User talk:Discospinster

If I have deleted your article and you would like to know why, please first have a look at the following Wikipedia policies and guidelines:

• WP:N (General Notability)
• WP:BIO (Person Notability)
• WP:ORG (Company or Group Notability)
• WP:WEB (Web Content Notability)

• WP:MUSIC (Musician or Band Notability)
• WP:V (Verifiability)
• WP:RS (Reliable Sources)
• WP:COPY (Copyright)

If none of these pages addresses your concerns, leave me a note.

Happy New Year!

Christmas was yesterday: Happy New Year!

---

Happy new Headcheese!-hexaChord² 02:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! ... discospinster _talk 02:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy new year 'spinster! Did you just reverted the first Pokémon related vandalism of 2009?[1] Great! Happy new year! Cheers, Face 16:59, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Andrew Stefan Ehrenkreutz

Dear who ever you are, and wherever you are.

"Congress has plainly instructed us that fair use analysis calls for a sensitive balancing of interests. The distinction between "productive" and "unproductive" uses may be helpful in calibrating the balance, but it cannot be wholly determinative. Although copying to promote a scholarly endeavor certainly has a stronger claim to fair use than copying to avoid interrupting a poker game, the question is not simply two-dimensional. For one thing, it is not true that all copyrights are fungible. Some copyrights govern material with broad potential secondary markets. Such material may well have a broader claim to protection because of the greater potential for commercial harm."

There is NO doubt that you are involved in deliberate vandalism, claiming alleged deliberate copyright infringement. You definitively do not understand the copyright law and the fair use doctrine. First of all YOU do not understand copyright, and secondary you do not understand Fair Use doctrine. NOT all MATERIALS are copyrighted,only work for financial gain is copyrighted. Notices such as OBITUARY are NEVER copyrighted, are never work for financial gain, and they are ALWAYS screened and issued issued with the permission and under the supervision of the family members. I am the family member, Andrew Stefan Ehrenkreutz is my uncle, and ONLY I as the member of the family can decide what, and how it can be used. So I am requesting that you immediatelly restore the work which you are vandalised. First of all you should know that OBITUARIES are NEVER copyrighted materials. Obituaries are condensed Curriculum Vitae of the decesed, prepared in honor and memory of the deceased.

The fair use doctrine is well defined by the Supreme Court United States of America Supreme Court and based on this decision there are several tests of Fair Use: The fair use statute:

The first test is if the material have the commercial character: OBITUARIES are not commercial materials for sale, those are materials prepared with the input of family members, an\d for precise purpose to summarise and to honor the life of the decesed.

Second, Wikipedia itself is a established as a nonprofit organisation and for documentary and educational purposes; That is the fundamental reason that the Fair Use doctrine can be applied even for some copyrighted materials published for profit, granted that the Fair Use doctrine test is met.

The opinions of the justices about Fair Use doctrine you might find at:

• Betamax v. Universal studios
• Fair Use

The doctrine of fair use developed over the years as courts tried to balance the rights of copyright owners with society's interest in allowing copying in certain, limited circumstances. This doctrine has at its core a fundamental belief that not all copying should be banned, particularly in socially important endeavors such as criticism, news reporting, teaching, and research.

Although the doctrine of fair use was originally created by the judiciary, it is now set forth in the Copyright Act. Under the Act, four factors are to be considered in order to determine whether a specific action is to be considered a "fair use." These factors are as follows:

  1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
  2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
  3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
  4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

A fair use example: It can often be difficult to determine whether or not a particular use is a "fair use". The four factors described in the statute often lead to conflicting results. This is best seen in analyzing an example fair use situation. The quotation of short passages from a novel in a negative newspaper review of that novel is generally considered a fair use. But an analysis of the four factors makes this result far from clear.

First Factor (purpose and character of the use): In analyzing the first factor, the copying party used the quotations in a for-profit newspaper (and therefore the use was for commercial gain). Generally, this would mean that the first factor weighs in favor of finding no fair use. However, the fact that the purpose of the use was to review or criticize the work is a fact favorable to a finding of fair use. While it is not clear from examining the statute, the later fact is probably more important than the first, meaning that the first factor set forth in the Copyright Act should weigh toward a finding of fair use.

