User talk:DangerousPanda

Bubble tea!

-download | sign! has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the awesomeness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:User:Download/Bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

vandalizm

reverting everything of my edits is vandalizm if i understood correct —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blablaaa (talk • contribs) 19:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

i have done nearly all of this here [[1]] , what now? i spended hours to search for admins and search for third opionion, i spended hour to explain my edits and ask for explanation of his ones. i create maps for the article and add content, and he reverts it always . what is this, what is the name for this. can someone simply what to do. i want to improve the article i add statements and entire sections and he reverts without explanations. what are my options, deleting my account. everyone sends me links to "disolve disputes" i have done this already this methods dont work... Blablaaa (talk) 20:17, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Blablaaa and Dapi seem to have reached an agreement to work together collegially going forward, so I have unblocked him. If you think I've missed something, I won't consider reinstating the block to be wheel warring. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 13:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Nah, we'll see how this one goes. Cheers! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Alexandra Daddario

Hi. The birth info you added was already removed four times already, for reasons I explained on that article's Talk Page. Please do not add it again without citing a reliable source in the article text. Nightscream (talk) 17:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

A little more polite might have been nice. Do you prefer tv.com ? movietome.com ? listown.com ? I can find a few dozen sites that list the birthday the same way. It's a non-controvertial piece of information. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you thought I was not polite. (Which passage was impolite?) D.O.B. is not "minor". It is important information that like all other info, must be sourced. The only information on Wikipedia that doesn't need to be sourced is stuff like "Christmas is on December 25". Yes, other BLP's lack sourcing for this, and they are wrong too. I didn't know you were an admin, though. But yes, I argue this point frequently, since WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:RS and WP:CS must be upheld.

If there are "multiple sources", and they pass WP:RS, then adding them should be easy. As long as they pass WP:RS and are given in the form of an inline citation, any of them would be fine. Sources whose content is user-generated, however, do not pass WP:RS. The content on TV.com, for example, is user-generated. If you look at the movietome page for Alexandra, you'll notice the link that says "Submit a bio", which would indicate the same thing about that site as well. As for listown, I don't know if the links that say, "Join In", "Submit Blog", or "Post A AD" would indicate the same thing, but I started a discussion at RSN to address this. The bottom line is, you can't just slap any ol' info in an article because you found it elsewhere on the internet. Blogs, sites with user-generated content, sites that mirror Wikikpedia, etc., are not reliable.

See this at the top of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons:

Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.

See also Jimmy Wales' words on the subject here. Nightscream (talk) 18:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Križevci anchor

Hi, I was wondering, under which criterion did you speedy delete the Križevci anchor article? Timbouctou (talk) 18:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Notability. It was originally tagged as too short to get the context, but from what I read, it was clearly a private zoo - context was great. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

R3

Why did you speedily delete Craig hoffman under R3? The name of an article in lower case letters is a completely plausible search term, is it not? Swarm^(Talk) 22:45, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

No, not the way the search engine works. We don't do redirects from lowercase. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:14, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

We don't? Every article name I've ever typed in in lowercase redirected me to the proper article. WP:R even mentions "likely alternative capitalizations" as a reason for redirecting. The other thing is that you speedied it as implausible. Do you really think typing something in lowercase is implausible? I do it all the time, since Wikipedia is streamlined enough to not give me an annoying search engine page every time I don't capitalize someone's last name. Swarm^(Talk) 20:35, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I have restored it. Honestly, more polite discussion would have been more beneficial than the above - I'm extremely open to positive discourse in these matters, and DRV sure would not have been needed. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:10, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I sincerely apologize, BWilkins. I didn't mean to come off as rude, but I see that I did. At the time I felt that I stated my argument clearly and rationally, and since you didn't respond to me (though I saw you were responding to later comments), I assumed you were not going to listen to me any more, so I asked for the deletion review. However, if it was rudeness that caused you not to repsond, again, I'm sorry. I don't know why I took such a hostile tone, but it was quite dickish on my part. If it's worth anything to you, thanks for overturning your deletion. Regards, Swarm^(Talk) 01:33, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Why you delete my article?

Why you delete my article?

In my article there's nothing show promotion/advertising

about profile company

so please, don't delete my article

Johannovtirajamal (talk) 04:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The article (note: it's not your article) has three specific tags related to its deletion on your talkpage as to why it should not remain on Wikipedia. It has now been deleted 3 times because of it. It included the text of a speech from the chairman - it can't get much more promotional than that. It ended up with the phrase "Get the brighter future with Telkom Education Foundation" - that's pure sales/promotion. It was also deleted once as a copyright violation. Because you failed to respond to the problems, and simply re-created it, it has been prevented from re-creation at this time. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:21, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

translation Salpêtrière school

Thank you for adding the references. I was planning on adding them en vrac as they say in french, doing all the references at once. With regards to the title...Charcot is associated with Salpêtrière and the Salpêtrière school is referred to in other articles in english on hypnosis. Or we can use Salpêtrière School of hypnosis...or Salpêtrière School (Charcot) The French title is, as you see, the Salpêtrière School (Hypnosis) but I don't find it satisfactory. The Paris School is really associated with art and it might be too confusing. I will continue to think about this. Thank you for the help. Will you be helping in the future? If so, let me know if this is a good way to communicate.--Lilymaielang 08:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilymaielang (talk • contribs)

