Jump to content

User talk:Cindamuse

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Renamed user 5695569576f6b340 (talk | contribs) at 16:33, 5 July 2011 (→‎Can you hold off on CSD's for a moment while I write a response?: r). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Everybody has a right to have a tizzy fit every once in a while.

That said, please don't tizzy on my talk page.

ARCHIVES → 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11 • 12 • 13

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
Asilvering 245 1 0 100 09:15, 6 September 2024 0 days, 2 hoursno report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

assisting NP Patrollers

I'm delighted to find someone helping beginners learn how to do NPP. DGG ( talk ) 23:42, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks so much for the kind words. I enjoy helping out others when I am able. Even vandals or disillusioned ones. I'd much rather help turn them into valuable Wikipedia editors then to turn them away. While it is sometimes a challenge, it is a welcome one. Thanks again for contacting me. Cind.amuse 09:30, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

Request for adoption (when you are up to it)

Hello Cindamuse I am fairly new to the wonderful World of Wiki. I am hoping to find a mentor who can guide me in the area of BLP's. I have a few friends who's articles could use some attention and I am determined to help them to the best of my ability. In this case, that will require some coaching. Your healing must take priority over my adoption. Please advise if you may be able to assist me in the future. Have a day filled with blessings. Digital villager Digital Villager 19:31, 10 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digital villager (talk • contribs)

  • I'd be more than happy to help you out on Wikipedia. My hand is continuing to heal, it's just deformed a tad bit. Some helpful policies and guidelines for BLPs can be found here, here, and here. The first thing I highly recommend is that you create your articles in a subpage of your userspace. When you create a draft version first, you can then ask for feedback on it, without the risk of speedy deletion. I've seen too many people jump in with both feet, only to have their article deleted soon after they create it. It's like jumping off the high dive, when they haven't learned to tread water. Please let me know what's on your mind. Share your ideas with me. I'll be happy to work with you to help make your involvement on Wikipedia a pleasant one. (Be forewarned, Wikipedia can be addicting!) Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 20:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the links Cindamuse. I will have some time to study them today. I am crystal clear about the potential for addiction here. It is an amazing environment. As I mentioned, I will start by working to improve the articles already started regarding my friends Yank Barry and Gary US Bonds among others. I sincerely appreciate your offer to coach me as I become fluent in Wiki-speak. Thank you and Happy Valentines Day. Digital Villager 16:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digital villager (talk • contribs)
  • I have read the suggested material. After reading a number of biographies both of living and deceased persons, I have reached the conclusion that it is impossible to please everyone when creating or editing an article in the Wikipedia environment. A number of my ancestors have articles written about them and some of the text disagrees with our family's historical information. The BLP articles that I have read can not help but be somewhat incomplete when we consider that we can obtain biographies from Borders that devote 400+ pages to a 20 year span of someone's life. Unless I am wrong, the key to creating and editing articles here is a "determined best efforts approach". With this in mind, I was wondering if you would have a moment to read the two articles that I would like to cut my teeth on. Each of these articles are apparently lacking in certain areas as pointed out by another user. I would sincerely appreciate any specific input that you can share in order to assist me in improving both Yank Barry and Gary US Bonds articles. My goal is to make improvements in order to have the labels removed from them. Once I get these articles sorted out I would like to address a couple of my ancestor's articles but that will require some in-depth research. I am glad that your hand is improving. Have a great day.Digital Villager 15:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digital villager (talk • contribs)

Flint Dille & John Zuur Platten

When were you planning to create the AfD discussion? I'm not sure why you're so intent on wasting everyone's time, these people are clearly not notable by wikipedia's, or any other standard. Kuguar03 (talk) 06:59, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I removed a CSD G11 due to the lack of blatant promotional content. I then removed the PROD and indicated that if you have concerns over the notability of the subjects of these two articles, by all means open a discussion. I do not share your concerns and recommend that you present your thoughts to the community for consensus. Best regards, Cind.amuse 07:25, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Could you please answer my question? There is no point in moving forward until I have assurances that you are acting in good faith. Thanks. Kuguar03 (talk) 07:53, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • With all due respect, why would you assume bad faith? You asked when I plan on creating an AfD discussion. I answered stating that I have no intention to do so. Was there something else? Assurances from me in any regard should not hinder your ability to function on Wikipedia. If you are assured of your own convictions, again, present the article for discussion. Regards, Cind.amuse 08:30, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • You said in both edit summaries "rm prod/send to AfD", yet you did not send it to AfD, you merely removed the prod, and gave the reason "meets [WP:CREATIVE]]; significant figure in video game writing, development, and production; widely cited by peers", even though that's clearly not true for either, and "feature film screenwriter", even though that does not make a subject notable. Based on that, I have every reason to believe that if I start the AfD discussion you'll just remove it. If you are acting in good faith, then please put the speedy delete back up (as both pages are 100% promotional), or the prod, as neither are notable, or send it to AfD as you said you were going to. Kuguar03 (talk) 08:43, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Sorry for the shorthand. I should have been more clear in my summary. I removed the prod, therefore, you should send it to AfD, because the subject "meets WP:CREATIVE; significant figure in video game writing, development, and production; widely cited by peers". It may be beneficial for you to review Wikipedia's deletion process. If you maintain that the article does not meet the criteria for inclusion, the appropriate action is to open a discussion at AfD. Once a speedy deletion or PROD is removed or declined, we do not replace with another one, but opt for discussion. This would be your course of action at this point. Best regards, Cind.amuse 09:08, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to actually read Wikipedia:Proposed deletion sometime since you seem so fond of it. It clearly states that if you object to a nomination, you should "Consider improving the article to address the concerns raised." Is there some reason you're refusing to do this? If it is somehow true that these individuals are "significant figure in video game writing, development, and production" and "widely cited by peers" it shouldn't be too hard to find references, no? I've looked and can't find them, and I could be considered an expert on the game industry by virtue of having worked in it for 20 years. If you have greater expertise or access to information that's not available through conventional outlets, please do us all a favor and share it. If that's somehow not the case and you're acting in bad faith, or simply too lazy to check, please stop. I'm trying to work to improve wikipedia and I don't really enjoy having those efforts blocked by editors who do not share the goals of the project. As it stands you've offered nothing but contradiction and utterly failed to give any justification for your removal of the prod. If an AfD discussion was warranted I would have started there; it's clearly not in this case, and if you feel otherwise, the onus is on you to offer evidence. Simply saying "no" without any rationale whatsoever is not constructive. Kuguar03 (talk) 23:52, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your actions at this point are clearly wikihounding Kuguar03 (talk) 04:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to stop with all the condescension, passive-aggressive comments, and posturings of moral superiority. I'm actually giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you're acting in bad faith, since if you really believe your actions are justified then you're quite delusional. You constantly reference policies and guidelines you clearly don't understand, and do so as a means to avoid actual discussion. And saying I'm a "relatively new editor"? I've been on wikipedia longer than you. You have been completely and utterly wrong at every instance in your interactions with me, from the beginning. I'm giving you the chance here to stop digging and walk away, I suggest you take it. Kuguar03 (talk) 18:22, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might also want to look at Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement at some point. You've never once offered anything beyond "Contradiction: states the opposing case with little or no supporting evidence". Generally not constructive, and certainly no substitute for actual discussion. Kuguar03 (talk) 19:02, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

M Factory article is not mine.

The article M Factory is not my article. Please advise the creator of speedy deletion listing. I only moved it to correctly formatted title.--Dmol (talk) 11:10, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Big Society Bank

Hi Cindamuse. I started a stub article on Big Society Bank (which has 86k GHits) and within 2 minutes you put it up for a speedy deletion. Isn't that a bit trigger-happy? Esp if you are on Wikibreak! Why not work together and expand it. NBeale (talk) 11:30, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Generally, it would be considered a bit hasty to tag articles having no context or content within the first ten minutes. The Big Society Bank was tagged as promotional, due to the attempt to establish notability through speculation of future events. Wikipedia is not a news source or public relations outlet. I think the article would best be added to the encyclopedia once it truly becomes notable. Best regards, Cind.amuse 11:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi Cindamuse. 86k GHits is not speculation! And please read WP:BEFORE - I'm afraid that nomination was a clear violation of policy. NBeale (talk) 14:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks, I appreciate the note. I respect the community's consensus, while disagreeing with the rationale. That said, I do not appreciate the belittling comments you have made about me on talk pages and in the AfD. Try to show a little restraint and self-control. And please read WP:AGF. Thanks and God bless, Cind.amuse 17:53, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

About: St. Xavier's College, Palayamkottai

Hi, Cindamuse. I would argue that the better outcome for St. Xavier's College, Palayamkottai would not be a WP:SPEEDY but a Redirect to Manonmaniam Sundaranar University per Wikipedia:WikiProject Universities/Article guidelines#Faculties and academic colleges. Your thoughts about this? --Shirt58 (talk) 12:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I placed the speedy due to the copyvio. It looks like the article is stubbed out now. I think a redirect would be appropriate. (Not much to the article without the copyvio content.) Cind.amuse 12:39, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Talked to Salih about this. Perhaps lets wait and see that turns out for the now? --Shirt58 (talk) 14:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ideally, I would like see an independent article about this college as it is one of the oldest colleges in Tirunelveli district and has a significant history behind it. I did not search for any sources, but I am sure that there must something available, at least in the local language Tamil. So let's keep it as a stub. However, if consensus is to redirect to Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, I have no problem. Salih (talk) 15:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I responded on the talk page, but just noticed your comment here. A merge would be appropriate, and would greatly enhance the University's article. That said, it would be interesting to read more about the significant history of the college. Could you add the statement that the college is the oldest in the Tirunelveli district, supported by independent, reliable sources? If the article can be fleshed out with additional content, I say... go for it. Otherwise, a merge would work. Just my two cents. Cind.amuse 17:59, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What we need is some kind of three-way conference call wikimedia software update to talk about these kind of things!--Shirt58 (talk) 13:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Indian University system is different from the west, here the colleges usually are independent entities and not an integral part of a University. Affiliation to a University just means that the degree is awarded in the name of the University. Salih (talk) 13:30, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Three way conference call? I'm down with that! Based on what Salih says about independence and affiliation, I would go with keeping the article. I added a bit about the founder, as well as a stub notation. It's an appropriate stub right now, but could be enhance with a bit about the history. Please let me know if you have any questions. Cind.amuse 18:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 February 2011


RE: Linking to Dr. Giorgio Frangiolli's internet1marketing.com

I am ABSOLUTELY agree with you and share your concerns if article's are promotional, NOT neutral or links are NOT relevant. In my opinion, people who contribute articles have to understand the article's subjects. In most cases such people (who write articles) deal with the subject - work in a company or have interests in the subjects’ field (otherwise, they are amateurs). If people who are involved in the article's subject would stop writing RELEVANT articles - we would have amateur approach in Wikipedia. Thank you. Giorgio-1970 (talk) 16:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Giorgio! I hope things are going well for you on Wikipedia. I noticed that your Internet marketing tools article has been nominated for deletion. This essentially means that your article will undergo a discussion by editors to determine if it meets the policies and guidelines for inclusion, which would allow it to remain on Wikipedia. Were you aware that you could participate in this discussion? You are welcome to recommend either keeping or deleting the article. You can also respond to any comments or questions raised by other editors. The discussion will go on for seven days, after which, an uninvolved editor will review the discussion and determine the consensus as to whether the article will remain or be deleted. Here is the link for the discussion:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internet marketing tools. You can also read the notes on how to effectively participate in the discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to discuss an AfD. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 17:38, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Wikipedia Ambassador Program

Hi Cindamuse!

Congratulations! Your application to join the Wikipedia Ambassador Program as an Online Ambassador has been accepted.

First off, I apologize for the following info-dump. If you're wondering how to get started or are wondering what's going on, please contact me.

If you haven't already done so, take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines: Wikipedia:Online_Ambassadors/Guidelines

The "mentorship process" section lays out approximately what will be expected of you as a mentor. If you'd like, you can also volunteer to be the coordinating online ambassador for a class or two.

Please add yourself to the top of the list of available mentors, and note the number of students you think you'd like to mentor next term (it doesn't have to be a final answer, this is just to help with matching students and mentors once the students start getting active) and if you'd like to take on the coordination role for any classes note that as well: Wikipedia:Online_Ambassadors/Mentors (Don't add yourself to the lower "Additional online ambassadors section; that's for ambassadors-in-training and ambassadors who are already mentoring all the the students they want to take on.)

To coordinate between Online Ambassadors and Campus Ambassadors, we've been using a Google Group as a mailing list. It's not required, but almost all the ambassadors are on it. Would you like me to subscribe you? Email me with your email address if so.

You can catch with what's been going on so far with the first major message this term, with details about what the group should and shouldn't be used for: Wikipedia_talk:Ambassadors#Information_for_Ambassadors_about_January_-_May_2011_term

You can also check out the first two ambassador newsletters, which have more detail about what's going on right now. You'll get future editions delivered to your talk page.

If you use IRC, please consider adding #wikipedia-en-ambassadors and #wikipedia-en-classroom to your channel lineup.

Finally, please help us find more mentors! Because the number of students, and their involvement with mentors, is increasing so much for this term, we're going to need a lot of solid Online Ambassadors. Please take a few minutes to think of several other editors you know who would make good mentors, and invite them to apply the the Wikipedia Ambassador Program. The key things we look for are: regular activity (so that we can be confident they'll keep up with their mentoring role for the whole term), friendliness, and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones). You can point them to Wikipedia:Online Ambassadors for information on how to apply and what to expect.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 15:52, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks so much. I look forward to working with you and the other members of the team. Please don't hesitate to contact me with any suggestions, concerns, questions, bribes, or whatever else may cross your mind. Have a great weekend! Cind.amuse 11:53, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yuppo

Hi there! I see you removed the CSD I put up in the Yuppo article. The article is about a word invented by two unremarkable people who were not demonstrated or asserted to be notable in any way, so I felt the unremarkable person was appropriate. All the best, Pianotech Talk to me!/Contribs 14:47, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Ulch language
Katrina Bowden
Injaz
Kimberly Brady
2012 Republican National Convention
Production sharing agreement
Hugh Wilson (director)
Oh, Grow Up
Asia-Pacific
Running Away
The Zoo (TV series)
Michael Muhney
Wimborne St Giles
Lester's theorem
Sony Aath
Frank Harris Hitchcock
Kumyk language
Museum für angewandte Kunst
Back Again... No Matter What
Cleanup
World Cyber Games 2007
The ABC Monday Night Movie
Aphrodite
Merge
Council of Epaon
Minor characters of Days of our Lives
Inertia tensor of triangle
Add Sources
Phi Alpha Literary Society
Golden ratio
Gaza flotilla raid
Wikify
Extended Secondary School
Chris Eubank, Jr.
CardTalk
Expand
PlayStation 3
2009 Republican National Committee chairmanship election
Differences between Scottish Gaelic and Irish

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:25, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mojo Project

Hi, just so you know: I did not misunderstand the guidelines on talk pages for the user involved in the above article. I was trying to retrieve a situation (badly, as it turns out, as I made an unwise comment and she went berserk about it) & so restored just the welcome message so that the links were there for her. My comment on blanking pages was because the user had blanked the article talk page after I had replied to her comment there directing her to what I'd already told her on her own talk page - that blanking was out of order. She seemed to be very confused about things but, oddly, appeared to have a grasp of such arcane matters as the delete page templates, the OTRS system and all sorts, which makes me a little suspicious despite AGF. Her website, BTW, is not great: I tried it subsequently using an alias & it is affiliate selling etc. I would encourage anyone to stay with this project but there are limits of personal tolerance (and inability to accept answers to your own queries is one of them). - Sitush (talk) 14:23, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • My comments were in regards to your edits found here and here. The user blanked her talk page, as is completely within her rights to do so. However, you reverted her edits to show your chosen priorities, rather than that of the editor. Unless you have specific permission from the talk page owner, you should never remove content from their talk page. Honestly, your comments and interaction with this editor have been inappropriate. Rather than working to retain the editor, your belittling and demeaning comments have served to actually hinder the user's ability to freely edit on Wikipedia. Your comments are inappropriate in this forum. Berserk? Really? Her website is "not great?" Really? And affiliate selling? C'mon. Let's focus on Wikipedia, okay? Best regards, Cind.amuse 15:10, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Centre, Bristol

Thanks for looking at The Centre, Bristol the other day. I've been doing a bit of work on it since you tagged it, and would be grateful if you could (a) see if you think any of its issues are resolved, and/or (b) give any more concrete suggestions for improvement. I may be fooling myself, but I'd really like to see if I can work this up to GA status... — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedSquirrel (talk • contribs) 22:30, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously it would help if I could remember to sign things. You should see me try to bank a cheque!RedSquirrel (talk) 22:44, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you did a great job on the article! I went ahead and removed the maintenance tags. The only thing I see off hand are minor punctuation issues (commas, periods, and apostrophes) and reworking the lede to present and emphasize what makes the Centre unique, special, or prominent to the residents of Bristol. Honestly though, I'm quickly fading due to pain meds, so I'm not able to give it a full review. But really, it looks great! I'll try to take another look in a few hours. Stop by anytime you have questions or whatever. Best regards, Cind.amuse 23:03, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring students: be sure to check in on them

This message is going out to all of the Online Ambassadors who are, or will be, serving as mentors this term.