Second Factor (nature of the copyrighted work): In analyzing the second factor in our example, a novel is one of the premier examples of a work which should be protected by copyright law. As a result, the second factor weighs toward a finding of no fair use. If the novel had not yet been published, this would be even more important. It can be difficult to prove fair use in the quotation of an unpublished work. However, it is not impossible, since the unpublished status of a work is only one element in the fair use analysis.

Third Factor (amount and substantiality taken): As for the third factor, only short passages from the novel were included in the review. This generally means that the third factor is analyzed in favor of a finding of fair use. However, the "quality" of the portion taken is analyzed under this factor as well as the "quantity." It is possible that these short passages are the most important part of the novel. If this were the case, this third factor might lead to a conclusion of no fair use.

Fourth Factor (effect on potential market for protected work): Finally, the fourth factor should be considered in our example. Courts have stated that this is the most important factor in the fair use analysis. In this case, the negative review would clearly impact the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. However, courts have stated that this factor is to look only at the portion taken to analyze the effect on the potential market, and not at any negative comments contained in a review. Thus, the question is whether the inclusion of the short passages in the newspaper would affect the market for the novel. When only short passages are involved, courts have generally held that there is no market effect, and this factor should be analyzed in favor of a finding of fair use.

Conclusion: The four factors are split. However, courts would generally review this analysis and determine that, on the whole, the four factors weigh toward a finding of fair use.

The conservative approach in any other situation would be to remove such publication, however you know or you should know that OBITUARIES are not work for profit, and not for financial gain, only to honor the deceased, and to remember his life achievements. Not all "works" are copyrighted, by the nature of publication and its use. Such is the case of OBITUARIES. Where you do have the legal evidence that OBITUARIES are accorded in any form copyright protection? So where is the copyright ? What is copyrighted? If you do not understand the copyright laws and the fair use doctrine despite any if all your contributions, you are beyond resonable doubt at the wrong place.

I am complaining about your actions, and I firmly belive you should be removed from the position as Wikipedia Moderator, due to your overzelaous behavior and lack of your understanding of the law of the land.

Hrabia Ehrenkreutz Sas 19:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Count Ehrenkreutz SasHrabia Ehrenkreutz Sas (talk) 19:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Huggle message "Reverted unsourced content "

How are you generating the "Reverted unsourced content" message? This is an extremely common issue and I would prefer to be able to be as specific as possible in providing a warning. Alansohn (talk) 04:07, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that reply. I tried it out, but the message is only available as a revert, not as a revert and warn (at least as I see it). Am i reading this correctly. Thanks again for the tip. I'm sure there's plenty of Huggle features i know nothing about. Alansohn (talk) 17:02, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for that error

Thanks for correcting that, I didn't notice. Versus22 _talk 04:44, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

It happens; it was my first thought as well. ... discospinster _talk 04:45, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Ackuron

It appears we both had the same idea. :P Would you like to close yours or would you like me to close mine? Cheers! TN‑X-Man 18:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Mister shithead

Good shot, quickdraw :) I had half the AIV report done when you nailed him. Bullzeye ^{(Ring for Service)} 03:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That's what they (don't) pay me for! ... discospinster _talk 03:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.6.180.47 (talk) 03:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello. ... discospinster _talk 03:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Ricardo Carrasco Jorquera's Page

Dear sir. i'm very concern about the ereasure of the biography page on Ricardo Carrasco Jorquera. I understand your disconformity with the relevance of that person. But let my assure you, that he's a well know individuall in my city; in fact. he has lead two comunity aid iniciatives and have participated in several other. I'm asking you to reconsider you position or at least, i will greatly apreciate if you give a more deep explanation of your criteria about relevance. Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlcarras (talk • contribs) 05:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of "Chicago Film Producers Alliance" page

