User talk:Dan1679

Welcome to the Talk page for user AbsolutDan

If you are initiating a new conversation, please click here or use the + sign above (next to the edit this page button) to create a new section for your comment. If you are continuing an existing/past discussion that is less than 14 days old (not yet archived), please find the discussion and click "edit" to add your comment to that discussion. Please be civil. If you have a problem with any of my edits or reverts, please state the issue calmly and factually, and I will respond in kind. If you are not civil, I may choose to not respond. Please sign & date all comments by adding ~~~~ at the end of the comment. If you need to discuss something that doesn't belong on the Talk page, email me. Please note that Wikipedia E-Mail often ends up in my Junk E-Mail folder, so if you do e-mail me, please drop a quick line on my talk page as well to notify me of the incoming e-mail so I'll be sure to check it. Also, I use IRC (freenode) once in a blue moon, if you'd prefer a real-time chat.

Template:Werdnabot

Archives
Archive001 Archive002 Archive003 Archive004 Archive005 Archive006 Archive007 Archive008 Archive009

Reply to Articles for deletion/MojoMojo

Hi AbsolutDan,

Please see the reply to Articles for deletion/MojoMojo on my talk page. We are seeking independent writeups about MojoMojo in specialty journals. Is there a way to keep the page alive in the meantime, perhaps by indicating that it needs more references? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dandv (talk • contribs) 00:53, 3 March 2009

Borgeet

Thanks for your msg. I've added an external link in the article for verification. Plz have a look.--Footage (talk) 02:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello Footage,

I did see the external link you added. The reason I reinstated the {{refimprove}} tag is because the article currently only has one source; the "Folklore of Assam" book. Articles should rely on multiple, reliable sources. The external link appears to be one person's website (see [1]), and probably could not be considered a WP:RS. If you can find other reliable sources, feel free to then remove the {{refimprove}} tag again. Best regards, --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 02:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

The link I added is [2], not the one you show me ([3]). It is a site maintained by Govt. of Assam. I'm still confused, you plz advise. With regards --Footage (talk) 03:17, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Both of these links are from the same website. The link I showed you is to help illustrate that onlinesivasagar.com is a personal website, not an official one. The site is operated by an "Abhijit Borah", not the Government of Assam. Look at the small print at the bottom of both of these pages. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 03:23, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

My apologies. I didn't notice that. Thanks again. I've got another link ([[4]]), will it be fine? Regards --Footage (talk) 03:31, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

No problem! I think the new link will help, however what's really needed are what Wikipedia considers "reliable sources"; these have editorial oversight. A rule of thumb to determine a reliable source is: "Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand". These can be other books, published magazines, newspapers, etc. Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources & WP:RS can help you determine if a source is considered reliable. Cheers, --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 03:36, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. So can I remove the {{refimprove}} tag now? --Footage (talk) 03:40, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Not just yet, india9.com is not clearly a reliable source. So, right now the article has only one confirmed reliable source - the book. If you can find another book, magazine, newspaper or similar, I think the tag could then be removed. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 03:44, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Editing article Katja Rahlwes

Hello Absolutdan
I edited and added some references and sources to the article Katja Rahlwes Could you tell me what you think of this new edit ? Do you think we can get rid of the article issues banners ?
Thanks a lot
Lake Lakehunter09 (talk) 14:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakehunter09 (talk • contribs) 14:00, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Dear Lakehunter,

Thank you for finding some sources for the article. These are a good start. However, they all seem to be what Wikipedia considers to be "trivial" mentions; in other words, none of them seem to discuss Katja in any significant detail. Most seem to be taglines to photos indicating that Katja is the photographer. In order for an article to be properly sourced, there needs to be more in-depth writing about Katja in reliable sources. I have changed the "unreferenced" to "refimprove", indicating now that it needs additional sources. The "notability" tag should remain as well, again due to the lack of more concrete sources. The remainder, "wikify" and "cleanup" indicate that there is some formatting-related work that needs to be done on the article.

Good work so far! Keep looking for more sources, and let me know if you find any that you'd like me to review. Cheers, --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 23:36, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

re: deletion of usc blogs/links

Dear Absolute Dan,

Good day!

The link I added in the University of San Carlos page was not in any form of vandalism (FYI) and that the link was a good resource (and verified since I am a Cebuano and an alumnus of USC) of old pictures of the University so as the site can be more appreciated by the readers.

