Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:15, 22 April 2009

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Talkback|your username}} on my talk.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|WikiDan61}} on your talk.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Please post all new discussions at the END of the page, to allow for easier chronological tracking! Thank you! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how to stop deletion of wiki page

Hi,

I just created this page, and then got the message that it is up for deletion. what can i do to prevent it from being deleted?

The foundation is notable, and is very well known within the opera/theater world. All of the artists are notable and recognized as is the founder of the company.

The company is new to the online media world, and the issue with references is that the Opera Magazines do not keep an online achieve of their articles so I could not link back to them. How do I reference non online articles.

The Family Opera Initiative is a non-profit company and this is one of the best outlets to inform the public of what the company is and what it does and how to get involved with it.

Thanks,

Cole D. Wassner —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwass85 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like to join the discussion about the deletion of this article, please do so at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Family opera initiative. Any comments or explanations should be made there. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boris Mordukhovich article

Dear WikiDan61,

The article about Boris Mordukhovich has now 3 links from other articles. Can you please remove the orphan status from it?

Thanks you very much,

Idomath (talk) 13:45, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it only has 2 in-links, which are both trivial (list of mathematicians and list of alumni). As far as I can see, this still qualifies under "Orphan" status. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 02:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article Deletion

Hi Dan,

I submitted an article that is about to be deleted. It's called the Colchester Co. and is about the original Colchester Co. established in the late 1800's. I recieved the request from the owner of the new Colchester Co. established recently, to do a write up on the both Companies and post them on yr site.

I've have made the new submission more historical than it was before and it is still being deleted. Is there any way around this? I have a copy of the article with me if it has already been removed. The references on there are from viable and reliable sources.

Can I just use the factual, historical information in the body and then create links to the site if people want more info? Would that be more acceptable? I won't use anything other than that to draw people to the site. I'm aware that they will be no follow links and won't improve ranking but, but myu client is not worried about page ranking. He just wants togive people an informed history of the co.

Philogean (talk) 08:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First, you need to understand that this isn't "MY" site. Wikipedia is a collaborative site where any user may write and edit articles, including you. However, those articles must meet the guidelines by which Wikipedia operates, namely that the subject of the article be notable (click on the link to find out what exactly is meant by notability for different categories), and the article must be verifiable by citing reliable, unbiased, independent third-party sources. I suspect the reason you wrote to me to ask about this is that I nominated one of your submissions for deletion based the fact that it appeared to be blatant advertising for the company in question. I suspect other submissions of the article have been deleted based on the general notability of the company and the availability of reliable sources. The fact that you want to create the article in order to draw people to your client's page indicates that you are still attempting to use Wikipedia as an advertising vehicle (see WP:SPAM). Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a Yellow Pages. It was NOT created in order for company's to be able to draw attention to themselves. It is intended to provide factual information about notable companies, provided by neutral third party authors. The fact that the company is your client makes you NOT a neutral third party author, and you should not be creating this article at all (see WP:Conflict of interest). Finally, please note that I am NOT a Wikipedia administrator; I cannot enforce any policies here. I can only tag articles to bring them to the attention of administrators who CAN enforce policies by deleting articles and banning users. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Again Dan,

To be honest the ownership of the site is irrelevant. I was merely making reference to Wikipedia and your association with it, but thank you for your clarification.

You seem agrivated that I have contacted you in this regard and all I wanted was some help. I was hoping to get some suggestions from you as to how I can place the article without it coming across as "marketing ploy"

This article should not be seen as advertising - that was my point from the start. It was mereley meant to be a historical representaion of a company that has existed in the past. Ideally it should be reflecting the ENTIRE history from when it started right up until today. That is why the new company's info has been included.

How can I contact someone that is actually willing to assist me with the submission? Preferably someone that won't assume I'm some stupid internet marketer that is trying to take advantage of this site as a possible advertising medium.