I don't care for a subjective and inconsistent process. And the fact that you and others have group think and banded together to delete the article is more evidence of the site's weakness. Sure, I can have more 3rd party article written about CFPA and will. In fact, they are being writting now. But, it's too late. This has become a legal issue. I'm in contact with my attornies about antitrusut violations and soon will contact the site's owner. You can't accept other similar groups for different reasons and selectively reject CFPA. It's illegal. And rest assured, when the summons are issued, your name will be on one.--ATurnerIII (talk) 00:26, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Darrell Bell

We definitely disagree with the deletion of this page. All information is 100% correct and he is definitely a notable individual. The page has been edited and updated and the questionable references that he has REALLY worked with will be added when i can find in your words "proof of it". Not everything in the entertainment business is documented on the internet. If there are any more objections please inform me before deleting this page. I am sure his fans will update more references in the coming period 100%. Darrell Bell is a seasoned veteran with more than 20 years of experience in the entertainment business and a pretty incredible resume (this is the short version). As a producer/engineer/businessman he has always had a policy of staying in the background and ensuring his Artists/Projects get the recognition and not him. Not only from the music business but he is one of the owners of Masters of the Game (the pioneers and god fathers of street football). You can check out The #1 Street Soccer Channel on YouTube. MotG is the largest street football brand in the world. That alone is monumental. I hope you are informed. If there are any questions or comments feel free to contact me.

WeGotBeats —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wegotbeats (talk • contribs) 07:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Your Disco identity

I notice you made an edit on the Bianca Ryan article. There's a notorious troll who appears to be on a personal crusade to deride Bianca on YouTube and has made attempts to invade her website. His various sockpuppets typically include "Disco" in them. Not you is it?TheJazzFan (talk) 06:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. It wasn't the nature of the wiki edit which was inoffensive, but the similarity in username and that you happened edit that particular article. Your contributions exhibit more literacy than this is typical of this clown but the name caught my attention. Obviously just a coincidence.TheJazzFan (talk) 21:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Reunion Dinner

Any problem with it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.12.216 (talk) 03:41, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

user box

Hey Disco, as a past winner of the "CSD'er of the week" I wanted to let you know that there is now a user box that you can add to your user page: {{User:Balloonman/CSD award/userbox}}. This box was adapted from Rlevse's user box for Awesome Wikipedian of the Day by Faithlessthewonderboy ---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloonCSD Survey Results 14:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Occupational Titles

You have removed 'The Rev'd' from The Rev'd Bonavia-Hunt, founder of the Trinity College of Music and you note the reason for so doing as being because it is an occupational title.

However, The Rev'd is not exactly an occupational title: Rather, it draws attention to the fact that someone is ordained and (usually) in priests orders. Whether or not an ordained person is an incumbent or holder of similar office is secondry to this. Whilst Dean ... etc., would suggest an occupational title, The Rev'd is much more than this and is nothing to do, in itself, with an occupation, nor is it an academic mark.

Therefore, I am returning The Rev'd Bonavia Hunt to his priests orders (such an essential part of his person) and I hope very much that it remains as such.

Best wishes, R —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.220.220.101 (talk) 01:27, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I only removed "The Rev'd" from the main title of the article as per WP:NCP, but I did not remove it from the text within the article. ... discospinster _talk 04:02, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Category:Disambiguation carnivorous plant pages

Actually, this is not a disambiguation category, it is a category that was intended to contain disambiguation pages. It is empty because it turns out to be redundant with Category:Disambig-Class carnivorous plant articles. - Stepheng3 (talk) 23:07, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, I got confused. I'll re-delete it. ... discospinster _talk 00:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I applaud you for being cautious though. - Stepheng3 (talk) 00:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

