User talk:JBW

If I 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, unless you request otherwise, and usually I will notify you on your talk page. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Mine's the scientist

No problem. My decline was merely meant to reflect that the report did not fall within AIV criteria. If there were non-AIV reasons to sustain a block, I have no objection. Daniel Case (talk) 22:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

John "Beatz" Holohan

Hi James,

Just put a speedy attack delete on John "Beatz" Holohan, by User talk:Ncd33 which appeared to attack you. It was immediately questioned by User:Porchcrop - see my dscussion page. Perhaps a sockpuppet investigation here? Cheers. Acabashi (talk) 02:33, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, it was certainly written by someone who was feeling unfriendly to me, but it was pretty mild, as attack pages go. I have posted a message to the author, but my guess is it was a SPA that has done its work and will never come back, in which it's not worth bothering with. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:15, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, JBW. You have new messages at Krashlandon's talk page.
Message added 04:26, 26 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Seen. Thanks. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		I, Krashlandon, award you, JamesBWatson, this barnstar for your outstanding diligence, patience, and willingness to write exhaustively long explanations to editors who have made mistakes, as in your dealings with me and especially in the Dukeare1 case. Krashlandon (talk) 16:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

A little thanks for your good work. Krashlandon ^(talk) 16:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

The WITF wants you

No thanks. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Association of College Unions International

As the deleting admin, would you mind userspacing that, please, to User:SMcCandlish/Incubator/Association of College Unions International? There's probably something salvageable there, as the organization is certainly notable (they run intramural nine-ball, college bowl and electronic sports competitions at the collegiate level all over North America). — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 04:51, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately much, perhaps all, of the article infringes copyright, containing text to be found either verbatim or very closely paraphrased at, for example, http://region6.acui.org/Region/06/Scholarships.htm, http://www.acui.org/ipds/, and http://www.acui.org/programs/professional/index.aspx?id=4022. Consequently it is not suitable for restoration. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:49, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Onkey-donkey. Thanks for checking. :-) — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 06:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

regarding deletion of aricle named sai madhusudhan

dear sir

i am priyadharshini i have included sources of reference for my article of Mr sai Madhusudhan , can u please repost the article , i took great pain in publishing the article , he is our real hero of tamils , you can watch his shows on satelite TVs and he is also the person who is really our protector

regards humanrights.dc@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.102.141.98 (talk) 07:36, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I have restored the article. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

I wanted to thank you for your administrative work in some recent cases (OK, lets call it by name, for blocking some vandals). Often I would report an obvious vandalism and be rejected with some petty bureaucratic claim or suggestion to take the subject to some noticeboard where it will be ignored. I try so hard to tutor people, and I only resort to asking administrative help as a last resort, so this is quite annoying. But not when your bold hand is handling the case. Thank you for helping me and other editors improve Wikipedia. --Muhandes (talk) 10:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

ANI help

Hi James. I'm not sure if you are the editor who posted on my talk page without being logged in regarding the ANI post about the merged AfDs but if so, just to let you know that I've replied. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

No, nothing to do with me. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:14, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh well, I guess it will remain a mystery! Cordless Larry (talk) 14:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

The Egyptian Liberal

No problem whatsover. Thanks for straightening things out!--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:25, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Indian Accounting Standards

Indian Accounting Standards need to be amplified with more specific details. Also important difference with existing Indian ccounting standards need to be included. concepts of fair value and MTM needs to be included. pls help.--Vi1618 (talk) 16:17, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiToyol

While I do no disagree with the deletion of Elephas, with WikiToyol I believe the closure was too speedy. As Cunard, whose !vote was deleted, has pointed out, the page has been edited to comply with the wikifauna 'requirement' which is to be related to editing rather than simply myspacing. Should this be true, the delete rationales given would out of date and therefore invalid. I'm wondering if you could take a look at it again? Kayau Voting IS evil 14:08, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

There are actually two different questions here: (1) was I wrong to close the discussion as I did, and (2) is there a case for saying that the article should be reinstated, as the reasons given for deletion o longer apply? As far as question 1 goes, my job in assessing the discussion is to determine consensus in the discussion, not to make my own assessment of the article. Question 2, however, requires looking at the article and seeing how it has changed, and how those changes relate to the reasons given in the discussion.

