User talk:Ramaksoud2000

Delhi Public School Noida AFC

you recently reviewed the article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Delhi Public School Noida. you said that the school is not notable enough. I would like to inform that there already are articles for the same chain of schools like Delhi Public School, R. K. Puram and Delhi Public School, Mathura Road. This information may not be notable to the world, but where I live, it is the most prestigious institution for elementary education. The page may seem incomplete, but I can assure you, that if a page this small is created, it will provide a base for more information on the topic. And after a year or so, you will definitely have a reasonably big article. And by the way, I live in an extremely well developed Urban Area right next to the capital of India.

Your article did not have any reliable secondary sources as outlined here. Based on the sources you submitted, I can not accept your article and create it myself. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 23:31, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hi Ramaksoud2000, I just wanted to let you know that I have granted the reviewer userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, please contact me and I will remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:05, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

inre Oz and the Wicked Witches

I agree with a delete (for now) but, as explained at the AFD, the topic is credible and has plenty of available sources. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you so much for helping with my Melissa Tantaquidgeon Zobel page!!! DPWinslow (talk) 01:39, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

AFC

Hi Ramaksoud2000, Since you were such great help to DPWinslow with the Melissa Tantaquidgeon Zobel page, I was hoping you might be able to help me with my article. I submitted my article on Trace DeMeyer, which was denied today by a user that appears to be pretty new to Wikipedia. Do you have any advice or suggestions on how to better my article so that it can be created? Thanks! Ame283 (talk) 15:37, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Sure. I'd be happy to help. Looking at your article, it seems that your subject is not covered heavily in multiple independent sources as prescribed here WP:BIO and here [[1]]. A made a google search of your subject and most sources found were published by the subject. An article may not be based primarily on such sources as prescribed here [[2]]. If you can find more sources that report on the subject in depth and not briefly mention the subject, then you can make a much stronger argument for the subject's notability. Help in identifying good sources can be found here WP:IRS and here WP:VERIFY. If you have any more questions please feel free to ask me. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 01:06, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Leslie Gabriel page

Hello, my recent page that I created for Leslie Gabriel has been flagged for deletion because I hadn't added my sources yet. I have since added my reliable sources but it's still telling me that the page is subject for deletion. Is there something that I am missing? How can I improve the page so that it doesn't get deleted? Washvb (talk) 18:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)Thanks

Hello. The sources you added seem to all be either from Wikipedia(which is not accepted as a reliable source as outlined here WP:WPNOTRS) or a self-published source. An article can't rely on self-published sources as outlined here Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Using_the_subject_as_a_self-published_source. To stop your article from being deleted, reliable third party sources that report in depth on the subject need to be introduced. Help in identifying reliable sources can be found here WP:IRS and here WP:VERIFY. If you have any questions please ask me. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 01:14, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Peter Taliangis Page

Ramaksoud2000 - regarding my article titled Peter Taliangis, I apologise as I had just copy and pasted from the Real Estate website for a description that I was to go back and edit later. I was writing an article that was not supposed to be (or read) like self promotion and as I am still learning the Wikipedia platform I had not yet worked out how to reference. I would like to post an article just stating who I am as a person not for promotional reason but for informative as I am a LinkedIn coach and am trying to establish and show people how to use a number of social media tools in terms of marketing and networking within an online community. It is a good tool to have along with Facebook and Twitter.

Regards

--Taliangis.peter (talk) 07:13, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi. It is strongly discouraged to write an autobiography about yourself. See here. Also, you may not be notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 00:39, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Re the listing for wlnt-lp

My name is Richard Lynn, general manager of WLNT radio. I recently removed articles from the wiki page for WLNT. This was erroneously marked as vandalism. The estates of two deceased persons mentioned in the articles, along with our board of directors have asked me to remove all information regarding WLNT. Also, we do not wish to have WLNT listed as a low power station, while we do carry the legacy -LP designator we operate with a TPO of127 watts; by definition, any station operating with more than 100 watts is a full power class d station and not a low power fm station. We have decided to no longer make unneeded information about the station public, as much of it is out of date. 96.38.96.128 (talk) 06:09, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello. Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not censor our encyclopedia. Unless the content violates one of our Wikipedia:List_of_policies_and_guidelines or is not verifiable, it generally won't be removed. Can you please tell me more about why you want so much information to be removed and I can see if I can remove some of it if it is in violation of one of our guidelines and policies. Also, I can designate your station as a full power station if you can give me a source that shows that it is. Currently, I have found this source [3] that states you are 100 watts, which would count as low-power. Thanks! Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 23:17, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments Deleted for WBFZ

Greetings Ramaksoud2000, The following comment is in response to the information you extracted regarding WBFZ:

The information that you left on wikipedia is false and negative about a radio station which serves an expansive community. How you arbitrarily made the decision to delete updated information about the current status of WBFZ and allow something which is neither educational nor constructive to be left on wikipedia pages makes me question your motive. Can you please explain your decision to take off updated and accurate information which exposes the inaccuracy of a statement posed on wikipedia that is lebelous to WBFZ as a business entity which serves are large community? In fact, my question to you is why you did not delete an item that has no expressed purpose except to be destructive to WBFZ. It is unconscionable to allow information to stay on Wikipedia falsely about WBFZ when it is still operating and it is still owned by Imani Communications. So in your estimation you seem to think that it is positive to falsify the existing status of a station on Wikipedia by not updating records to reflect current status? Your action makes it appear like you are a collaborative part of sharing mis-information regarding WBFZ or you are unwittingly creating a cause of action of libel for the entity of WBFZ as exposed via wikipedia. In either case, your decision to remove the update was not founded upon sound reasoning. The problem is not with the addition to correct the falsification, the problem is with the inaccurate posting and motivation for same by the original poster in the first place. Given your response, it appears that you may not be aware that you are perpetuating a negative problem which has fiscal impact on a 50,000 watt radio station that broadcasts worldwide though Ipads, ipods, cell phones, computers etc. I encourage you to rethink your position on what constitutes negative. Furthermore, what qualification justifies your unilateral and arbitrary decision to delete this action. I await your response and reason.