Jump to content

User talk:Cindamuse: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Auscaster (talk | contribs)
24 edits
Auscaster (talk | contribs)
24 edits
Line 306: Line 306:
Hi Cindamuse,
Hi Cindamuse,


Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia! It was a shame that the page was deleted as its was intended to provide information on a valuable open source resource. I am a little confused at how to proceed, specifically weather I should attempt to modify the content or abandon it completely lest it be deleted again?
Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia! It was a shame that the page was deleted as its was intended to provide information on a valuable open source resource.
I attempted to use the same format at similar projects on Wikipedia, such as [[Twinkle_(software)]], [[Slrn]] [[SipX]] and others. I see that the text used in the opening paragraph should have been modified now, but I am a little confused at how to proceed, specifically weather I should attempt to modify the content or abandon it completely lest it be deleted again?


[[User:Auscaster|Auscaster]] ([[User talk:Auscaster|talk]]) 11:17, 30 March 2014 (UTC) Kam Low
[[User:Auscaster|Auscaster]] ([[User talk:Auscaster|talk]]) 11:17, 30 March 2014 (UTC) Kam Low

Revision as of 11:21, 30 March 2014


Template:NoBracketBot

"Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn."
 ~ Benjamin Franklin, 18th century statesman, scientist, and writer

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 00:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

Removing Sexism and Racism from Primary School Readers in the United States

Dear Cindamuse, Earlier tonight you deleted my article Removing Sexism and Racism from Primary School Readers in the United States for lack of context. Okay, but how can I access what I already wrote (so I don't have to rewrite it all) and edit it to add the requested information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SDFeminist2.0 (talk • contribs) 07:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC) Hello Cindy, Earlier this evening you deleted my article Removing Sexism and Racism from Primary School Readers in the United States for a lack of context. I'd like to edit my article to add the requested content. How do I do that? SDFeminist2.0 (talk) 08:17, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi there! thanks for contacting me. I've gone ahead and userfied the article to User:SDFeminist2.0/Removing Sexism and Racism from Primary School Readers in the United States. Please make sure to review the Manual of Style and guidelines pertaining to reliable sources and notability. It is also very important to review the policy pertaining to original research. In essence, the article appears to present "original research", i.e., "analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not advanced by the sources". At this point, the context of the article is unclear. Is it a book? organization? essay? concept? theory? In all sincerity, the article lacks cohesion which would allow readers to identify the subject. I recommend working on the article in your userspace and when you are done with it, submit it to the Articles for Creation team. Once it meets the minimum requirements for inclusion, a member of the AFC team will move it to the mainspace. If you have questions or need further assistance, please feel free to contact me anytime. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 08:24, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi, I made a response to you, but I'm not sure where it went. To my Talk Page? In short, what do I need to do to make my article acceptable and uploaded to Wikipedia where the information can be shared with others? SDFeminist2.0 (talk) 01:20, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • In order to move this to the mainspace, we need to resolve the issues identified with this article. I've given guidance in my previous response above. At this point, the best that I am able to discern is that we have an essay. As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is not the place for original research or essays. Please take the time to read through the links I've provided and work to address the specific concerns. At this point, your draft does not reflect an encyclopedic article. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 01:47, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • I am sorry, but I strongly disagree. I have looked at the Manual of Style and I feel that my writing style is neutral, informative, grammatical, and easy to read. I have looked at Reliable Sources and I would direct you to the 13 citations at the end of my article. Only one is a personal recollection, and that was by one of the people who actually made the historical accomplishment I am trying to document and share. I believe a first-person account is usually considered a reliable source. The subject IS notable in that it brought about a huge cultural change in our society. As for original research, I have only stated facts and given credible citations for each statement. I am not promoting an opinion or a position -- I am stating facts about an important struggle for equality in American History that is about to disappear into the mists of history because it is not well documented. I have documented all that I have been able to discover in four months of research. There is no doubt that there is more information on this subject to include, but I'm not looking to write a book here. It is my hope that others will add information when they find this article exists. Isn't that part of the beauty of Wikipedia? I am asking you to show this article to some other administrators and see how they read the piece. Please let me know what will happen next. SDFeminist2.0 (talk) 02:45, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yes, your writing style, while lacking in neutrality, is informative and grammatically correct. The layout and formatting needs a cleanup. And yes, you've provided a bibliography of the sources you've used to write your essay. All that said, the article is still an essay. Please understand that while your passion and desire to present this information is admirable, Wikipedia is not a host for this type of material. The encyclopedia is not the place to promote a cause or ideal or inform readers of a particular view or assessment of a subject. At this point, you are welcome to submit the article for review to the Articles for Creation team. However, if the article is moved to the mainspace in its current condition, it will be placed for community deletion discussion. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 03:18, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • I will revise again and we will see.SDFeminist2.0 (talk) 05:19, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • I have updated this article and I hope it can now be put in the public space. I need help changing the title. I'd appreciate your help with that. I left a message in the box "Edit summary" below the article. SDFeminist2.0 (talk) 04:38, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • Please respond. Can my article more forward? SDFeminist2.0 (talk) 22:05, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
              • Nothing has really changed since my initial response, outside of the format and removing a section. There is very little improvement compared to the first version of the article. In essence, we have a promotional report piece attempting to masquerade as an encyclopedic article. We have an unremarkable chapter of a national organization presenting a background essay about one of their initiatives or projects. This is simply not encyclopedia material. When all is said and done, it's still an essay. At this point, I recommend that you host this content on the San Diego NOW website or a personal blog, of sorts. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 02:49, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 March 2014

