Jump to content

User talk:DragonflySixtyseven

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Benadillo (talk | contribs) at 20:54, 6 March 2009 (I have queried this guy...). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

IMPORTANT NOTE: ADD YOUR MESSAGES AT THE BOTTOM, NOT THE TOP. OTHERWISE I MIGHT NOT SEE THEM. Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

Negative energy Deletion

Hello, im the drummer in the band "negative energy" and was shocked to see that our page was deleted. Being that i'm young (not twelve, but still saw your comment about them), i don't want to be "That Guy" who sounds like he's attacking you for it, i'm just wondering what we did wrong and how we can fix it so we can revive the article. (p.s take this however you like, compliment or dis, but you have a very long list of deletions :-o) 172.162.51.193 (talk) 01:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

responded. DS (talk) 16:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User Info Question

Hi there. Since you seem to know a lot of the basics of wikipedia, I'm wondering if you can clear something up for me. I know that notability and credibility are huge parts of wikipedia, so to make sure I am a completely transparent user, I disclosed that I am an employee of the Cancer Research Institute and gave my contact information there. Have I done this correctly? Is there any information or statements that I should add or remove? I want to make sure that I can make factual changes to pages in the realm of cancer immunology without seeming like I have personal interests involved and staying neutral. Thanks for the advice. --CancerResearchInstitute (talk) 14:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually thinking the same thing about the possibility of a future job change. I think I may go for a personal change rather than add Employee to my current user name.--CancerResearchInstitute (talk) 22:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restored Agropedia

Hi Dragonfly, I've restored the article Agropedia that you deleted, because I can't find any evidence that it's a copyright violation. Feel free to nominate it for deletion if you want to. Dcoetzee 21:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restored US Geospatial Intelligence Foundation (USGIF)

I've now also restored the article US Geospatial Intelligence Foundation (USGIF) that you deleted, also because I couldn't find any evidence that it was a copyright violation. Some parts like the faculty list appear to be copied from elsewhere but I'm not convinced the entire article was, even if it's not formatted like a standard entry. Feel free to nominate it for deletion or point me to any sources you might have access to that I don't. Dcoetzee 22:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored the article US Geospatial Intelligence Foundation (USGIF) that you deleted, again, because, despite problems with tone and syntax, it clearly is written in the form of an article, contrary to your deletion summary. If you really don't want it around, I suggest you nominate it for articles for deletion. Dcoetzee 02:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the info on the negative energy deletion thing. Unless one of the other guys tries remaking it, im not sure you'll be seeing it up again. With luck it'll be up in a few years when we top the charts! it could happen. But until then, thanks for the info and I'll be sure to use DragonFlySixtySeven for all my future Admin. needs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.163.155.207 (talk) 22:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

commons encouraged on PD-self

Why did you take it off? Railwayfan2005 (talk) 21:54, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are some licensing concerns. It can go back on when they're all sorted out. DS (talk) 01:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where is this discussion taking place? Railwayfan2005 (talk) 20:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isconova