LeFlore High School

Hey Discopinster, how are you? I looked at the LeFlore page and it just sounds like a really good encyclopedia article to me. I'm an education administrator for the Los Angeles Unified School District and I would like to see more high schools take the initiative to include as many programs to assist children in success as I see in this article. I wish I could help in it's not sounding like an advertisement, but I can't. It reads as this school is trying to put education first again; where it should not have left. I allowed some of my faculty to look over it, without persuasion, and they wanted to go and visit this school. Schools are much rougher than you could imagine these days. I had a fourth grader bring a weapon to school and shoot a girl in the mouth last year(and was only suspended per rules above the district) and that's nothing compared to what we deal with any other day. I applaud this school for bringing something new to the table educationally. I also submitted this school to my colleagues at the school district here and another state and we we're thinking about offering some scholarships for more deserving students there and other schools. This is exactly what we need today. A school on a mission for educating. I viewed some other schools on Wikipedia such as Murphy and Auburn High School and they sound great as well. We here in California and Delaware appreciate a great school that's not just trying, but doing. My staff and I give LeFlore Magnet High School an A+. We can't wait to visit. If you saw the lack of effort put into many other educational programs across the states, you may think that this is a stand above the rest school. Please sir, let's try to help some of these schools, not take away from the little they do have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.41.130.190 (talk) 00:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure the school is great, but the way the article is written right now seems like an endorsement, which is not what we're trying to put across in Wikipedia. The articles should lay out the facts related to the school, its history, its student demographics, etc. If the school has won an award then that would be mentioned, and if a prominent personality has complimented the school then that would be mentioned as well (being a fact that this person said this thing). Of course effort must be put into schools, but Wikipedia is not really the place to put that across. I hope that explains things. ... discospinster _talk 14:46, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Herbert Goldfarb

Easily notable by affiliation with notable professional recognition groups. Definitely not a candidate for quick delete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.251.1.11 (talk) 21:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

All the article said was that Dr Goldfarb was a member of these two groups. How are the groups notable in and of themselves? Does one have to be appointed to the society, like the Royal Society of Canada, or does one just join up? How is he considered a pioneer? There just wasn't enough to sustain an article, I'm afraid. ... discospinster _talk 14:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

One of them you have to be appointed, the other you can pretty much just join. My point is not that you were wrong, but if you weren't sure about that than you should not have intiated a "Quick Delete." Authors put time into these articles and do so in order to invite discussion about the subject, not to watch their work be thrown in the trash carelessly. 167.251.1.11 (talk) 21:18, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I didn't actually initiate the delete, that was someone else. I happened to agree with it, so I followed through. I can reinstate the article if you wish, and place it on WP:AFD for a wider discussion. ... discospinster _talk 02:42, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

i have obviously done somthing wrong can you help?

Hello Discospinster, I have been deleted by you (cutterskink) and wanted to ask how i can enter details without breaking a rule? I am not fully aware of all the ins and outs of what i should do so asking for a bit of help here please. I had been ok since first creating the page a while ago until i tried to update my information (don't get me wrong i do understand why i was deleted) however i had put the previous text back in place thinking that this would resolve the issue as it had been ok before. any advice is greatly appreciated. thanks, Ian

also sorry i don't understand this typing four tildes thingy?

just want to send a message to you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cutterskink (talk • contribs) 18:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Robert Schwartz

Hello. I was wondering why you deleted the article about Robert Schwartz. Were you able to see the rationale provided on the talk page of the entry as to why the page should still exist? Look forward to hearing from you. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.214.28.185 (talk) 23:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I did read the talk page, but I agreed with the response from User:Peridon that the article as it was did not meet Wikipedia standards for inclusion (WP:Notability). Mr Schwartz may have done a lot of things, but in general being a candidate for city council does not meet the notability criteria. Paul Koretz, whom you mentioned in the talk page, was already in the California State Assembly, so he meets the notability criterion of "People who have held international, national or first-level sub-national political office, including members of a legislature and judges" (from WP:POLITICIAN). However, just being a candidate does not, in itself, meet the criteria. I hope this explains the decision to delete. ... discospinster _talk 00:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Paudash Lake

Over the holidays the editors of Paudash Lake agreed to abandon the site and move to a new venue due to your trashing of this light and pleasant article on a pleasant recreational area of the Province. After our response to your preposterous insistence on the banning of certain words, we received no rational response from you.

We are a group of retirees, and your lack of response lead to the conclusion by the psychiatrist among us that you are a “true believer” who cannot be reasoned with. Furthermore, it is clear that you, like many “true believers”, have also become a “useful idiot”, in this case for our friends in San Francisco, who make a mockery (as we demonstrated) of your delusions regarding the so-called proper use of words in Wikipedia.