Selina Hakki

Just had a question. At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Selina Hakki this was closed as a redirect to Flunitrazepam#Drug-facilitated_robbery but it looks like the page was deleted and no redirect left. I was thinking of adding this as a redirect, but thought I'd check first in case there was some reasoning that I missed. Thanks.--Cube lurker (talk) 19:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Fixed ... for some reason, the "delete before redirect" missed the second half of that command. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.--Cube lurker (talk) 14:43, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Singarella

An article that you have been involved in editing, Singarella, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Singarella. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Woogee (talk) 22:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I declined a speedy as it was tagged wrong, and made some minor fixes as I did ... why not just PROD it? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

That attack page

In fact that page, if you read it, is not preparing to file a sock puppet case. The case has already been decided on the majority of that list, with clear evidence that it was not proven as I noted in my complaint about the page at WP:AN on the accounts MisterSoup, KermitClown and SkagRiverKing. Those names were disproven already at an WP:SPI case. It's nothing but speculation and allegations about editors in good standing with no proof or diffs to support his suspicions. Four of the names are of editors in good standing. But you know, go ahead and run a checkuser for Pinkadelica, Crohnie, Mosedschurte and Yachtsman1. They are not me and I am not them. I don't even know where he dug up Mosedschurte and Yachtsman1, except from articles we've worked on. That page also contains attack commentary like "Possibly relevant: the contents of User:Wildhartlivie/Viewpoints & Politics are all pretty straightforward lefty stuff, so you'd think there'd be a pro–gay rights or gay marriage box there. Nope." Judgment of my political beliefs and stances based on userboxes on my userpage and conclusions based on his POV from that. This page is not a SPI case in progess, it exists solely as an attack. I find the reticence of some of the administrators here to deal with this disappointing and a huge let down. It does qualify under WP:CSD G10 and the editor clearly said he "would probably delete it in the near future" here, so how does that support he has any intention to use it. He's gone around to various talk pages all over this website posting content just like this, which I won't revert because he'll attack me for doing it and how interesting that no one will revert it or deal with the attack page either. Yeah, I was blocked last month for a week, but damn it, I did my block time and for some reason, I keep coming up against reluctance from administrators to deal with any issues that are raised by other editors that I bring up. What? I'm scum now? I don't deserve to have done my "time" and come back? Wildhartlivie (talk) 16:08, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not willing to speedy it ... I said to MFD it. It's nothing against you here, and MFD is most common for this case. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

But if I nominate it for MFD, then I am opening myself up to being attacked again. I wrote to three different administrators about this, as well as a couple editors who are active in AN and AN/I and dispute resolution and no one responded. Wildhartlivie (talk) 16:31, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

G10 doesn't only apply to BLP subjects, Bwilkins. No comment as to whether it actually meets G10's other facets though. –xeno^talk 16:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Craig hoffman

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Craig hoffman. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Swarm^(Talk) 22:18, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

As above. More polite discourse could have avoided this. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Tedd-the-Tiger

Hello, I note your comment on User talk:Tedd-the-Tiger about the deletion of user talk archives. However, according to WP:DELTALK, it is only archives created by page moves that should not be deleted (as deleting would clear the history). User talk archives created by simple copy-and-paste appear to be OK as all the information is retained in the user talk page's history. Would you be able to delete the archive of Tedd-the-Tiger's talk page (which was created by the cut-and-paste method rather than page move, retaining history on main user talk page) please? If there's a problem I would be happy to discuss. Thanks, Arctic Night 04:28, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Never mind, solved now. Thanks, Arctic Night 08:42, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Pieter Markoe

You deleted Pieter Markoe under WP:CSD#A1 (no context). It seems to me that the statement in the article that "Peter Markoe was Dep. Gov at British Spanish Town (Virgin Gorda)ca. 1718" provided context. The article could have used expansion, copyediting, and better sourcing, but I think the context was there for anyone interested to find out more. Please consider undeleting it. Thank you. DES ^(talk) 05:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Reading the article, the first and longest sentence was about Jan, the second about Peter, and the third was about Philip ... the context problem therefore was that "who is the article really about"? Although I now see that there's some obvious COI (someone doing some family history), I would be happy to userfy it for the editor. I will defer to your take on it - let me know. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

There is at least one google books result. Please userfy to me (or to the incubator if you prefer), i will either source this well enough for a return to article space, or (if I can't) transfer it to the creating editor, or delete it if that editor does not want it. DES ^(talk) 19:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done It's here for you. Cheers! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:56, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. DES ^(talk) 16:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Talk page concerns

