User talk:Sandstein

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

• Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

• Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

• If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: [[example article]].

• If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Start a new talk topic

I passed the (music) Notability and you deleted my article

As per the Big D Kuwaiti Rapper article on wikipidea how can you delete it if it passed the(music) Notability rules? your deletion was a error! As per your rules in the notability I came across a sentence that said a musician may be notable if it meets at least "one of the following criteria": you claimed "ONE" the criteria's stated "published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles" and I had a newspaper article “Big D - Kuwaiti rapper promotes positive message (Article – Via Arab Times)", If you want it in PDF format, “Click Here" I also have another reference which is www.kuwait-music.com which the website owner was interviewed by BBC and his website was nominated the leading website of music in Kuwait VIA ARAB TIMES I’m honored to say they featured me in their website too “Click here to view my User profile on Kuwait-Music.com” which was "online versions of print media" "Kuwait-Music.com is legit according to BBC click here "BBC News- Musicians in Kuwait struggle with censorship, Kuwait Music" and watch the video. Also according to ARAB TIMES newspaper article, "Kuwait-Music.Com Helps Bridge Cultures - Via Arab Times" So I guess your deletion was a ERROR, because I had more the one notable reference! You just deleted me because everyone said delete and Nobody reads my sources! I request you re-open my page. Regards, Big D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big D Kuwait (talk • contribs) 11:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I suppose you refer to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big D Kuwait. Sorry, but no. As you say, "everyone said delete". Wikipedia is based on consensus, and as the person who closes the discussion I have to follow that consensus, no matter whether you or I agree with it or not.  Sandstein  12:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay sounds reasonable but since you mentioned the consensus of the people, everybody noted that my article was to be userfied too, breaking a persons spirit like that is not cool, at least you could of used the consensus of the people to userfiy it like all the admins noted, So when I can gather reliable sources that meet more of the music notability rules we could re-post my article and get accepted in the future. I guess the best solution and the least you can do for my 1 month of hard work is to restore the data and userfy it and in the future when I gather more reliable sources to get accecpted then I could submit it to Wikepdia.

P.S they all said to delete it before the ARAB TIMES article I got the notable source only 3 days before you deleted the article and the article was available for a month that is why there are so many people that said delete.

I'll userfy the article, if at least one other editor is interested in retaining and improving it. I'll not restore it for you alone, as per WP:COI#Autobiography writing one's own article is very much frowned upon here. Also, please sign your talk page messages, per WP:SIGN.  Sandstein  12:57, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Could it be my wife? or does it have to be a admin? and do I edit it in my sandbox? or does she copy and paste my old article on a user page and improves it?  Big D  (talk • contribs) 1:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Some previously established Wikipedia editor who is interested in the topic and, naturally, is not related to you or acting on your behalf. They can request that the deleted article be restored to their userspace where they can improve the article and, if they think that the problems identified in the deletion discussion are fixed, request consensus to restore the article to mainspace at WP:DRV. You yourself, per WP:COI, should not normally edit the article about yourself.  Sandstein  13:56, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Caucasian Albania article level sanctions appeal

Dear Sandstein, please be aware of this request at WP:AE: [1] I believe in the light of consequent SPI results it is time to review the remedy imposed on this particular article. Further information is available in my appeal. Best regards, Grandmaster 10:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

ASMR page

Please restore the ASMR page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_Sensory_Meridian_Response ). This is a real sensation that many people experience. I never knew what it was called until very recently and since learning about it I've been able to trigger it nearly on demand. I hope other people can learn about this sensation so that they will also be able to enjoy it more and the wiki page is one possible vector for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mylon (talk • contribs) 15:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, the community discussed this and decided otherwise, in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response.  Sandstein  15:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I count 8 votes to keep among maybe 20. For something that returns over 9000 results on Youtube alone I think there's something noteworthy to be said, even if the name lends it a very pseudo-scientific air that could be misleading. The link I included in this comment suggests a topic's inclusion into Wikipedia seem very inconsistent.--Mylon (talk) 15:45, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Can you please reconsider the deletion of the ASMR page? There are several communities dedicated to inducing this phenomena. There are devices manufactured and sold to induce it. There groups dedicated to finding research on the topic. As the above commenter mentions there are over nine thousand videos on Youtube which appear when you search for "ASMR". There is no doubt that this topic is notable, and worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. 62.254.76.153 (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Our deletion process is not a vote; the strength of argument is taken into account. Here as there, the number of search results is not relevant; rather, coverage by reliable sources is, as explained at WP:GNG. Random websites, blogs and videos are not reliable sources because they have no editorial oversight.  Sandstein  18:07, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Obviously, not enough research was done before the arguments were made. There is a radio station dedicated to the phenomena - yet this seems to be held to a higher standard than insignificant genres of music. There is an ASMR day, which is every bit as legitimate as other made up days. There are news articles in major (editorialised) publications. This certainly needs the guidelines for notability for a phenomena of this kind. Please do not sideline this community without good reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.76.153 (talk) 12:48, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Your disagreement is noted, but it does not change my assessment. The only thing approaching a reliable source you cite is the Huffington Post article, which per WP:MEDRS#Popular press is not appropriate as a (main) source in an article about a medical topic. If you still think my closure was inappropriate, you can appeal it at WP:DRV.  Sandstein  12:54, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

This is not a medical topic. It will never appear in a medical journal for the same reason a genre of music won't. It is a sensation produced by a certain stimulus, and should be judged as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.76.153 (talk) 13:06, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

The IP has listed this at DRV here. Hut 8.5 15:15, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice.  Sandstein  16:12, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I submitted a deletion review as suggested. Despite providing dozens more sources, someone who didn't even contribute to the discussion shut it down. Apparently this has nothing to do with the validity of the arguments, or the notability of the subject, but is purely because of some wikipedia-technicality. Isn't this something you should have know about before sending me to the WP:DRV page? I spent a week finding interesting articles from a wide variety of sources, and got insulted and treated like shit by deletionists, and all for nothing. 62.254.76.153 (talk) 19:29, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters

Greetings! I would like to discuss the recent closure of the List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters article. You elected to delete the article on the basis that Moonriddengirl's argument demonstrated that copyright violation had occurred. However, Moonriddengirl stated that she agreed with my assessment that the article constituted fair use, the only real argument for deletion was that we should be more conservative that fair use guidelines per US law. The only question remains is how much more conservative. As there is no clear guideline here, is it really appropriate to delete the article without consensus? - Sangrolu (talk) 13:49, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I am preparing a DRV and hope to have it ready within an hour. BOZ (talk) 15:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Since you indicated in your rational that this may go to DRV, I am proceeding on that venue. BOZ (talk) 16:41, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

DRV on UFC 27

Now the DRV has been closed what is the procedure to clear up after the history restore at the article ? Mtking ^(edits) 05:21, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

looks like you have dealt with it. Mtking ^(edits) 05:22, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Right-wing socialism

Survived an AfD, but some who sought deletion are now [2] and [3] trying the old "deletion by removal of all the content" maneuver -- well, over 95% of the content <g>. Including an insertion of a tag that it now only uses one source! Cheers - I find this sort of "stealth deletion" (used in the past by one of the same editors, by the way) to be abhorrent. Collect (talk) 13:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

After RfC was started, TFD repeated his bold removal of essentially the entire article. I asked him to self-revert, but it looks like he feels that he can "win" by simply deleting everything over and over without even seeking a consensus. Sigh! Collect (talk) 13:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)