Hi there! This is just a friendly reminder to check in on what your mentees are doing. If they've started making edits, take a look and help them out or do some example fixes for them, if they need it. And if they are doing good, let them know it!

If you aren't mentoring anyone yet, it looks like you will be soon; at least one large class is asking us to assign mentors for them, and students in a number of others haven't yet gotten to asking ambassadors to be their mentors, but may soon. --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boldre Working Mens Club - marked for deletion

Hi, you left a comment on my page re the Boldre Working Mens Club hangon request. I was wondering if my comment on the talk page was OK, and if so how long do I have to make people happy its a normal page. Ideally I just want to do a few comments each day in my lunch break to build it up. Happy to have any suggestions else I'll slowly work through the page, but it might take a few weeks. Edwardbairstow (talk) 13:14, 22 February 2011 (UTC)edwardbairstow[reply]

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

The February 2011 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive Needs Your Help!

Please help!

The February 2011 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive is almost complete. Please help, as the backlog is still very large. Still exceeding 20,000 articles! The goal is 18,000 or less. Lets see if we can do it! We're going to need all the firepower we can get, so please remind your friends to help as well.Thank you for all your help thus far!

Regards,

Guoguo12 (talk · contribs), Mono (talk · contribs), Nolelover (talk · contribs), Sumsum2010 (talk · contribs), and WikiCopter (talk · contribs).

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 04:16, 24 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

PPI Program/White House Conference on Aging

Hi Cindamuse, I am currently working under the U.S Public Policy project at James Madison University. The specific page I am working on is the White House Conference on Aging. Just wondering if you will be my mentor!? Thanks, murdocgr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Murdocgr (talk • contribs) 18:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • While reviewing my talk page, it became apparent that I missed your request. Please accept my apology for not seeing this earlier. One thing that will help is remembering to add a section heading to your comments. At this point, it looks like you are working with User:Jmh649 as a mentor. If this is not so, please let me know. I would be more than happy to help you with you project. Even if you have a question and cannot reach anybody else, just shoot me a line. Happy Editing! Cind.amuse 10:31, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shelley Lubben

Could you be more specific about how using the word, "said", violates the manual of style or neutral point of view? The independent source (relevant magazine) to that assertion can't verify when she contracted herpes. Morbidthoughts (talk) 22:46, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Honestly, I don't think I can. A bit hasty on my part. My bad. Not sure what I was thinking at that point. Thanks for pointing out my error. To that end I went back to reread the guidelines. I removed a couple of blogs used as references for the content on the just-released documentary, but left the content intact. I also made a change in the lede paragraph, changing "educates the public", to "speaks in public forums", thinking it a bit presumptious. I think the "reaches out to men and women..." could also be changed to be more specific, but I'm going to bed. Have a great day/evening. Regards, Cind.amuse 12:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Online Ambassador Program

Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just wanted to respond and let you know that I checked out the course page, but found all students aligned with a mentor. Let me know if you need help in any other areas. Cind.amuse 10:26, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Did I mess up one of your edits? CrazyAces489 (talk) 09:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm so sorry I couldn't respond earlier. The winds took out all our power last night. Major ugh. About the preview stuff? Nope, nothing messed up. I just thought I would give you a heads up. Last night I was patrolling new pages and I noticed that you were making minor edits and saving, in order to view your work. Previewing your work makes the editing process go smoother. (When I started working on Wikipedia, I did the same thing, until someone told me about the preview button.) Generally articles are easier to create in a subpage of your userspace before moving to the main space. I realize this may be a bit confusing. Basically, you should create articles in a subpage such as User:CrazyAces489/Kiyoshi Shiina or User:CrazyAces489/Joe Wanag. Creating an article in a subpage helps you so that you can create the article without the threat of deletion due to placing an incomplete article on Wikipedia. The very basic criteria is making sure the article is supported through significant coverage in reliable sources, that are independent of the subject. For example, take a look at the Kiyoshi Shiina article. The references are not independent of the subject, while some don't even mention him. We need sources that speak significantly and specifically about Shiina. Another thing to keep an eye out for is the embedded links. This link will provide some guidance. → WP:INCITE. Rather than embedded links, we need inline citations. Feel free to contact me anytime, if you have any questions. Happy editing! Cind.amuse 15:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bullying in academia

Sorry, I removed your speedy tag. This probably needs to be debated at WP:AfD about whther it is a POV fork. Bearian (talk) 20:19, 3 March 2011 (UTC) P.S. I have health issues, too, so I may not check in for 48 hours or more. Bearian (talk) 20:20, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey, take care of yourself! The article? I agree, based on the author's statements, it appears to be a fork of the two articles mentioned. I'll send it to AfD and see what the community thinks. It should be interesting. I learn something new everyday and enjoy a challenge. Again, take care of yourself. Cind.amuse 20:27, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Could you review in my editor review? Thanks. -Porchcrop (talk|contributions) 09:03, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Bullet for My Valentine (EP)
Even language
Triple Zero Heroes
Oroch language
Loose leaf
Electronic Battle Weapon 10
Ramazan Tavşancıoğlu
High tech manufacturing
Scripps Howard Foundation
Kieran Phelan
Dolphins cricket team
Midnight Madness (The Chemical Brothers song)
Manhattan wiring
Highveld Lions cricket team
Turn (geometry)
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines cricket team
Pearson VUE
Kishin Line
La Géométrie
Cleanup
Justin Bieber
Workplace violence
Albuquerque Public Schools
Merge
Oakhanger, Cheshire
Kent State shootings
International Musician
Add Sources
Iron Man 2
Nintendo Mini Classics
Deepwater Horizon oil spill
Wikify
Superbreak
List of The Law of Ueki episodes
West Memphis School District
Expand
Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
List of Idaho State Highways
College Life

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:40, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Offensive behaviour by User:Cindamuse

Hello, Cindamuse. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Offensive_behaviour_by_User:Cindamuse and relates to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bullying in academia. Thank you.--Penbat (talk) 16:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

refactor

Please don't refactor your comments after someone has responded to them (like here) [1], unless you like strikethrough and specifically make reference to the fact you're updating your statement. Makes the discussion hard to follow. Thanks! Gerardw (talk) 18:20, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. The addition did not change the context of my previous comment. I had already indicated in the comment that the article is a POV/content fork and was within guidelines, as appropriate, for providing clarity to the discussion, see WP:REFACTOR. Now, if I had changed the context of my previous edit, or the comments of another editor, that would be an entirely different story. ; ) Please feel free to contact me anytime, if you have any questions or concerns. Best regards, Cind.amuse 18:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Improve and Such

Why did you delete Improv and Such? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chazz Pitts (talk • contribs) 02:13, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. The article was actually deleted by another editor. Articles on Wikipedia require a clear indication of the significance and importance of the subject. Unfortunately, this article failed to meet the criteria for inclusion. We also require significant coverage in reliable sources, that are independent of the subject. You can actually discuss the deletion further with the editor that deleted the article. When you click on the name of the article above, you will be directed to the former location of the article, which will offer a link to the editor's talk page, where you can ask questions. After you speak with him, please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 02:32, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cindamuse i dont like how you deleted my page. it angered me. im really mad and im going to make another one and i hope you dont delete it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chazz Pitts (talk • contribs) 02:59, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Chazz, please read my response above. You may want to consider creating the article in a subpage of your userspace. The editor that deleted your article may be able to provide a copy for you if you contact him. Regards, Cind.amuse 03:24, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mentorship

Hi Cindamuse - Hoping you would be willing to be my mentor and help guide me through the Wikipedia process. I'm usually pretty good with new technology but creating a Wikipedia page/editing and updating pages totally intimidate me. Thanks so much in advance. BooBooBurrito (talk) 22:14, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey there! Just wanted to respond and ask if you have found a mentor yet. If not, I would be happy to lend a hand. And if you have found a mentor, I would like to offer my assistance in any regard, simply to serve as a backup. Feel free to contact me anytime. Hope all is well with you! Cind.amuse 18:25, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have not found a mentor yet, and I would really appreciate your help! Sorry for the delay in responding. Thank you again! BooBooBurrito (talk) 20:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

WikiProject Wikify's March Mini Drive

WikiProject Wikify's March Mini!

Hello, I thought you would be interested in the March Mini, a coordinated effort by WikiProject Wikify members to eliminate the 2008 backlog of articles tagged with {{wikify}} and/or {{dead end}}. Come join in the fun! There are only three prizes to be won, including a special barnstar created just for this drive!

Regards,

WikiProject Wikify

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 04:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Na Hye-sok and some general questions about cleanup and references

Cindamuse,

I came across the Na Hye-sok page today and tried to sort it out a bit. Created some internal links from Wikipedia.. etc. Came back and saw your two tags.. cleanup and citations.

As I've never completely understood these^^ even after nosing around in the documentation, I thought I'd get a sense of it by asking you directly.

Is the "citations for verification" problem there that someone put references in from a trial subscription to Highbeam (i.e. there's no way to use them as a reader)?

Is the "cleanup" problem that works weren't separated from life? If not, what do you suggest? This tag has always been one of the vaguest for me, so I'd appreciate your input. Then I can go back and re-sort it out.^^

Thanks..

Ccmontgom (talk) 08:08, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • First off, thanks for creating the article. I had never heard of the subject before. The article is a welcome addition to Wikipedia. I would be happy to clean up the article myself, if it wouldn't be stepping on your toes. Some people learn better through visual examples, rather than step-by-step guidance. And of course, sometimes effective guidance is lost over the internet. Just let me know your preference. Cind.amuse 19:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Cindamuse,

I would be fine with your doing the actual work. ^^ And to be clear, someone else should get credit for the page, I'm just trying to get it to look right and at the same time understand some of the of the tags that are nebulous in my mind. In fact, you may not remember, but some time ago you were helpful when I created a double-entry based on a weird romanization of Korean.

LOL.. some day I will understand all this.

and thanks! Ccmontgom (talk) 06:08, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Market Road Films

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Market Road Films, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not an unambiguous copyright violation. Please consider proposed deletion. Thank you.   -- Lear's Fool 10:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. Approximately 85-90 percent is a word for word copyvio. At the very least, this article is an extremely close paraphrase. I'll go ahead and PROD the article and see if this can be addressed. If not, I'll send it for a discussion. I've offered a comparative analysis on the talk page. Cind.amuse 19:08, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Jose Kurian

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I deleted Jose Kurian, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you.   -- Lear's Fool 10:33, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikiperson, would like to publish a short autobiography

Good day, I hope your health is back to TOP. My name is Alberto Rava, I'm Italian, 64 years old and I have published my third book this week. In the past I created my own website, visible at www.albertorava.it but as I retired I intend to concentrate on my passion, which is drawings. The books I published were all books with my drawings (Aldabra, Irian Jaya and now Animals at the Egyptian Museum)and I would like to put a very short biography and reference on Wilipedia. Please tell me if you could see www.albertorava.it to know me a little, and if I can send you a short biography so that you could give me some advice to publish it on Wiki. Many thanks. Alberto — Preceding unsigned comment added by ALRA2006 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Alberto. Welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, I was unable to take full advantageous of your website due to the language barrier. That said, I think your fish drawings are impressive! There are a couple of things to keep in mind. Writing an autobiography on Wikipedia is strongly discouraged and frowned upon by the community. Wikipedia is not a webhost, but an encyclopedia. For most people, it is difficult to write a neutral and verifiable encyclopedic autobiography. Articles on Wikipedia require notability of the subject. This must be reflected through significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Additional criteria for artists include the following:
  1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
  2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
  3. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
  4. The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

    If you believe that an article about yourself would meet the above criteria, I recommend creating and editing the article here: User:ALRA2006/Alberto Rava. Simply click on this link and begin editing. When you are finished, it is then recommended that you request feedback on the article to ensure that it meets the policies and guidelines. If it doesn't clearly indicate significance and importance, it risks being quickly deleted, which would be a bit frustrating after working to create the article. Nobody wants that. Please don't hesitate to contact me anytime you have questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 20:58, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH: All you wrote makes good sense to me so I think I will wait until I meet at least some of the criteria specified. You are also very welcome to ask about my website, but why do you mention "language barrier"? It is all in English, or Images .... — Preceding unsigned comment added by ALRA2006 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • As I recall, it was all in Italian. Maybe I did something wrong. I'll have to check it out again! I have a background in fine art and enjoyed looking at your work. Cind.amuse 11:26, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I UNDERSTAND WHAT MAY HAVE HAPPENED: probably, in the home page, you didn't notice that you could scroll down to the bottom of the page... There you can also find my lastest work on Etchings... I hope you'll like it , and thanks again for your advice —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.38.45.122 (talk) 16:30, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jesswest Mentorship

Hello Cindamuse,

Will you be my mentor? I am a graduate student at Indiana University and my Approaches to Development class is participating in the Wikipedia's Public Policy Initiative.

Thank you, Jess — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesswest (talk • contribs) 19:35, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Jesswest! Thanks for contacting me. I would be happy to work with you. I am available through email as well as here on WP. I'll review your course over the next couple of days. Feel free to contact me anytime. Just a reminder, make sure to use the section link above, so your comments and questions on the talk page stand out. Otherwise, comments may get lost in the shuffle. Again, feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Cind.amuse 18:23, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kiyoshi Shiina

Kiyoshi Shiina - more references CrazyAces489 (talk) 06:26, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orangefan32 Mentorship

Hi Cindy - I am currently a student at Syracuse University, and am participating in the US Public Policy Wikipedia Project. I was wondering if you might be willing to become my mentor for the project. Thanks so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orangefan32 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Orangefan32! Thanks for contacting me. I would be happy to work with you. I am available through email as well as here on WP. I'll review your course over the next couple of days. Feel free to contact me anytime. Just a reminder, make sure to use the section link above, so your comments and questions on the talk page stand out. Otherwise, comments may get lost in the shuffle. Again, feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Cind.amuse 18:23, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

Speedy deletion declined: Dima Khatib

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Dima Khatib, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance. PROD and AfD are available if notability is a concern. Thank you. Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 15:14, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marking articles students are working on

Howdy, Online Ambassador!

This is a quick message to all the ambassadors about marking and tracking which articles students are working on. For the classes working with the ambassador program, please look over any articles being worked on by students (in particular, any ones you are mentoring, but others who don't have mentors as well) and do these things:

  1. Add {{WAP assignment | term = Spring 2011 }} to the articles' talk pages. (The other parameters of the {{WAP assignment}} template are helpful, so please add them as well, but the term = Spring 2011 one is most important.)
  2. If the article is related to United States public policy, make sure the article the WikiProject banner is on the talk page: {{WikiProject United States Public Policy}}
  3. Add Category:Article Feedback Pilot (a hidden category) to the article itself. The second phase of the Article Feedback Tool project has started, and this time we're trying to include all of the articles students are working on. Please test out the Article Feedback Tool, as well. The new version just deployed, so any bug reports or feedback will be appreciated by the tech team working on it.

And of course, don't forget to check in on the students, give them constructive feedback, praise them for positive contributions, award them {{The WikiPen}} if they are doing excellent work, and so on. And if you haven't done so, make sure any students you are mentoring are listed on your mentor profile.

Thanks! --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 18:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bad to Verse?

I looked at Verse the World and thought it didn't look quite spammy enough for a speedy. (I have no doubt, of course, that it was created with a pure intention per AGF.) I have taken it to AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Verse the World as I am not at all sure about the notability (and other people might not share my view on the spam level...). CU there? Peridon (talk) 18:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Write This Down (band)

What sort of silly rule is there where an AfD can be created but removed without discussion and not be replaced? Write This Down (band) does not meet WP:BAND and should not have an article, but I don't know how to create an AfD where it's linked to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Any assistance would be appreciated. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:30, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tinkle doesn't add the link to the AFD community which means that the original author can't remove it until the discussion ends, as I've found out the hard way. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure what you mean, Walter. Twinkle adds a link to the AFD discussion to the top of the article. Sometimes, the link is red (not sure why), but clicking through will still take you to the discussion. Cind.amuse 09:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help please!

Hi,

My name is Jessica Saunders and I am writing an article (or trying to) about Mobio Identity Systems. I could really use some help as our last submission was deleted.