Hi - I gave User:JoyDiamond an ultimatum about changing or removing her talk page content based on the fact that the majority of what is there violates WP's talk page guidelines. She did not respond. Where should I go to have this situation looked at for fair, unbiased administrator opinion (minus the chiding and mocking and gneral unhelpfulness I have been subjected to on other occasions when requesting similar comments re: JD)? --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 17:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:BEANS, SRQ.... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd leave her be honestly - stay as far away from her talkpage as possible. I know I said the same thing months ago. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:47, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Daniel Rostén

This created redlinks and broke a (my) redirect and you removed an important disambiguation for Arioch. Presently if someone searches for Mortuus or Arioch there is absolutely nothing concerning the man. What do you propose? I have justified my reasons for making the page but I feel they are falling on deaf ears. A redirect to Funeral Mist or Marduk doesn't work. Wikipedia needs this page. Urpunkt^☎ 17:48, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

As this has come to my notice, I do feel that a deletion done in a speedy and unilateral manner is grossly inappropriate and counter-productive. Could it not have been simply nominated for deletion or had a notice inserted so people familiar with the subject and perhaps willing to devote time - which people who delete articles in such indiscriminate fashion seem to lack - to making improvements could have some input instead? Is that a problem? Dark Prime (talk) 21:40, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I haven't received a response and I do want to create this article again. So here goes: Daniel Rostén.Urpunkt^☎ 23:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with restoration as it didn't meet A7 criterion, since there was a "credible claim of significance or importance". However, references need to be added. Ty 23:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Ditto on references. Also, more information could be included - such as the incident a couple of months ago with a drunk fan on stage, and Morgan's reasons for choosing Mortuus in light of Marduk's history with Legion. Dark Prime (talk) 23:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

(ec)The speedy request was actually removed by User:Mhking,[2] who had originally placed it,[3] and then replaced along with "hang on" a minute later[4] (presumably by mistake with a near edit-conflict) by Urpunkt, who wants to keep the article. Ty 23:50, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

In the light of all the above, I've restored all versions of the article and talk page. I hope that is OK with you, Bwilkins. Ty 00:00, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

No prob - I was off throwing up most of last evening, didn't get a chance to clear up issues. It was - as noted - not a unilateral deletion. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:59, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Glad we could sort this out, thanks Urpunkt^☎ 09:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Some crossed wires, but sorted. I hope you are recovered. Doesn't sound a very pleasant evening. Ty 17:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Not fully yet, but thanks. I still see zero notability in the article ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Pieter Markoe correction

My contribution regarding Pieter Markoe was brief because there was no elaborate way to say Pieter Markoe was not the Governor of Dutch St. Eustatius in 1736-1737. The interim gov that period was Jan Markoe, Jr. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkoeJohn (talk • contribs) 12:53, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

As you can see above, the short article was userfied into a good editor's hands to see if they can do something to fix it. Sources are always vital. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

RE: PROD VS CSD

Sure thingMod mmg (talk) 21:46, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I had been given advice to use PROD on my new page patrol, rather than speedydelete, however, the fact that the page in question was being deleted under a CSD policy on a PROD tag dosen't discredit the fact that the page needed to be deleted. Whether the page was to be deleted under CSD or PROD is irrelevant, it was to be deleted. I have been given advice to delete with a PROD tag when patrolling new pages, and the page was to be deleted under a CSD policy. My point: it was going to be deleted anyway, CSD or PROD.Mod mmg (talk) 07:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)Reply on my talk page.

EDIT: I also refer you here for a wikipedia policy that justifies my reasoning. You may also want to read up on thispolicy as well as this one.

Mod mmg (talk) 07:47, 26 February 2010 (UTC)Reply on my talk page.

How so, did you look at the policies I refered to?
Mod MMG (User Page) Reply on my talkpage. DO NOT CLICK this link 00:47, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Userfication request

Could you please userificate the Sniff Petrol article you deleted and transfer it to my userspace? Thanks. --Ckyliu (talk) 15:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

It was created and deleted. It went through AfD and was deleted by community decision. You then created it again. I can userfy it, but first, explain to me what you're going to do differently this time. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I didn't create the previous versions of this article and I've never seen them, so as far as I'm aware, the new version should already be substantially different and therefore shouldn't of been deleteable under CFSD G4. The previous deletion logs, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sniff_Petrol, mention reasons for deletion as CFSD A3, A7, WP:WEB, lack of references, all of which I was attempting to address more thoroughly and seeking advice on when the article was deleted, hence the request for userification. Since deletion I have found mention of this e-magazine in The Times[5] and Irish Times[6]. My actual feeling is that as a substantially different article in the process of being written it should of gone through AfD again, or at least been give more than 12 hours, hence the userification request. --Ckyliu (talk) 16:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC) PS: I'd be grateful if you could grab me the talk page for the article too, many thanks.

Ok, it's located in your userspace here. WP:CSD does not require anyone to be given 12hr notice - indeed, having read it, I would have A7'd the article (in fact I think I did). Good luck! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much :-) --77.86.126.237 (talk) 02:02, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Bot Trial Complete?