Sorry I'm Late (Cher Lloyd album)

Why don't you let me create the album's page ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kpmbsgam (talk • contribs) 02:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, thanks for contacting me. I protected this page due to repeated recreations. In essence, a community discussion took place which resulted in consensus to redirect this article to the existing section within the Cher Lloyd article. Overall, notability is not yet established in accordance with the general notability guidelines or the topical notability guidelines for albums. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 02:50, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MEA Engineering College Article recent content deletion

I would like bring your attention to rectify the deletion of the contents of the article MEA Engineering College, Perinthalmanna marking it as self publicity. In my research it has been found the edits made by Meaengg user, yes, the user has done policy violation, by editing a page about it itself. But seems the user did so to remove another violation, done by a user Midhun1993, as he has uploaded the emblem of of the organization as his work, which a serious copyright violation, instead of using the emblem as fair use, he has taken credit for the design File:MEA Engineering College, Perinthalmanna Emblem By Midhun Mathew.png, which you have reinstated to in your edit. The other details which have deleted in the understanding of it is a copied extensively from meaengg.in and self publicity is overlooking the matter. As those details were entered by genuine users to to add details about the college, and publicity is not apparent from it. the details confirm to the original scenario as facts, which can be verified by any one, keeping in mind it is an educational institution and the credibility of information can be verified with out ambiguity, and as I understand Wikipedia is a source for factual information of credible and notable primary source. I would like to request you, to please delete the file which in violation, that is File:MEA Engineering College, Perinthalmanna Emblem By Midhun Mathew.png, from Wikipedia, and request to undo the deletion other contents, I myself had done some most of the edits. I am new editor and, I try my best to adhere to the wiki policies, any do my best to edits pages that that I have information about. Thank you. AWP 09:20, 17 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awp9633 (talk • contribs)

  • While this content was flagged following correspondence sent to the OTRS team, much of the other content removed was the material that was added by you, which was deemed promotional. Additionally the content was unsourced. Please understand that Wikipedia is not an extension of the college. While it is apparent that the school's website has been disabled at meaengg.in and meaengg.org, in all regards, if the websites were working, Wikipedia would not be a mirror or extension of them. While the website is shut down, we cannot allow the Wikipedia article to host promotional content for the institution's marketing team. In accordance with policy, this content was removed. (I appreciate the heads up about the derivative work uploaded by Midhun1993. I've sent a message to Commons to flag for deletion.) Best regards, Cindy(talk) 22:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I understand your notice. I have few things to note, you said the contents by me is promotional and alleged that I work as marketing team for the institute, I work for none and the information I entered are out of my knowledge about the institute and is also verifiable from credible source and CEE Kerala State Governement which is the governmental website for educational department in Kerala, and pertaining to notability of the article, MEA is an educational institute in India, and the norms in India might not the same in US. Other then that you noted that the website, www.meaengg.in the official website given in all authoritative websites, is shutdown and the institute is using wiki as mirror page, I disagree with it, when I access the URL it gives the official webpage with out errors which is very comprehensive website to put up long wiki article. Regards,AWP 12:21, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
      • Hey there! I'm sorry if I implied that you are a member of the marketing team. I was speaking in general terms, but I suppose my thoughts got lost in writing. We have no questions about the notability of the school, but rather the promotional content. I understand your assertion that the information you are contributing to the article is verifiable, (outside of your own personal knowledge ([[see WP:OR). We are not questioning verifiability, again, but promotional content. Verifiability and notability are separate and distinct from promotional content. (This is often the case, since official websites are essentially created to promote the entity for whom the site has been developed.) Note that when I attempt to go the school's website using the URL you provide, I get a message "This domain name expired on Feb 28 2012 09:22AM". I'm not sure what is going on there, but I am unable to access the site. Cindy(talk) 18:49, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Farhad Shahnawaz