Thank you,

Jessica — Preceding unsigned comment added by MobioID (talk • contribs) 23:42, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Jessica, Welcome to Wikipedia! There are a couple of things that need to be addressed immediately. Your username is a violation of our username policy and needs to be changed. Failure to do this may result in a block of your account. It is also clear that you have a conflict of interest in attempting to write an article about Mobio Identity Systems. That said, I would recommend that you write your article in a subpage of your userspace. For example, create your article here: User:MobioID/Mobio Identity Systems. Simply click on the red link and start writing. When you think the article is ready, I would advise getting feedback before moving it to the mainspace. Some things to keep in mind? Stay away from promotional content and copyright violations. If you are writing an article in an attempt to manage the public's perception of the company or to promote or enhance the image or profile of the company, it may unfortunately result in deletion. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that presents articles of historical notability. The project is not a public relations platform or promotional tool for individuals, products, or corporate entities. This is a common misunderstanding for first-time editors. Simply announcing the existence of a subject prior to notability would be considered inappropriate. All in all, notability must be established and presented through significant coverage in reliable and independent secondary and third-party sources before inclusion on Wikipedia can be accepted. You can also review secondary criteria for corporations here. Please feel free to contact me if you need additional help or have further questions. Now, go change your username. Nobody wants to see you blocked. Best regards, Cind.amuse 01:44, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

a question about tracking pages or creating book

Hi i am Gulcin and new to wikipedia i want to keep the pages i've read in wikipedia. I kind of my own book, i used the book creator but when i log out i couldn't find it back. Could you please help me

Thanks a lot ps: i dont know if i have a talk page if yes where it is but i'll figure i hope


Gulcincetin (talk) 09:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC) no i dont want to do that, it will be a real book maybe a year later, i just want my account to keep the pages i find useful so as not to loose them, what i ask for is useful for readers maybe not the contributers.[reply]

  • The book creator is not designed to maintain an online copy of pages or articles that you have viewed. It is used to provide the means for you to keep an offline record of specific articles of your choosing. No alternative means for online viewing is provided. Please feel free to contact me if you have additional questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 17:28, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clive Parker

Dear Cindamuse - by restructuring the page you have made some of it meaningless like;

'Additional participation on the tour was made in support of Tenpole Tudor, Altered Images, Department S, and The Mo-dettes'

It would just be that the support bands were Tenpole Tudor, Altered Images, Department S, and The Mo-dettes

also... 'in support of Gary Glitter and Joy Division'

its not 'in support' of them, it is as 'support band' to them, or on the same bill - a completely different meaning

also... 'During the tour, the band (Solar, Spizz and Lu Edmonds from The Damned) provided support to Siouxsie and the Banshees at the Palladium in New York City'

it was during the tour, as the tour was with 999. It is in addition to the tour as they were already touring with 999.

also... 'In his spare time, he writes, and plays guitar and keyboards' - you have made an assumption that it is in his spare time, that's not what it said in the original article. What's your source?

Perhaps you should have a look at other band sites and come back, as your changes seem to reflect some sort of college dissertation rather than an accurate version of what occured at the time.

I take on board there should be more citations, so on, but give us a chance, we've only just started !!

I'll leave it a few days, and see if you can improve it, if not I'll undo it, and continue to make improvements that have references and citations. Thank you Debbiereynolds (talk) 16:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, the edits were made in accordance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style, as part of the New Page Patrol and reviewing new articles. When new articles are created, we review the article and make an initial assessment to determine feasibility. We then make an attempt to bring the article into compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines and Manual of Style. The alternative is deletion. Editing is always somewhat difficult when editors fail to provide required sources and inline references upon which they base their articles. That said, reverting edits made in attempt to bring an article into compliance is considered disruptive. Before moving forward, I would recommend that you read and review the Manual of Style for biographies. It is also vital that you provide inline links to the article to ensure verifiability. You mentioned "give us a chance, we've only just started". to whom are you referring? Not sure I understand. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Regards, Cind.amuse 17:23, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for the advice - duly noted Debbiereynolds (talk) 12:04, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Enets language
Nganasan language
Tara (Northern Ireland)
Alina Foley
Brandon Mychal Smith
Koryak language
Titans cricket team
Mark Hapka
The Beatles' Hits
Gagauz language
Ken Townsend
Beatles for Sale (No. 2)
Jimmy Workman
Mehcad Brooks
Johnny Hutchinson
Jürgen Vollmer
The Damned Things
Mason Vale Cotton
Kam Heskin
Cleanup
BP
Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 7th Earl of Shaftesbury
Medial triangle
Merge
Pink Cross Foundation
Uetsu Main Line
List of shopping malls in Greater Houston
Add Sources
David Mason (trumpet player)
Julie Meadows
The Beatles' recording technology
Wikify
Lynchburg City Public Schools
Education in Arunachal Pradesh
SRM University
Expand
Baylor Bears tennis
Project Superstar (Malaysia)
Baylor Bears baseball

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Sky Airlines destinations

Hello Cindamuse, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Sky Airlines destinations, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Contains not one word of promotional text. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Thparkth (talk) 23:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's not promotional. Airline destination listings are common on Wikipedia. However, a dedicated article is not needed. This article has been merged into the existing Destinations section in the parent article, the prod removed and replaced with a redirect to the parent article.--RadioFan (talk) 00:58, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed that the standalone article isn't needed, and the redirect is a good idea. Thparkth (talk) 02:37, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for contacting me. I agree. Not sure what I was thinking at the moment. The merge was appropriate. Cind.amuse 07:43, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

recommendation

If you are going to act as an ambassador, I'd suggest you simplify your sig. While custom sigs can be fun and are obvious to experienced editors, new editors may find it confusing and have difficulty clicking on the link to your talk page. Just a suggestion.--RadioFan (talk) 00:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PROF

I see you've been active on Wikipedia for several years and participate in patrolling new pages and guiding new users. Those efforts are appreciated. While I appreciate your passion, It appears that your are putting a bit too much weight into WP:GNG in this deletion discussion. While it is the basis for which other notability guidelines are written from and is what we often go to when a debate about notability needs to be simplified, they are all guidelines and ultimately concensus of those participating in the AFD is going to guide the admin closing the debate. I encourage you to read over some AFDs regarding academics here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators. It will give a good insight on consensus among other editors here.--RadioFan (talk) 13:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for contacting me. While I have a thorough understanding of the deletion process and the policies and guidelines evident therein, I remain open to the opportunity to hear the thoughts and opinions of others. And honestly, while I appreciate your enthusiasm, it is clear that you lack a comprehensive understanding of Wikipedia's deletion policy. I find it unfortunate and very telling that you disregard the general notability guidelines appropriate to the deletion policy and retention of articles on Wikipedia. The WP:PROF criteria clearly states that "If an academic/professor meets none of these conditions, they may still be notable, if they meet the conditions of WP:Notability or other notability criteria, and the merits of an article on the academic/professor will depend largely on the extent to which it is verifiable." As consistently encouraged in your RFAs, I concur that taking the time to read, review, and come to an understanding of the policy would be beneficial to your time on Wikipedia. Feel free to contact me anytime if you have further questions. Cind.amuse 06:31, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I still think you are misunderstanding those passages in WP:PROF. Yes it allows, as it should, an academic to simply meet WP:N. That ensures that WP:PROF doesn't wrongly exclude a person simply because they are an academic. For example and assistant professor who has published little and hasn't been cited at all but has received much attention in the mainstream media would be notable based on this. I encourage you to rethink such a grand approach to notability where specific guidelines exist. If you step back and read the comments in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aditya Tripathi I think you'll see that you stand alone in this regard. Let's focus on the article and not the editors. --RadioFan (talk) 11:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, the consensus is clear. Yet, User:Open3215 requires scrutiny as a single-purpose account whose only edits include commenting on two AFDs in which you and the other editor that weighed in on this AFD (User:JohnCD) have participated. Additional comments are exclusively on your talk page, as well as the talk page of User:JohnCD. JohnCD states "nearly all things that he has written" are references, yet disregards all based on the inclusion of some. I certainly respect the consensus. That said, if you truly desired to focus on the article and not the editors, you wouldn't have contacted me in the manner that you have. A focus on the article would have remained on the discussion page of the article, rather than the talk page of the editor. That said, I extend an olive branch. I prefer to agree to disagree. While we may have different interpretations on the guidelines, I respect your opinions and level-headed approach in the discussion and look forward to working with you in the future. Best regards, Cind.amuse 11:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 21 March 2011



This is the third issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed.


Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 22:21, 21 March 2011 (UTC) [reply]

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

Sandbox

Hi Cindamuse, I saw that you inserted the large box onto my user page with a link to create a sandbox. Do you know if there is a way to link my already existing sandbox to that section? My sandbox is Jesswest/sandbox (sandbox with a lower case s). Thanks for your help! Jesswest (talk) 03:13, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please check

Could you please check the above diff—I just noticed one paragraph that I *think* was added by you while copyediting ("In 2002, ..."), that is a bit closely worded to the source (National Inquirer). Thanks, /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 14:49, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for giving me a heads up. I'll take a look at it. Sometimes I find content and use it to revise and copyedit to reflect my own words, then delete the source content. I must have deleted the wrong content. Appreciate your restraint in the face of my lack here. Best regards, Cind.amuse 03:28, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I reviewed, made some revisions, and provided for references requested in the article. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks again, Cind.amuse 07:01, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking out my article

Hi Cindamuse, For the section that I was going to add to under Human trafficking, I was thinking about breaking out my section on Eastern Europe (similar to what was done for Central Europe in the same article). I posted a comment on the article talk page to get feedback, but do you know if there is anything else I need to do to bring it up for discussion? Or do you have any suggestions or feedback on whether that is a good idea? Jesswest (talk) 02:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Jess. The Human trafficking article is very unstable and highly charged. Various camps of editors from the opposing spectrum of the human trafficking issue tend to weigh in with their thoughts and add their political bent to the article. I would definitely recommend creating a separate article Human trafficking in Eastern Europe. That said, don't follow the process according to the break out done of the section on Central Europe. The content pertaining to Central Europe that was previously in the human trafficking article was inappropriately removed. When you create the article on Eastern Europe, keep the content currently in the human trafficking article and expand in the break out article. No need to bring this up for discussion on the talk page. Be bold and just go for it! Cind.amuse 08:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rainer Friedrich

Hello. I was ready to move Rainer Friedrich to Friedrich Rainer, but I've noticed you have done the exact opposite, stating that Rainer Friedrich is the correct name order. So, to avoid unnecessary moving back and forth, I thought it would be better to discuss it first. As far as I know Rainer is the surname and therefore it should follow the given name (Friedrich), which means the title Rainer Friedrich does not adhere to the standard naming conventions. Of course I may be missing something, so I'd appreciate your opinion on the subject. Regards, --Jake V (talk) 19:39, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not really familiar with the subject, but another editor asked me to weigh in. I ran a search and could find nothing definitive beyond over 120,000 returns on the name "Rainer Friedrich" and just over 50,000 on "Friedrich Rainer". I'm not personally vested in the article beyond that, but would be interested in any information you have on the name. Cind.amuse 05:21, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry for the late response. In fact, the search about "Rainer Friedrich" via google brings up rather irrelevant results. I am convinced that the proper name is "Friedrich Rainer", as e.g. the German wikipedia, and the Axis History Forum state. Anyway I'm going to leave a message to the talk page sometime and request move. Thanks for replying --Jake V (talk) 13:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Andy Hopwood (Martial Artist)

Hello Cindamuse, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Andy Hopwood (Martial Artist), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 01:54, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

PPI Privatization

Hi my name is Andrea Walker and I am a student at Texas Southern University, my class in participating in a Wiki Project on Privatization. We are to write a seven paage paper on a subject dealing with privatization and i have chosen education. I would like for you to be my ambassedor and give me pointers on my paper. Will you be able to help?

Andrea Walker TSU Student — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreanecole (talk • contribs) 21:11, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ball State

  • Hello Cindamuse. I used to be an Ambassador, but had to withdraw because of real-life time constraints. However, I would be happy to pitch in and help with Ball State. I have already emailed Dr. Newbold. Thanks • Ling.Nut (talk) 01:04, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hey there, thanks so much for the offer to help. I left the professor some information and an invitation to become involved in the program, but it doesn't look like he has checked in yet. I'm sure once they get up and running (if they become involved), there will be much to do. I left a note for Sage and Annie to give them a head's up. We'll see what happens next. Best regards, Cind.amuse 06:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Our Ball State Group working on researching the histories of several Ball State dormitories has run into some trouble figuring out where to put there contributions. Right now they are (in varying degrees of completion) in (pathfinder) Kelsey's sandbox. They're wondering whether to link from the current Ball State article to new pages (one by someone else on the LaFollette complex already exists) or to include their content within the Ball State article in sub-sections. Your opinion on this would be much valued, and any suggestions for the way ahead. I'll tell Kelsey Cox to keep checking her user talk page for your suggestions. Thanks for your help. --Webster Newbold 19:55, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

my 'commonwealth realms' articles

Hello cindamuse; I wrote these articles in an attempt to profile the commonwealth realms that no longer exist. Yes, you can argue that they're historical, but there's a wealth of other historical states and territories on here that no longer exist, and that existed for a shorter time and were less historically significant. Should we delete the 'nyasaland protectorate'? 'Nedic's Serbia', the 'kingdom of iceland'?...I fail to see why these states, which were independent, had their own separate monarchy/throne/crown, albeit in personal union with that of the united kingdom, do not deserve a separate article, or AT LEAST a clearly detailed section in the history article.

Best wishes

JWULTRABLIZZARD — Preceding unsigned comment added by JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk • contribs) 13:21, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please know that these deletions are nothing personal. These articles are redundant content forks of the other articles indicated. A content fork is the creation of one or more multiple separate articles all treating the same subject. Guidelines state that content forks that are created unintentionally result in redundant or conflicting articles and are to be avoided. If you have additional information, you are welcome to merge them into these other articles, but they do not warrant separate articles. Let me know your wishes here. At this point, short of a merge, the option would be to group all of the "Commonwealth Realm" articles that you have created and send it for discussion by the AFD community. Due to the repeated recreation of these articles, they will most likely be deleted and salted in the manner of Kenya (commonwealth realm), by another administrator. Administrators can prevent the creation of a page through the protection interface. This is useful for articles that have been deleted but repeatedly recreated by an editor. Let me know your decision. If you wish to merge the articles, I would be happy to assist you, if needed. If you insist on keeping the content forks, Wikipedia's guidelines call for deletion discussion. I will note that generally in this situation when an editor mentions other articles for comparison, we direct the editor to review "Other Stuff Exists". That said, I would mention that Nyasaland Protectorate redirects to History of Malawi, the Kingdom of Iceland is another redundant content fork, and Nedic's Serbia appears to be an appropriate spin-out article. Sometimes, when an article gets long (see Wikipedia:Article size), a section of the article is made into its own article, and the handling of the subject in the main article is condensed to a brief summary. This is completely normal Wikipedia procedure. Again, let me know if you wish to merge the content from the "Commonwealth realms" articles, or send to deletion discussion. Best regards, Cind.amuse 16:59, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd recommend taking the whole "(commonwealth realm)" series to AFD (assuming the user doesn't agree to merging), as some of the speedies have been contested by other users. In most of the cases, these are content forks, and even when there is some unique content, it's still small enough to be easily merged to other relevant articles. AN AFD will get a formal consensus on the articles' existence, and prevent recreation ad infinitum. - BilCat (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that the whole intention of these articles was not to be 'historical', despite the 'historical' nature of the states involved, they were intended as a 'spin off' of the main 'commonwealth realms' article. That, and like the chap who declined the deletion put, this series of articles has little or no information in common with the 'history of -' articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk • contribs) 19:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Wikipedia Ambassador Barnstar
For excellent work advising students on their Wikipedia assignments, and a delightful willingness to take on more, I award Cindamuse the Wikipedia Ambassador Barnstar. Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 18:02, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Wikfiy's April Drive

things to do

Thanks again for volunteering to take on more responsibility with the ambassador program. Here are some things you can do (as many or few as you like):

  1. Sign on as the mentor for this group of students working on "US biofuel policy]]. Introduce yourself, give them some feedback on the draft they've got going, and keep an eye on their progress.
  2. Sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Courses/Spring 2011/Environmental Law (Aaron Frank) as one of the volunteers for that class. I don't think we'll do mentors there, but they want a modest pool of ambassadors they can turn to for help.
  3. Sign on as the coordinating ambassador for Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Courses/Spring 2011/Economics of Public Policy (Eugenia Toma). Find all the articles or drafts students are working on, and make sure they get marked with the article feedback tool category and the {{WAP assignment}} template. Let me and/or the other ambassadors know if/when the students need extra help.
  4. Ditto for coordinating Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Courses/Spring 2011/Public Policy Design and Evaluation (Matt Dull).

Thanks! --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:36, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Akuntsu Social Media Agency

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Akuntsu Social Media Agency, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Winning a design contract for the youth olympic games just barely saves this from A7. Consider proposed deletion. Thank you.   -- Lear's Fool 14:17, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think you misread the article. The agency did not win a design contract. One of their employees won a design contest, separate from the agency. The source provided does not even mention the subject of the article. Cind.amuse 14:28, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your previous comment on WP:VPM

[3] → I could not have said it better myself. –MuZemike 02:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Ain't She Sweet (album)
The Beatles (No. 1)
Federal Unemployment Tax Act
The Beatles' Million Sellers
Sweet Talkin' Woman
David Marconi
Ray Connolly
Brittany Curran
Hussein bin Al Abdullah, Crown Prince of Jordan
Ashley Argota
Laurieton, New South Wales
Pacific Council on International Policy
6696 Eubanks
War Remnants Museum (Ho Chi Minh City)
Moor Crichel
Burton Salmon
Roar (utterance)
Julian Morris (actor)
North and South Cowton Community Primary School
Cleanup
National Association for Change
Newton Public Schools
Kefaya
Merge
Pasco County Schools
The Day Before
Thyroid adenoma
Add Sources
Ardsley, South Yorkshire
Athersley
Green Bay Area Public School District
Wikify
Krypton (band)
La Martiniere Calcutta
Lincoln County Schools
Expand
Harvard University
Catholic Church
Big Time Rush

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:07, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Autoconformation RfC

A formal Request for Comment has now been started on this topic. Feel free to contribute; best, Ironholds (talk) 19:33, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Message

FYI I am using your message here. I hope its ok. cheers --Guerillero | My Talk | Review Me 23:25, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please feel free to use anything I write on Wikipedia. Head's up though, in that particular msg, I had added the editor's name of Jacob, so you'll want to adjust the words. Thanks, Cind.amuse 05:09, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

Yes, I am Wikipedia also. However....