There was a clear consensus in the discussion for deletion. Leaving aside WP:OTHERSTUFF from the article's author and WP:NOHARM from others the only argument to do anything else but delete was the "possible keep" from ThatPeskyCommoner, based on (in effect) "I will change the wording of the article to deal with the charge that what it refers to cannot apply to Wikipedia". Cunard responded to this, saying that it increased the reason for deletion.

Suppose we take the most generous possible interpretation of ThatPeskyCommoner's changes, which means that fully accept that the change has met the objection it was intended to meet, and suppose also we completely ignore Cunard's response to it. Then we have to ignore everything said in the deletion concerning the argument that "we don't own the ideas we put into wikipedia", as that no longer applies. However, we are still left with the "MySpacey" argument, and the fact that the term is not in fact in use. To oppose that we still have only the article's author's WP:OTHERSTUFF in favour of keeping, and WP:NOHARM from two others in favour of userfying. This still leaves the arguments in favour of deletion carrying much more weight than the others. If instead we don't ignore Cunard's response to the changes, then we have a further argument for deletion. And remember that this is still based on "the most generous possible interpretation of ThatPeskyCommoner's changes". My conclusion is that there is still a consensus for deletion. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:20, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

As Cunard has stated, the page is now more relevant to Wikipedia editing, which I believe resolves the WP:MYSPACE argument. I don't think the term not being in use is a very strong point, and in any case (though it's probably just my carelessness in reading) I don't think anyone has pointed that out. I admit that my comment lacked clarification and I would like to switch my position to keep per the change. However, as you are an admin and have twice determined consensus, I will respect the closure. Kayau Voting IS evil 14:08, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Deleted Page

Hello James,

I would like to have the page I created for the rock band So Long Davey, please returned to Wikipedia. I did include references in my article as well as several links to help users navigate terminology. PAGE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/So_Long_Davey

I find the band to be of cultural significance due to their placement on highly influential punk rock roadshow, Vans Warped Tour in 2009, as well as their continued publication in rock magazines and online reviews. The Vans Warped Tour wikipedia page also lists So Long Davey as a performing band but without a link to discover who they are. The article was intended to answer "who, what, when, where, and why" so that anyone interested in learning more about Vans Warped Tour history or San Diego music history can gather information about this band.

Based on these, I ask if you can please restore the wikipedia page for So Long Davey. If there is anything I can do to make the page more viable, I would love to have your suggestions. This is my first contribution to wikipedia and I would like to make more helpful and informing pages that can help readers as well as extend the knowledge database of this encyclopedia.

Much thanks, Punkrockwriter (talk) 19:12, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I understand everything you say, but unfortunately it does not answer the reason for deletion. As well as the article itself, I have looked at the pages given as references, and the best claims of significance I have found are statements such as "The local band charts the uncertain waters of being a new band in a treacherous time for music" and "So Long Davey! supported several national bands including Say Anything, Family Force 5, and Jeffree Star in sold out venues". Unfortunately being a supporting act to notable bands does not confer notability. Quite un-notable bands often tour with very notable bands as support acts. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi James! I'm not sending thankspam, but I would like to personally thank you for all your invaluable support, without which I might not have succeeded. What I learned on this RfA will also go towards continuing to mentoring others, and participating in the campaign to make RfA a more appealing prospect for editors who also need the tools, but who are too afraid to come forward - contrary to what is often believed, the older we get, the tougher we don't always get, and behind my big mouth is actually a rather shy (almost) old man. I look forward to working together with you as a fellow admin. Again, my heartfelt thanks. --Kudpung (talk) 11:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Gemma Mewse deleted wiki page

Hi there,

On Feb 25th I was in the process of creating a wiki page for singer-songwriter Gemma Mewse. I was compiling a list of published sources to attach to the wiki page when it was deleted (although i did not realised that it had been published). Due to this, I have lost the content which i was editing on the page, and was wondering if the page can be undeleted or saved in sandbox so that I can edit the wiki page in full before publishing.