Hello, i am the creator of the page called "Farhad Shahnawaz" which was deleted recently. I respect the deletion as i feel there was something wrong with the page. As i am New to writing articles on Wiki, Can you please guide me in completing the article?Can you please throw some light on Where i went wrong? I appreciate the efforts and time you have spent on my page.Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Footfallexperts (talk • contribs) 16:14, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • This article was deleted following a community discussion, which resulted in consensus stating that notability for the subject has not yet been established. When we create articles on Wikipedia, we are required to establish notability for the subject, verified through significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The topical notability guidelines for models or actors may be found at WP:CREATIVE. In addition to these guidelines, I would recommend reading the specific information which will help in identifying reliable and independent sources. Unfortunately, until such time as notability can be established, this article may not be retained in the encyclopedia. If you have additional questions, please feel free to contact me again, Cindy(talk) 22:56, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in Education: March 2014



Headlines

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

DYK for Saddle Ridge Hoard

The DYK project (nominate) 00:01, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your tip/reminder. Thank you.

Thank you for your message re remembering to use the edit field to keep track of what edits happen. All the Best Jennnu (talk) 04:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please. Sorry I'm late.

Sorry, I'm late to tell you that Cher Lloyd has already said about the track listing, second single and release date, and the album cover is already available on iTunes. WTF why are you the hell admin-protecting the Sorry I'm Late (Cher Lloyd album) page? I know you purposely put the freaking expiry date as 17 April, the release date. Please. Pulses, this album by Karmin, already has its own page when the studio album is released on March 25. Yeah, I know that date is coming, but this page is already there since December 2013, dude. Please. Thanks. --Nahnah4 Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here! 10:51, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know, Cindamuse. However, it is already going to come out! I mean, I know about that AfD page already, as I commented on it, so....
And, what do you mean by "repeated recreation"? It was only wanted to be re-created ONCE, and it's by an IP who hadn't done editing the page. If you don't believe me, you can go to iTunes US and you could see that if you search "Sorry I'm Late Cher Lloyd", the album cover is ready and the track listing is already there! So I really don't get the fuss over this thing. If only Cher Lloyd has her own Wikipedia account so that she do not even need to cite a single source as it is her own album and then all the editors will shut up. And, the links you give me on the Wikipedia guidelines and whatever, I've never read them once 'cause I'm just tooooo lazy. Anyway, if this is the case, I will wait and please you by not doing anything. Happy? Not wanting to be rude. The reason I'm saying this is because, on what User:Livelikemusic said on the AfD page, "I Wish" did not cause too much impact on UK or US. I just want to say- yeah, just US and UK. Ever spared a thought to other countries? Technology live around us, anyone can use the computer and go to English Wikipedia to search for this album, and if I were in the shoes of the readers, I would be very disappointed at the sight of a redirect. You see? (I'm scolding Livelikemusic, not you, but whatever. Scolded him/her so many times already because I just really hate him/her for no reason.) And, by the way, can you please use the {{talkback}} template and leave it on my talk page so that I will know? You replied here so secretly that I almost forgot all about it. I hope that you can understand. And, the second single of the album, "Sirens", is already released but the page is still blank and is a redirect. Just wanna ask if I can go create the page. PLEASE. The official cover is hardly found, but if you go to Cher Lloyd's official YouTube account, CherLloydVEVO, the audio is already uploaded and the official cover is there already. Problem is, can't find that image on Google Images, so I don't know what to do. I cannot copy and paste the video, that will be very weird. So, any suggestions? (P.S. sorry for my super long comment)--Nahnah4 Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here! 07:47, 19 March 2014 (UTC) Remember to put the TB template (Talkback) or else, heh heh heh. --Nahnah4 Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here! 07:48, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am quite disgusted that I am being personally attacked by a user, which is a clear violation of Wiki policy. And as an administrator, I would expect you to warn them against doing so. It's crude and shows lack of maturity from an editor, and a bit a lack of executive from an admin. User is clearly unable to adhere to many other Wiki policies, etc. I'm disappointed once again. And to note, the cover on iTunes is not the official album cover; it's the promotional cover until fans unveil the true cover. livelikemusic my talk page! 22:03, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • There is nothing in the statement made by the editor above that reflects a personal attack. There may be borderline civility concerns and they may not like you much (or me, for that matter), but this doesn't rise to an attack. If you have a dispute, you may consider