Your comment about "you guys" and "me" is all too true. I do wish I felt part of this community as I used to just a year or so ago. However, over the past two years, I have asked for help, advice, suggestions, and consensus about the project I have selected for myself, and have received naught but repetitions of the same old unworkable schemes--if I draw any answer at all. I have repeatedly outlined my problems in various venues, and cannot recall anyone bothering to comprehend them. I operate as a consensus of one as a result.

Along the way, as I have written away, I have staved off AfDs by the clueless, insults from the ignorant, denial of obvious contradictions, and random bogus tags from out of nowhere. I quit dealing with the History Contest and the assessment process when I was told that changing my writing style would magically cure a contradiction in WP policy. I quit DYK as a waste of time because I can create another entire article in the time it takes me to primp a new article into DYK shape. I come here to WP to enjoy myself, so I detach myself from these bull-byproductive portions of WP. Overall, I see a trend of bureaucraticization, with rules of thumb becoming ironclad, policy enshrined as directive, and process being more important than product. The emphasis seems to be on how to build Wikipedia rather than how useful it can be to the readers.

My reaction has been to turtle down and keep writing. This single trip to the Village Pump has convinced me it was and is a wise course. Once again, it's time to quit wasting my energy making ignored suggestions or requests.

Georgejdorner (talk) 01:47, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Reelsville (album)

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Reelsville (album), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, or is not a musical recording. Thank you. Salvio Let's talk about it! 22:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. My sincere congratulations on your new role as administrator. While I didn't get a chance to weigh in during your RFA, I think you will be a welcome addition to the admin team. That said, I went ahead and sent this article for community discussion. The current version of the article was something like the third or fourth recreation, while previously deleted according to the A9 criteria, as a recording of an artist, for whom an article did not exist. After the last deletion, the editor got creative and attempted to indicate the importance or significance of the album, based on the significance of one of the songs on the album. However, this was misleading. The one source offered, refers to a song "Quasimodo's Dream" from the band's album Quasimodo's Dream, rather than a reinterpretation of "Quasimodo's Dream" from the solo artist's album, Reelsville. The band's song was honored, rather than the solo artist's rendition. You can find the AFD discussion here. Please don't hesitate to contribute to the discussion, presenting your concerns or support. Thanks, Cind.amuse 03:04, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Eddsworld" Speedy Deletion Nomination

Hello, this is Zach. I am the creator of the article "Eddsworld" that you proposed for Speedy Deletion a few days ago. First, I would like to thank you for all the work you do for Wikipedia. "Thank-You". Next, I wanted to inform you that sense then I have worked very hard on the article and I believe that I have found proper, reliable sources that support the subject's notability. I have also removed some unnecessary information and any references that are not proper (like the blogs and user-accounts). These sources were difficult to find, but that does not subtract from their reliability. I have also been working with other Wikipedians on ways to improve the article and now I believe it is up to par, as I believe the sources now prove its notability (via the 3rd Wikipedia Web Criteria). I was wondering if you could please re-evaluate your first decision to delete the article to see if these improvements meet your standard of what is "notable". I will admit that the article is not the best, but I see deletion as too much. Maybe one of those "clean-up" notifications could be posted on the article? Any-way, thank-you for reading and any consideration you put into the Eddsworld article. Zach Winkler (talk) 23:48, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello, this is Zach again. I just wanted to notify you that I added another comment to the discussion page and wanted to thank-you for the large impute on the sources I used. I will be removing most of those by tomorrow, but I am in the process in getting an important reference that is not on the web (if it comes in time) from the BBC. Do you think one of those "This article may not meet notability guidelines" notifications would be good to attach to the article? I do not mean to seem bothersome, so if I am, I apologize. Thank-you for the assistance and attention you are putting into this mini-project. Zach Winkler (talk) 05:50, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete nomination of Diary of a Bad Man

I have removed your CSD#A7 from Diary of a Bad Man because I think the article does make a credible assertion of notability,(The large number of views) albeit one that does not pass the stricter regular article notability standards. I have replaced it with a notability PROD. Monty845 18:42, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Diary of a Bad Man

Cindamuse, I am not entirely sure why you re-applied the CSD-A7 tag to this article after another editor removed it, with the valid claim that the article makes a credible claim to assertion. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 20:14, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clive Parker

why did you undo the stuff i did please? Ninabrem (talk) 19:52, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. The changes were made according to Wikipedia's policy on copyright issues. The specific concerns with this edit were the YouTube videos used as references. Directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States. Linking to a page that illegally distributes someone else's work sheds a bad light on Wikipedia and its editors. Here is a link for more information on links which should be avoided. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you ever have any other questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 21:21, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Expressway video was recorded by the girlfriend of the promoter Metroplis Music. She had full authorisation from the band. It is a video that doesn't violate copyright. The Marshall Star video is an authorised up-load by the band themselves and offers no copyright issues. Both pieces of work show Clive Parker performimg, which is valuable footage towards the authenticity of the article, and I hope will go someway to help remove the citation notices that you have displayed in the header of the page. Videos uploaded by the owner of the work do not infringe copyright. Ninabrem (talk) 21:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Wikipedia has strict guidelines pertaining to copyright compliance. Identification and verification of the owner of these videos and/or permissions granted has not been made. We cannot use these videos as references. These videos do not assist in determining the authenticity of the article. Videos of this nature are defined as primary sources. This article needs significant coverage in secondary and third-party sources to support notability. Regards, Cind.amuse 22:59, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • You are mistaken. The videos are linked from the bands official website and are fully 'cleared' band videos. They do act as an authentic document of otherwise marginal and underground groups, because the performances show and therefore verify band personnel. You have also undone the changes I made to the text. I corrected your mistaken use of Clive's name, where you say he was 'known' as Clive Parker or Clive Parker-Sharp. This is untrue. This suggests it wasn't his real name. His name actually changed in 1999. You keep mentioning him as 'Parker', in the wrong instances, as you do not know. I therefore have used 'Clive' so that it is consistant and makes sense. You have undone these changes without any explaination also. Surely this is not right.Ninabrem (talk) 20:44, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Hi Nina, the changes that were made were actually explained in the edit summary. You can find more information about editing Wikipedia biographies at this link. Specific issues about general editing in compliance with the Manual of Style can be found here. In the case of the subject's name, we use the name by which the subject is most recognized during their years of notability. Hence, the name of the article. We also refer to the subject in subsequent article mentions by the surname, rather than the given name. I reviewed the Marshall Star website and found no mention or link to any authorized YouTube accounts. If you can provide a link to an official website that authorizes the use of the videos, I would be happy to take a look to ascertain the appropriateness as external links. Cind.amuse 00:57, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • Ok I will try and find a link. Clive is the artiste, owns the video and submitted to Utube. He is privvy to these discussions and suggested inserting these links. He was always known by his real name 'Clive', not his surname, Parker or Parker-Sharp. When you say 'known as' it implies an alias, which is not the case. He has requested the use of his real name, Clive. So you are saying he can not be referred to by his real name? Ninabrem (talk) 08:35, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • Okay, let me know when you find a link. Word of mouth regarding ownership of the videos will not suffice. If there is a band website that either has a link to an authorized YT account or has the video on their website releasing use of the video under Creative Commons, that will work. As far as the name, the subject is referred according to the name used in reliable and independent sources. Professionally, he is known by the name of Clive Parker. Accordingly, the article is titled as such. So, in essence, as far as the interests of the encyclopedia is concerned, yes, I am stating that the subject cannot choose the name by which he is referred. You can find our guidelines on conflicts of interest here. I realize this must be frustrating to no end. Wikipedia is often mistaken as a web host or promotional tool, in order for editors to create articles and edit with goals to present a subject in the best possible light. This is not the case. Wikipedia, while providing opportunities for open-source editing, has specific policies and guidelines to ensure compliance. Yes, it may be frustrating, but the goal is to support the integrity of Wikipedia. We have to work within the policies and guidelines. Best regards, Cind.amuse 09:50, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's no Marshall Star website anymore so I am curious as to what you are saying above as you said you've been on their site and researched it - where is it??! The Marshall Star footage links from official sites CD baby; http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/marshalls2 and The Orchard http://www.theorchard.co.uk/artist/30662/bio The Orchard & CD Baby can only use copyrighted product from bands / labels with the relevant links to officially cleared material.

John Moore official site; http://www.john-moore.net/category/videos/

As you suggested I have been reading Wikipedia guidlelines; Quote 'However, if you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work'., so since I know that it not in violation the below will apply;

There is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites through external links or when citing sources. However, such links must abide by various policies and guidelines. Linking to such sites is often discouraged due to misuse. Copyright is of particular concern. Reliability of the uploader and video must always be established if the link is used as a source.　

The Marshall Star material is up-loaded by the band (Marshall Star), and John Moore has endorsed the Expressway content. There's no copyright issues, it's 'free to air' There would be little possibility of verifying a person's involvement in bands such as this, due to their marginal or underground output, apart from official endorsed films of the period. They are therefore a valuable recourse in citing personal line-ups in groups from the 70's and 80's, and therefore need to be seriosuly considered in this instance. Actually Clive has had various aliases through his career, various names appearing on record releases, hence the need to have consistency through the page, otherwise there would be several references/names, and no-one would know who you were talking about. You say 'the subject is most recognized during their years of notability', but neither Parker or Clive or Parker-Sharp were these. Where did you get the information from to verify this source?

There's various grammatical errors on the page, which I am trying to address, but everytime you do an 'undo' you revert everything. Is it possible you can correct the things you are not happy with please rather than 'blanket'changes?

Thanks again CindyNinabrem (talk) 22:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the updates Cindy, I'll try and deal with them one-by-one, & I'll wait for your response; (1) 'From the age of nine, Parker played in local show bands and working men's club's.[citation needed]' the photograph is a working men's club band from 1975. Its highly unlikely there can be anything but photographic evidence left of this period since these bands were marginal to say the least. We can only go on the say-so of Parker, and witnesses, it being a standard stomping ground for up-coming musicians in the 1970's anyway. A photograph (part of Wikipedia's commons images) being solid evidence, otherwise what's the point of the creative commons photo's?. What else could this photo be?! The hair and clothes give it away. Thanks, look forward to hearing from you. Debbiereynolds (talk) 11:52, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Debbie, I'm going to preface this with stating that it will sound absolutely and totally ridiculous. Okay? Here goes the boilerplate message. We cannot use Wikipedia articles or files, in this regard, for sources of article content. The reasoning? Wikipedia, as a tertiary source is considered unreliable. I know, sounds strange. If the only information we can go on is word of mouth and witnesses, it is best not to include the content. Articles are supposed to be written "based on" external sources. The point is not to write an article and then hope to find information to add later, in support of the article. It's kinda putting the cart before the horse. On another note, there was a source offered from the NY Times that led to an invitation to buy a subscription. If you can find the actual source, we should be able to use that. We would need article title, author, publisher, page, and date of publication. Thanks, Cind.amuse 12:10, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message Cindy - we don't understand that 'boilerplate' thing here in England, anyway, its a fair comment. The point I am making though, is that the photograph up-loaded to Wiki commons images is the verifiable source. That was the original photo that originally started the Clive Parker page, showing that he started out in working men's club bands. That's how its verifiable, through a verifiable photgraphic record of the event.

The other issue, is the New York Times article. I bought it, ($4.75 !!), but then the link wouldn't work. I am trying to find out whether I can up-load it to Wiki commons images, so it can then be cited on the page. Unfortunately its hard to get any sense out of the images questions page - maybe you can answer that query? thanks again Debbiereynolds (talk) 19:28, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for warning Gandaf12 for me :) — Oli OR Pyfan! 13:11, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think that deserves a cookie!

Pyfan has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

I moved my article out of my sandbox

Hi Cindamuse, I have made some headway on my article on Human trafficking in Eastern Europe. I still have a ways to go, but I moved the article to the main wiki space at the request of my professor. If you have some time in the next couple of days, can you look over it to see if I am on the right track? I'd appreciate any feedback you have. Thank you. Jesswest (talk) 00:51, 13 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Middleton Tyas
Chantabbai
List of types of limestone
National Register of Historic Places listings in the Marshall Islands
Jeff Muncy
Ontario-Montclair School District
National Register of Historic Places listings in Palau
Halecombe
Ninety-Nine Nights II
John Flowers
Hobbs Quarry
Yesterday (EP)
Syed Shamsul Huq
Muncie Flyers (ice hockey)
Nowhere Man (EP)
Dunn's River Falls
8-Bit Rebellion!
Wyalusing Path
India Eisley
Cleanup
Eppleby
Sexual slavery
Los Angeles smog
Merge
School District 38 Richmond
Tea Party movement
I Saw Her Standing There
Add Sources
Cardinal Greenway
Hobbs' Angel of Death (album)
List of schools in Barnsley
Wikify
Davangere
Hamilton Joes
New Britain Public Schools
Expand
List of awards and nominations received by The Beatles
Human rights
Rapid City Area Schools

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 22 April 2011



This is the fourth issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed.


Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:31, 22 April 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Earl of Shaftesbury

For my part, I'm puzzled as to what you're talking about. Of course he was an heir - he was the eldest son of the 9th Earl, as the list indicated before you reverted it. That's why he had the courtesy title "Lord Ashley". And the reason he didn't inherit the title was that he died before his father - this is obvious from their respective dates of death. The other heirs didn't, and so they are listed - as Earls. And it is common practice - see Duke of Somerset, Duke of Richmond, Duke of Grafton, Duke of Beaufort, Duke of Bedford, and countless other articles, for this practice. The fact that something isn't listed in a guideline isn't a reason for reverting it, by the way. Proteus (Talk) 15:19, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • While Lord Ashley was an heir apparent, he was not an heir. An heir is one who inherits upon the death of another. It is inappropriate to refer to an individual as an heir, since the exact identity of the persons entitled to inherit are not determined until the time of death. A person only becomes an heir upon the death of the decedent, in this case, the 9th earl. When he died, the heir was determined in the earl's grandson, who subsequently became the 10th earl. By the way, Lord Ashley was not the only first born son in the Ashley-Cooper family that did not inherit. If you are going to include heirs apparent in the list of Earls of Shaftesbury, you may want to do some research and include a complete list. And then properly title the list. Another thing, the fact that other stuff exists, isn't a viable reason for keeping it. For the sake of consistency, it would support your assertion, if the inclusion of Lord Ashley list in the Earls of Shaftesbury article reflected the inclusion of other individuals in the same manner as the other articles have done. Cind.amuse 22:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help with a picture

Hi Cindamuse - I replied to your earlier post on my talkpage, but I have an additional question. I would like to use a photo that I found in wikimedia commons but I would like to crop it so that only Eastern Europe is visible. This is the link Eastern Europe for what I did and here is the original file Original File The user is giving permission to alter the file as long as credit is given and the copyright permissions stay the same, but I can't figure out how to replicate the permissions that are listed on his page. I also don't have the "summary" section that he has on his page. Instead I have a file history, so I think I must have done something wrong. Can you help me or tell me how to fix this so that no one deletes my photo? I would like to be able to link it to my article as a thumbnail like I did with the original file. Thank you! Jesswest (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey Jess, can you upload your derivative work to Commons? From there, you can simply use the permissions used by other derivative works to create applicable permissions for the new file. It's basically the same process over there for uploading here. Pretty user friendly. Let me know if you need help. Cind.amuse 17:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Europe countries map ee.png

Chris Vaughn page

Thanks... I think i fixed it..the Chris Vaughn page. I am going to work on the format a bit on the film section to better fit the standard film sections of other articles. :) Creditcamp (talk) 00:43, 25 April 2011 (UTC) Happy Holiday![reply]

Sorry what do you mean by " inclusion of self-published sources and cleanup " do you mean because I cut and pasted it from something i was building? Do I need someone else to cleanup for me? What is improper about references? is the pdf reference improper? is it necessary? I will work on it a bit tonight, thanks again! If so would you be willing or could you advise? Thanks so much sorry about removing tags, I thought I was allowed to remove tags after I edited them. Do I wait and have you do it? Creditcamp (talk) 23:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Were you able to review the policy and guideline links that I provided on your talk page? The specific policy on self-published sources can be found here. The guidelines for bringing an article into compliance with the Manual of Style can be found here. Guidelines for bringing biographies into compliance can be found here. Generally, I wouldn't hesitate to simply edit and address these issues directly. However, your editing history reveals that you are editing for a single purpose in order to promote the documentary and the individuals involved. When an editor appears to be personally invested in an exclusive topic or article, it can become disruptive going back and forth with others editing to bring the article into compliance, only to have those edits removed. Please review the links that I have provided. Maintenance tags can only be removed once the specific issue is appropriately addressed. If you need assistance, don't hesitate to contact me. I am more than happy to edit the article, but haven't wanted to "steal your thunder" or step on your toes. If you need help, holler. Cind.amuse 01:00, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I am TOTALLY ready for you to just help me bring it BACK into compliance. Take it away, pal! It was in compliance last week, until i tried to updated it with more info. thanks!! Creditcamp (talk) 04:59, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey There, my page was totally wiped out and replaced by a different Chris Vaughn. Many of the references on my article had already been received, WHAT HAPPENED? How can this be fixed? Please help! Creditcamp (talk) 05:40, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

Jasmine (American singer)

Re. {{Jasmine Sagginario (born September}} (edits changing it both ways)

This is just a quick, friendly note to 3 people who've recently edited that specific portion - Djc wi, Michael Bednarek and Cindamuse

That article has, recently, been problematic - bordering on edit-war. (Sorry, some of you will already realise that - but I'm just being neutral in commenting here),

Therefore, please exercise great caution in editing and reverting - and if there are any problems at all, please discuss them on Talk:Jasmine (American singer) - especially before repeating edits.