Our retired psychiatrist has pointed out that if you did not employ your spare time in vacuous attacks on web sites, you would probably spend it on radical politics in the notorious Hamilton area. In this regard, it is perhaps more desirable to have you wasting time on trashing web sites than adding to the crackpot politics of your local area. Please try to understand that Sanger does not love you and has moved on from Wikipedia and that Comrade Stalin is long gone. For the sake of your mental health, do try to get a life!

Lake Central (talk) 07:02, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Simul-edits

What a interesting coincidence. I was just cleaning out example images. hbent (talk) 19:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Category:WPMIT reviewed possibly unfree media

Please undelete this maintenance category. Thanks. -- Cat ^chi? 21:16, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. ... discospinster _talk 20:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I noticed the deletion of two other categories: Category:WPMIT review needed & Category:WPMIT reviewed media. -- Cat ^chi? 02:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Justification for reinstatement of article 'Qin Rong Yang'

Dear Discospinster,

You recently deleted the article 'Qin Rong Yang' in belief that the content did not '...indicate why its subject is important or significant...'.

This article was written with the purpose of presenting a biographical account of Qin Rong Yang (with a heavy focus on his career portfolio) and to exemplify his accomplishments.

He is a notable figure internationally for his cutting edge achievements in art and economic circles, his diverse achievements are supported by the following;

1. A record on the 'Guinness Book of World Records'
2. Over 100 tabloid and feature articles in newspapers and magazines from around the world
3. Commendation of his work by media agencies and higher education institutions in Canberra (the capital city of Australia), including:
   • front page spread in 'The Canberra Times' newspaper
   • letters and press releases from the National Museum of Australia
   • letters from The Australian National University
4. Footage of on- air interviews with leading Australian Television Stations; SBS, Channel 7, Channel 9 and Channel 10
5. Documents of correspondence and letters conferring thanks from Presidents and Prime Ministers of western countries

We understand that the tone of the original article may not have been strictly objective and requires revision. However, we adopted that style with the intention of reinforcing the praise that Mr Yang has attracted from media personalities and political leaders. If this is not appropriate, we will endeavour to conform to a more suitable style and approach to conveying such content.

However, the bulk of the evidence circumventing Mr Yang's career clearly points to a credible claim of the high significance of his work and efforts.

We would appreciate your assistance in restoring the 'Qin Rong Yang' article, also any aid that you and/ or fellow administrators may afford in order for this article to avoid fulfilling adverse criteria.

Kind regards,

TheWorldUnited (talk) 02:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)TheWorldUnited

Resume Writer 1

Wikipedia includes countless entries describing private businesses. My article included simple factual information regarding the nature of my business and some of its history and included a reference to a notable news publication (SFGate of the San Francisco Chronicle). What else can I do to make this a worthy encyclopedic entry? Jefftoff (talk) 04:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of the article about Nemos Music (IDB label)

Hello.

I guess I understand the point of the original deletion. However, I'd like to go for a second try, since the atmospheric / intelligent drum and bass era is far from being over (although it had it's first high point somewhere around 1999 and seriously faded since then) and I think that all active labels which stand for this kind of quality music deserve a short mention under the topic of intelligent drum and bass.

Of course the first IDB giant labels like Good Looking, Looking Good, Moving Shadow, 720 degrees, Partisan and others should be mentioned for sure. But Nemos Music has been an active independent intelligent drum and bass label for some years now, one of the few, so I'd like to propose to:

• rewrite the article about Nemos Music, concentrating on the two founders who started Nemos (a result of close relationships with blu mar ten) as a artist which now has evolved into a independent IDB label. This should position the article better into the current IDB scene and also make more sense in the Wikipedia context.

• in long run I'd also like to add articles about other (also already shut down) IDB labels like Looking Good, Partisan, etc. The point would be to keep the original intelligent drum and bass article up to date.

I hope this sounds reasonable. Please let me know what do you think!