Once you're satisfied that the trial conditions have been met, add {{BotTrialComplete}} and a comment to the BRFA. I've reviewed the log and have seen nothing where the bot opted for deletion inappropriately (I am not an admin). Josh Parris 01:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for your work on this! I look forward to WildBot tagging for G7 again :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:25, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Now that the bot is approved, I've turned tagging back on. Yay! Josh Parris 08:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Recreate Article

I will no longer write anything to do with advertising or promotion I will make back the article "Telkom Education Foundation" was without any promotion or advertising so please get me to This article in Wikipedia and also I will not repeat it again so please allow me to make it again with what has been defined by Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johannovtirajamal (talk • contribs) 13:47, 25 February 2010 (UTC)--Johannovtirajamal (talk) 06:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC) Johannovtirajamal (talk) 07:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: User:Alloyvalves

I've been away from WP for a few days and came back to see how you handled User:Alloyvalves' unblock request (I was the one who initially blocked her). My compliments - I think you handled it absolutely perfectly.--Kubigula (talk) 01:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks ... appreciate the note! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

purple.travel

hello, i want to add this new social network i found online to the list of social networks but i can't do it..can you please tell me what i should do ..thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Madmatte (talk • contribs) 11:30, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

There are millions of social networking sites, and this one is not notable, so unless you can somehow find when it becomes notable, it has no place. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Awesome (window manager)

Hi, I discovered that you have deleted the page about the Awesome WM. I wonder if there is a possibility to reestablish this article. Since I am only a casual contributer here at en-wikipedia I am not very familiar with the common rules here. On my home-WP (de) I would simply utter a recovery request or participate in a deletion debate. Both things seem to work differently here and I could not find an appropriate entry point for a discussion. I used the Awesome page at en-WP as a source of information about this WM until a German page will be available. So I would be very interested in a recovery. Regards, --HV (talk) 14:10, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It did go through a deletion discussion here, and the decision was clearly to delete. Restoring the information was therefore invalid. Have a look at the discussion and let me know what you think. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Hm, the discussion seems to me being a bit biased by people who simply never heard about this WM and so do not care about it. I am a only an occasional user of this software, which I consider as indeed very useful in some situations, but did until yet never realize that the group of users might be a minority. In fact I do know some other people who use it more seriously than me, but that's about it. Unfortunately I now discovered the deletion discussion here too late. I would have argued that awesome is part of the window managers repository of openSuse (see here). Same is true I think for ubuntu and other linux distris. So this I think is a strong criterion for keeping it, because that's the way usually people get the idea to install this software and then possibly consult wikipedia for more information. How could I continue to revive this article? Or is it too late now? --HV (talk) 12:32, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

What I would do would be to draft a new article in your personal userspace (WP:SANDBOX). Source it, ensure notability, and all the key requirements of Wikipedia. When you think it looks good, have a few people take a look - maybe even some of those who !voted in the Deletion discussion. Articles that are similar to one that was deleted via AFD can been immediately removed - the new article would have to be much different, and much better. I also suggest the title might not have been great ... is "windows manager" really a good disambiguation, or would "software" have been better? Hope thees suggestions help (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:12, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

For the time being I would not consider myself as being able to contribute with a better article. As I said above I am only an occasional user of awesome and just beginning with it. As a reader I used the article as a source of information (and luckily could save a version of it from google-cache). Secondly English is not my mother tongue and so I somewhat hesitate contributing a whole article to this wikipedia. What I could do is informing the other people I know which use awesome regularly and ask them if they might contribute something. --HV (talk) 16:19, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Brian Todd

When I requested speedy deletion, the article was full of nonsense claiming the reporter was a lizard and a link to this YouTube video. After I tagged it for speedy deletion, the original editor changed the content to something more rational. Sorry for the confusion. -WikiFew (talk) 21:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

No issues! Cheers. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:02, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Ravenfeathers

I see that you blocked and cut off email access for Haida chieftain (talk · contribs) today. You may also want to look at the new user Ravenfeathers (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who appears to very quickly have decided that Canwest needs edits made to it. I started to revert the edit to Talk:Canwest myself, but on second thought, I'd rather a set of eyes not involved in the editing of Canwest to have a look at it. —C.Fred (talk) 22:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I see he's been blocked as an obvious sock. After 3 increasingly harassing e-mails, I had no choice but to remove e-mail access. I don't mind passion ... but ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:02, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Walter Koenig Article/Pronunciation

Hi Bwilkins,

I did not understand your comment here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cub68134#Walter_Koenig_article

Perhaps you can clarify how WP-CONSENSUS applies to how Walter pronounces his name? Or perhaps you can let me know what you were referring to if that was not what you were referring to in relationship to WP-CONSENSUS.

The only other thing I can think of is the "working together" aspect. I simply reverted from an incorrect pronunciation to the correct one as per Walter himself. And it seems that this may simply be a case of (1) Cub accidentally switched to the wrong pronunciation with the correct intent in mind, or (2) I put my message on the wrong page and it should have been directed at someone else.