Thank you for your efforts, but I will probably be better off with someone else providing me with assistance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philogean (talk • contribs) 14:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if my tone has put you off. I understand that you would like to create this article, and apparently you have gone through the proper channels by posting a submission at Articles for creation. The administrator there also felt that the article did not meet the guidelines for Wikipedia. If you will read the guidelines at WP:Your first article, it will better help you understand the process. Unfortunately, I can't help you with this article because I do not see any evidence that the company you are writing about meets the guidelines for notability on Wikipedia. Please feel free to seek other opinions on that matter. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Symble equations

I decided to redirect it because it was clear that the content was about ammonia, but then the title was containing a typo, "symble" for "symbol", so it qualified for an r3. De728631 (talk) 21:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion

I notice that you tagged the page Michael Mifsud Canilla for speedy deletion with the reason "vandalism". While that's a valid reason for speedy deletion in general, this page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because it does not appear to be vandalism. If you still want the page to be deleted, please consider tagging it with a speedy deletion template which does apply, redirecting it to another page, or using the WP:PROD process. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 15:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged the page as vandalism as there was NO sign in any source I could find that the information wasn't totally made up. The page has been brought to AfD for the same reason. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MICHAEL MIFSUD CANILLA

Dear Editor, I have just been informed that my personal profile has been sent for publishing and that you estimate it is a hoax. My press files are abrim with history and achivement which I am and my famil proud of. If you need me to publish newspaper articles photogrpahs or whatever information may be required to calm the doubting Thomases, I would be happy to do do. In my generation we did not make our lives available to the public however successful because we did not want any reward other than the sweet taste of success of our projects. As such therefore I have always refrained from such things. Today however there are far too many who have little to discuss or present in the way of achievement who get into public sapce for the sheer glory of it. I did what I did and will continue to do so till the end of my days and care little about criticism or denials. I challenge anyone to prove false any of the contents of the profile sent. Articlesbase.com have a few articles that may help to determine just what I have done or understood in my short life.

Michael Mifsud Canilla —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.97.72.61 (talk) 17:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear WikiDEan61, I submitted the article on Michael Mifsud Canilla. I have known Michael for some years and his life story is true. I am new to Wiki and am not at all sure what you need to "prove" this is not a hoax, though I cannot imagine why people would bother to lie, it would be a waste of time. Please can you advise me what you need to keep this article live. I am finding the whole process very difficult to get around, and follow, there seems to be no way to talk to anyone or easily get answers to specific questions. I think Wikipedia is a wonderful site, and understand it being guarded well, but perhaps it could be more user friendly. I would really appreciate some positive advice on the article, as I think it would interest a lot of people. purseyle Dreamngo (talk) 18:21, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I noted on your talk page yesterday, any comments you wish to make about this proposed deletion should be made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Mifsud Canilla. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 11:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Master of European Design

Hello WikiDan61!

The page Master of European Design was just deleted. The page informs users about the Masters program of European Design. It's a notable community of design students. The program is about the development of young designers from Design institutions, from throughout Europe, This page is not about promotion, but informing, there would be no financial gains made for Masters of European Design from this Wikipedia.org page. The purpose of Wikipedia is about informing the world, Masters of European Design is about improving the skills base and experience of Design students, giving them a broader outlook. The program is 10 years old and does not need to be promoted as it already exists and survives on its own accord.

Please reinstate this page as it does not fall foul of the speedy deletion rules, if you still feel it does, please inform me exactly, what we should change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlofischer (talk • contribs) 15:27, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an administrator and do not have the rights to delete or restore pages. I nominated the page for deletion, but an administrator performed the actual deletion. If you feel the page deserves to be reinstated, check its deletion log and contact the administrator who deleted the page. However, as I recall the page, it read like a blatant advertisement. Whether or not any entity stands to enjoy financial gain or not is really not relevant -- the page did not INFORM users of the program in question, but rather served to entice users to join the program. An encyclopedic article would be less positive and enticing in its choice of wording, and would attempt to demonstrate how this program is notable (in terms of impact on the international design community, etc). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OS Edit war

We have tried. If you notice there are more then enough of us that agree that this is not relevant. We have tried on a talk page, on the main page, and on a wiki editor's page. He wont stop editing eventhough he is vastly outnumbered!!! Its just plain not relevant!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truism422 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then a request for page protection should be made. And a report of the abusing user. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry im very new to wiki. How do I do these things? Truism422 (talk) 16:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted the request. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TY Truism422 (talk) 16:28, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We are our own organization

Dear Dan,

GAVI Alliance Immunize Every Child is recognized as it's own entity. We have our own website http:everychild.gavialliance.org. Our organization has it's own board.While we are working towards the same goal and in collaboration with GAVI Alliance, we should have our own wiki page.

Many thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amanda.gavi (talk • contribs) 19:34, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand that your organization may be separate from GAVI Alliance, it appears that the only reason your organization exists is to raise funds for the GAVI Alliance, and as such, does not appear to be notable in its own right. If you disagree, please provide citations from reliable sources to demonstrate such notability. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RSSCorner

Hi Dan,

I've rewrited the RSSCorner content but it is still marked as "Speedy deletion" and I want to explain to you that RSSCorner is a project that doesn't has any company envolved, just a group of developers called asapcode.