I tried to embed the file so as not to post links but to no avail since those wonderful pictures of the old Colegio de San Carlos (Now University of San Carlos) was copyrighted by the owners of the blog site/pictures.

The first picture shows the then Colegio de San Carlos (University of San Carlos) at the old Martires St. site (now M.J. Cuenco) prior to being moved to its present site along P. del Rosario St.

The succeeding pictures shows the post WW-II University of San Carlos buildings at P. del Rosario St.

Thanks!

Erik —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.248.138 (talk) 04:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Erik,

I removed the link primarily for three reasons: first, the site is a blog, which are rarely considered to be reliable sources of information (information of any kind). Second, the text that was added to the article: "Click on the link, University of San Carlos: old and new photos" isn't appropriate for the text of an article. Lastly, we try at Wikipedia to limit our reliance upon external links. One reason for this is that Wikipedia content is intended for use in many different mediums, including print. In a print version of University of San Carlos, the external link would, of course, not be very helpful to the reader.

Because of this last point, the idea is to incorporate as much material as possible into the article itself. Are there other photos available that could be properly uploaded to Wikipedia? That would be the best way to improve this article. If the photos at this link are the best out there, perhaps you could contact the website owner and ask him/her to release his photos in a license appropriate for Wikipedia. You may find that the owner would be happy to share his work with our project!

The reason I marked the latest addition as vandalism was that I had already removed the link with a "soft" explanation of "rv - blogs not reliable sources" - thus indicating the proper reason for removal. I'm glad you chose to send me a message after the 2nd removal so that we could have this discussion. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Regards, --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 14:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Lava lle and Sports marketing Group

Added the following in discussion. Also, I apologize for placing in archive, since I didn't know where to place.

Gentlemen, I'd advise examining other pages of companies in this industry that have virtually no cites and are far more biased than anything written on these pages. I will have my students add more to these other companies and individuals with proper cites. You simply can't ignore a multibillion industry in America that keeps you watching and attending NASCAR or WWE wrestling or whatever floats your individual likes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESPN_Sports_Poll http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Luker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMG_(business) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProServ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Marketing_Arm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millsport http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doyle_Dane_Bernbach Mark McCormack was a billionaire and counseled everyone from the Pope to Tiger Woods and virtually every CEO in America. Without money, expertise, and research, there would be no NASCAR. To delete any of these companies or persons would be a tragic mistake. We are not the wiki police deciding what is relevant and what you may not find relevant is very relevant to others. Sports management and marketing classes are majors at many colleges and universities as well as MBA programs in the discipline. If you want to add, edit etc that is fine and what wiki is about, but don't let personal views dictate and cloud your judgments. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&as_q=&as_epq=sports+management+program&as_oq=college+university&as_eq=&num=100&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=off Many of the above wiki pages need to be beefed up and cited. We shall do in coming weeks. However, scan any company or person on wiki and I am sure you can criticize any. Few pages have as many cites and references as these pages do and the pages we've edited and added to. Sports marketing and management are a major part of American business and education see http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&as_q=&as_epq=sports+marketing&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=100&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=off http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&newwindow=1&as_q=&as_epq=sports+management&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=100&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=off Ignoring the companies and individuals that contributed to this massive worldwide industry would be wrong. Additional comments. I have read the wiki policies and comments. Neutral point of view is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles, and of all article editors. Please note: The above label is meant to indicate that a discussion is ongoing, and hence that the article contents are disputed and volatile. If you add the above code to an article which seems to be biased to you, but there is no prior discussion of the bias, you need to at least leave a note on the article's talk page describing what you consider unacceptable about the article. The note should address the problem with enough specificity to allow constructive discussion towards a resolution, such as identifying specific passages, elements, or phrasings that are problematic I see tons of criticism, but no specific passages, elements or phrasings listed. Sim redid tons on the article. I'd suggest someone go and ID negative info about the company or Lavlle and see what can be added. Am I wrong here? Not trying to argue, but to discuss valid points. Also, anyone is free to report on any additional info. The info is all sourced, cited, and uses extensive quotes from reliable sources that are cited. I have yet to see such a well cited story here. I know I am in a man's world, but come on guys, some specifics as to what is not reliable, not fact, etc. is appropriate I think rather than any personal views or bias, yours or mine, that are all natural in their selection. Some of you all may like blondes over brunettes, small over big, individual sports over team ones... you get my point. Let's address specifics, rather than personalities and personas. KrissyPope (talk) 05:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)