seeking assistance at WP:DR. Cindy(talk) 22:41, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well it sure felt as a personal attack to me and you cannot define what isn't felt as a personal attack against me. It's a negative comment towards me, and I may definitely bring it up. It's also alarming you did not guide them to not make such comments, as you're supposed to comment on MATERIAL and EDITS, not the editor themselves. And they failed to do so. livelikemusic my talk page! 23:14, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, I can understand how their comments may have felt like a personal attack. I'm sure it must be very frustrating. In all sincerity, I didn't much care for the "dude" reference, when it is very clear that I am a "chick". However, while "dude" may irk me, it actually just made me smile. They also said "WTF why are you the hell admin...", but I chose to ignore that as an emotional response. We all respond in our own way that may not correlate to the communication manners and means of others. I have enough grace in my life to go around. Sure, the editor spoke negatively. And your name was brought up in the conversation. However, they were speaking of their own feelings. Who am I to negate their feelings? That is not my role here. My response was simply to identify their concerns, address them, and point them in the right direction. There is more than enough conflict on Wikipedia to go around. One way to better manage our emotions and reactions is to weigh the validity to the concern and respond accordingly. We need to choose our battles carefully. Honestly, there was (is) nothing here that rises to the point of personal attack (as defined by the community) that warrants greater concern, warning, or admonishment. Again, if you have a dispute with this editor, I recommend dispute resolution. Cindy(talk) 23:40, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Livelikemusic: Okay, fine Livelikemusic. I'll stop. Happy? Okay, I will not say bad things about you anymore, I promise. But I have a feeling that you hate me too (I don't know, just guessing). And, BTW, I did not know you are an admin. I'll stop disturbing or irking you, whatever. However, I already sent a Barnstar to you as a token before. Sorry for everything. And, furthermore, when we first met, you are like repeatedly deleting the page and putting a redirect while I keep reverting, for some reason, it felt like a personal attack to me too. And, when I uploaded some photos, till today I still don't get why you wanted to nominate speedy deletion for them. (Especially the picture on Taylor Swift's "Breathe".)All this what you did felt like an attack on me like you're irking me. One more- whenever I leave a message on your talk page, most of the time you would just delete it without any further explanation in your edit summary. Why is that so? Even when someone said about the Days of Our Lives thing, I told the user I think that it is meant to be Capital, but you deleted the whole thing too. I felt so disappointed that you did that, as if like you're hating me permanently. And, once again, MOST. I know it's not all, I understand. And don't call this cyberbullying as I already apologised to you about it. If you don't believe me, don't worry, be happy. I will confirm - I will never irk, provoke or backstab you anymore. At least, let's just understand and stop. Cheers!-Nahnah4 Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here! 04:58, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Cindamuse: I thought I told you to put the talkback template, but you didn't put it, but not that I mind though. And, what about the Sirens thing? I'm quite ignorant, I know that, but just asking so that I won't end up in a dispute resolution or AfD page or whatever. And I'm sorry to say the WTF thing as that time I was in a bad mood. I already said that I did not mean to be rude, and that's true. --Nahnah4 Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here! 04:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • Livelikemusic is not actually an administrator, they were referring to my role as an administrator. I rarely use TBs, since the system automatically alerts you when someone mentions your username, i.e., the "ping". Note that it is redundant to use the feature on someone's talk page. As far as creating an article for the song, it hasn't been deleted previously through community discussion, so I see no blatant reason why you could not draft the article. That said, please make sure to establish notability through significant coverage in reliable and independent sources. See also WP:NALBUMS. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 05:29, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
              • Anyway, don't take it to the heart, people. I will be more friendly from this day onwards. I hope you understand. Since Cindamuse is an admin, just wanna ask - Can I change my username? Just want to change it. If it can't, too bad, but I'll see. --Nahnah4 Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here! 05:31, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
                • @Cindamuse: So, are you gonna deactivate the admin-only lock? I'll promise there will be good sources and whatsoever. In addition, "The Hunting Party", a studio album from Linkin Park, is out on June and the page is already there, with no admin-only lock. So I hope you can deactivate the lock. And I'm still awaiting your response on the Sirens thing. (P.S. yeah, I expect you to use the talkback template and you said things like the ping. Problem is, you did not even ping me and how am I gonna know?) I hope you understand. Cheers! --Nahnah4 Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here! 08:05, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