Cheers, Nemosmusic (talk) 08:42, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if you're going to see this response, but I'll put it in just in case. The best process would be the following:

1. change your user name to something without a conflict of interest;
2. read Your first article for guidelines and ideas;
3. start a new article as a subpage in your user space;
4. visit the Drawing board to get others' opinions on the article;
5. when the article is ready you can move it to the main Wikipedia space.

Hope this helps, ... discospinster _talk 01:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Supporting evidence for Article 'Qin Rong Yang'

Dear discospinster,

Thank you for your reply.

In response to your request for a few sources to verify our claims;

Guinness Book of World Records
The record was established for the smallest miniature sculpture-artwork-ancient Chinese calligraphy work on one medium, this record has yet to be contested and/or superseded.
You may refer to a hardcopy French 1987 edition of the Guinness Book of World Records.

Footage of on- air interviews
The interviews were recorded during 1993. You may contact Australian Television Stations;

• SBS (Special Broadcasting Service)
• Channel 7
• Channel 9
• Channel 10
• ABC (Australian Broadcasting Bureau)

Given the dates of the abovementioned events, it is unlikely that a Google search will yield relevant results. Our cold storage archives enable us to provide Wikipedia with a copy of the Guinness record and videotaped recordings of the interviews; however, you have made it clear that independent sources are necessary in order to attach credibility to our claims. Therefore, a feasible alternative is for you to consult the sources directly, in this regard, we understand your obligatory requirements and wish that your efforts will progress unhindered.

We will follow this matter up in a few days.

Kind regards,

TheWorldUnited (talk) 04:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)TheWorldUnited

Re: Supporting Evidence for Article 'Qin Rong Yang'

Discospinster,

Evidence that supports our claims has been sent to you by the following article and attachment:

(1) The message is an article addressed to: Co-founder of Wikipedia Jimmy Wales.

(2) Also, the message contains attached evidence from independent and original sources.

(3) Evidence that supports our claims has been sent to you though the following addresses:

info@wikimedia.org, press@wikimedia.org,press@wikimedia.org.au, blaugher@wikimedia.org.au,info@wikimedia.at, thomasbuckup@gmail.com, wiki@zirland.org, press-de@wikimedia.org, press@wikimedia.fr, info@wikimedia.hk, wm-hu@wikimedia.org, media@wikimedia.web.id, itzik@infra.co.il,fbrioschi@wikimedia.it, wm-nl@wikimedia.org,zarzad@wikimedia.pl,filip@vikimedija.org,l_guldbrandsson@hotmail.com, press@wikimedia.ch, frederic.schutz@wikimedia.ch, press@wikimedia.tw, ilario.valdelli@wikimedia.ch, press@wikimedia.org.uk, mickey.conn@gmail.com, tcliou@wikimedia.tw, walter@wikizine.org, abeesley@wikimedia.org, jdforrester@wikimedia.org, nicholasmoreau@gmail.com, mapellegrini@comcast.net, drosenthal@wikimedia.org, zuirdj@gmail.com,abeesley@wikimedia.org, kat@wikimedia.org, mapellegrini@comcast.net, drosenthal@wikimedia.org, nicholasmoreau@gmail.com, timo.jyrinki@hut.fi

Regards,

TheWorldUnited (talk) 05:04, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Murasame Liger

You deleted a page on the Murasame Liger, could you by chance explain why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.190.4.189 (talk) 06:29, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I deleted the page because it was a repost of an article that had been deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rainbow Jerk. ... discospinster _talk 00:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Supporting Evidence for Article 'Qin Rong Yang'

Discospinster,

The email feature you referred us to does not permit attachments.

You may visit this slideshow to appraise a copy of the attachment, which was forwarded to the email addresses in our previous correspondence.