I remain neutral and uninvolved; I'm just trying to avoid trouble - particularly, trying to avoid a need to 'protect' the article from editing.

Thank you for your understanding, all the best,  Chzz  ►  07:52, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. A closer look will reveal that there are no edit wars taking place on this article. An additional review will show that there has been discussion on the article with two editors working together with the third new editor User:Djc wi, to corporately bring the article into compliance. Working with these other editors has actually been a positive experience in community editing. Nothing problematic here, but appropriate, effective, and good faith edits on the part of all editors involved. Thanks again, Cind.amuse 08:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cindamuse, yes, absolutely - I agree; that's fine, and good; I'm just trying to keep an eye on the article due to previous trouble, and to ensure everyone is aware of things. Cheers!  Chzz  ►  08:49, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks again. All well and good, but my focus, as well as that of User:Michael Bednarek has been to work with User:Djc wi and User:Jasminepedia to avert any edit wars. Neither Michael nor I have engaged in any edit wars, so the warning comes off a bit premature and unnecessary. Essentially, it appears that you are attempting to monitor the individuals that have been monitoring the article and the editors that have previously engaged in disruptive editing. Honestly, and with all due respect, it's just bit puzzling. Sincerely appreciate your work just the same. Cind.amuse 09:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • It was not, in any way, a 'warning'. It was, as it says, a "quick, friendly note". And if I had only put the note on the talk page of selected editors, that would have been biased of me. I'm totally neutral on the subject, and totally removed from it - in fact, I still have absolutely no clue who "Jasmine" actually is (nor any interest in her).  Chzz  ►  03:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • I certainly meant no offense by describing your note as a warning. I most definitely believe that you offered your note in good faith. That said, I sensed that your "quick, friendly note" was a gentle way of presenting a warning without using a template. And it's never been near to needing full protection. Your note left me puzzled. My bad. Warning, caution, heads up. It's all semantics and really it's no skin off my nose. I think in the future, rather than fearing biased action, just take a look at the history, assess both appropriate and inappropriate actions and address those specific editors accordingly, rather than lumping them all together. Just a thought. Honestly, I have no idea who Jasmine is either. I came upon the article when I was asked to review another article and an editor asked me to keep an eye on this one due to edit warring between three earlier individuals. You are honestly, no more removed from it than I am. So, it felt like you were coming late on the scene and monitoring the monitor. I was puzzled, that's all. I have no ill will toward you. Honestly, it's all good. ; ) Cind.amuse 05:08, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not a problem. I certainly was not offended.
I did not see a reason to bother you with background details, originally, but allow me to elaborate;
The reason that I got involved was, Djc wi posted on ANI about the other user, then created an SPI for Jasminepedia, and then placed a help request here. In responding to the help request, I realised that CU would be inappropriate (for an IP editor), and that fundamentally, the dispute was over Jasmine (American singer), and thought if that could be resolved, further action (block, protection) would be unnecessary. The diffs that concerned me were [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11].
Thus, at that time - without making any judgement over who was right or wrong - I cautioned both Djc wi [12] and Jasminepedia [13] for edit-warring, asking them to discuss things on the talk page. Djc wi accepted the notice in good spirit [14] and from the ensuing discussion, I hoped the problems were resolved without the need for any further actions.
However, I continued to monitor the article, and when I saw the month of birth being flicked back and forth [15] [16] [17] I dropped those notes on the three user talks, to try to head off any potential escallation.
I hope that will now make more sense, and I'll be genuinely interested to know if you feel I acted appropriately.
Just to be perfectly clear: I am not criticising, complaining, defending myself, or objecting to anything at all that you have done. Just explaining background (which hitherto I didn't feel a need to bother you with), and wondering "how is my editing". Best,  Chzz  ►  00:04, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Aleanca Kuq e Zi

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Aleanca Kuq e Zi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Source one does perhaps indicate notability. Uncertain enough I think for it to need to go to AfD if necessary. . Thank you. GedUK  19:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sajjad Shaheed-e-Bajaur

My page Sajjad Shaheed-e-Bajaur has been deleted on NOTABILITY reasons. I want to contest this.
My Point of View: The page is about a highly notable K.I.A (Killed In Action) Military Officer of Pakistan Army, Lt. Sajjad Khan, S.Bt (Military) who was posthumously awarded one of Pakistan's national military honour "Sitara-i-Basalat" meaning "Star of Bravery"..... He is widely known among the people of FATA and his notability is no issue as for as a 180 Million strong nation, Pakistan, is concerned...... If every "Tom, Dick and Harry" can be represented by a page on WIKIPEDIA then why not the HERO of a NATION...... The fact can be confirmed from the official website of Pakistan Army' Public Relations wing.... [1] Also see following newspaper pages containing his name in the AWARD list. [2] [3] [4] After the above discussion, I think I can request you to cancel the deletion and restore the article / page Sajjad Shaheed-e-Bajaur .... Thanx. Debajaur (talk) 17:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)Debajaur[reply]

  • Thank you for contacting me. I realize this must be very frustrating for you. While I saw the article in question, I'm not actually the editor that deleted the article. I recommend that you contact User:Courcelles. He deleted the article because there was no indication that the article met the guidelines for inclusion. There were also concerns over copyright violations. You can find more information on the guidelines here and here. Overall, the article was not supported through significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The sources provided included blogs, Facebook, and a press release, along with the following sources:

The Sitara-i-Basalat actually means the Star of Good Conduct. The Star of Bravery is the Sitara-i-Shujaat medal. The Sitara-i-Basalat is awarded to all ranks of the Pakistani military for valor, courage, or devotion to duty while not in combat. In any case, the topical notability criteria accepted by the community states that a soldier may be notable if s/he were awarded their nation's highest award for valour; or were awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour multiple times. Unfortunately, the Sitara-i-Basalat is not recognized as the highest award for valour, or second-highest award. While this individual appears to have been an admirable person, the information presented about him does not meet the notability criteria. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 02:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Economics of Public Policy (Eugenia Toma)

I'm currently working on getting you a list of all the articles the students have been working on. I will have that for you as soon as possible. As for the timeline of the course, my training was 15-16 January. The Spring semester began 12 January. I began training the students the school week after training (i.e., the week beginning with 17 January). The course ends next week, 5 May. Starvinsky (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starvinsky (talk • contribs) 14:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks so much. Can you either drop the list in a subpage of the course page? That would probably work better than my talk page. As soon as I get the list, I'll start dropping templates and review each article to provide some feedback. Thanks again, Cind.amuse 14:16, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cindamuse/Googs

Just a short note to say that I came across User:Cindamuse/Googs a few days ago and I loved it. Nicely done. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 20:47, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Declined speedy deletion: Upon a Burning Body

Hi Cindamuse. Just letting you know, this did not qualify as an A7, as the band is signed to a notable label, and charted on Billboard Heatseekers. It might not be enough for clear notability, but it's enough to escape a speedy. Thanks, Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 15:48, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Dr. Michael Wolff

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Dr. Michael Wolff. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Michael Wolff (Consulate-General of Austria). Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Michael Wolff (Consulate-General of Austria) - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Cind.amuse 14:43, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Cropley Ashley-Cooper, 6th Earl of Shaftesbury
Tamala limestone
Lord Lieutenant of Dorset
Michael A. Banks
Extracts from the Film A Hard Day's Night
The Beeb's Lost Beatles Tapes
Shelly limestone
Indiana State Road 332
Lord Deramore's Primary School
Aamani
Wigmore Street
Midget
Shelby Cinca
Canton Local School District
Goon Affiliated
Crash Rickshaw
Broadlands
Up Against It
Edwina Brudenell
Cleanup
Khloé Kardashian
Poway Unified School District
Limestone Coast
Merge
Stock paintball
Paintball variations
Singer
Add Sources
2010 eruptions of Eyjafjallajökull
Underoath
National Register of Historic Places listings in Washington, D.C.
Wikify
Chipmunk (rapper)
Hazlehead Primary School
Alton Community Unit School District 11
Expand
Far-Less
Nudity
Act of Depression

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:49, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

changes to Hal Sparks entry

The changes made were initially to eliminate vandalism that has been present on the page for some time.. some information on the page was erroneous but a good deal was the result of intentional wiki graffiti. re: The original ZERO 1 band name being listed at (The Hal Sparks Band Part II: Electric Boogaloo) Most television credits were lifted from IMDB but some were added that were untrue or simply random and not germane to the body of work or work compilations formed of the artists work.

Radio info was incomplete and the times were wrong

ZERO 1 band info (all verifiable changes) are from the bands official booking page (www.reverbnation.com/zero1) All ZERO 1 info was out of date and much of it had been vandalized

details regarding Queer As Folk have been updated to include the depth of the work and elements of it's importance.

All links added are official

all the graffiti that has been on the page for some time has been there without any verification and yet the page continues to revert back to the false and in many cases intentionally misleading or mocking versions

Thanks for your time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 5park5inc (talk • contribs) 19:59, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for contacting me. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is focuses on the verification of content. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth: whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. Anything that requires but lacks a source may be removed, and unsourced contentious material about living persons—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately. Therefore, if you challenge content that is unsourced, by all means, feel free to remove that content. However, do not delete content by replacing it with a preferred, unsourced version. Irregardless of the comment made in your edit summary, verification is not redundant, but required. Please note that in order to meet Wikipedia's standards for verifiability and notability, the article in question must actually document that the criterion is true. It is not enough to make claims in the article or assert details about an individual's life or importance on a talk page – the article itself must document this content through independent and reliable sources, using an inline citation. Wikipedia takes the creation and editing of biographies of living persons very seriously. We must get the article right. To that end, we are very firm about the use of high quality sources. While the addition of questionable, unsourced content to articles may sometimes fall through the cracks, it does not justify a tit for tat addition of further unsourced content. Where you are challenging content, I would recommend at this point, that you present the contentious information on the article's talk page. If you are the subject of the article, there is a process for dealing with articles about yourself, where inaccurate information exists. You can find more information HERE. Best regards, Cind.amuse 00:07, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I understand your wanting to maintain a verifiable source however in some cases that is impossible since there is no source that says something is not what it never was. There are several unsourced intentionally malicious elements on the page and their simple removal does not correct the problem. especially when they keep being RE-instated as facts...

thanks

p.s all the references that support the malicious content were sourced with dead links. there was no verification of those and yet they remained up unchallenged(5park5inc (talk) 06:16, 4 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]

  • The answer in this situation is stated above. While the addition of questionable, unsourced content to articles may sometimes fall through the cracks, it does not justify a tit for tat addition of further unsourced content. Where you are challenging content, I would recommend at this point, that you present the contentious information on the article's talk page. If you can list the specific statements or content in the article being challenged, I will be happy to remove that content from the article. If you can provide additional information that is referenced to reliable sources, again, I will be happy to add the content to the article. Due to the expressed conflict of interest, I recommend that you refrain from editing the article further in any capacity. Cind.amuse 06:16, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

GOCE drive newsletter

The Guild of Copy Editors – May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive

The Guild of Copy Editors invite you to participate in the May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive began on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). The goals of this backlog elimination drive are to eliminate as many articles as possible from the 2009 backlog and to reduce the overall backlog by 15%. ! NEW ! In an effort to encourage the final elimination of all 2009 articles, we will be tracking them on the leaderboard for this drive.

Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.

We look forward to meeting you on the drive! Your GOCE coordinators: SMasters, Diannaa, Tea with toast, Chaosdruid, and Torchiest

You are receiving a copy of this newsletter as you are a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, or have participated in one of our drives. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add you name here. Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:11, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Laura Bryna

Just letting you know I re-made Laura Bryna with more reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:00, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dang, dude. Great work, although honestly, I'm not surprised. I sincerely appreciate the work that you do and the example you set. I'll pop over and add my recommendation. It comes to mind that an article about one of Bryna's recordings was recently deleted in AFD, partly as a result of the deletion of the Laura Bryna article. The article title was Trying to Be Me. Would you mind taking a second look at that article, since the artist's page was restored? Maybe it can also be salvaged. Cind.amuse 02:16, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please help assess articles for Public Policy Initiative research

Hi Cindamuse,

Your work as an Online Ambassador is making a big contribution to Wikipedia. Right now, we're trying to measure just how much student work improves the quality of Wikipedia. If you'd like contribute to this research and get a firsthand look at the quality improvement that is happening through the project, please sign up to assess articles. Assessment is happening now, just use the quantitative metric and start assessing! Your help would be hugely appreciated!

Thank you, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 17:11, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

And thanks for your welcoming words. Best! --Doktor Plumbi (talk) 19:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rocket Girl Label

Hello there, Thanks for taking an interest and wanting to help out. I have now taken onboard some of the points youve made, and also have checked other similar record label wiki pages, just to make sure Rocket Girl follows standards. I agree with you, the -biography- heading is unecessary, as it would be more fitting for a single individual. As for inline citations and 3rd party cross-reference, I have now included the -singles book reference - and have also included a -BBC- interview, which I believe is a reliable enough source. It is obviously a work in progress, and I shall endeavour to add as many sources and citations, as my research progresses. Thanks for your help, the page I believe, has been improved. cheers. sonicbamboy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonicbamboy (talk • contribs) 01:59, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bangladeshi Poets in Facebook

hi Cindamuse, yup you're right, should have been a7. thanks -- The Elves Of Dunsimore (talk) 08:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

Declined speedy on Adam C. Boyd

Hi, I've declined the CSD-A7 on this article... there's a credible assertion of significance in the statement that he had a career with the Philadelphia Eagles. I don't particularly agree with the criteria listed at WP:ATH, but he appears to satisfy the notability criteria if he played a single game with them. I've BLP PROD'ed the article for the time being. Cheers, Catfish Jim & the soapdish 12:22, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey CJ! Thanks for giving me the heads up. I removed the BLP PROD. While poorly formatted, the article had two references. I reformatted as external links. I also sent the article for deletion discussion. It can be found here if you want to add your recommendation. Best regards, Cind.amuse 21:06, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion Roscoff Restaurant

A Michelin starred restaurant without indication of importance? Sorry to say, but you must be kidding! Eddylandzaat (talk) 03:48, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. I agree with the sentiment above. My bad. While "significance" and "importance" are both subjective, I should have sent it for deletion discussion. I jumped the gun a bit, I suppose. At this point, I've placed some maintenance templates, which indicate the current needs of the article. While the restaurant received a star from the Michelin Guide, this does not confer notability in accordance with the topical guidelines. We don't have blanket notability for restaurants recognized by any particular restaurant guide, including Michelin, Zagat, Harden’s, or Forbes. A restaurant is considered notable ‘’if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources’’. This is where the article lacks. I have not been able to find significant coverage outside of restaurant guides and reviews. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. In-depth coverage is simply lacking. One source encompasses inclusion in a list, another one independent and reliable, and a third is a restaurant guide that reviews the restaurant that replaced the Roscoff Restaurant after it closed down. At this point, I would work on establishing notability through the presentation of significant reliable and independent sources. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 23:29, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • To be true, I felt disgusted and insulted by the templates. They came so soon after the declined speedy deletion request that I assumed them to be revenge templates! But My76Strat cooled me down and on his advice I have added quite a number of references. Dodgy and unhandy wording is possible. English is not my first language and only recently I moved over from the Dutch to the English WP. Not everything works the same. If you have more comments on my restaurant articles (see my userpage), please put your comments on my talk page. The templates are absolutely horrible. After I have finished the series (4 restaurants to go), I will rework all restaurants based on your comments and to add extra references. Eddylandzaat (talk) 00:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Nah, revenge is not my style. You were on target with your opposition to the speedy deletion. I was the one that was a bit off. Throughout my "life" on Wikipedia, I have found that I learn the most, from my mistakes. The purpose in placing the maintenance templates is wholly to indicate areas in the article that need addressing for compliance. Rather than a slap on the wrist, the templates serve as guidance, support, and direction. To that end, I made some clarification of the issues on the article talk page. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you have questions or need help any time (unless I've scared you off!) I'm more than happy to assist in any capacity. Best regards, Cind.amuse 00:47, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! thanks! how...

i created an article and although i got the message that it needed to be reviewed by someone else ... i can't find it to edit the references. Could that have been deleted?