question about removing someone's warning to edit once the edit has been done

Hi! Thank you for your previous help and I hope you don't mind if I ask you a question about editing. I edited a formatting problem that someone put a warning at that top of the page. After editing I included their comment/warning in the Edit Summary and included what I edited and deleted their warning at the top of the page (but the exact wording is preserved in the Edit Summary). Is that okay? Or is there a better way to do that? I'd go to the person's talk page, but I can't tell who made the warning on the article. Thank you for any insight you can give me. I have a ton of other questions too--let me know if it's okay to ask (basically questions about all the warning at the top of the page). I appreciate your time. Jennnu (talk) 15:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm guessing you're referring to Sian Beilock? Overall, if you're not going to address the concerns identified or have questions about the validity, don't remove the templates. Instead, start a discussion on the article's talk page. I highly recommend also that you click through the links on the maintenance templates to review the specific concern or issue identified. In this specific article, cleanup is still needed to address noncompliance in the section headers. Please note that the maintenance templates are not warnings. They merely provide assistance to help identify and improve articles. I don't mind helping out at all. Bring it on! One of the more pressing concerns I see involves the lead section. At this point, it fails to indicate how or why the subject is significant or important. At the same time, the article greatly lacks independent sources. The subject does not meet the notability guidelines for academics, but may meet the general notability guidelines, which required significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, employer, associations, and affiliates. I also see close paraphrasing and copyright violations starting with the first sentence. I would recommend pulling out her journals used as citations (since they are not independent) and creating a section on "published works". Then work to find reliable and independent sources to assist in establishing notability. Note that the awards received are not notable awards. And having her name on a list of other names is not significant coverage. The first step is to establish notability. In all honesty, if this article was nominated for deletion, it would likely be deleted due to lack of notability established through significant coverage in reliable and independent sources. That said, I'm more than willing to help! Cindy(talk) 01:03, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Slavia News

hi there has been a misunderstanding About Slavia News (Alistairwm) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alistairwm (talk • contribs) 05:44, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • You know, I think you're correct. In addition to blatant promotional content and failure to state how the subject may be significant or important, I should have also indicated that it was a hoax and a copyright violation of http://mashable.com/. Is there anything else I missed? Cindy(talk) 06:03, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Anti-Hinduism

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Anti-Hinduism. 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) 18:56, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jessi Malay

Thank you for the time you spent looking for sources, as I had done. If have now entered a bloc AFD. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:53, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 March 2014

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For you, the admin. Cheers! Nahnah4 Any thoughts? Pen 'em down here! 08:07, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AFC you might want to take a gander at

Heya! Hope all is well. You might want to take a look at this AFC and perhaps review it if you have time? Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kristen DiAngelo --Thank you much! SarahStierch (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey there, girly! Thanks for the heads up. While I would decline this article due to lack of notability and reliable sourcing, along with original research, I need to stay away from this one. Too close to home. If I were to decline this, it would likely raise red flags with the subject of the article. Scary daze! Cindy(talk) 02:19, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Template talk:Tq

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Tq. 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, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

About an attack page

Hi,
You deleted Siptarski editori wikipedije as an attack page (G10). Don't worry, I'm not here to argue about it :-)
Would it be possible to know what was in it? I've been looking into some broader problems around other edits made by that page's creator; I'm just curious (and promise not to be offended by the content). bobrayner (talk) 00:20, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Bob! The article was written in Bosnian and attempted to denigrate Wikipedia and its approach to and presentation of interests of Serbs and Serbia. The editor stated that the article was intended to inform readers of their rights and then listed three different editors who would "face their crimes". Hope this helps. You sure you don't want to protest the deletion? Oh, but I jest. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 01:17, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I can guess some names which might appear on that list. If it doesn't mention any other articles &c then I don't have to dig any further.
Have fun. bobrayner (talk) 10:51, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agricultural Research Organization, Volcani Center