Hi, I wonder why "Isconova" was deleted ? What can I change before I Add the article again without risking a deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isconova (talk • contribs) 13:14, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted because it had been (or very very much looked like it had been) copied from a pre-existing corporate website. It felt promotional. If you can write an article about the company from scratch, using neutral language, and complying with the style recommendations in WP:LEAD, that will probably be good. DS (talk) 14:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dragonfly: I find the claim of "apparent copyvio" highly questionable, considering that you have not provided a source material and the very first edit included a variety of wiki syntax. I'm going to restore this article unless you provide a different reason that it should have been deleted - and "it felt promotional" isn't a good enough reason. Dcoetzee 21:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's g11 and was deleted as g12. If it were undeleted, it would likely be re-deleted as g11. DRV is thatta way if you believe that df67 was in error. --slakr\ talk / 22:14, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c)Most of it seems to be copied from here (one click away from the only link in the article) and the links in the sidebar of that page. It took me about 10 seconds to find that. In any case, the article is pretty blatantly advertising copy and short of a bunch of buzzwords like "Differentiated by its outstanding innovative technology" makes almost no assertion of notability. It was also created by a user with the same username as the company. None of this raises any red flags for you? This deletion was absolutely correct IMO. Mr.Z-man 22:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd add criterion A7 to the mix - an article about an organisation that "does not indicate why its subject is important or significant." Despite this, the article cited no references to assert notability or verifiability. Without these, it will likely be deleted via the Articles for Deletion process even if it does not fall under speedy deletion. Hope this helps, Gazimoff 22:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, you're right, Z-Man, I didn't spot that page (and it isn't indexed on Google). As for being advertisement, the forthright name of the user was in compliance of WP:COI - the tone of the article may have been a problem, but I don't think it's a valid G11 (it could have been edited into shape without being "fundamentally rewritten"). It was also not a valid A7 because it made clear claims of importance, such as "[b]road endorsement of ISCOM technology by well-reputed vaccine manufacturers; 8 license deals and 4 veterinary products marketed." But unless Isconova explicitly licenses the material from their webpage, it can't be used as the basis for an article, and I will accept the deletion on that basis. Dcoetzee 02:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the tone of the entire article is promotional, it would need an entire rewrite to be salvageable. Once you remove the meaningless buzzwords and marketing-speak, you're left with a list of board members and some random facts. The article in its last form was not remotely close to an encyclopedia article. Mr.Z-man 07:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gazimoff, and other experienced Wikipedia users. Please let me know what I need to do with this article before I upload it again. Gazimoff stated: "Unless Isconova explicitly licenses the material from their webpage, it can't be used as the basis for an article," How do I proove that I explictly licence the material from the company webpage ? The material in the written Isconova article was written by me, and yes, I used the presentation here as a base for the Article, but i did not "copy-paste" it and if you read the material once more, you´ll understand that its very diffrent from the original text. I have permission from the Company (Isconova) so please let me know jpw I can proove this. I did not have any marketing intentions when writing this article. The intentions is to have fundamental information about Isconova available on Wikipedia.I would appritiate some detailed assistance in this matter since I´m very new and unexperienced when it comes to editing/publishing material on Wikipedia. Please let me know what to do. Isconova 09:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Donating_copyrighted_materials#Granting_us_permission_to_copy_material_already_online. In short, you have to contact your company's legal department, who will then either have to place a suitable GFDL license statement on the webpages you use as source material, or send a GFDL permission letter to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Once you've done this you can use as much of this material as you like in the article. If this were done I would restore and help clean up the original article. Dcoetzee 09:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, all set now. I´m awaiting your reply/assistance. Many thanks. Isconova 14:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
If you mailed permissions-en@wikimedia.org, you will receive an e-mail response from them. Let me know when you do. Dcoetzee 22:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have received an email response now. Thank you very much for your help. What is the next step? Isconova 10:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isconova (talk • contribs)
I will continue this on your talk page, Isconova. Dcoetzee 22:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of Baby Fae

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Baby Fae, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Baby Fae seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Baby Fae, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 14:50, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DragonflySixtyseven. You have new messages at Tnxman307's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deletion of The 2904

Was wondering why the page The 2904 was deleted, and how it is not notable. It has the same history and content as similar events such as The 24 Hours of Lemons, and it just had a 7 page article in Top Gear magazine with a subscription base of over 1.8 million in the UK and 22 editions worldwide. CreativeFilmCars (talk) 20:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Deletion of Alpha Phi Gamma

I'd like to know why this page was deleted? There are over 50 other Greek organizations with pages on wikipedia. The page followed the same patterns as the other greek organizations (alpha kappa kappa, alpha phi alpha, alpha kappa delta phi, etc) describing the history of the organization, their locations and the types of community service they participate in. Alpha Phi Gamma is the same type of organization as any other Greek organization that currently exists. The links from these organizations all lead to external links related to their organization's websites. It seems out of pattern that the page for Alpha Phi Gamma cannot exist when there are others already posted. Aphigarchives (talk)

just passing by, but the usual practice is that if they are at only one or a few colleges--as is the case here-- they get deleted. Only the actually national ones are kept; this is exactly the same os for other types of organizations, per WP:ORG. DGG (talk) 05:30, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alpha Phi Gamma is located at 9 different universities at present and growing. Each of the Universities Alpha Phi Gamma is a part of has it listed as a Greek organization. You can refer to University of Missouri's greek page listed on Wikipedia for confirmation of theirs ("MU Greek Life"). By greek standards, an organization is considered national when there are a minimum of 7 locations. There are quite a few greek organizations that are smaller than Alpha Phi Gamma that have their own pages. All are listed as Greek organizations on at least two or three other pages within wikipedia itself ("List of social fraternities and sororities"). Alpha Phi Gamma is also part of the National Asian Pacific Islander American Panhellenic Association(NAPA). Aphigarchives (talk)