(

thanks, egaion —Preceding unsigned comment added by Egaion (talk • contribs) 08:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Welcome to Wikipedia! Was the article Andrea Moller: Waterwoman? If so, it was moved to Andrea Moller. There isn't another article named Andrea Moller, so we didn't need to disambiguate. I don't think the article has any specific issues that would warrant deletion. At this point, just a good cleanup, copyedit, restructuring, and making sure to verify content through the addition of inline citations. Please feel free to contact me if you need help or have any questions. Cind.amuse 08:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Birthright Armenia

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Birthright Armenia, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 01:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Send to AfD? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:29, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's what I was thinking as well. It's just not G11-eligible because it's not unambiguously promotional. Logan Talk Contributions 02:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I went ahead and removed the promotional content, which in the end was a copyvio and close paraphrasing of the organization's website. At this point, while the article lacks sufficient inline citations, it looks like notability may be met through the general notability guidelines. In my opinion, the organization may meet the topical notability guidelines as an international nonprofit corporation. That said, it needs proper sourcing. Cind.amuse 04:05, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Radio Sandwell

Just a quick note to let you know that I removed the speedy deletion template you placed on Radio Sandwell because the article did not seem to meet the speedy deletion criterion G11. The article, brief as it is, is written in entirely neutral language and does not qualify for G11 deletion.

Please be aware that is normally inappropriate re-add a speedy deletion template when another editor (other than the creator of the article) has removed it, because speedy deletion is only for uncontroversial deletions. If you believe the article still needs to be deleted, please consider WP:PROD or WP:AFD which can be used for deletions which are not covered by the speedy deletion criteria.

I am not an administrator and I do not have any special authority in this matter. If you feel that I have made a mistake, please feel free to contact me on my talk page.

Thparkth (talk) 15:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. I've gone ahead and sent the article for deletion discussion. That said, I would recommend that you revise your template in consideration of your audience. The statement, "Please be aware that [it] is normally inappropriate [to] re-add a speedy deletion template when another editor (other than the creator of the article) has removed it, because speedy deletion is only for uncontroversial deletions," is not exactly assuming good faith on the part of your fellow editors. Another heads up that an article may be entirely promotional, while presented in a neutral tone. Mere publicity, promotion, and advertising need not reference sales or reviews pertaining to the quality or feasibility of the subject of the article. Simply announcing the existence of a subject devoid of importance or significance would be considered inappropriate and oftentimes promotional. Take for example, external link spam. Promotional. Now consider or compare that spam link with an article merely presenting their web address and where you can find them on the frequency dial. Spam. And there we have Radio Sandwell. Hope this helps. Feel free to contact me if you have questions or need assistance. Best regards, Cind.amuse 06:41, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The wording of my template is unfortunately necessary in many cases, because editors who misunderstand the speedy deletion criteria often misunderstand the rest of the process too. I apologize if it seemed to assume bad faith; it was meant to be better than that "pat on the head" patronizing wording of the standard csd-decline template "Thanks for patrolling new pages, {{USER}}!" which I find particularly grating. To address your specific comment about this case, the explicit wording of WP:CSD#G11 says that "an article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion." I disagree that the mere inclusion of an external link automatically renders an article non-NPOV, and I'm quite certain that your interpretation of G11 is at odds with consensus in this case. As far as taking the article to AFD is concerned, I will have to consider how to !vote myself there, but per WP:OUTCOMES there seems to be a strong supposition that licensed radio broadcasters who originate their own programming are notable. (A community radio station in the UK is not like a Part 15 restricted license in the USA - this broadcaster has a potential audience of at least a half million people.) Thparkth (talk) 10:47, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • It may be advantageous to consider your audience when you place your template. You're essentially trading "patronizing" for "assumption of bad faith". While this may not be your intent, it's certainly not assuming good faith, is it? You are assuming that other editors will disregard your removal of the CSD tag and replace it with another. While it may be necessary for new editors, it comes across rather presumptuous on the part of experienced editors. Especially when you are working with others that may have quite a bit more experience and/or knowledge than you may have. You may also want to revise your template to accurately define the CSD process, which is not reserved for uncontroversial deletions. On the contrary, they are often controversial. You're thinking of PRODs, which are used for uncontroversial deletions. On another note, you may want to review the actual guidelines for broadcast media, rather than relying on an essay. FWW, I'm in agreement with the G11 criteria that you stated above. I never stated that inclusion of an external link renders an article "non-NPOV". I'm not concerned with POV in the article. The article is clearly not a POV issue. The issue was one of a promotional nature, which is quite different from a point of view. They are separate issues. I think you're muddying the waters a tad. I would invite you to revisit what I wrote above. Something was definitely lost during translation. Best regards, Cind.amuse 13:05, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • "Uncontroversial" is a bit of an over-simplification, it's true, but it is the case that all speedy deletions must be obvious, objective and incontestable. I promise you that I am not "thinking of PRODs". I will think about how to reword my template in light of your comments! Thparkth (talk) 18:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Abolition of Prostitution

As you are aware, the community consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abolition of Prostitution was that this article is not appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia. Some editors felt that some material could be merged into Prostitution and the law, but in nearly two months that hasn't happened. Regardless, any editor could easily access the history to do merging if they were so inclined. The community consensus is that the page as it stands should not be on wikipedia, your actions are directly in contradiction to that consensus, and to accuse someone of vandalism for acting in support of that consensus is not constructive. Given your actions and long history of POV-pushing in sex work-related articles, I could easily take this to ANI, but since I have this unfortunate tendency to try to assume good faith I'm appealing to you to put aside your viewpoints and try work with other editors rather than disrupt the project. I'm not going to let you drag me into some edit war, so I'll merely restore the consensus edit and leave it there. If you continue to pursue disruptive editing this will have to be taken to ANI.

Since you feel strongly about this topic I encourage you to take the lead on the merging; most other editors don't seem to feel there is anything to be merged, so it's unlikely to happen otherwise. Simply stalling and waiting for someone else to do the merging is just a tactic to avoid complying with the community consensus. TJ Black (talk) 00:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi TJ. I have restored the article, in preparation for a merge. This has been done in accordance with community consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abolition of Prostitution, which resulted in a directive to merge. The AfD consensus was formalized after a debate involving several editors. The discussion at Talk:Prostitution and the law#Abolition of Prostitution merger, with one out of (only) three supporting the merger does not override the community consensus at AFD. Maintaining the article rather than a redirect provides instructions for other editors to participate in any discussions pertaining to the merge. I agree with your encouragement to take the lead on merging the article. Over the past few months, my time has been centered on working with students and professors as an Ambassador with the Public Policy Initiative. The semester recently ended. Earlier today, I began working on merging these two articles. Please understand that regardless of any personal viewpoint I may have, I am solely focused on compliance with Wikipedia policy, guidelines, and standards for quality. Honestly, when it comes to the issue of human trafficking, pornography, prostitution, or any like-minded subject associated with the sex industry, in my role on Wikipedia, I am more than able to separate my personal interests from my assessments and review of article style and tone, or whether a specific topic meets the topical or general notability criteria for inclusion. There are actually editors on both sides of these issues that consider me "the enemy". I can be your strongest advocate, if your goals are in alignment with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I'm not the enemy. My goal here is to bring clarification and balance through merging these two articles. Nothing more. To that end, I welcome all interested editors to participate in any discussion regarding the AFD consensus to merge. Maintaining the article provides direction in participating in this process. Redirecting the article disregards the process established by Wikipedia and hinders the ability for other editors, primarily newer editors, to work in bringing the merge to fruition. Best regards, Cind.amuse 02:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is absolutely no need to restore an article "in preparation for a merge." To merge, one can take text from the archived versions. Restoring it goes against the consensus to merge, which is one click short of delete. The only reason it was not deleted was to maintain its text history to enable a merge of whatever useful information (not much in this case) it contained. Binksternet (talk) 04:47, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • There is no consensus to redirect or delete this article. The consensus in the AFD discussion is to merge. Wikipedia's Guide to Deletion in response to AFD outcomes specifically states, "Merge is a recommendation to keep the article's content but to move it into some more appropriate article. It is either inappropriate or insufficient for a stand-alone article. After the merger, the article will be replaced with a redirect to the target article (in order to preserve the attribution history)." Administrative actions direct us to mark both pages by adding {{Afd-mergeto}} and {{Afd-mergefrom}} to the top of their respective pages. Upon removing the {{afd}} notice (if still present), add the {{Afd-merge to}} tag to the top of the nominated article. This lets as many users involved in those pages know that content is to be merged as a result of a deletion discussion. It is the involved editors' job, rather than the closing administrators' job to perform the merger. The appropriate response when an AFD consensus results in a merge is not to circumvent the deletion policy and process guidelines through redirection or deletion. In accordance with the AFD consensus and administrative guidelines, the reinstatement of the redirection is inappropriate. Therefore, I have restored the article in compliance with community standards. While I appreciate your passion and obvious good faith attempt to bring clarity, the action to redirect prior to merging is ill advised and contrary to the deletion process. Throughout this week, I will continue to work on merging the two articles. After the merge is complete, in accordance with Wikipedia guidelines, I will redirect the article. If you have questions during this time, please feel free to contact me. Best regards, Cind.amuse 08:25, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikifier: March 2011




To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Hello Wikifiers!

Sorry this Newsletter is late, It should have gone out a month ago. I've been very busy in real life and didn't have time to get over to the newsletter. In this edition of the Newsletter, we have an editorial written by our new executive coordinator; Guoguo12. Guoguo12 has succeeded Mono due to an indefinite wikibreak. We also have the results of the February and March Mini drives.

Happy Wikifying,

Sumsum2010, the assistant coordinator of WikiProject Wikify

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 01:57, 16 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Ladbroke Black
Billie's Bounce
Great Houghton, South Yorkshire
Olegário Benquerença
Danielle Staub
Sterling Knight
Southern Cross (ship)
Mrs. America
Hugh Willoughby
J. Ottis Adams
Anatoly Sagalevich
Bessacarr
Yevgeny Tolstikov
Tunak Tunak Tun
Skittles (confectionery)
Joe FitzPatrick
Burton Agnes
Keyingham
Greenbrier Limestone
Cleanup
Riverside South (New York City)
Strawberry Field
Hunter Davies
Merge
Wisconsin Lutheran School
Legal drinking age
South Magnetic Pole
Add Sources
Friendship
Goldfish
Cries of the Past
Wikify
Smog Watch
Gateway Primary
Urusei Yatsura (band)
Expand
Collaborations between ex-Beatles
Cheerleading
Alaska–Yukon–Pacific Exposition

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 09:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

Information Deletion and Editing is Incorrect

Hello, you have recently deleted and editing some information on the Birthright Armenia's organization page; however now the information is not correct. "summer volunteer internship program to assist in the development of Armenia." is not what the organization does directly and that is what the previous content has been changed to. Is there any way to change it back to the previous text to correctly give this message?

Also is there any tips/tools you can give on creating that page again as to not be 'promotional' because it has been edited on numerous occassions, and it is either too promotional or there is not enough content detailing the page.

Thank you in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by G0h4r (talk • contribs) 07:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. After reading the organization's website, I tried to offer a definition. If the statement is incorrect, please feel free to change it. As far as editing, there is often semantic confusion over the definition of publicity, promotion, and advertising. Mere publicity, promotion, and advertising need not reference sales or reviews pertaining to the quality or feasibility of the subject of the article. One of the ways to better understand the criteria pertaining to appropriate inclusion on Wikipedia is to determine if the article has been written or edited in an attempt to manage the public's perception of the subject of the article. Common promotional content that is often added to articles include staffing and organizational structure outside of executive roles; detailed presentations of programming, goods, and services; announcement of corporate events; and instructional and directional content. Rather than using Wikipedia as an alternative version of the organization's website, the article needs to present significance and importance of the subject, establishing notability through reliable secondary and third-party sources. Hope this helps. Please feel free to contact me anytime you have questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 09:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prostitution and the law

Hi. I think you could help with the Prostitution and the law article. About the image: the original description as written in the legend for the color blue by the person who created the image is "Prostitution (the exchange of sex for money) is legal, but organized activities such as brothels and pimping are illegal; prostitution is not regulated". This original description has been changed by several editors. My edits yesterday were in response to User:Unreal7 who has made a change to the image description yesterday, so I changed it again to what I thought was clearer. Anyway, we should have the original text , I believe. Also, maybe you could offer your opinion here:Talk:Prostitution_and_the_law#Image_description and maybe you could also help with the merging of Abolition_of_Prostitution. Prostitution and the law needs a lot of work and maybe you could help? 123username (talk) 11:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello and thanks for contacting me. Obviously, I read the image information wrong. Don't know what's up wit dat. I am working on merging content offline, planning on completing the merge by next week. That said, personal health issues are taking precedence right now, so my editing is not as consistent as it usually is. I don't think my input on the discussion page will be a positive addition to the conversation. While I really don't have a horse in this race, every edit or comment I make pertaining to prostitution, pornography, or the sex industry in an effort to communicate Wikipedia policy and guidelines, ends in misguided accusations. I'm simply not interested in playing the games. That said, I'll offer a short response. Thanks again for contacting me. Best regards, Cind.amuse 11:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Ziheng_Yang

If my comments came across as being too critical I apologize. I can see that you and a few other editors have tried to explain things to the editor in question, I just felt that 'nofootnotes' plus a 'citation needed' on every statement was a little much. This is a difficult one as FF seems to be constructive in their intentions but problematic in their interactions with other editors. It seems that some are determined to see every article that they created deleted, or at least would be easy to get that impression looking at their talk page. At least some of those articles are about notable subjects. I'll attempt to point FF in the right direction.--Michig (talk) 20:11, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh, please let me clarify. I don't and didn't sense your tone or comments as too critical. I am frustrated with the situation. Clearly, you just waded in to a place with FF where others have spent several weeks attempting to reason with him to no avail. I have simply arrived at the point where I have essentially thrown my hands up in the air in surrender. That rarely happens with me. Yes, I agree that "nofootnotes" and "citationneeded" are overkill. And yet, FF did not understand the meaning of "nofootnotes" and asked for direction, thus, "citationneeded" on steroids. I honestly believe that most of FFs articles may in reality be notable. That said, I am a bit sore feeding the horse, only to get kicked in the backside for setting out the oats. Good luck with FF. I'm in your corner. Best regards, Cind.amuse 23:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador sweatshirt

Hi! This is the last call for signing on for a Wikipedia Ambassador hooded sweatshirt (in case you missed the earlier message in one of the program newsletters about it). If you would like one, please email me with your name, mailing address, and (US) sweatshirt size. We have a limited number left, so it will be first-come, first-served. (If more than one size would work for you, note that as well.)

Cheers, Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Birthright Armenia

I understand that this page was speedy deleted due to a violation of promotional content. As it reads, the page does not include correct information and lacks some thereof. In comparing it to a very similar page (Birthright Israel), I noticed that there was information included on their page that was deleted on the Brthright Armenia side. Since you are the one that speedy deleted it, is there any way you could go into detail of why this was done, and what would be able to be included that was previously there? Thank you. Amg921 (talk) 09:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, the Birthright Armenia page was not speedy deleted. However, there has been extensive editing to remove promotional content, along with copyright violations and close paraphrasing of http://www.birthrightarmenia.org/pages.php?al=how_works and http://www.birthrightarmenia.org/pages.php?al=volunteer_internship. I haven't worked on the Birthright Israel article, but off hand, one of the primary differences in the articles pertain to sourcing. While I have not reviewed the BI article, I am not aware of any copyright violations or close paraphrasing. Please keep in mind though, that oftentimes, an editor will attempt to create or edit one article, using a separate article as a guideline or example. Generally, this really isn't a good idea, since the article used as an example may also be incorrect. If you see content in the Birthright Armenia article that is incorrect, I would like to welcome you to present the differences on the talk page of the article. I highly recommend providing independent and reliable references for any content you may suggest for the article. Lacking sources, the content cannot be added. If you are able, I would also recommend pruning the external links in the article, to include only the three most important links. Is it possible that some of these links can be used as citations for content in the article?

    Please note, if you are working on behalf of BA, it is recommended that you review our policy on conflicts of interest. Oftentimes, it is difficult for individuals to appropriately edit articles on behalf of others. Generally, their purpose and intent is to assist in managing the public's perception of the individual, group, or organization. This is contrary to the goals of Wikipedia, and falls within the guidelines prohibiting promotional content. Individuals with a conflict of interest are not forbidden from editing an article, however, their edits are closely monitored by seasoned editors in order to offer assistance to make sure that the article meets our policies and guidelines, which will keep it from being deleted. (Which nobody wants.) To that end, if you have any other questions or need help with anything, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best regards, Cind.amuse 01:17, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tarannon103

Hello. I'm just letting you know I've started a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Suspected trolling regarding the above user. As you are indirectly involved, I thought you might wish to contribute. Thank you. LordVetinari (talk) 06:49, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hello Cindy, you welcomed me a couple of weeks ago when I joined wikipedia and I don't think I ever thanked you for that. I appreciate you sharing your background, I see very few people do that, but I believe that is a sign of an open personality and pureness in spirit. I also see that you are an ambassador of Wikipedia, which is commendable. Well, all I wanted to say was that it was very nice of you to welcome me. Best. --Doktor Plumbi (talk) 20:31, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

Fussville, Wisconsin

Many thanks for editing Fussville, Wisconsin. I added citations from GNIS and the Wisconsin Historical Society. Fussville is not a village, it was an unincorporated community that was annexed to the village of Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin. There is the Political subdivisions of Wisconsin article that you might want to read. I like being part of the Wisconsin WikiProject being familiar with the history, geography, culture, politics, etc, of my native State of Wisconsin. Many thanks for what you do for Wikipedia.RFD (talk) 14:49, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please take the Wikipedia Ambassador Program survey

Hi Ambassador,

We are at a pivotal point in the development of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program. Your feedback will help shape the program and role of Ambassadors in the future. Please take this 10 minute survey to help inform and improve the Wikipedia Ambassadors.