Hello - You made a lot of changes to the Volcani page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcani_Institute_of_Agricultural_Research). I understand that many changes were to try and improve the page according to Wikipedia standards, which is greatly appreciated, as I am a novice to Wikipedia and am trying my best to provide clear and correct information. As you saw, I made a serious response to your previous comments. Unfortunately, some of your latest changes do not accurately reflect Volcani or its history. Volcani is, first and foremost, a research organization which has been dedicated to agricultural research for more than 90 years. Its other activities, such as outreach, are secondary to Volcani's primary mission and contributions to the world over these years. I will change this back so that the emphasis is correct; I hope this is OK with you. It would not be good if Wikipedia was promoting mis-information. I would be happy if you would kindly explain why you removed all the information about the different Institutes and their research activities; this is for my edification. It seems to me that such material is fundamental information for someone who wants to learn about the Volcani Center. Was the problem lack of citations? I'd be glad if you could provide me with some specific ideas about what kinds of secondary sources you think are needed. I looked at the link you provided, but it was not very instructive for this type of subject matter. Thank you e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 12:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • This content was removed due to promotional content. In essence, Wikipedia is not the place to present every jot and tittle about your organization. This is better saved for the company's website. Remember, that this is not the place to manage the public image or representation of the company. Note that I've restored content to the lead, in accordance with the Manual of Style. If you have more questions, please feel free to contact me again, Cindy(talk) 07:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you, this was clear. I was wondering if you have a source for the assertion that the center was "previously known as "Agricultural Research Station of the Jewish Agency for Palestine". My source (Katz, Shaul; Ben-David, Joseph (1975-06-01). "Scientific research and agricultural innovation in Israel". Minerva. 13 (2). Kluwer Academic Publishers: 152–182. doi:10.1007/BF01097793. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)) gives the original name as "Agricultural Experiment Station", changed in the 1950s to "Agricultural Research Station", and then later in the 1950s to Volcani Agricultural Research Institute, finally becoming the Agricultural Research Organization in 1971 (p.156, of the cited source). If you don't have a more reliable source, I'd like to correct the history according this source (and give the citation). All the best, e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 12:58, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have two more questions regarding the issues you raised with the Volcani page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_Research_Organization,_Volcani_Center) 1. You suggested that: The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. (March 2014). My question is, how may notability be proven? I typed "Volcani" into the search engine of "Haaretz" (http://www.haaretz.com/), an Israeli newspaper that publishes an English version, and got 7 pages of results (10 articles per page). Is this sufficient proof of notability? If not, what more is needed? If yes, can this issue be deleted? 2. Would a reference to Web of Science be sufficient to demonstrate that scientists at Volcani have published more than 8000 papers in the last 30 years in the international reviewed literature? The Web of Science (http://wokinfo.com/) is the premier research platform for information in the sciences. The number of articles published by ARO scientists in journals reviewed on the Web of Science database can be estimated by searching the database according to address, which is what I did to get to that number. Thank you e1baa340@opayq.com (talk) 14:53, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New page deletion - BioScience Research Collaborative - Rice University

Hi there, last week you deleted our preliminary page for the BioScience Research Collaborative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioScience_Research_Collaborative_%28Rice_University%29 (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: numerous pages from rice.edu and others as indicated in article) We're making a page for this research building, which is a part of Rice. I confess to being totally new to trying to make a Wikipedia page, and the amount of information on how to make a page is rather overwhelming. I can't check what my student assistant wrote, because the page has been deleted, so I'm not sure how to correct the problem. Any assistance you can provide would be most welcome. RiceBRC (talk) 20:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC) RiceBRC[reply]

  • Due to the blatant conflict of interest, it is recommended that you refrain from creating or working on an article for this subject. As far as your specific question, this article was deleted due to legal violations of US copyright law. In essence, when we create articles and contribute to Wikimedia projects, we are required to use our own words. The editor who created the previous incarnation of this article failed to follow the community policies and guidelines in this regard. Correcting the problem is rather simple. Firstly, make sure to write articles in your own words. Secondly, establish notability for the subject through significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Hope this helps. Best regards, Cindy(talk) 06:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Catcoin

Probably a good idea to close the AfD that was opened: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catcoin. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:25, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Torlib

Seems to me this editor is correct -- that account is covered by the gallery, library, and museum exception. --jpgordon::==( o ) 17:54, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. It may be possible that the GLAM exception is no longer valid. The guidelines there actually state that the user account should be [theirs] alone (not shared) and should not be named after [their] institution. The block was also made following an OTRS conversation and a desire to control and own the Toronto Public Library article. There's also an interesting conversation on the talk page there about shared accounts for GLAM participants. In all honesty, thanks for contacting me. If you find some information (either historical or current) about the exception, I would sincerely like to read it. Hope you have a great weekend! Cindy(talk) 01:32, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting "Rixton (band)"