This is JUST a question (as I am kinda new here - at least as an editor): Anyway, even though it is not an issue here, I am curious how WP-CONSENSUS would apply to such matters where (this case as an example) the person has publicly pronounced his name "kay-nig" (sorry, no proper phonetics) and has even publicly gotten upset when it is mispronounced "ko-nig"? Wouldn't citable, verifiable reality trump consensus (that could not be cited)?

See what I am trying to ask? Again, using this example, it is 100% impossible to find anywhere, any instance of Walter pronouncing his name "ko-nig" and very easy to find him pronounce it "kay-nig" - so, since one is impossible to cite, and the other is easily citable, how would that affect or invalidate WP-CONSENSUS?

I am guessing, but wanted clarification, that finding the citations to get the consensus to be accurate may be the method?

Thanks again for your time.

Best, Robert RobertMfromLI | User Talk 23:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm re-reading what I wrote below above and think it may be coming off the wrong way... either confrontational, or idiotic. So, please dont take it either way, as neither is intended. If clarification of what I am trying to say is needed (or it seems confrontational or idiotic), just ask... and I will be glad to try to clarify.

Just have a lot on my mind and a buncha stuff I am working on due to recent events.

RobertMfromLI | User Talk 23:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

From what I read, the pronunciation had been wrong, I believe that you brought up the correct pronunciation, the other editor had fixed it to what you suggested - that means you both agreed with the change, and thus consensus reached. I cared little about right/wrong but about people agreeing and fixing it to the agreed-to version. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! And thanks for your understanding of the horrendous wording and explanation I gave above. In a better state today and realizing what I wrote definitely did not come out the way I intended. Thanks again for the explanation and the calm (especially in contrast to my own) response.

Best, RobertMfromLI | User Talk 20:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Andre

Well, he had some other subpages which I had to likewise delete. It's all about his political aspirations.

If he gets elected, then we'll do an article about him. But at the level he's trying for... no. DS (talk) 14:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Unless he becomes a really good dogcatcher once elected :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

He's back (see my talk page) - apparently he's recovered from quite a bad infection, and is politely asking what he did wrong. Would you mind explaining to him? Thanks. DS (talk) 03:55, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

RE: Summation of elohim

Thanks, I just couldn't pin down under what it went. ChrisDHDR 15:02, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:04, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

RE: Altered speedy deletion rationale: Buggzie

When I tagged the page all it said was;

"Buggzie is awesome!"

Or something along those lines. Doesn't that qualify as A1 (or even A3), as well as G3, which you deleted it under? And, off the subject, but thank you very much for giving me the chance to work on improving Lukundo Nalungwe.
Kindest regards, Spitfire^Tally-ho! 16:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, it turned to Vandalism when he merely copy/pasted the same line into the article about 40 times :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I see Spitfire^Tally-ho! 20:40, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

RE: Jade Starr article deletion

hi there. I have added the sources into the article. Thank you for your help and time. Please let me know if I need to do anything else to fix the article. As you can tell, I am new at this. :) Update: I added some more sources, cleaned up the formatting some, and fixed my signature on here. Thanks again! Phantomcowboy (talk) 20:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

How does it look? Do I need to do anything else? Phantomcowboy (talk) 20:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry

Oh, after reading your messages on my talkpage I must admit I was wrong, looks like I'll have to actually think about what policy I'm nominating a page for deletion under, and thanks!
Mod MMG (User Page) Reply on my talkpage. DO NOT CLICK this link 23:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Farnworth

Hello, would you care to close? Dlohcierekim 12:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done Odd that it was an active CSD when I handled it ... and should have remained that way. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:15, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

The creator removed the AFD tag a number of times, someone came along and retagged for CSD. Turns out that the creator modified and userfied the article-- it was about him after all. Dlohcierekim 13:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

A lot of WP:BURO then in order to delete a simple A7 / COI issue? As a minimum it was an unsourced BLP. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Requests for unblock page moving very slowly

Hello. The requests for unblock page has been moving very slowly today, and some users have been waiting quite a few hours. Just wondering if you could help. If you can't, please delete this message. Thanks.Chuckcreator (talk) 16:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I have looked at all of them - many have been awaiting replies from the editor for some time, and might just turn into declines. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of the MacGuffin Film Podcast Page

I believe the MacGuffin Film Podcast page deserves inclusion, because it provides an outlet for film discussion and an avenue to understand the work and artists who make films. I believe it is certainly just as relevant as a podcast like Comic Geek Speak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_Geek_Speak). If you could help me understand why that page is relevant and the MacGuffin Film Podcast page is not I will correct it accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heitbwp (talk • contribs) 19:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Notability. Oh, and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Applicants

Hey, Was trying to upload new page for Applicants. For sources I included a reference from a British national newspaper and an article published by the Joe Meek Society (although it was reproduced on LastFM) I was about to link to some reviews and interviews published on independent websites (including drownedinsound.com) but the article was deleted. Anything I could/should do to get the article up to scratch? Adamrbsv (talk) 23:02, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - I hadn't mentioned it but the band satisfies this criteria: - Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network