WMF will de-identify results and make them available to you. According to KwikSurveys' privacy policy: "Data and email addresses will not be sold, rented, leased or disclosed to 3rd parties." This link takes you to the online survey: http://kwiksurveys.com?u=WPAmbassador_talk

Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments, Thank You!

Amy Roth (Research Analyst, Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 20:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 2011 Wikification Drive

Sumsum2010·T·C 04:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:10th Earl of Shaftesbury and Lady Bianca Shaftesbury 1966.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:10th Earl of Shaftesbury and Lady Bianca Shaftesbury 1966.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 22:21, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jamila M'Barek on trial in 2007.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Jamila M'Barek on trial in 2007.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 22:22, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mohammed M'Barek on trial in 2007.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mohammed M'Barek on trial in 2007.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 22:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clean Value Plastics article

Hello cindamuse, thank your for your quick and friendly reply to the bespoke article. I understand the conflict of interest - rookie mistake I suppose. However, I attempted to write the article as information-focussed as possible and believe have achieved to do so as the article is online - even if so with another structure. If the article has been proofread, which I supposed it has - would it be possible to go back to the original structure? (essentially another headline for the HydroDyn system). Also the link for the founder of the company leads to another Michael Hofmann - so I'd like to change that. Thanks in advance, M — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvp st (talk • contribs) 12:28, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Welcome to Wikipedia! I made the changes to the article. As far as the COI goes, please make sure to read the applicable links provided on your talk page... and follow the instructions for changing your username. I would focus on resolving the issues highlighted at the top of the article. Primarily, articles are kept on Wikipedia according to notability guidelines. Organizations require significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. While the sources provided are in the German language, they appear to be news and press releases presented by the company. This issue concerns one of reliability. Please note, that articles on Wikipedia require clear indication of significance or importance of the subject. This information should be placed in the lead paragraph. While I am not familiar with the technology of CVP, I did not nominate the article for deletion. Another editor differently. Change your user name and focus on those issues, and the article may be safe from deletion. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Cind.amuse 12:58, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ringo Starr and wife Maureen.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ringo Starr and wife Maureen.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 17:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Vent d'Est

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Vent d'Est, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Website is licensed as CC-BY-SA. Thank you. Alexf(talk) 19:59, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Questions on multiple issues tag

Just wondering if you could explain 2 of the 3 multiple issues you tagged on this new article [18] as there is no ES or talk page note. It seems to me the article is wikified, so I am wondering what you think can be cleaned up?. There are there are 3 links-- I will try to add more--but how many would be enough? -Regards-KeptSouth (talk)

  • Just want to double check. Are you referring to the StudentsFirst article? I'm not sure, since a maintenance tag to wikify isn't on that article. And you mentioned three links, while this article has several references. Can you clarify? Let me know and I'll be happy to help out. Cind.amuse 06:29, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, I was referring to the change you made in the diff, and asking what you thought could be cleaned up. I was referring to the orphan tag when I asked how many links would be enough to remove it because at the time the tag was placed, the article was linked by 3 others. Thank you for removing the tags and adding the paragraph break.--Regards--KeptSouth (talk) 12:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have to be honest, I had a face palm when I realized the article was linked three times. I don't know what I was doing at that moment. Hope it works now. Thanks for contacting me. Best regards, Cind.amuse 00:16, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Kate Fox
Central Academy (Kansas City)
Chris Staples
Universal Music Distribution
Kansas City Middle School of the Arts
Southwest High School (Kansas City, Missouri)
Debi Nova
Betsy Rue
Ashley-Cooper
Bradley Steven Perry
Wendell Phillips K-8
Opposition proceeding
Richard Dortch
Treyarch
Andy Whitfield
Central High School (Kansas City, Missouri)
Lincoln College Preparatory Academy
Palais de Justice, Paris
Jangseong
Cleanup
Foreign Language Academy
Michael Jackson
Conservapedia
Merge
List of Dr. Steve-O episodes
Fix Me
Beer and breweries by region
Add Sources
Dubai
Shaftesbury Avenue
Sexual addiction
Wikify
Henry Vollam Morton
The Arts Castle
Wassily Kandinsky
Expand
Celibacy
Karlsbrunn
Fisting

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Questions on Page

I have a few questions regarding editing that was done on the Birthright Armenia page. The following are the editing notifications, but I am unclear on what needs to be done because I changed the information and references from previously to fix this but they are still shown.

1. "This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate. (May 2011)"

2. "The topic of this article may not meet the notability guidelines for companies and organizations. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (April 2011)" Amg921 (talk) 07:38, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I went ahead and removed the "more footnotes" template, since a sufficient number are present for the size of prose. Contact User:Kudpung for any questions on notability, since he is the editor that flagged the issue. Feel free to contact me if you need additional assistance. Best regards, Cind.amuse 08:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thepeerage.com

Is this not a reliable source? Sergeant Cribb (talk) 15:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The website is considered unreliable by Wikipedia, in the same manner as blogs. Daryll oftentimes relies on word of mouth, personal family trees, and email messages from other individuals working on their genealogy. He also uses Wikipedia as a source for genealogical data. That said, we can use his website as a prompt for other sources that may satisfy verifiability. For example, if he gives a source for something such as Burkes Peerage, it will be easy for us to review that source for accuracy and use it as a reference. Another thing that messes with verifiability is that every time Daryll adds an individual to his database, the URL changes. A lot of different issues, but overall, the website is unreliable for use as a reference. Cind.amuse 15:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for helping me mark the article Teachinghistory.org for deletion. I misunderstood how page moves v. new articles worked. My apologies, and I appreciate the help. Chandlery (talk) 17:03, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

Gaurav Kapoor

How does G2 apply to this article. It clearly isn't a test, the creator of the attempted redirect is absolutely doing the right thing (most new editors will try and make a cut-and-paste move when they realise they have created an article at the incorrect topic). In my opinion, it should be tagged G6 so that it can be moved to the article can be moved to the correct capitalisation. I was tempted to just do that immediately, but thought I'd give you the benefit of the doubt. So, could you please explain the G2 tag? Jenks24 (talk) 08:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's both a G6 and G2. One or the other. While the editor essentially wanted to move the article, unaware of the process. Testing one method, he created a redirect from the correct capitalization to the poorly titled article. A bit backwards and certainly not doing the right thing (however, the attempt is admirable). This is called a test edit. Your statement doesn't make sense: "so that it can be moved to the article can be moved to the correct capitalisation." I think we're speaking the same language though. At this point the test edit needs to be deleted so that the improperly titled article may be moved, rather than redirected, to the proper title. But on the other hand, the poorly titled article is an A7 autobio, so take your pick. Cind.amuse 08:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ugh, yep, sorry about that mangled sentence (but I think you got the point). The reason that G6 is preferable to G2, in my opinion, is that it doesn't slap another template's on the creator's talk page. I think it's a bit unfair to characterise the attempted redirect as a test, as the creator wasn't trying to test how redirects work, but actually trying to create a beneficial redirect. If you use such a broad statement to define test, nearly every article that some through Special:NewPages could be defined as a test. In any case, I see the actual article has been deleted (by RHaworth) so the redirect needed to go. Rather than tagging G2 though, wouldn't it have been better to make the page move to the correct capitalisation in the first place? Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 08:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • "Rather than tagging G2 though, wouldn't it have been better to make the page move to the correct capitalisation in the first place?" Sure, if it would have been possible, but it wasn't. A move would only be possible after deleting the editor's redirect, which was clearly an attempt to test the system to see if the redirect would result in the desired move. Sorry, I think you simply misunderstand the situation. I rarely use the G2, but with this article, it was clearly inline with the criteria. Nothing fair or unfair about it, it's just the process of editing. Best regards, Cind.amuse 00:56, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sorry for the ridiculously late reply to this; I had watchlisted your talk, but somehow missed your reply. Not wishing to bring this issue back up, but just wanting to let you know that any autoconfirmed user can move a page over a redirect, so long as the redirect only has one revision. The point I was trying to make above was that before you applied the G2 tag it only had one revision (if I recall correctly) and it would have been possible for either me or you to move the article over the redirect. But once you applied the tag, it became impossible for a non-admin to move the article. Again, not trying to bring the issue up, just letting you know as I often find it's quite useful to be able to move over redirects without having to get an admin involved. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 11:49, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Hey there, not to be a downer, but I honestly don't remember this article anymore. Could be that my brain is in a fog at the moment. Either way, hope everything is kosher in your little corner of the world. Cind.amuse 11:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oceus Networks

Hi Cindamuse. I've had a few articles flagged lately and notice that you flagged the article I posted for Oceus Networks. I wonder how I might improve it for relevance. I figured the investment into the group alone was enough to make it fairly significant. I'm still fairly new to Wikipedia editing so any thoughts you have to offer would no doubt be very valuable. Thanks! Ratfinx (talk) 18:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello, Ratfinx! Essentially, it appears that you are writing articles about organizations that simply haven't established notability. When we write articles about organizations, we must show notability through "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". This is called the general notability guideline, which is reflective of the template I added to the article.

    Oceus Networks is a brand new organization. Notability at this point is unlikely. Of the three sources provided, one is a link to the organization's "About Us" section on their website. Another reference is a press release announcing the existence of the organization along with one of their products and links to their website, Facebook, and Twitter. Neither the organization's website or the press release are independent of the subject. Under any circumstance, we do not use press releases. The third source used for the article is to the Washington Post, announcing the purchase of a division from Ericsson and naming it Oceus, with the statement that the organization is seeking to establish its new brand. While Ericsson is notable, the new organization is working toward that end. If you are unable to locate significant coverage of the organization, beyond mere mentions of its existence, I'm afraid the article may be deleted. The tag that I placed is basically a prompt of the needs of the article in order for it to remain. (Whenever you have questions about a tag on an article, click through the blue links to read the guidelines.)

    Other issues? A review of the articles that you have written reveal a lot of what we call "original research" or "unverified claims". Unverified claims either need to be supported by a reliable source that is independent of the subject... or removed from the article.

    Take a look at the PQ Media article. There are entire sections that are unsupported by references. When we write articles, we use outside sources on which to base the article. Some people will write an article and then try to find content on which to support what they have already written. This is basically putting the horse before the cart and appears to be the process under which you are creating articles.

    On the 2011 African Union Summit article, you don't define the Summit for the readers. You basically only provide the date that it is being held, the leaders, and the participants. Therefore, the article is highly promotional. Try to rewrite the article. Provide the history of the Summit. When did it start? Who are the past leaders? What is the purpose or goals? What accomplishments have been made toward their goals? I would go ahead and remove the list of countries altogether. All you really need to say in the article is that there 53 countries that participate. At the very least, you need to remove all of the flags, since they are not in accordance with the Manual of Style.

    The United States Embassy in Malabo needs copy editing. You also have an entire section directly copied from a press release. The article needs additional sources that are independent of the subject.

    The issues with the Kissinger Institute on China and the United States are much like the articles above. Of the three sources provided, two are from the organization's own website. These are not independent and accordingly, notability is questioned. The article needs significant support through reliable and independent sources. Much like the 2011 African Union Summit article, you don't define the Institute for the readers. Try to rewrite the article. Provide the history of the Summit. When did it start? Who are the past leaders? What is the purpose or goals? What accomplishments have been made toward their goals? Remove the list of all the members. Content of this nature changes changes constantly inline with turnover. We only need information on the two chairmen, which can be inserted appropriately in the infobox. On that note, an incorrect infobox is being used. It should use Template:Infobox institute or Template:Infobox organization.

    Hope all this helps. Feel free to contact me if you have questions. And remember that whenever you have questions about a tag on an article, click through the blue links to read the guidelines. Best regards, Cind.amuse 02:35, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

East Evergreen Elementary vs. Kalispell, Montana

Hi Cindamuse, I'm new to the wiki universe. Just trying to understand the system and knowledge it presents. I created a page(?) for the school where I work, but you redirected it to the main page for Kalispell, Montana. Did I post it in the wrong manner? Or this there something else I should have done? I like using Wikipedia for research and learning information, but I logged on tonight (for the first time) to start a page. This is in response to an assignment. If you could give me some pointers so my page does not get taken down, or where I should add my information, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance. ConsciousRipple (talk) 07:05, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, first off, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you'll consider sticking around. As far as the East Evergreen Elementary School article, our notability guidelines instruct us to redirect elementary and junior high school articles to the school district article or that of the city or town in which it is located. Generally, only high schools are considered inherently notable. Primary schools may occasionally qualify as notable, based on individual circumstances of something significantly newsworthy taking place at the school. As a suggestion, I was quite surprised that the school district did not have an article already on Wikipedia. Would you consider creating one? It would be a tremendous asset to the community. Additionally, all the schools in the district could be mentioned in that article, including elementary and junior high schools. I hope this wouldn't be too much of a task, but it seems that you would be in a perfect position to have access to significant amounts of information. I would also like to invite you to check out our WikiProject that focuses on education. (Just click on the blue link.) The project is made up of a group of editors working together as a team to improve articles on Wikipedia, pertaining to education. In either case, please feel free to contact me anytime you have questions or need help. Best regards, Cind.amuse 07:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Thank you for the great advice. I was unsure why my information disappeared, but now it makes perfect sense. I am going to attempt a new start with our school district and add to it (and maybe others will add as well) as my time permits. I may need to seek out your help again, but for now, I am going to forge ahead and see what I can produce. Thank you again. ConsciousRipple (talk) 15:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Area 51 (website): redirect or changed disambiguation?

hi cindamuse! thx for your info. reading your comment on my talk page after my edit of the Area 51 (website) talk page. anyway my basic idea was to have a page to link to for the disambiguation, but i can see that this collides with the minimal standards for pages. therefore i have put the content from Area 51 (website) on Stack Exchange Network, but my question is: do i link from Area 51 (disambiguation) to Area 51 (website) and redirect from there to the content on Stack Exchange Network, or do i link to the content dirdctly from Area 51 (disambiguation)? Halloleo (talk) 08:41, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Keep in mind, I have no idea what Area 51 or Stack Exchange Network is outside of Wikipedia. You'll have to reword the above so it makes sense in the real world.) Hope I helped even a little bit. Cind.amuse 08:50, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

complex situation

re your edit [19] please join the conversation [20] Thanks! Active Banana (bananaphone 07:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cheyenne Monique

You should not be adding delete when you nominate an article for AfD. As you are nominating the article, you are already stating that you vote delete. One of the first times I did and AfD, my delete was removed for the same reason as have others. Take a look at today's log and you will hard pressed to find another nominator saying delete.

Also, I personally think you are not assuming good faith in doing an Afd on a 39-minute old article. I highly doubt that Cheyenne Monique is notable, but atleast wait a week or so as to not bite the new user. Maybe a better route would be to discuss the shortcomings of the article with the author first.

A repeat sockpuppet told those of use fighting him that we would all go to hell. We shouldn't be offending new users because in hell, we need all the friends we can.... It will be a hard job trying to vandalize God's wiki. Bgwhite (talk) 21:49, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for contacting me. 1. If you had another editor modify your comments or nomination in an earlier discussion, or if this happens to you in the future, by all means, revert the modification. Our talk page and deletion discussion guidelines specifically address the lack of propriety in modifying the comments of other editors. 2. The nomination for deletion is made at the top of the AFD entry. Recommendations and rationale are made below, preceded with an asterisk. There are no guidelines advocating for or against an editor preceding their nomination with a delete notation. 3. The nomination of the Cheyenne Monique article was made in good faith, applicable with our deletion policy. There are no guidelines that support your suggested timeline. A discussion with the editor would not result in notability of the subject of this article. The claims of importance, significance, and notability in the article are based on vast exaggerations. The subject's background and participation in the films listed in the article is limited to extra and uncredited roles. None of the sources provided are reliable or independent. Since the article claims importance, however erroneous, our deletion process calls for sending the article for deletion discussion, rather than speedy deletion. Accordingly, this is the process followed. 4. I respect that you may have your own personal ideals and manner of editing on Wikipedia. That said, when others work appropriately within the policies and guidelines developed by the community, please refrain from assuming that others not sharing your ideals are assuming bad faith. 5. I don't understand the context in which you present the sockpuppet, hell, and God's wiki. That said, sounds like it was an interesting conversation. Best regards, Cind.amuse 22:25, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

aiCIO article

Cindamuse, thank you for taking the time to edit the aiCIO page and to voice your concerns. I'm looking forward to working with you to improve the page so that it meets the standards of Wikipedia.

Your main concern about the notability of the magazine I think can be easily satisfied. For one, aiCIO has receieved several accolades, namely its "Interrogations" section was a 2011 Jesse H. Neal Award finalist in the category of Best Subject-Related Series of Articles, Class A (Up to $3,000,000 in gross advertising/circulation revenue). The link can be found at this address: http://www.americanbusinessmedia.com/abm/Neals_2011.asp?SnID=1028434890. In 2009, ai5000 (its former name) was an Ozzie Award Silver Winner in the Best Design New Magazine, B-to-B. Link can be found here--http://www.foliomag.com/2009/2009-ozzie-winners --(you have to scroll down a bit).

The Commercial Observer wrote a story in November 2009 about the formation of the the new magazine: http://cluster.omgit.net/2009/commercial-observer/publisher-asset-international-moves-manhattan-cohen-brothers%E2%80%99-805-third.