Hello! I am the author of "Rixton (band)", an article which was recently deleted, cited as "unambiguously promotional" and "lacking explanation of significance". I would like some clarification, however, because I would like to know how to better explain its significance (the band is very significant, as it has over 1,000,000 views on YouTube, has made made global music news with organizations like MTV, and has been played on Sirus XM Hits 1). I am not very experienced at writing articles, so I can understand that I probably did a lot of things wrong. For the other citation, "unambiguously promotional content", I would like to have it pointed out where I was promoting the band. I am in no way affiliated with Rixton or Scooter Braun, and I do not personally know any of them in any way. In fact, I am not even from the same country as the band, so I would have no reason to promote them, and any promotion was accidental. If you could please tell me where I promoted them, I would be more than happy to fix it. Thanks! :)Nick towne98 (talk) 18:20, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If I may butt in here (I had Cindamuse's Talk page on my Watch list and never took it off, and saw this interesting conversation), one thing to remember Nick is that YouTube acclaim or views does not equate to notability in Wikipedia's standards. In fact, if that's all that's mentioned, it often makes an article on a band or a performer suspect. Take a look at Wikipedia's guidelines at WP:GNG and WP:BAND. Rixton may in fact meet those guidelines, but you need to prove it in your article by listing, mentioning, or quoting – and citing via footnote – the relevant non-YouTube reliable source mentions. In addition, a new article on a subject which has already had an article deleted (as this one had in August 2013), is automatically going to be under extreme scrutiny and will probably need to be bullet-proof to avoid a similar deletion. If you still feel the band meets the notability requirements linked above, and still feel it merits an encyclopedia article, you could create a draft on your user-space, or via the WP:Articles for creation, or check in with the WP:Teahouse, and have someone vet the completed draft before you post it on Wikipedia. That way, you are probably saved the disappointment of having your article deleted (happens to most all of us at some point, but we learn from it). Anyway, I'll let Cindamuse talk now. :) Softlavender (talk) 23:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nick! Thanks for contacting me. In all honesty, I think Softlavender said it very well. There is often semantic confusion over the definition of publicity, promotion, and advertising. One of the ways to better understand the criteria pertaining to appropriate inclusion on Wikipedia is to determine if the article has been written or edited in an attempt to manage the public's perception of the subject of the article. Common subjects of articles that are often written to promote include persons or groups. I would venture to say that we see promotion of a new unremarkable band at least once every five minutes. Simply announcing the existence of a subject, while failing to indicate how or why the subject may be important or significant would be considered inappropriate. Essentially, in this particular case, the article was merely promoting awareness of the band, rather than presenting notability. Notability must be established and presented through reliable and independent sources before inclusion on Wikipedia can be accepted. You can read more about our notability guidelines HERE and HERE. Hope this helps. If you have more questions, feel free to contact me anytime. Cindy(talk) 01:52, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people). 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) 00:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 March 2014

Muckle book as a made-up word

I didn't invent it. The turn of phrase was used in the book I cited. I looked up "muckle," in this case, as a variation of "mickle" and thus the word has the meaning of "very large." The Oxford English Dictionary defines "muckle" as a variation of "mickle," but also has the separate definition of "A heavy maul used for killing cod." Separately, the OED defines "mickle" first as an adjective for "great" particularly with respect to size, bulk or stature. I didn't find many web references to it, including on WP, but I agree it might not warrant an encyclopedia entry. I didn't have my copy of the OED handy for reference, but it's a moot point as the article is deleted. Varricknunez (talk) 18:59, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. In essence, the phrase or descriptive "muckle book" rests within the imagination of Ian Rankin. He made it up. Outside of a possible mention in his article, it is inappropriate to create an encyclopedia article about the subject. Hope this helps. Let me know if you have other questions. Cindy(talk) 00:42, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Index (Kalamazoo College)

Hello Cindamuse,

I created a page for Kalamazoo College's student newspaper earlier today and noticed recently that you redirected it to the general Kalamazoo College page. I'm still a novice on Wikipedia and completely understand why the redirect occurred. Would it be possible for me to retrieve the code and content that I added thus far? I would really like to expand on what was written in order to have an article that conforms to Wikipedia's notability standards.

Best, Gkey12 (talk) 02:24, 30 March 2014 (UTC)Gkey12[reply]

BULL (student magazine)

Hi there, I was wondering if I could get the work back from the article BULL (student magazine) as I am working more on the article. Thank you Notatory (talk) 05:51, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chaka Fattah Jr.