AfD nomination of Themis Music

An article that you have been involved in editing, Themis Music, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Themis Music. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Deletion of Electromagnetic Fields Recorded in Mesocyclones

I loaded Electromagnetic Fields Recorded in Mesocyclones which has plenty of references and the copy is transferable as per The National Weather Digest policy. It has been inserted in many other online encyclopedias as well. It was accepted into the National Weather Digest upon a two year peer review. I was editing it in my spare time to fit Wikipedia's criteria online and was hoping others would come online to help contribute. If you wanted a perfect copy up in the first place, then why do you allow any just Tom, Dick, and Harry to edit all existing articles and to place any random text up? Electromagnetic Fields Recorded in Mesocyclones has merit. Instead of simply "Deleting", could you not find it within your "Expert" writing field to help fine tune or even help to make recommendations to get this fixed as per Wikipedias criteria? Your profile seems to be extensive in helping others get their papers accepted. User talk:Richard Heene Richard Heene (talk) 15:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC) January 28, 2009[reply]

Lake at Kensico Cemetery

It's OK for you to delete the photo of the lake at Kensico Cemetery (file name too generic), because I already uploaded this photo at Kensico Cemetery under a different filename.

Anthony22 (talk) 00:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ub

thanks for vandalizing the userbox PRODUCER (TALK) 19:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for destroying a thoughtprovoking piece of art, dragonfly. Way to go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.187.65.116 (talk) 23:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

My RFA passed today at 150/48/6. I wanted to thank you for weighing in on the RFA--I will do everything I can to uphold the policies of this site, and try to make it a better place. All the comments, questions, and in particular the opposes I plan to work on and learn from, so that I can hopefully always do the right thing with the huge trust given to me. rootology (C)(T) 08:22, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Philippe Dubois

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Philippe Dubois, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Not notable.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Bladeofgrass (talk) 22:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Goatleg

You indef blocked him as a grawp sock. However, his talk page is unprotected - and thus is a very likely target. I would recommend that either you protect it, or delete it entirely. (No goatse pl0x.) Inferno, Lord of Penguins 03:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I just mentioned that because in the past grawp sock pages have been targets for other grawp socks. Inferno, Lord of Penguins 03:39, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marsden Collage

Have read your comment and fully understand it.

{Weglinde (talk) 08:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC)}[reply]

ماهستیم

You have deleted this article with the rationale "wrong language." Actually, it was listed at WP:PNT and not slated for prod before next Tuesday. (It will probably end up being prodded by then, so I'm not sure it's worth the trouble of restoring.) Just a reminder that CSD A2 only applies if the article is a copy of an article that already exists in a foreign-language Wikipedia, which doesn't seem to be the case here. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 00:28, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored it. Dcoetzee 03:54, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Restored articles

I have restored the following articles that you deleted.

My reasons are described in the restore summaries, and I invite you to nominate any of them for AfD if you like. I caution you against deleting user talk pages containing recent warnings, as well as to refrain from making decisions of notability unilaterally. Remember that categories can also provide context, even in articles with no introduction. I also remind you to use the speedy deletion dropdown more often; most of your deletion summaries are too brief and may confuse or mislead new contributors. The reasons in the speedy deletion dropdown include helpful explanatory links. Dcoetzee 05:34, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for restoring those two user talk pages - I checked the block log incorrectly and didn't see that they were blocked. Those were correct deletions. I want to emphasize that I have nothing against you and I would have consulted you prior to making any of these restorations if I thought you would answer. I don't know why you ignore me but I really just want to help avoid getting good articles like US Geospatial Intelligence Foundation deleted. Please let me know how you would like me to treat these cases. Dcoetzee 21:41, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

