User talk:Graeme Bartlett/archive 14

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user in whose space this page is located may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Graeme_Bartlett/archive_14.

Older talk is in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 archives.

If I deleted your article, it may be possible for me to restore it. Please post a message for reconsideration of the deletion. and you can read Why was my page deleted?

please add your talk at the bottom of the page:

Mattthew Skenandore article

Thank you so much for adding the artist's portrait and yes "the future of reproduction" painting on flickr was intended to be added per your license recommendation. Unfortunately the admin DragonFlySixtyseven has deleted the article. I hope to recreate the article with expansions to show why he is considered a notable NW artist and re-upload. Thanks again and I hope your wiki-break is a nice one. Sincerely, Curlyharpy1 (talk) 16:48, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

John Steinbeck bio vandalism again

It was soooo nice after your sprotection. Now that it's unprotected, the IP's are at it again. Could you please sprotect it once more? S B H arris 23:35, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP Articles for Creation in the Signpost

WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for Creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:49, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirection of typos

I take your point about "Zosterophyllacea" being a plausible typo for "Zosterophyllaceae", but here's the counter-argument. If you search for "Zosterophyllacea" in Google, all but one of 16 responses are actually sourced from Wikipedia (the odd one is the Paleos.com page; they should know better!). The problem with having typos redirected for topics like scientific names is that they then propagate around the replicates of Wikipedia and become established when they would not otherwise exist. Anyone who understands Latin nomenclature for plant families well enough to use this term knows that such names always end in "-aceae" and will quickly correct their error when searching doesn't find what they want. I'm very uneasy about the effects of so many redirects of typos in Wikipedia. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:20, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pleeeeeeeeeeease?

Can you block me until February 27? Thanks. MickWithoutGlasses (talk) 05:45, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Smile?

It seems that not everybody edits without thinking. (Actually, I find that encouraging ... ) Pdfpdf (talk) 14:10, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you planning on having me blocked? MickWithoutGlasses (talk) 01:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, (laughs) that was me! I only forgot that I requested to be blocked. So block me. MickWithoutGlasses (talk) 18:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because...

Because I want to see what it would be like to go one week without Wikipedia. I edit Wikipedia EVERY DAY, and I feel like it's unhealthy to go on Wikipedia this often. I wonder what I would do for fun while I'm blocked. MickWithoutGlasses (talk) 01:53, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine School of Business Administration

I recreated the article for the school from tl:Philippine School of Business Administration. While I don't speak more than a smidgeon of Tagalog, I think it is enough to determine that the google translate of the article is close to reasonable (tweek a word or two). It is definitely a stub (the tl article is as well), but I think it is a reasonable start and doesn't appear to be a copyvio. Could you please do a quick check and either comment here or on the talk page for the article. Thank you. Naraht (talk) 16:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Needing some help

Since my article on Soma Snakeoil was deleted could I get some guidance or assistance to avoid this snafu in the future and since you all do edit down the redundant links (very helpful by the way) so this doesn't happen again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Big D Shire (talk • contribs) 23:20, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

3

Hi Graeme,

Thanks for your speedy correction to the page 3 (number). You see, I did this as a test for my 2 sons (ages 10 and 12) who both expressed a distrust of Wikipedia because "anyone can put anything out there". I encouraged them to test their ideas, so together we added a small Monty Python joke to the 3 page and made friendly bets on how long it would stay there. They were thinking it would take months and here you cleaned it up in under 2 hours. Well, sorry for putting you through this, but I thought it would be worth it in the grand scheme of things. I hope you feel the same.

Sincerely, -Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauljackson1 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Orionsocialmedia

How 'bout blocking the account as a username violation then? 69.181.249.189 (talk) 13:06, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

About SomersTotalKare

Thank you for rightly declining the speedy. Hmm. Lets hope the article gets up to speed as little stub.--Shirt58 (talk) 16:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear both, can you give me some advice on amending the article to comply to your concerns. I would really appreciate feedback from both of you.

--Kingswinford92 (talk) 10:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. while I have provided a lot of relevant sources, many pieces of past evidence have been short-sightedly thrown away. Also, a different administrator told me that I couldnt cite book references or magazines as he/she was unable to verify them. Is there any language that you feel needs rewording? I know the article has been tagged for advertising, and at first galnce I can understand the point; however, when the reader analyses the language, I don't feel it is any more implicitly promotional than most business articles on wikipedia. If you could keep me posted I would really appreciate it. Thank you for not speedily deleting the article becuase, as I'm sure you realise, it has taken a lot of time and effort and I am keen to get it to wikipedia standards rather than just giving up and letting it be deleted. Thanks again,

--Kingswinford92 (talk) 14:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Graeme, I am not able to work on gathering sources again until Friday. However, on Friday I will be dedicating time to researching additional reliable sources from magazines, books and newspapers, though the chances of finding sources from over 5 year ago are not great. Also, while I will be searching for sources on Friday, it may be next week when they go online so please bear with me. Thankyou for your co-operation

--Kingswinford92 (talk) 16:22, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]