- having received regular airplay on BBC6 Music. Would stating this have made the article acceptable? Adamrbsv (talk) 23:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

As the sites you're using are not reliable sources, (you would need to properly source the "rotation" as well) and all the searches that I have done find zero notability results, I cannot see this easily making it ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:05, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Is guardian.co.uk really not a reliable source? It seems to fit the criteria. I'm not sure about sourcing the rotation. I've found this page - [7] - would that count? (Sorry to keep on bothering you!) Adamrbsv (talk) 00:33, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The Guardian should be a reliable source - it's a prestigious UK broadsheet, with wide coverage of music subjects, and an article in the Friday section should be acceptable. Not sure what BWilkins is thinking, but he's normally a sensible sort of chap so you should be able to discuss with him. Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I have no issues with much of the Guardian. It depends whether it's a blog on the Guardian, or a wide-covering article and not a mere mention. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 13:00, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

As I said, you're a sensible chap, so the editor should be able to discuss with you why there was a problem in this instance, given that the Grauniad is normally sufficiently reliable (they even spell properly these days). Elen of the Roads (talk) 14:06, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Larry Andre 01:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I am Andre39 - I didn't understand your directions for fixing it - all pictures were ours to use, and whether or not it is an appropriate use of a page, I still do not understand what was wrong with it. I still have the code - what can I do to fix it? I went to alot of work to put it up, and the only reason I have not logged on is I have been suffering with a sreious staph infection for the last 4 weeks. Can you please help? — —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andre39 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Mr Andre, you do not meet the notability requirements as listed at WP:POLITICIAN. Wikipedia cannot be used as your campaign website. Much of the information that was on that page was certainly not encyclopedic - and you need to keep in mind WP:COI. To fix notability, you actually have to win an important position. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:57, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, one more question please? I am not Larry Andre, I used Andre39 because it is not suggested that I use my real name. So, my question is can I do what it states below? "In the case of candidates for political office who do not meet this guideline, the general rule is to redirect to an appropriate page covering the election or political office sought in lieu of deletion. Relevant material from the biographical article can be merged into the election or political office page if appropriate." Can I create a page which pertains to the election? Thanks for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andre39 (talk • contribs) 08:07, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Jed Brandt

You CSD' Jed Brandt under A7. If it is anything like Jed brandt, then this is not true: there is a claim made of notability. A7 specifically mentions the standard is NOT notability, but a claim of notability, and hence this is not a good speedy candidate. Rather than go to a Deletion review, I ask that you please restore and submit to AfD for community discussion, rather than speedy, or at least allow the moving of Jed brandt to Jed Brandt. Thanks!--Cerejota (talk) 15:23, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Please note that the article has been re-created following page-protection as Jed Brandt (activist). It seems heavily promo, but at this point it's hard to tell whether it's been written by his fans or his detractors. Political bios often seem to be like that. :-) Another editor has prodded it. MuffledThud (talk) 19:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I see the prod has turned into AfD. Let the games begin! :P More seriously I agree the multiple recreations are not very smart but AGF tells me to chalk it up to inexperience rather than malice... lets see --Cerejota (talk) 00:58, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Jade Starr article

Sorry to be a pest, I am just rather confused as to what is going on? Is there anything else I need to do? I think I fixed all the references issues and htmling. Thanks! And sorry again if I am posting in the wrong place. Phantomcowboy (talk) 21:24, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

7SeriesBOT approved

You're aware, I hope? Josh Parris 12:42, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I did add the ID to the config file this morning, and watched it delete a few articles ... it did give one or two code errors this morning, but I thought it looked okay before I left home. I see a few WildBot tagged pages that are waiting, I wonder if the bot crashed? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:44, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

That'd be right. Gimmie a holler when you can get the stack (and a little beforehand, if possible, so I know what lead up to it). Josh Parris 14:10, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Regarding User:Michael1963

The page was not created by Michael1963, but by Criss245, an account that appears to have stopped making serious contributions. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:18, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Still, it didn't meet the requirements for a speedy. Someone put a talkpage comment on an otherwise blank userpage (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion query

Hello Bwilkins, You deleted my page about JBA Consulting and if I understand the coding correctly, it was because of lack of notablility. I hope to be able to remedy that but I need to access the article. I have been advised that the thing to do is to ask you to restore it to a subpage of my user page. Then, if I want to submit it again , do I repeat the procedure or come back to you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aliceelisabethmay (talk • contribs) 14:13, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done (further info on your talkpage) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of user talk page after it had been moved into main space

I see you deleted Talk:Ina Ina, with the edit summary "G8: Talk page of deleted page". Ina Ina had been deleted with the summary "G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page". However, Ina Ina had originally been User:Caragea Florina, which was moved to Ina Ina with the edit summary "moved User:Caragea Florina to Ina Ina: confidentiality", and likewise Talk:Ina Ina was originally User talk:Caragea Florina. The consequence of this is that the user has, by moving her user page and user talk page to main space and then requesting deletion, managed to get round WP:UP#DELTALK, which says that user talk pages are normally not deleted "barring legal threats or other grievous violations that have to be removed for legal reasons". I discovered this because I wanted to check back to some edits on her talk page, and am not able to. Unless there is some special reason, I think that the deleted Talk:Ina Ina should be restored to User talk:Caragea Florina, and, since it was you that did the deletion, I should like to ask you to restore it. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:35, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done ... cheers. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:04, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks JamesBWatson (talk) 08:44, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Pal Park