St Nicholas Suns Basketball Club

You deleted this article because of 'notability not asserted'. I know wikipedia is seen by alot of young students and since our aim is to promote sports and not drugs we decided to begin this article. We are trying to build this article and refering to same sport clubs as on Wikipedia.Hope you understand . [[user;Rlr0304] 9 February 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlr0304 (talk • contribs) 14:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kazuba User: Page

Well, whatever. I would like to get a copy of my user page which you deleted. Is that possible? I have no printer at the present time. It may be a week or two till I get one. Please reply. That page was a lot of work. I hate to lose it all. I am totally lost on computer stuff. I could use a little help a six year old would understand Charlie Turek charlesturek@comcast.net Kazuba (talk) 03:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Birkett`

Heya, thanks for the work. One thing; judgement is judgement, not judgment; see this for example. Ironholds (talk) 09:13, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

from the very source you quote, Ironholds: "in Great Britain and many of its former colonies, “judgement” is still the correct spelling" Wikipedia is international -- but Birkett is British, so articles about him should be written in British English, not American English .(International topics are written in whatever version they're started in.) See Wikipedia:MOS#Consistency within articles DGG (talk) 04:32, 14 February 2009 (UTC) DGG (talk) 04:33, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
...yeah, that was my point. See the edits made by Dragonfly67 in which otherwise excellent (thanks, btw) copyediting was marred by a respelling of "judgement" as "judgment". Ironholds (talk) 04:58, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marysville

I did look carefully at what you changed and I rather resent your claim that I did not. Your edit still remains inappropriate with claims like this "Marysville depended heavily on tourism" (my bolding) and removal of "During the snow season, the population of the town may double or even triple, due to the influx of other hospitality and tourism caterers, such as ski hire, toboggan hire, chain hire, and many other profitable ventures associated with snowplay and skiing." Tourism will take a hit but will continue; the town is still at the foot of the Lake Mountain ski resort and when the eucalypts regenerate (which they do remarkably quicky, being well adapted to a fire prone area) the area will regain its natural beauty.

This desire to write off the town and its industry less than a week after the fire is unseemly and quite frankly original research. Where is your evidence that Marysville will no longer rely on tourism? Do you even know which resorts and caravan parks have been destroyed? If you do you know more than most of the media in Aust. who have had limited access to the site. I am reverting again and suggest that everyone takes a break before deciding that whole industries are in the past. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ein barnstarengefilteshtein

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your copyedit of Norman Birkett, now a GA, who was involved in the Nuremberg trials (hence my germanificationkraftwerk of the header). Thanks again! Ironholds (talk) 03:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CintaNotes

Hello! You have recently deleted the page about CintaNotes, a personal notes manager with the comment: "Freeware + Beta release in January 2009 + no reviews = not yet notable. Try again once people have noticed." Could you please elaborate what exactly do you mean with "people have noticed". Googling for "CintaNotes" produces currently 1,490,000 results. There are also many independent reviews, for example:

http://lifehacker.com/5136054/cintanotes-is-a-web+clip+friendly-notes-manager

http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/02/03/portable-cintanotes-saves-text-clippings-from-any-app/

http://cintanotes.en.softonic.com

http://www.killerstartups.com/Web-App-Tools/cintanotes-com-a-free-personal-notes-manager

http://www.barrysbestblog.com/2009/02/cintanotes-easiest-way-to-store-text.html

There are also many reviews in languages other than English.

CintaNotes is in public beta, like Google Mail.

I'd be grateful if you could tell me what exactly is lacking in order to qualify. Thanks beforehand!

Regards, Alexjenter (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Thanks for restoring the article! Alexjenter (talk) 04:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP 212.183.134.209 blocked

Hello DragonflySixtyseven, I am an admin from Thai Wikipedia. Do you mind to review this IP blocked [1]? It seems that a non-techie Thai Wikipedia (who makes a great contribution 10,000+) using that IP as well. She has a problem when browsing English Wikipedia. Now she tried to usurp the account, but the IP was blocked to do that.

Some info can be found here th:user_talk:Mattis#IP_บล็อก; but it's in Thai.

Thank you. --Manop - TH (talk) 18:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yazketbal

Hello, As scribe and historian of the YAA I would like to know why our page was deleated. It is a growing sport and while it does seem unconventional, is a great form of entertainment.