The purpose is just to build a giant directory of feeds and more than that, an archive of feed's contents, becoming a great important tool for the community. Through this tool any person can review contents published in RSS or Atom format that does not exist anymore in the original sources.

I'm available to explain any further doubts if you need it.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tvassiliadis (talk • contribs)

The problem with your article is that it is about a subject that is not notable. Wikipedia has guidelines (WP:WEB) for what constitutes a notable website. In general, coverage from independent sources is the minimum requirement. Your website is new and may, in time, become quite notable, but it has not yet had time to do so, and Wikipedia is NOT intended to be a directory of all things. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:48, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What?

Dear WikiDan61!

What is required/missing of the encyclopedic article on Isis Translations?

Please assist me!

Sincerely, Linda -- Linda Ahlblad CEO Member of The Finnish Association of Translators and Interpreters Isis Translations Töölönkatu 8 A 7 00100 HELSINKI FINLAND Tel. +358 9 499 019 Mob. +358 40 866 8669 E-mail linda@isis.fi www.isis.fi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Käännöstoimisto Isis (talk • contribs) 14:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, WikiDan61. You have new messages at Decltype's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

decltype (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

martha lloyd community services

I guess I did not realize the extent of what I had to do to create a page. Delete the content and I will begin start from scratch.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Marthalloyd (talk • contribs)

I am not authorized to delete the page, as I'm not an administrator. However, as the page's primary author, if you simply replace the entire contents (including the {{db-company}} tag) with a {{db-author}} tag, that will flag the page for an administrator's attention. I would discourage you from "starting from scratch" as you say, since your username indicates that you have an affiliation with the group, and creating the article yourself would constitute a conflict of interest. If your organization is notable enough, someone will get around to creating the article about it (see WP:BFAQ#COMPANY). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Naznin Seamon

Hello,

I have reverted the CSD A7 tag as the entry asserts notablity. The Shabdaguchha Poetry Award is a notable accomplishment, just needs references. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 16:27, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can find no references to a "Shabdagucha Poetry Award" on the internet. Can you provide a reference asserting the notability of this accomplishment? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AirNYC & Official site < shows Naznin as 2007 winner Amazon & Some random blog R3ap3R.inc (talk) 16:35, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kunwar Inderjit Singh

Hi WikiDan61. Thanks for your work on Kunwar Inderjit Singh and its various other incarnations, which I've now speedily deleted as a copyvio and replaced with a clean stub. I noticed on the page Kunwar Indrajeet Singh that you replaced the infringing text with a redirect to the clean version. Well done for dealing with it it, but we need to be careful about addressing copyright problems in that way because simply replacing them leaves the infringing text in the page history. I've deleted that revision now so there's nothing to worry about in this instance, but if you could bring cases like this to the attention of an admin in the future (or use the {{copyvio}} template) that would be great. Thanks! --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\^talk 16:46, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A question about deletion

Could you please tell me what's wrong with my article? it actually says why this person is important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RuDeeDoner (talk • contribs) 16:49, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have created two articles. Synthetic Substance was tagged by another editor as being spam, as it does nothing but promote this artist, but does not constitute a legitimate encyclopedia article. Tomasz Łoś does NOT actually assert ANY notability for its subject. If describes its subject as a composer and producer who has released a single track. This hardly qualifies as notable under the criteria of WP:MUSIC. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Duncan Stuart Black

Just a friendly note on Duncan Stuart Black. I wasn't quite comfortable doing the speedy deletion on this because I think there was a good faith claim of importance. However, after a gsearch, I wasn't happy leaving it be either, so I sent it to AfD. Feel free to weigh in there. Cheers!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:38, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Ocean Fracture wiki page.

Hello there,

I can see that one of the others has placed a "keep" notice on the articles for deletion discussion page...

"

Keep per the sources already supplied in the article (and album article). No where in WP:RS or WP:V does it say that they have to be available online, only that they are reliable, third-party, and published. From WP:RS; "it is useful but by no means necessary for the archived copy to be accessible via the internet." Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 01:48, 14 April 2009

"

earlier today I've placed another reference from a different issue of Rock Sound on the main page, and have also placed two seperate radio playlists featuring the band (from Radio 1 and XFM) on the page for the band's single... I also have more references from different magazines/websites I can put on there... does any of this help my case at all?