Regards,

TheWorldUnited (talk) 05:07, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Nativity of Jesus

Disco, would you mind commenting on a content dispute at Nativity of Jesus. It concerns a table comparing the accounts of Matthew and Luke. There are concerns over the use of primary sources, OR, novel synthesis, lack of explanation/context which would be afforded by prose, and even its necessity, given the section "The nativity as myth". The table can be seen at this version of the page: [2] at section 1.3, "The narratives compared". Discussion on the issue can be found at Talk:Nativity of Jesus, in the threads "The two narratives compared", "The two narratives compared, part 2", and at "Task List (January 15, 2009)". Your input on the issue would be greatly appreciated, as very few persons have commented on it. Thank you, Disco. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 20:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Prod to CSD-A7 on Relationship Day

Just giving you a heads up that I changed an article you prodded, Relationship Day with a speedy delete template. The user has recreated the same article four times today and each time it was speedily deleted by different people. The author has still not stressed notability and therefore is liable to be speedied. Thanks, Valley2city^‽ 20:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Upper Arlington Progressive Action

You deleted the Upper Arlington Progressive Action page I created. If it was for copyright reasons, I changed the copyright on our site.

Let me know the reason and I'll try to fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdybiec (talk • contribs) 22:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

A-Space disambiguation

Greetings. I'm not sure who is responsible, but there has been a disambiguation page mistakenly created at A-Space although there are only two articles related to this title; in cases like these a hatnote at the undisambiguated title is all that is required. Could you help clean this up? Thanks, Skomorokh 19:05, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

OBTS Organizational Behavior Teaching Society

I am on the Board of OBTS and the Communications Chair. I was directed by the President of the Society to create a Wikipedia entry. I have used content from the official webpage since it best describes us and has resulted from long discussion at the Board level about how to describe the Society and its initiatives.

OBTS Organizational Behavior Teaching Society

I am on the Board of OBTS and the Communications Chair. I was directed by the President of the Society to create a Wikipedia entry. I have used content from the official webpage since it best describes us and has resulted from long discussion at the Board level about how to describe the Society and its initiatives. Gary Coombs (talk) 21:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Gary Coombs

Dobber

Hi Disco Spinster,

Strikeout Sister left a message on my talk page saying that she recommended Dobber for speedy deletion. Unfortunately, I did not receive this message until it had been deleted. Due to server lag, I can tell that Dobber was a redirect to Designing Women when it was deleted, however I doubt that I initially created the page as such a redirect. There are several articles which could be referred to as "Dobber", therefore Dobber should really be a disambiguation page listing such entries as mud dauber, Bob Lanier (basketball), and Glenn Dobbs. Would you object to my recreating Dobber as a disambiguation page?

Neelix (talk) 18:16, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Surfliner in Trainz

Thank you for deleting Surfliner in Trainz I was conctructing this article at the tie it was short, I was working on my Trainz stuff in order to upload images and put more details — Preceding unsigned comment added by UPSafetran (talk • contribs)

Attention please fix

I have concerns about the Marc Mysterio Article and potential warring and trolling by a user THF.

I am simply, as a wiki member, noting the controversy here... It appears that this user THM is trolling this page and deleting acceptable edits, including noted of major country chartings, despite chartings... I posted a yousendit link of the judge jules bbc radio 1 show i found on the net... He cited some reason to not validate these edits and revert back.

i think that you need to realize this individual whom keeps deleting valuable portions of this article is warring and trolling this article, notwithstanding other valuable contributions to this site.

As i mentioned, The Chris Lake article notes that he was a guest dj on BBC Radio 1 with Pete Tong and even included a Tong quote. Judge Jules is also on BBC Radio with a timeslot just after Tong and, moreover, Jules is ranked higher than Tong in DJMAG; therefore, it is more notable -- the mysterio guest mix.

THF also deleted important chartings in the One More Time section of Mysterio (2009) including national chartings.

I suggest that you undo the latest revision of the mysterio article by THF and block him from editing this page since it seems there is a vendetta.

THF's edits are in violation of T&S. Can you please revert his undo and/or explain why not? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.82.159.151 (talk) 23:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Dotster

Why did yuo delete the Dotster article? I have no connection with this company - I was working on the page.

Domainer11 (talk) 16:30, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Wears Valley - thanks

Just saying thanks for moving the Wears Valley article back to the correct spelling. It cleared up much confusion. Bms4880 (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

New religion

You are the seventh member of my new religion, but seven is an unlucky number so you don't get anything. In fact you don't even know the name, your going to have to find out. (Heaven12345 (talk) 17:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC))