User talk:Tikuko

Three Kings High

You have recently denied my submission for Three Kings High due to notability? There are links to interviews, features, reviews, IMDb profiles, promotional campaigns, yet this still gets denied.

I draw your attention to a number of profiles where there are NONE of these, yet the listings go live? All they have done is link to their own record labels?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braintax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicky_Spesh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verb_T

Thanks

BillyBolivia (talk) 12:17, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

WP:Other stuff exists. This is not a reason for your article to pass AfC. You need to provide sources which aren't directly tied to the record label, the artist, or press releases from either of these. Interviews are directly connected. You provided one review, which is acceptable, an IMDb profile which doesn't establish notability, and lots of promotional material or music videos which don't really establish anything at all. They aren't verifiable.

Thank you for pointing out the three articles, I'm looking at them now and will be bringing them to WP:AfD if it's appropriate. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 12:46, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I have now included additional, non relatable links. These are separate from the artist themselves, and are independent of the record label or people involved with the band.

I was using those as an example, there are many, many more, though this entry has as many notable entries as some band pages such as The Heavy or Sonic Boom Six

BillyBolivia (talk) 13:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

maxpapa

Why is maxpapa deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clextan (talk • contribs) 14:23, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

It was not deleted, when you submitted the article it was blank. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 15:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Daniel Rebour

tikuko hi

you reviewed a submission from me

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wlexxx#Your_submission_at_Articles_for_creation:_Daniel_Rebour_.28December_8.29

let;s say i fixed the problems you mentioned

could the article still be rejected for other reasons?

i am specifically wondering if the subject [daniel rebour, french bike illustrator] would be considered important enough?

in the past, that was the issue..

how could i find that out without doing a lot of work to correct and improve the article, then finding out the subject isn;t good enough?

thanks wle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.19.221.250 (talk) 18:22, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

You can google him and see what turns up. I just took about ten minutes to look and didn't turn up too much. He has passing mentions, but those don't make him notable, and his own website and wordpress won't be considered reliable. However there are several results in google books; the Cycling Chain book was apparently illustrated by him? It may be worth seeking reviews of the book. It also looks like th--TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 01:50, 10 December 2013 (UTC)ere is a line of leather bike parts named after him?

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Content	Headings	Images	Links	Sources	Tagged with…
47		Jehst (talk)						Add sources
65		Chakyar koothu (talk)						Add sources
1		Vishovgrad (talk)						Add sources
186		British hip hop (talk)						Add sources
126		Modern furniture (talk)						Add sources
53		Computing Tabulating Recording Company (talk)						Add sources
12		Highbury College (talk)						Cleanup
7		Rajamangala University of Technology Srivijaya (talk)						Cleanup
57		Djemal Pasha (talk)						Cleanup
4		Dubrovačko Primorje (talk)						Expand
64		Elbow dysplasia (talk)						Expand
9		Bay Park, New York (talk)						Expand
17		Mount Sinai Medical Center (Chicago) (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
147		Mervyn King (economist) (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
3		Vex King (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
163		Conformation show (talk)						Merge
601		White Shepherd (talk)						Merge
84		Xanthomonas campestris (talk)						Merge
7		Cautionary and advisory label (talk)						Wikify
3		UNESCO Chair in Telemedicine (talk)						Wikify
9		New River Community College (talk)						Wikify
1		Michio Igasa (talk)						Orphan
1		Gigulate (talk)						Orphan
1		Canadian Lutheran World Relief (talk)						Orphan
2		Venturia (fungus) (talk)						Stub
7		Low Life Records (talk)						Stub
23		Multi-Ethnic Placement Act (talk)						Stub
3		My Last and Best Album (talk)						Stub
2		Abraham's Woods (talk)						Stub
3		Panorama (Braintax album) (talk)						Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:27, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Sriracha sauce

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Sriracha sauce. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 December 2013

• Traffic report: Deaths of Mandela, Walker top the list

• In the media: Edward Snowden a "hero"; German Wikipedia court ruling

• News and notes: Wiki Loves Monuments—winners announced

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Wine

• Interview: Wikipedia's first Featured Article centurion

• Featured content: Viewer discretion advised

• Technology report: MediaWiki 1.22 released

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 05:24, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Signature concerns

Hello Tikuko, my name is Howicus. Today User:Drjignesh came onto the #wikipedia-en-help IRC channel. Besides question about their article, they also talked about feeling offended by your signature, since they thought it was like calling people who posted on your talk page "dogs". Now, I'm sure you didn't mean to offend anyone, but "dog" can have various connotations in different cultures, and I thought you'd want to know that someone is upset by your sig. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 03:15, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

It's a reference to this song; no harm / insult / etc intended. You might have figured out from my user page / contribs that I'm pretty active with WP:DOG, I never really even thought about it being offensive. I have no problem changing it. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 04:03, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Reviewing instructions

Hello: just a note that in your declination of the submission at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Carla Caceres, your comment there regarding inline citations is outdated. Please see the project's Reviewing instructions page, section General standards and invalid reasons for declining a submission page, where this is documented. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:05, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

So BLPs without inline cites are accepted now? Christ. --TKK! bark with me! 05:14, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

My understanding is that only potentially contentious claims require an inline ref; the AfC submission linked to by Northamerica1000 doesn't seem to make a claim of anything besides simple facts, which could be considered non-contentious. At least that's how I see it. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 05:52, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't involved in formulation of the Reviewing instructions page. To contest information there, you'd have to contact those involved. I just adhere to the current rules. Cheers, Northamerica1000^(talk) 06:54, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Diverging diamond interchange

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Diverging diamond interchange. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:04, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Content	Headings	Images	Links	Sources	Tagged with…
8,370		California (talk)						Add sources
133		Naushad (talk)						Add sources
114		Lp0 on fire (talk)						Add sources
6		Ikenai Taiyō (talk)						Add sources
278		Slow Movement (talk)						Add sources
793		History of IBM (talk)						Add sources
171		Charter schools in the United States (talk)						Cleanup
10		Bundy Manufacturing Company (talk)						Cleanup
149		Bangor University (talk)						Cleanup
313		Lay the Favorite (talk)						Expand
1		Ika Summer (talk)						Expand
5		Prey Lang (talk)						Expand
1,652		CeeLo Green (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
157		Travelling funfair (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
23		Press TV controversies (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
59		Blu-spec CD (talk)						Merge
24		Ottoman Tunis (talk)						Merge
15		Società Italiana Ernesto Breda (talk)						Merge
659		Hip dysplasia (canine) (talk)						Wikify
176		Time clock (talk)						Wikify
36		Salt Lake Community College (talk)						Wikify
2		Community Care College (talk)						Orphan
4		Southern Technical College (talk)						Orphan
3		Erwin Technical Center (talk)						Orphan
3		Biophotovoltaic (talk)						Stub
8		Panic Fancy (talk)						Stub
13		Charles Mungoshi (talk)						Stub
33		Venturia inaequalis (talk)						Stub
3		St Columbanus' College (talk)						Stub
48		Prince Luitpold of Bavaria (b.1951) (talk)						Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:50, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Your Leavitt Bulldog decline

Hello Tikuko

You declined [[1]] because the references. Also did you comment on the UKC letter of recognition. Please notice that I deliberately put that in as a link and I did not used it as a reference I never told in my article that we are a recognized breed also Wikipedia does not require that. Look at the Mongrel dogs they have a page but the FCI ,AKC or the UKC do not recognize them as a breed but still they may share information on your platform. [[2]] We do not want to be a recognized breed by the UKC the letter just showed we are fully capable of being a parent club for our own Leavitt Bulldog within the UKC if we wanted. The main reason not to do so is because we (Leavitt Bulldog Association) do want to bring in Out crosses when needed to keep our Bulldog healthy and we do not want to be stock in a gene pool. The UKC and the Old English Bulldog have other believes we do respect that. Also you removed my history part this is for me unacceptable we do may have the same history as the Old English Bulldog but sins 2006 we have our own not recognized breed and our own studbook and we want to show the world our history even if its the same. David Leavitt is the creator of both breeds but he choose to be with the Leavitt Bulldog Association becuase this is how he ment the dogs must look like and to be as healthy as they are now. In Germany we have an official club recognized by law. Our registration number in Germany is UR.-NR.1611/2012 S. [[3]] Therefor I want to ask politely to restore my page. If you have any advice on the reverences I made now i would be more than happy to learn them so I can finish my page the proper way you want it to be Kind regards, Barry Schutte [[4]]

I didn't delete the page, I don't know what you want me to restore. I removed a single unsourced quote which could create copyright issues and that's it. The fact that the quote composed the entirety of the history section is not my doing

The issue is the lack of sources referring to the breed. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murray River Curly Coated Retriever for a similar scenario. The only source you have provided that is even remotely third party is this, and it does not look reliable. Your 'further reading' section is not being used as sources at current so I can't speak to those.

Pinging SagaciousPhil (talk · contribs) because you're also involved with WP:DOG--<fonts color="black">TKK! bark with me! 17:15, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I can also see that your article has been declined numerous times previously forthe same reason. This is clearly not a problem noticed only by me. You'll also probably want to address the promotional nature of some of the phrasing used in the article. --TKK! bark with me! 17:17, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi TKK, I've just been looking at the draft (which seems to have been re-submitted?). AFC is not an area I work in but I don't think the article can be accepted and should be declined:

• it only has a primary source, the Leavitt Bulldog Association and is in fact almost in it's entirety a reproduction of it's website. I notice that it is marked as copyright (although an old version IS indicated via the archival system as CC licensed);
• it is promotional, therefore not neutral;
• I did a quick search on google books this published in 2009 just confirms Leavitt claims to have established the "Olde English Bulldogge"

I do not see how this meets the WP:GNG so I think it should be declined - I would do it if I knew how SagaciousPhil - Chat 18:20, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello to you both. I see your having problems but it’s not only to promote. It is because lots of countries look first at Wikipedia therefor I make my page to inform. I tried to show with my reverences that we are a breed on our own and that other see that as well. I do not understand why this is for you such a big problem It clearly by now to showed that we are not the Old English Bulldog and that we have dogs who have different appearances. I thought Wikipedia was an encyclopedia for everyone who wants to edit but you make it very hard by now Also searching books shows indeed that Leavitt was the founder of the olde English Bulldog but like i wrote ,in 2006 we choose to go our own way with our breed and 7 years later we can clearly see that our dogs are different — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedombulls (talk • contribs) 19:35, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I can appreciate you are trying to promote dogs that you are passionate about but you have to establish it is notable. The only reference you really have is to your own breed club. Even your own breed club site says David Leavitt established Olde English bulldogges, which is also confirmed by the book I indicated in my comment above. You would have to find independent reliable sources discussing the Leavitt Bulldog and these do not seem to be available - I did try doing a quick search to see if I could find any but had no success. SagaciousPhil - Chat 19:52, 18 December 2013 (UTC) re-instating my comment which appears to have inadvertently been deleted when Freedombulls altered his comment above. SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello I found one from the BBC program pedigree exposed Is this what you looking for see my article Gr--Freedombulls (talk) 20:59, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that is Jemima Harrison's personal blog so is most definitely not a reliable source. It is not a BBC endorsed site. SagaciousPhil - Chat 21:13, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

• But Tikuko and Phil it doesn't make sense and I don't get it. Why would Leavitt create two different breeds, one called OEB ( Olde English Bulldogge and the other Leavitt bulldog? Hafspajen (talk) 14:19, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

From what I can discern, Leavitt created the OEB, lost direct control of the breed, and decided to abandon it and create the Leavitt Bulldog so he could have more control over the breed. They are, in almost all regards except that of the two breed clubs, identical. --TKK! bark with me! 19:59, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

David Leavitt did not get lost of control he simply did not was happy the way the OEB heading. Therefor read the history it is fundamentally different we started with a view selected specimens and work from there to reestablishing our goal to breed healthier Bulldogs with slimmer and less bone dog. Our dogs are now slimmer and healthier . Even if it looks the same as the OEB we are entitled as much to inform the world of our existence as much as everyone else Again read PLEASE carefully and you see we are different .