Happy DragonflySixtyseven's Day!

User:DragonflySixtyseven has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as DragonflySixtyseven's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear DragonflySixtyseven!

Peace,
Rlevse
~

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Sam (koala)

Updated DYK query On February 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sam (koala), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 11:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

daily patroller stats

This is a start on monitoring who is doing the patrolling. It reports the stats of the last completed day according to GMT. The link to the log will not always be accurate because the stats exclude automatic patrolled pages, however they always appear in the log. To limit the impact of that design limitation of this hack, the log link takes the reader to "number of manually approved pages + 1" so the reader should expect an additional log entry from a prior day. John Vandenberg (chat) 11:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Papayana

Hi, I found this page in a google search. Regarding the term 'papayana', as a Sri Lankan Buddhist I've heard monks use it when describing history - where Mahayana was stamped out of Sri Lanka. I'm not sure if there are any written records, but if you ask some Sri Lankans you might find some info.

Blacking out

I think that the term 'blacking out' refers to completely extinguishing any remaining embers from a bushfire, in order to prevent, or reduce the risk of, the fire flaring up again. Figaro (talk) 09:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chess set articles

If you want to have the articles deleted then use AFD don't just delete them. These chess sets are very notable and were used for hundreds of years. Now put them back! Green Squares (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC) Don't be a dick put the articles back and use the AFD, and build a concensus, the admin powers you have are not to be abused. Green Squares (talk) 01:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Comanche

I do not understand why The Comanche shouldn't be a disamb page. It isn't certain that someone typing The Comanche definitely wants Comanche. Kingturtle (talk) 20:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i don't mean to be rude but why did you get involved and yes im willing to apologize i just wanted him to leave me alone sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bushey001 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

er...I am involved because I made the edit. Kingturtle (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic patrolling of tagged pages at New Page patrol

Hi there. There is a suggestion to get a bot to patrol any New Page that an editor has tagged for CSD, AfD, etc. As someone who patrols a lot, your opinion is particularly welcomed. --GedUK  10:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Wrist Instability

Wrist Instability (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

It would seem that User:Wrist Instability has betrayed your good-faith assessment of sincerity. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 09:35, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Compsci, DWITE - Not notable?

Hi I'm not sure why you removed the DWITE page especially because that contact has been going on well before the owners at compsci.ca took over - it was and still is recognized among many high schools, how is it that once the owners of compsci.ca took over, it became "not notable"?

As well, if you search the web for help on Turing, you mind find your self constantly being referred to compsci.ca - why? Because its probably the largest (only?) site that provides support for Turing (programming language), that its self should make it notable.

Under what basis do you deem these pages "not notable" ?

Amailer (talk)

Well, firstly, I'm going to say that I have no idea which article this was. I'd need the exact name to be able to answer. Secondly, I don't delete things as "not notable", I delete them as "notability not asserted". The problem is not with the topic, but with the article. DS (talk) 21:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Jeake

Sorry I missed the message on IRC;

The article is fine, for a stub. I fixed up some links and made the refs better. I'm not sure if 'addend' should wikilink to addition, or would a wiktionary be more appropriate?

Personal preference, I don't like "" too much, so I wouldn't bother putting "addend" and the other one in quotes. I think wikilink highlight is sufficient; I only use quotes for quoting. But I know others do.

I found 2 pages that mentioned him, so put links into them; Zenzizenzizenzic and Exponentiation. edit - they already were links --  Chzz  ►  06:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, --  Chzz  ►  06:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Franek Kluski

I think I've tamed this one. Remove the dispute tag if you agree. Cheers. - LuckyLouie (talk) 18:52, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Cairoli

Just thought I should explain that I reverted your edit on the article as I am in the middle of working on it, hence the "In Use" tag requesting other users not to edit while it is on there. Also your edit created an edit conflict as I was slap bang in the middle of an edit. I have though put most of your edit back in, however, I have also restored the Irish Sea wikilink which you removed and replaced with the generic "ocean" as Irish Sea is correct. Thank you and have fun.--♦Tangerines♦·Talk 20:35, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Benadillo

Can I ask why you deleted my BHR Comics page? Do you have any idea how long it took me to make that?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DragonflySixtyseven&oldid=275469505"