Thanks for your time. Verklemmt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Verklemmt (talk • contribs) 13:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any references help, but as the article is already under discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Ocean Fracture, you should direct your comments there. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Borderwars speedy deletion

Hi Dan, Well I totally understand your point of view and I m trying to help by finding info that would be reliable to you. I had read the "Big Five" statement in a magazine a year or so ago, I have no clue where to find that so I guess I m quoting nobody on this one since I can't prove it. I took it off.

Here's a website of a major amplifier company that metallica uses. Borderwars name is right along Korn's, Slipknot's, Muse's. http://diezel.typo3.inpublica.de/users.15.0.html VHT is another amplifier brand sponsoring the borderwars, their website is being redone, but the name of Borderwars was right along metallica's and Guns and roses. If you give a lil time I can get that info at some point.

As For "Black Hawk Label Records" they are derived from another company which isn't a record label anymore myspace.com/lommoriproductions is the website and they use to deal with bands as internationnally reknown as Exodus, testament, Metal Church, Sepultura etc. Here is the Black Hawk Label records site, apparently it's temporary while their new website is being launched. - myspace.com/blackhawklabelrecords.

Also, I changed the Link to Billy Anderson's record producer wikipedia page. I made it a direct link

Am I wasting my time here or am I on the right track? Thx a lot Dan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Transambytrial (talk • contribs) 17:48, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The link on the Diezel site is hardly notable as it is followed almost immediately by instructions on how anyone can get their band's link added (as a marketing ploy). As for VHT, I can't respond to that as their website is unavailable, as you say. I can't find any reference linking Black Hawk Label Records to Metal Church (all of their albums are listed as being released on other labels), or Exodus (all of THEIR albums are also listed as being released on other labels) or Sepultra (they don't have a Wiki page and I don't know enough about Thrash Metal to discuss them). But if Black Hawk doesn't have a legitimate website, but only a Myspace page, I don't know that they can be considered a major label as required by WP:MUSIC. I understand that you WANT this band to be notable, as you appear to be a big fan, but if they don't meet the criteria of WP:MUSIC, they really shouldn't have a WikiPage. Finally, all further discussion of this should be taken to the article's AfD page. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS -- I have checked the Billy Anderson page and it DOES list Borderwars as a band that Anderson has produced for. However, this notation was just added today by Transambytrial (talk · contribs), and is not supported by the reference to Anderson's discography as linked from that page. Therefore I have reverted that edit (as unverifiable). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:02, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re. "Kayako" article by hatter87

Hello, WikiDan61. You have new messages at Hatter87's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

One of the things I like about wikipedia is that I can find concentrated amounts of information about specific topics without annoying ads and animation. I am not the only one who finds it useful to go an article about backup software or network monitoring and locate the major product offerings (who are the major players, who are the smaller ones?) No other place on the web does that with the economy and effectiveness of wikepedia. That companies in a particular field can describe their product, distilled down to its essentials and without a lot of hype, is something that I am sure I am not alone in appreciating. I think the reader benefits when the product makers / experts provide descriptions of the company or product, as long we take care not to hype the product or the company. Which I believe we have done in the CrashPlan article. Who better to tell the story than the people who work for the company and understand the product?

As a matter of precedence, this article is linked from a list of similar products, all of whom have links to an article about their product. In fact, I modeled my article at the BackBlaze article which has no conflict of interest tag. Please advise how CrashPlan article needs to be changed so that you can remove the Conflict of Interest tag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.8.104.179 (talk) 15:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to sign in...

One of the things I like about wikipedia is that I can find concentrated amounts of information about specific topics without annoying ads and animation. I am not the only one who finds it useful to go an article about backup software or network monitoring and locate the major product offerings (who are the major players, who are the smaller ones?) No other place on the web does that with the economy and effectiveness of wikepedia. That companies in a particular field can describe their product, distilled down to its essentials and without a lot of hype, is something that I am sure I am not alone in appreciating. I think the reader benefits when the product makers / experts provide descriptions of the company or product, as long we take care not to hype the product or the company. Which I believe we have done in the CrashPlan article. Who better to tell the story than the people who work for the company and understand the product?

The CrashPlan article is linked from a list of backup software products, and I believe it makes sense for our product to be included as well. I modeled the CrashPlan on the Backblaze article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backblaze, which carries no conflict of interest tag. Please advise as to how I can change the CrashPlan article so that you can remove. the Conflict of Interest tag.

Mariecrashplan (talk) 15:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)mariecrashplan[reply]