Many Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdanie2 (talk • contribs) 12:39, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I have restored the article and userfied it at User:Mdanie2/Gemma Mewse. This is a temporary measure, to allow you time to prepare the page for re-launch as an article when it is ready, not a long-term way of avoiding deletion, as it will be deleted again if you don't make it into a suitable article. However, I hope you will do so. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:46, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks alot. I appreciate it. Would it be possible to completely delete the page (so it will not appear in google search as a deleted item, as it should not have been published at this stage in the first place) or does the log (in that pink box) have to stay? Essentially, I would like time to create the page properly (this may take a week or two given my time constraints), and when I'm ready I can recreate the page. (I've saved the "content" now). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdanie2 (talk • contribs) 12:56, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

It will appear in Google searches until the Google cache of the page is purged. I believe there is a way to ask Google to recheck a page and update its cache, but I don't know how to do it. (It's something that is handled by Google, not Wikipedia.) You may be able to find out how to do it, but otherwise it's just a question of waiting until Google gets round to rechecking that page. The current version of the page shouldn't show up in search engines, as I put a {{NOINDEX}} tag in it, but I can delete that page for you if you like, just let me know. Or, in case I am off line, you can add {{db-userreq}} to the top of the article, to ask any administrator to delete it. If I'm still on line asking me will probably be quicker, if not the other way will. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Would it be possible to delete the page then. I'd appreciate it. Mdanie2 (talk) 14:01, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done JamesBWatson (talk) 14:03, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Ardanaiseig House

Hello, You were helping me with the Ardanaiseig Hotel wiki page last week. There was a suggestion I should change the subject to Ardanaiseig House. I've really scaled back the article and removed anything that could be seen as promotional. Can you have a look and see if you have any other suggestions that could help me get published? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gordon_m_campbell/Ardanaiseig_Hotel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gordon m campbell (talk • contribs) 15:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Gordon m campbell. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

viewing del pages

Hi James, when we view a deleted page, if we don't do anything apart from view it, does it just go away when we close the browser window, or is there a 'close' button I cant find? --Kudpung (talk) 17:20, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

As far as know it's just a question of closing the browser window. I've certainly never seen anything else. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:48, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

about deletion of baldev raj

Thanks for expanding the article of baldev raj and removing the speedy deletion notice.

Suri 100 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suri 100 (talk • contribs) 03:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

It is important to always check the history of an article, rather than just basing a speedy deletion on the current version. If a good version exists in the history then restoring that is always to be preferred, rather than deleting. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:06, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

The recent deletion of the page: "Mack Coulibaly"

I am a new user, and have read the "Talk page guidelines", hopefully I am not violating any...

I completely agree with the decision and justification for deletion of the original page (which to my surprise even existed in the first place). Interestingly, the information not shared in his wiki page is exactly what would could possibly justify actually including him in Wikipedia: The fact that there was a major lawsuit against him and his associates and a small company that was dismantled as a result of the lawsuit. This is fact, documented in court records of the case, docket number is in public domain. It was a quiet scandal not really publicized and resulted in many jobs lost. It was not on the scale of a "Bernie Madoff" or "Bernie Ebbers" event, but not insignificant either.

My question: Is a wiki page documenting a not-so-grandiose litigious event in mid-level management corruption likely to be deleted, and deemed a violation of rule A7 ("Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject")? After all, a modified version of the page would be a more "complete" and truthful picture of a significant event not publicized, and "accidentally" excluded from the original wiki page, I'm sure.

Logan Tom (talk) 08:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

The answer to your question depends entirely on the amount of independent coverage. If you can show that the case received significant coverage then it should be OK, but if it got no more than a one-paragraph mention in a local paper then it isn't. Court records are obviously excellent sources for verifying facts about the case, but they do nothing to establish notability, as any nonentity who gets involved in a court case for some reason will appear in such records. I tried a few Google searches and found nothing. However, that doesn't prove much, because your message gave me very little idea what to look for, and so I just tried things like "Mack Coulibaly" lawsuit and "Mack Coulibaly" court, which are really too generic to be much help. You may like to look at the guidelines on notability and reliable sources to get an idea what sort of thing is needed. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:23, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Ghantola

DUDE, why did u delete the Ghantola page...Its a local phenomenon and culture amongst BITS Pilani (one of India's best engineering colleges) Students and you had no right in deleting it.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.249.18.24 (talk) 16:07, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I could find nothing about it anywhere except in that Wikipedia article, which means it either doesn't exist or is not notable. In either case it should be deleted. In addition, the content of the article contained claims which were so implausible as to make it look like a hoax. I certainly did have a right to delete it. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:11, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

How to delete article - from Tee Davis

I'm trying to delete my article but do not have time before I have to leave out. Sorry about the "soapbox" and I now see this and agree. Tee Davis