Cindamuse, the previous edit without edit summary, was to remove "[{" at the top of the page. It was a minor edit, I will be sure to add edit summaries in the future. Also, the article meets notability guidelines, see 10+ news article references. There is no evidence at this time the article was written by the subject or a representative. This is not true, as I am not the subject, or a representative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.108.152 (talk) 08:47, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia notability guidelines, A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in multiple published[3] secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability. The links re:Black Enterprise, Philadelphia Style for example, are written by independent journalists having nothing to do with the subject's IRS lawsuit. The are then several independent articles regarding the subject's IRS lawsuit. The in depth coverage by Forbes is also relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.108.152 (talk) 09:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I arrived at this article as an administrator to address the removal of the earlier speedy deletion template. Your edits and IP address indicate that you are the article creator. Rather than delete the article, I simply spent some time to address the promotional content, copy editing, link rot, cohesion, and layout. My goal was to (hopefully) save this article from deletion. Unfortunately, I find quite a bit lacking. A review of the citations does not establish notability. Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability. While there is coverage outside of the subject's town, this coverage is based on his relationship to his father and the IRS lawsuit. See WP:BLP1E. At this point, notability is not established through his career or his lawsuit. It matters little that the article has been around for a while. A lot of articles slip through the cracks. What matters is whether or not this article meets the guidelines for notability, which would allow for retaining the content in the encyclopedia. Hope this helps. Cindy(talk) 09:16, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I actually think the majority of your editing, re:layout, copy editing, cohesion, is better written and not an issue. However, After the protection block is removed, I can do the following to address your concerns regarding notability. A link to an article in Urban Influence, which is an official publication of the National Urban League can be added from May/June 2008. Urban Influence magazine, is a national, or at the very least regional publication. It is not generally available or published locally in Philadelphia. I can also link to the subject being quoted as a travel expert on Forbes.com, with no mention of his father. The article, like many of the others is about his work as an entrepreneur re:the concierge service American Royalty. That forbes.com article, is date 6.20.07. I also would say the 2007 article from Philadelphia Business Journal, was distributed nationally on bizjournals.com as the national marketing story of the week. While rittenhouse magazine may be of limited circulation, the other media(Philadelphia Business Journal 2007) has in most cases hundreds of thousands of print copies, and in other cases millions of online viewers. Please take this into consideration, I will provide the links when I am permitted to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.108.152 (talk) 09:43, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cindamuse, also The Black Enterprise article which is already referenced is a national publication, and was focused on his work as the owner of American Royalty, a concierge service. Please consider this regarding notability. Hopefully this provides more clarity. The Black Enterprise article is from 2007, and does not mention the IRS lawsuit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.108.152 (talk) 09:46, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Here is an additional regional media piece, regarding notability, http://www.ydr.com/ci_19988604 - The York Daily Record is a regional publication, more than two houra away from Philadelphia. This was through the subject's work as a consultant with his company 259 Strategies LLC, which had Delaware Valley High as a client. Also the forbes.com article "Ultimate Bachelor Party Spots" is still on Forbes.com at http://www.forbes.com/2007/06/19/travel-party-bachelor-forbeslife-cx_sv_0620travel.html
    • Here is an additional regional media piece regarding notability. The subject was a featured guest on ABC'S FYI Philly, a regional lifestyle show on March 28, 2008. There is no mention of his father or the IRS lawsuit, which was recently filed. The link is http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=resources/tv_listings&id=6621690 - several segments appear at the link before his segment. In other words, check out entire video to see subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.108.152 (talk) 10:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please consider this regarding notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.108.152 (talk) 10:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • None of these sources meet the threshold for significant coverage about the subject. These sources represent local and regional press coverage that does not equate to significant coverage about the subject. In some cases, they appear to represent press releases masquerading as independent articles. At the same time, we cannot use the content from Forbes.com, since they are merely opinion pieces or blogs by contributors, lacking oversight and editorial control. Unfortunately, we cannot use this content to establish notability. Cindy(talk) 10:44, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Forbes.com piece from 2007 is a Forbes Magazine article which had oversight and editorial control, I will provide the link from the printout, its not a blog post. How did you determine that Black Enterprise or any other article, written by independent news outlets, with Editorial Control is simply a press release. Are you suggesting these are not real articles. In most cases the articles are still online and can be verified easily. If you are not being objective, and just want to delete the page for some reason, then just do so. There is no actual truth to the idea that these are not true authentic articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.108.152 (talk) 10:53, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Black Enterprise, http://www.blackenterprise.com/mag/the-personal-touch/

See Forbes at https://www.dropbox.com/s/nwyhlxoab9jxhpw/forbes.pdf - See TOP LEFT, "FORBES.COM MAGAZINE ARTICLE" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.108.152 (talk) 10:57, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also did not create the article and have only made edits since a few months ago. As you can see in the history, my IP address is not the same as the creator, or any of the several years of edits, until recently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.108.152 (talk) 11:04, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the welcome

Hi Cindamuse,

Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia! It was a shame that the page was deleted as its was intended to provide information on a valuable open source resource. I attempted to use the same format at similar projects on Wikipedia, such as Twinkle_(software), Slrn SipX and others. I see that the text used in the opening paragraph should have been modified now, but I am a little confused at how to proceed, specifically weather I should attempt to modify the content or abandon it completely lest it be deleted again?

Auscaster (talk) 11:17, 30 March 2014 (UTC) Kam Low[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cindamuse&oldid=601945318"