Why exactly did you delete Pal Park? Now the history is gone. It could have been redirected. Was the article brought back from a previous revision or started from scratch? Now there is no way to tell. Could you please restore it and redirect it to Pokémon? Thanks _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 20:18, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The article was rightly deleted as "No indication that the article may meet the guidelines for inclusion" under WP:CSD. Someone else recognized it as such, and I agreed. There is no "history" - it was wrongly recreated, and reads as a "how to". There is nothing in it, or in its history worth saving. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:36, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I knew it had no notability, but really? There was no history before that? I guess we started cracking down on articles before it was created. Thanks anyways. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 22:56, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The history was basically 3 creations, 3 tagging, and 3 deletions. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Is 7SeriesBOT up?

I suspect not. Josh Parris 10:16, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Restarted it seconds ago (after downloading the new version, of course) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Tip: while running an old version, you can download the sources for a new version, run it up and then kill the old version. Josh Parris 13:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, would you please block this guy with a IP number 213.240.232.170 from bulgaria

He is constantly vandalizing the data related to Turkish tv series Gümüş by adding a suffix (/166) to the number of original episodes (100)! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.110.95.62 (talk) 22:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

This is so long ago now that I cannot act on it. WP:AIV is the best place if it's truly vandalism. Sounds more to be like a content dispute though. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:08, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

FIctionist Page Deletion

I was just wondering what it was about the page I made for the Fictionist page that led to it's deletion. I used the news article written about them specifically because it made the page unquestionably fall within the relevance guidelines. Kevinflo (talk) 10:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I stated it on your talkpage before I even deleted it. Have you read WP:MUSIC? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:09, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Username problem

Hi again. Per above, the user Fukangsi (talk · contribs) had place his blatant advert on both his own user page (which was tagged CSD by me and deleted by you a while back) and that of WP:MCQ (evidence here → [8]). To me, this smells of WP:SPA. Would this suffice to warrant an indef on him? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 11:05, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

He's already been blocked accordingly ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:11, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm getting admins yelling at me again

I take it 7SeriesBOT fell over; are there logs for me? Josh Parris 14:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Ugh ... it was cool when I left home this morning. Grrr. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

It's back up now. What was the probem? A code crash, or environmental? Josh Parris 00:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Oddly enough, when I got home it appeared to be totally fine ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:52, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

My guess is loss of internets; do you have sufficient scroll-back that you can see if that happened - messages about things not being available and retrying in howeverlong would pop up? Josh Parris 04:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Can't be arsed

Could I ask you to please restore this to the pre-vandalism version? This was a long-standing, proper soft redirect. It was vandalized, CSD tagged, and deleted all in less than 5 minutes. I do not like the idea that someone vandalizing a valid page can get the page deleted like that. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and restored it. Cheers, –xeno^talk 19:18, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

No issues...thanks (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:41, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Dire Straits tour/Notes

I wish to discuss it with you, experts in removal, but User:Tagishsimon ignores the User talk page. I would not like to wage war of undos. Give we will discuss this question.--Andrey! 15:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)Has written also to the nominator--Andrey! 15:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Replied and will deal with in one location. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Gayboylacas spam links

I'm having trouble figuring out why surf.to is not blacklisted. Seems the type of thing that should automatically be added to the blacklist. Ridernyc (talk) 15:33, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I would think so too ... feel free to submit @ WP:BLACKLIST (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Paolo I.

This page was deleted as per your comment on not finding reference for winning Juno. The Juno was clearly indicated in the bio as being attributed to the unit CAPITAL SOUND which if you research correctly was a unit that Paolo I. performed in as well as participated as a songwriter. He is often credited under aliases. As for the diamond certified, it is based on overall sales in canada. MUCHMUSIC DANCE 95 (Quality Records)is 3x platinum in sales just to name but one that he has been on. You will find it difficult to find info on any artist who is working under different names or in a group. Just to base it on references or calling it promotion is a clear indication that Wikipedia is not there to list credentials but to delete those who have a history in the arts, politics and all other forms. Do a search for Rocko T. Bello as this is one of his aliases and see what pops up in google. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueskinge (talk • contribs) 00:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

...but none of the references confirmed anything claimed. Read WP:MUSIC, and know that I covered the Juno awards many times ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:14, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_Award_for_Dance_Recording_of_the_Year

http://mixes.eurodancehits.com/classic/capitalsound.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.47.249.251 (talk) 16:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

...and at what point does that approach being a reliable source? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 18:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

obviously putting a wikipedia link as a source does not seem valid to you. how do we rectify this to get the page back up. Can we simplify the bio and just put: Canadian songwriter. The end. Will that suffice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.147.28 (talk) 01:12, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Pls remove cats

