? DON'T post "talkback" templates. I'm already watchlisting your talk page Watchlist this page to see replies

1 UDR & 2UDR

Hi it's very kind of you to change the page names but unfortunately you've done it in such a way now as they don't make any sense. For naming they'd be known either as:

1 UDR
2 UDR
OR
1st Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment
2nd Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment
OR
1st (Country Antrim) Battalion, Ulster Defence Regiment
2nd (Country Armagh) Battalion, Ulster Defence Regiment

If you could make a choice on the naming convention you'd like me to stick to I'd be grateful as there are 11 Battalions of this regiment to create pages for as part of a major project I'm kicking off today.Thunderer (talk) 15:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, which would you be interested in using? "1 UDR" is awful, telling the reader nothing (albeit useful as a redirect, I suppose). The one I picked is consistent with other articles on battalions that WP:MILHIST looks after, but if it doesn't suit, we can pick something different. I'll help move stuff if the system is complaining. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:08, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I think I'd plump for "#th Battalion Ulster Defence Regiment" (no's 1-11). the # UDR is useful as a search term and is a very common name for them but the full title with the county name in it is rarely used except on paper so I can elaborate on that in the article. If you can rename or redirect for the first two then I'll name the other 9 articles following your convention.Thunderer (talk) 17:12, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you want "nth Battalion, Ulster Defence Regiment" or without the comma? (I'm neutral on this!) ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

The proper way in that format would be without the comma. Thunderer (talk) 17:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Done! ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 19:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you - I'll make sure the rest match that naming convention.Thunderer (talk) 19:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Good luck! ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 19:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

MiniTwins

You appear to have delete my MiniTwins page. Much of the text was a direct copy from www.minitwins.co.uk to which I own the copyright. I was well aware of the rules for submitting such information to Wikipedia and the implications for that copyright. Please can you reinstate my page? Asanyfuleno (talk) 17:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

If you have copied text to which you own the copyright, please read the guide to donating your own copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 17:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

sorry

sorry, and thanks for deleting the page i just created. it was wrongly named. i just realised that after clicking save. w_tanoto (talk) 19:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

No worries - it's very easily done. It's now in you userspace: User:W Tanoto/Contribution. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 19:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Boston Civic Symphony Orchestra

I am a member of the Boston Civic Symphony Orchestra.

I posted a page about the orchestra but you deleted it for "blatent advertising."

I just posted a few historical facts about the orchestra. Why is that considered advertisement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LUCAWINE (talk • contribs)

I'll answer on your talk page. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 22:34, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I just joined Wiki, so I'm new to this, so thanks for your patience.

In looking at the "conflict of interest" rules, I don't see a problem with what I posted. I have no financial interest in the orchestra since my position with them is completely voluntary. It is a not-for-profit orchestra. I am not promoting the concerts, only stating a few historical facts about this orchestra which is the second oldest orchestra in the city.

Why can the Boston Symphony Orchestra have a wiki page, but not the Boston Civic Orchestra? They even promote their official website on their WIKI page which I did not do with the Boston Civic Orchestra WIKI page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LUCAWINE (talk • contribs)

Replied on user's talk page. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 22:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, I won't post a factual page about the orchestra if this is a problem. I was volunteering to do it anyway, so your rejection of the page actually makes my life easier. The orchestra is already referenced many times on wikipedia such as on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=BOSTON+CIVIC+SYMPHONY&go=Go , but maybe I had the wrong idea of how everything works here. Thanks anyway! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LUCAWINE (talk • contribs)

There's no need to get all snotty. The article as it stood was not acceptable for Wikipedia. I've given you links to show you how to write a better one and warned you to avoid the conflict of interest you have in being the one assigned by the orchestra to write the article. But all you want is your original advert putting back up. There I cannot help you. Sorry that Wikipedia was not for you; some people it suits, others it doesn't. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 23:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Toxin (band)

Redvers,

I am really sorry i am brand new to wikipedia and i was not aware that recreating the article was against policy. I would strongly appreciate if you could reconsider the deletion of Toxin (band). Please also tell me what i did or did not include that made the article bad. All advice is helpful!

Thanks very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudemusicrocks94 (talk • contribs)

The article was deleted because it does not meet our guidelines for bands appearing in Wikipedia. Your recreation of the article - over a dozen times, including overwriting other articles - didn't help either and led to the title of the article being blocked from being created again.

I suggest you read WP:BAND for further advice; and that you find significant third party coverage of the band. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 23:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay thank you very much i appreciate the advice. I was just wondering if there is any possible way you could unblock the article Toxin (band) so that i could rewrite the article following the guidelines and you can keep watch of the article to make sure it meets the requirements? And again im very new to this program and i was not exactly sure that recreating or overwriting the article would get me in any kind of trouble. I truly am sorry for that and i will NEVER do it again

Thanks again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudemusicrocks94 (talk • contribs)

Best bet: create it in your userspace: User:Dudemusicrocks94/Toxin (band). That allows you infinite time to get your article in order without it being deleted. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 07:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay thanks again, but i have one more question. What was wrong with the article? I feel i explained why the band is important and i gave a source "Newsday" the long island newspaper?

anon

Thanks for the revert. "Anon, anon, good nurse!" --Uncle Ed (talk) 23:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Pumajaw

I have recreated the above as I was working on it when you speedy deleted it. There seems to be quite a lot of third party info on this duo and I feel that they are worthy of an article. Perhaps you could take a further look at them? It now needs some work by someone with much greater knowledge of the duo and folk music as a whole. Thanks.. Paste (talk) 13:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

When I speedy deleted it, it was a perfectly written advertisement for a group with no assertion of why they should be in an encyclopedia. Your redo improved much of that, but I've still removed a fair few words that were glowing in tone. It would be nice to have some of the statements directly sourced (when did Time Out say what it said? etc). But it is now, I believe, outside of the speedy deletion criteria. That's not to say that it meets WP:MUSIC, of course. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 13:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks lets see what happens to it.Paste (talk) 14:01, 11 November 2008 (UTC)