User talk:UtherSRG

zOMG

		zOMG
		I, Hojimachong, hereby award UtherSRG A completely gratuitous zOMG barnstar, for being 110% awesome. Plus 1. --Hojimachongtalk

Merry Christmas

JoJan is wishing you a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Bad faith vandalism warning and templating the regulars

Please do not make bad faith vandalism warnings and template the regulars, as you have done, here, [1]. I see no edits that deserved such a warning, nor prior talk page discussion about this issue. Please do not do this again. Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 04:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't know TEMPLAR. Even so, his edit was still wrong. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:57, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

"Wrong" does not mean it merited a vandalism templated warning. Have you even tried to discuss this issue before? Either on a user talk page somewhere, or the article's talk page, anywhere? -- Cirt (talk) 04:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

What's even worse is that we're both not even seeing that who did the bad edit wasn't Peter but an anon... Sorry man, i'm so freaking tired by getting no sleep for a week.... I should just give up and take a day or two wikivacation... UtherSRG (talk) 07:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, no worries. -- Cirt (talk) 16:20, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

And I didn't fix the right edit, and it took me multiple times to get it right. I fee like yesterday's xkcd.... LOL! - UtherSRG (talk) 05:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thomas Lutz

Why did you delete the English Article for Thomas Lutz while I was currently working on it?

For "A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject" see the German article.

Regards, Franklin.harding (talk) 13:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:BIO and explain how the subject passes our notability requirements. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I know the criteria. Although it says "The person is or has been an editor-in-chief of a major well-established journal in their subject area." and "The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education, affecting a substantial number of academic institutions." you are deleting it? The person has achieved a lot in holocaust remembrance and is still working in the field. Think about your actions!

Franklin.harding (talk) 16:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Take it to WP:DRV. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Thomas Lutz

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Thomas Lutz. 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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin.harding (talk • contribs)

Thanks. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:53, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I have made a comment there that you probably will wish to reply to. DGG ( talk ) 16:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Ml mlkw (talk · contribs)

Hey. I noticed you're deleting many of the articles created by this user. They've created quite a bit of work as all of the articles they've created are either copies of an already existent article or copied directly from another website. Twinkle doesn't have any warnings for pasting in copyrighted material or I would apply it. They've been idle for almost an hour but is there any way to stop all this? I don't know that they've broken any policies but they sure are creating a lot of work for others. OlYeller^Talktome 14:07, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure it does. Look at uw-create in the 1-4 level warnings. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I was looking for something copyvio specific but this will work just fine. OlYeller^Talktome 14:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

There ain't much that isn't in Twinkle... and if you find something that isn't and know a template for it, they can add it at WT:Twinkle. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:58, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of InterPals

I'd like to know why the page was deleted. I understand that an AfD discussion was in progress because of verification of sources, but as the largest pen pal web site on the Internet, it seems that the site would be notable enough to escape speedy deletion. Is there any way to appeal this decision? Thanks Mefistofele (talk) 14:28, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, go to WP:DRV - UtherSRG (talk) 14:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)+

Deletion of Alien vs Ninja

Is invalid as your claim is null and void. According to you "which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable" and the quote, no movies from the studio (such as machine girl) should be in this encyclopedia at all because they are not noteworthy. I am adding this page back again as your claim was invalid. --∑ssarege∑ (talk) 14:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I made no claim. I was only the deleting admin, but you are correct, films are not A7. So I've restored and elevated to AfD. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:57, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Back of the Throat

Hey there, this article has now been significantly expanded now with good sources (Ny Times, LA Times, etc.). Definite keeper,I think nom could be withdrawn if you are so inclined.--Milowent (talk) 18:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

AFD time period is a week. Let's see what others have to say first. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem.--Milowent (talk) 11:47, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Satiristas?

Why did you delete Satiristas without answering my question or helping in anyway? I had legitimate permission from the authors of the book and website and was asked to post for them - I credited the website, and frankly the way this whole thing is set up is impossible to understand - how else I would credit the website (WHICH I WROTE BY THE WAY)?? I guess I will waste an incredible amount of time and write a stupid differently worded article instead?? I would have been happy to send you any verification needed. GEEZ! Leannemcneil (talk) 22:15, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Take it to WP:DRV. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

COPYVIO content recreated after you deleted it.

You speedy deleted my COPYVIO nomination of User:Arup Roy Choudhury. The user recreated the exact same COPYVIO content shortly afterwards. Time for a wikislap? --Biker Biker (talk) 11:37, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Three times is the charm. ;) - UtherSRG (talk) 12:42, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Terry Smith, financier -- maybe it is time to allow him a page

Hi

Apparently you have deleted a page entry for Terry Smith. I learnt this just now after having created one. I understand Wikipedia's policy on living people, and that they should be notable. Terry Smith meets this criterion. He is certainly notable. It is true that he is less well known than many financiers who have their own entries in Wikipedia. Terry has a track record of doing finance right, so his firms has not (so far) had to have a bailout by government because of incompetent or immoral management. In many regards, Terry Smith stands out as the moral financier par excellence. he is very well known in the finance community in London, although perhaps not well known in the USA. His book was so controversial that at one time it carried the strapline "The Book they Tried to Ban." I may have misremembered, but this was because of legal actions on behalf of companies furious at his revealing some of the accounting tricks used in annual reports and accounts. In these days of financial catastrophe, brought on largely by financiers, regulators and governments using smoke and mirrors to hide real risks in capital markets, Terry Smith is one of the very small number of people who are both highly successful in finance and who have a track record of exposing financial chicanery, at no small personal costs.

By the way, I have no personal interest in whether Wikipedia carries or does not carry an entry. I have no connection whatsoever with Mr Smith nor any of his businesses. As a qualified finance practitioner, I was surprised that Terry Smith has no entry in Wikipedia, and even more surprised that his entry has previously been deleted. If some editor arbitrarily decides to ban Mr Smith from being covered in Wikipedia, it won;t make any difference to my life but it will be a poor reflection on Wikipedia, and will be in the tradition of trying to ban Gillian Tett from having an entry, which is surely one of the low points in Wikipedia's collective judgement.

I have no idea, nor much interest, in the source of your authority over these decisions, but I expect you are doing a good job at watever it is you do on Wikipedia and I salute you for that and tank you. I hope you will not censor a man who is a rare moral giant in today's financial world.

SUDFA —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudfa (talk • contribs) 15:58, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Peepshow (Burlesque)

Not having a chance to read the article (since you deleted it). I was wondering if you could clarify exactly how it didn't meet the context threshold.

Thanks!