PS i also change the part you linked in the [[ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Olde_English_Bulldogge&diff=587136419&oldid=587095861]] he is a writter from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, U.S. and not the creator from Coatesville, PA --Freedombulls (talk) 21:34, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

My comment was to explain to Hafspajen about the two breeds, not a critique of the breed.

You are entitled to inform the world of your existance, yes, but if you cannot meet the general notability guidelines then you aren't entitled to a Wikipedia article until you can. It's not a "never, ever" thing. It just means that right now Leavitt Bulldogs don't meet the criteria. These are from the notability guideline:

• Significant coverage: There is not significant coverage of the Leavitt Bulldog. There are passing mentions of it, but outside of its own website there isn't really any coverage.
• "Reliable: The only "reliable" source, really, is the NYT article, and that is not significant coverage. It's a passing mention of the breed. The breed website is not reliable, because it is written by people directly involved with the breed. For example, say I breed poodles (I don't) and wrote an article about their personalities. Because I have a vested interest in poodles (I breed them), my article is considered a "first party" or "primary" source and can't be used as an article source. This ties into...
• Independent of the subject: The breed club sources and kennel club sources are not independent. They can be used, absolutely, but they do not establish notability

Just some things to think about. No one is saying your breed isn't valid or doesn't deserve an article, we're saying that it isn't ready to have one yet. It doesn't matter how different or similarly the breeds are or how 'entitled' you are to inform the world of your breed's existance. You've already done that, you have a website. --TKK public _{(Bark at me \\ Block this account if it's acting funny!)} 23:58, 21 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TKK public (talk • contribs)

So it’s difficult if you are not mentioned enough in magazines or books. But if you were mentioned in television by a program the whole world looked at.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4tTjdZJpPI

See from 46 min and 23 seconds In written [[5]] Gr Barry--Freedombulls (talk) 00:32, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

That's still not showing depth of coverage. It's only a passing mention. --TKK public _{(Bark at me \\ Block this account if it's acting funny!)} 01:15, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 December 2013

• WikiProject report: Babel Series: Tunisia on the French Wikipedia

• Traffic report: Hopper to the top

• Discussion report: Usernames, template data and documentation, Main page, and more

• News and notes: Nine new arbitrators announced

• Featured content: Triangulum, the most boring constellation in the universe

• Technology report: Introducing the GLAMWikiToolset

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 07:38, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Dread Pirate Roberts

Hi Tikuko, the article is not the same as Ross William Ulbricht, who has merely been accused, not convicted. Thanks, Matty.007 15:28, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

According to this in the afc they're the same. --TKK! bark with me! 15:38, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

According to the FBI he is, but all the sources say "accused", they don't want to get it wrong, nor should we. I think that a DPR article is better than a possible BLP violation in accusing one man the FBI think did it. Thanks, Matty.007 17:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I added a section on Ulbricht's denial, which is what we have to believe until more info becomes available. Thanks, Matty.007 17:54, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Camp Poyntelle Lewis Village

The proposed deletion from a few months ago was contested and an administrator restored the page. I removed most of the stuff that was written like an advertisement. Just wanted to let you know. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

WP:DEPTH

WP:DEPTH was a redlink, but you weren't the only one to use it. It's blue now. I hope it points to the place you were thinking of. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:53, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I didn't even realize. Thank you! --TKK! bark with me! 03:41, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Tikuko,

I understand that my submission was declined for the article "Motor Trader Malaysia". Its a premier and well respected motoring classifieds magazine in Malaysia. I provided all the references and citations that were asked of me but the article was still declined. Please let me know what the problem really is. As for references, there aren't many as what has been given is all that exists at the moment.