When u userfy, it'd save time if u could pls remove {{New unreviewed article}} (eg User:Aliceelisabethmay/JBA Consulting), to save duplication of efforts; thx  Chzz  ►  00:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Ugh, I usually do ... my bad, sorry. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 00:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

thanks for speedy deletion

thank you for the deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.121.104 (talk) 11:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

AN/I "Quick Closures"

Hello, Bwilkins! I really think this should immediately be closed on this board. It's resolved, and its speedy closure might help demonstrate/alleviate the problem of unresolved conflicts being needlessly archived without decision. Easy one here, I think. I'll close it if non-admins are allowed to... pretty please with sugar on top? Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 11:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

"Closing" isn't vital there...but it was done before I got there. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

My bad - "resolved". Same difference, right? ;> Doc9871 (talk) 14:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Not really the same. Neither marking {{Resolved}} nor closing the discussion with {{discussion-top}} and {{discussion-bottom}} are required - nice, but not required. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:39, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I didn't know that (no wonder the archives looked so "messy" :>). I figured it was standard to close or resolve them in order to expeditiously separate them from open discussions (and I contacted you because you were watching the thread). Thanks for clearing that up for me, BWilkins! Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 14:51, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

If you do decide to "close them", make sure that a) the Resolved tag is directly below the title b)The discussion-top tage must come below that, or else archiving gets messed up, and c) the discussion-bottom tag, of course, goes at the bottom of the thread. Of course, typically don't mark one resolved that you opened or were the subject of (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:02, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Copy/paste user page

I thought this may be of interest you, I saw you deleted the Ben Torres page and this one might be a copy/paste type deal. I don't remember what the original looked like though. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 14:26, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

It's close ... but still spam! Thanks. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:29, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Nivelu' 4

Hey there. I would like to know what was wrong with the article about Nivelu' 4, so that I can improve it and then add it again. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duracellbv (talk • contribs) 20:33, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I have replied on your talk...and AfD'd this article so that the community has additional comment. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:45, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi.

Hi, I'm Layzap, you know the one who created 'Random Club'? Can u help me delete it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Layzap (talk • contribs) 05:11, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

It's already done. CSD is how you delete things quickly. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:46, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Calcott (car)

You declined this speedy deletion request noting that no source of the copyvio had been provided, yet the website address was provided which shows the same text as the Wikipedia article but as having it 8 months prior to Wikipedia. If the edit summary is not the place to note the address then where. Thanks. Weakopedia (talk) 11:11, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the supposed copyright source was empty - that's why I declined it. That CSD template has a location for the website. I will go back and double-check the edit summary instead (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:16, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if I didn't use the correct summary section. It was my first time using the template, although that should have encouraged me to take extra care reading the instructions. If I need to reapply let me know. Cheers. Weakopedia (talk) 11:23, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The other important part of that (or any other CSD template) is "can it be saved". You'll note I have trimmed down the article to stub size - it appears to be notable to a degree. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

In that I tried to consider whether notability was likely to be established and I wasn't confident. I'll have a go though, and thank you for your assistance. Weakopedia (talk) 11:36, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Bot Talk Page Deletion

I dislike what is happening here. I started an article with a link to a disambiguation page and the bot quite correctly started a talk page with a note that the problem should be fixed. I fixed the problem and the bot deleted the talk page. When I go to add a template to the talk page, I get a rather forbidding warning like:

A page with this title has previously been deleted.

If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below

• 21:49, 7 March 2010 7SeriesBOT (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Atyap" ‎ (Only one contributor who requested deletion under WP:CSD#G7)

To a new editor, this would be disconcerting. I think it would be better to leave the page and put in something more positive, like:

An automated tool found links in this article to one or more disambiguation pages. The problem has now been fixed.

Something like that. I know there is a guideline against creating blank talk pages, but once created it seems best not to delete it. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:22, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

WildBot's FAQ seems to say it best: see here (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:30, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

MobileRead wiki

I have a dilemma. You deleted this page because it promoted a site and I had another post from Realkyhick 20:41, 6 March 2010 (UTC) that wanted to delete it because the description didn't show the site as noteable. I don't know how to make it notable without seeming to promote it. There seems to be two Judges and I can't seem to please them both. I would like the page reinstated but you can delete anything you think is promoting the site. I won't change it. I added it because it is required to add the site for the list of wikis page and I believe it belongs in that list. It is unique and I modeled it after other sites listed in that list. Please let me know how this can be resolved.--DaleDe (talk) 18:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

About a deleted page

Hi, This is Nick Stevenson, and i'm writing to ask about a page of mine which got deleted. The page was about VirtualBarter, and i added it just yesterday (8th march '10). The article was yet to be complete, i was in the process of collecting more info about the Company history , services offered, etc. This was not meant to be a promotional article, i merely described what VirtualBarter does. Kindly let the article be finished. You may very well remove it if the article still has a promotional content.

Thank you...

Nick.Stevenson 05:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)