Let me know if these sources are sufficient. I am eager to work with you to make this article fit Wikipedia standards. Thanks, Bruffel (talk) 14:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another link on ai5000's launch: http://www.minonline.com/news/ai5000-Aims-for-the-Super-Money_11521.html. Bruffel (talk) 15:06, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey there! I'm so glad you contacted me. Definitely add the information about the awards to the article. This truly helps establish the notability of the magazine. I'm out for the day, but this information should suffice and answer any questions about notability. Make sure to mention in the lead section that the magazine has won awards. The purpose of the lead section summarizes the rest of the article and presents notability. You should be fine. I'll check back and see if I can lend any support this afternoon. Let me know if you have any questions. Great work! Cind.amuse 15:29, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I made some formatting changes. Additional content that you may want to consider adding to the article includes an overview of the awards that are presented by aiCIO. It would also enhance the article if you could maybe a photo of the magazine cover and a link to the "Interrogations" article. Maybe a photo of the magazine's headquarters? the building? Take a look at the article. I added a couple of sections, which are now empty. Just an idea. If you can add content, great! If not, just remove the section headings. I'm here if you need help or ideas. Cind.amuse 02:07, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucifer's Unholy Desire

The citation[21] doesn't state that a completed film screened at the festival. What it does indicate is that the trailer screened, and that principal photography has wrapped and the filmmaker is looking for festivals, while the product is completed... being in post-production until Fall. The trailer screening DID get the buzz the filmmaker hoped for, and I have added additional sources to a now-cleaned-up article, but the article is premature by a couple months. As the author has expressed a good faith wish to continue working on the article, I think he should be allowed to do so... off of mainspace.... with userfication or incubation as reasonable avenues. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 16:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • We're on the same page. I actually just recommended to userfy the article. Then I came to check my messages. You are correct that only the trailer was shown. I don't think I want to see the movie though. I think I'll stick with chick flicks. I'm also there for a good action film. Horror and demons. No thanks. But I digress... Cind.amuse 00:24, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback from Allen4names

Hello, Cindamuse. You have new messages at Allen4names's talk page.
Message added 17:10, 11 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Talkdemonic
La Tour, Alpes-Maritimes
Lucy Raverat
Stiletto (2008 film)
Johannes Vogel
No Distance Left to Run (film)
Veritas
Martin T. Barlow
Patrick Eston
George Taylor (botanist)
Midlife: A Beginner's Guide to Blur
Anthony Galsworthy
Julie K. Smith
Aspremont, Alpes-Maritimes
Bonson, Alpes-Maritimes
Carl Pusser
Clans, Alpes-Maritimes
Charles Darwin Trust
Christos Sirros
Cleanup
Academic Society of Iranians in Japan
Norma Percy
Lee Joon
Merge
Tertiary education
Death of Osama bin Laden
Richland High School (Washington)
Add Sources
Yuseong-gu
Shauna O'Brien
State Line Mob
Wikify
Shahid Syed Nazrul Islam College
California Bureau of Automotive Repair
David Miller (physician)
Expand
Resonance (Warehouse 13)
Aiglun, Alpes-Maritimes
Periannan Senapathy

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:58, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

Thank you

Hi Cindamuse. I just wanted to drop by and thank you for your kind words in my RfA. I appreciate every support, of course, but yours in particular cheered my week greatly. I will do my best to ensure your confidence in me is not misplaced. Best, 28bytes (talk) 15:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

reg. your recent edits to article Bhagwan Gopinath

Hi Cindy, While I understand the tags about the "lead section" and "general clean up", is there some ballpark number of links an article should have to avoid it getting the "few links/orphan" tag? I mean, this one for sure has one, how many more are we talking so that I have an idea? Thanks, Sharda Mandir (talk) 08:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for contacting me. Generally, an article with three or fewer links is considered orphaned. You can find more information here. As far as the lede section, the article is currently at about 11kb, so one or two lede paragraphs at the most should suffice. Just keep in mind that the lede simply serves to present the notability of the subject, as well as a short summary of the article. Please feel free to contact me anytime you need help or have any questions. Best regards, Cind.amuse 10:47, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi Cindy, Thanks for the reply.While a general definition of an orphan is what you pointed out, currently the criteria for jugdging an article as orphan is as follows " Currently our priority is to focus on orphans with NO incoming links at all, and it is recommended to only place the orphan tag if the article has ZERO incoming links from other articles. One or two incoming links may be sufficient as long as they are relevant." So, while I am trying to insert new links to create good network of links for this article, would you agree that having an orphan tag currently added might not be justified? Thanks, Sharda Mandir (talk) 15:19, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hi Cindy, I don't know about the Seattleites but we Portlanders are known for being weird and we love to keep it that way. So, speaking of weird, I burnt the midnight oil over the weekend (...if you will) to get the article I was editing (Bhagwan Gopinath) hopefully upto your expectations. I shortened the lead from 5 paragraphs to 2, added 2 more links which makes it a total of 3 now, and improved the style with a lot of general clean up. If you think that should be good to go, let me know if I can remove the tags or better still, I would be obliged (and elated at the same time!) if you kindly do the honors!!! Many Thanks in advance, Sharda Mandir (talk) 08:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Portlanders? Weird? Nah, it's definitely a northwest thang. It's currently 4:35am and I haven't slept yet. ACK! I would be happy to take a look and clean up the article, if it would be okay with you. I generally try to clean up articles left and right, but when another editor is actively working on it, I just try to give some pointers and help where I can. I hesitate to jump in and edit the article to keep from inadvertently stepping on anyone's toes. Let me know, and I will be happy to jump in and tie up any loose ends. Now, get some sleep! Cind.amuse 11:40, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • and I thought only us Portlanders were entitled to call ourselves so...guess not anymore! If you don't mind, I'd love to start first with some pointers from you and see how it goes from there. Best R Sharda Mandir (talk) 06:30, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • No problem working on the article yourself. I'll just give you a few pointers at a time. 1. It is recommended that editors use the preview button before saving; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Edit the page, rather than section. 2. The lead section basically has four paragraphs condensed into two. It needs extensive editing. 3. Section headings need editing and revised. 4. Sections that are indented need to be reformatted. 5. Review the Manual of Style for compliance overall re: italic, bold, layout, etc. This all should be a start. Let me know where you have questions. ;) Cind.amuse 09:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • Thats sounds fantastic! I'd take a step at a time, so how about fixing the lead first? If you can basically give me an idea of what you are think would be ideal lead (may be right here to preview it) I would appreciate that a lot! Sharda Mandir (talk) 16:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
                • Hi Cindy, so I fixed the lede and reformatted paragarphs with indents (Check it out and let me know your views). Regarding the manual of style (bold, italics etc) this is what I have followed (let me know what needs to change) - For religious texts - start in caps and word in non italics, for name/s of Deities/Gods - start in caps and word in non italics, for rest of the foreign words - word in italics and start with non caps. I don't have bolds anywhere except the subject name in lede. Also please let me know specifically changes you desire to see in section headings so that I dont have to double guess. Many Thanks for your help... Sharda Mandir (talk) 07:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE elections

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors

Elections are currently underway for our Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days and ends on June 30, 23:59 UTC. All GOCE members in good standing, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. The candidate with the highest number of votes will become the Lead Coordinator, therefore, your vote really matters! There is also a referendum to appoint a Coordinator Emeritus. Cast your vote today.

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:44, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

Conflict of Interest for Greater Homewood Community Corporation page

Hi, I do agree that the article may seem biased because of my position. However, my writing reflects, to the best of my ability, the attitudes of the secondary sources. There has been no embellishment of GHCC's involvement in any of the programs or initiatives; both successes and failures are being referenced. GHCC has been an important part of the history of north central Baltimore, MD including its public schools and the public school system(AmeriCorp VISTAs work with PTA and PTOs, close work with Andre Alonso, new Waverly School building, securing school funding with Baltimore Education Coalition, bringing Experience Corps to Baltimore City, being the first organization to establish a COACH program outside of Massachusetts, neighborhoods(Live Where You Work initiative, AmeriCorps VISTA hub, neighborhood coordinators, Baltimore City Fair, housing code enforcement, development and establishment of other neighborhood and civic associations, racial and socioeconomic discrimination, protection of historic sites(Roland Water Tower), City Council representatives(the early work of Mary Pate Clarke and other current initiative). Again, all of this work wasn’t perfect. GHCC almost shutdown because of a lack of funding, Camp Barclay didn’t have the amenities that it promised including a “bus/fieldtrip scandal”, Hampden refusing to work with GHCC, Union Memorial Hospital and Bank of America pulling out sponsorships, restructuring of the COACH program, and so on. The article was made public too quickly to reflect 40 years of successes and failures which is my fault. If it could be turned back into a draft and completed, it would make more sense. Best, Jober1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jober1 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • I certainly realize how frustrating this must be for you. Please know that I am willing to offer any help and guidance you may need. I think continuing to work on the article from the subpage of your userspace will work out best for this article. Something to keep in mind is the need to establish notability for the organization. Wikipedia is not a webhost to duplicate information already published on the organization's website. Much of the information above does not support notability. For example, the COACH program. The COACH program itself has not established notability apart from Boston University. While GHCC certainly appears to hold this to a high standard, this does not support notability. You state that the organization has been an important part of the history of north central Baltimore. While this is admirable, "importance" is not synonymous with being "notable". An organization can also not establish notability, based on an association with a notable person, event, or organization. Criteria for nonprofit organizations stipulates that the scope of their activities is both 1. national or international in scale; and 2. information about the organization and its activities can be verified by multiple, third-party, independent, and reliable sources. Based on this criteria, GHCC has not met the threshold for notability. You can read more about notability for organizations here. Try to move away from "local importance" and focus instead on any national or international activities in which the organization has been involved. And make sure to support all statements that may be questioned or challenged with third-party, independent, and reliable sources. Hope this helps. Please don't be hesitant to contact me if you have any questions. (I don't bite. Honestly.) Best regards, Cind.amuse 01:20, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I caused enough of a stink to get it deleted so that myself or someone else can eventually create a GHCC page without requiring so much attention from editors and admin. Thank you for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jober1 (talk • contribs) 02:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Ellwand

Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:38, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

please restore ... as user page at least ... thank you!

RIGHT! What's all this then?!? (Monty Python ref) One of your bobbies clubbed my page to death without reading the content of my contest (below). Please dig my page up out of the mass grave or drag it out of the pile and restore it ... as a user page, at least ... thank you!

vvvvvvvvv | content of my contest | vvvvvvvvvv This page should not be speedy deleted because... --Democracy207 (talk) 19:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC) while it references the page specific to the Mayoral election, this page goes beyond it to the broader context of the general election which deserves its own article and does not yet have one ... for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_general_elections,_November_2011[reply]

While I sincerely appreciate diligence and vigilance in protecting the integrity of Wikipedia, in all honesty, my experience in the brief time since I have begun participating as an editor borders on inappropriately rapid vigilanteism! The key to the success of the Wikipedia phenomenon, co-equal with conscientious discipline & maintenance of integrity, is the social culture which grows the community of editors & users and cements the strength & long-term sustainability of Wikipedia as an historic institution contributing mightily to the development a global culture of humanity, by humanity, and for humanity! As a community organizer and a father, I understand the burden of leadership - especially real & true leaders who care deeply about their responsibility and its vital importance. Add to this the volume of the work given Wikipedia's popularity, and this equation yields harsh, terse communication. However, if we include a growth factor from positive socio-emotional dynamics, then the community grows and the burden per editor eases, thus strengthening Wikipedia. I have carefully read the "speedy deletion" criteria and it does not apply. I have made most of the improvements I had originally intended to make. Upon careful review of the page, it should be clear that it stands alone by itself. The other races deserve inclusion and citizens deserve the ease of access to information afforded by Wikipedia - its very essence. I find myself wondering, was the "speedy deletion" tag automated? I promptly contested the tag with my reasons. I have received no feedback. I know you are busy. I am clearly working to learn the rules & practices. I have improved the page and expanded my response to the "speedy deletion" tag. I would hope to hear back soon! thank you! Democracy207 (talk) 12:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Although I want to thank you for contacting me, part of me is screaming, "Run away! Run Away!" (Monty Python). Sorry, I couldn't resist! LOL I realize that the deletion of your article must be frustrating. In all reality, once an article is flagged for deletion, the page may be deleted at any time, if it unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria, or if an explanation posted to the talk page is found to be insufficient. While I personally don't agree with this, no response from the deleting administrator is required. I have to be honest, I read your rationale on the talk page and fully expected the administrator to agree and simply move the article to a proper title. He must have seen something that I didn't. I apologize for any frustration that may have resulted from my initial flagging of the article. That said, please go to the talk page of the editor that deleted your article. Here is a link: Fastily. Make your petition known there. In all sincerity, while the humor is welcome, I would suggest saving all the rhetoric and simply request that the editor userfy your article. When you are finished with your article, contact him again for feedback before considering moving the article to the mainspace. Anything less may end in the same result as this last version. If you need additional assistance or have questions, please feel free to contact me. Best regards, Cind.amuse 13:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:David Ellwand by Andrew Sanderson.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:David Ellwand by Andrew Sanderson.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 04:47, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again~

Hi Sorry for writing after such a long while and all; I feel really bad, considering you willingly adopted me. But..uh..the reason may sound..really ridiculous But I kinda..forgot how to write on users' talk pages..sorry! And then, some things came up so I couldn't be as active as I would have liked to be.. That said, I would like to be quite active on Wikipedia now. So, I think, firstly, I should start by..making my User page? But I'm kind of confused as to what exactly should I write in that. I mean, I know it has to be about me- of course- but I've read yours and it's quite interesting :) You seem very practical :)

Aurora Glory Paradise (talk) 11:38, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Air University (South Korean Air Force)
Sunday league football
Moulinet, Alpes-Maritimes
Ask Max
Gourdon, Alpes-Maritimes
Saint-Paul, Alpes-Maritimes
Korea National College of Agriculture and Fisheries
Bureau Veritas
Tanya Rivero
Tumangang
Sunshine City, Tokyo
Sohung
Dana (South Korean singer)
The Castaway Cowboy
Arnold Margolin
The Revival EP
Buan
Vincent McEveety
Castillon, Alpes-Maritimes
Cleanup
Lisa Johnson Billy
International Association of Classification Societies
1988
Merge
Classical Christian education
List of countries by alcohol consumption
Baltimore Visitors Center
Add Sources
Eminem
Javier Colon
Veritas School (Newberg, Oregon)
Wikify
Harry Werksman
Kyle College (Zimbabwe)
Boryeong
Expand
Collongues, Alpes-Maritimes
Lee Woon-Jae
Tokyo Bay

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Cindamuse. You have new messages at Ukexpat's talk page.
Message added 16:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

ukexpat (talk) 16:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

WikiProject Wikify Discussion Invitation

Sumsum2010·T·C 23:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am inquiring regarding the Armenian Volunteer Corps. The acronym AVC was recently removed from the English page, but when people search for it, the Armenian volunteer units always seems to come up first. Is there a way to either change this so that at least both pages show up first? Or if there is some way around this? Please le tme know at your earliest convenience. Amg921 (talk) 12:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Crystalate

Hello Cindamuse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Crystalate, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 09:46, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi John, thanks for contacting me. Please share more information. The article presents two subjects, which are not synonymous. One subject is a polymer compound, while the other subject is a manufacturing company. These are two separate entities. Can you let me know how you identified the subject of the article? Thanks, Cind.amuse 09:57, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, the article is about both the substance and the company, but I don't see a problem with that - they are closely related. The author says on the talk page that it may be split into two articles eventually, but at the moment that would be pointless. WP:CSD#A1 is meant only for "very short articles" where you really can't tell what they're about. JohnCD (talk) 10:19, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think "very short" is rather subjective. Yet, based on your comment, what is the subject of this article? And why would splitting this article be pointless, while presenting two subjects in one article deemed appropriate? Please share your rationale. Thanks, Cind.amuse 10:30, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Lacking additional information, I went ahead and moved the article to a title reflecting the organization, with a section on the product. If an editor wants to create a separate article about the product, it can be done at another time. In my opinion, an article presenting two separate subjects is clearly pointless. Best regards, Cind.amuse 11:47, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • The A1 test is, can you tell what the article is about? In the example given in WP:CSD#A1, "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh" the answer is, no. In this case, the answer is, yes: it's about a substance and about the company of the same name that made it. I do not see any problem in covering two closely-linked subjects in the same article. "Very short" is subjective, agreed, but this is over 150 words. The deeper question underlying any speedy is, would the encyclopedia certainly be improved by deleting this without further discussion? and again, the answer here is, no. JohnCD (talk) 13:40, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • I sincerely appreciate the feedback. That said, please note that nothing in the article states that the company created the substance. On the contrary, the article states that they use the substance (created and patented by American inventor George Henry Burt) in their products. Nothing to indicate that they make the substance. Nothing in the article stated that the two subjects were related outside of a company using a specific substance to create their products. No more; no less. It's not enough that they use the name of the substance in the company name. Many companies use the word "Plastics" in their corporate name, yet there is no indication that by doing so, they are stating that they invented the polymer compound (plastic). Recognizing the subject of the article in this regard is based on mere assumption, rather than the presentation of facts. I'm looking at articles with fresh eyes. Assumption doesn't enter into it. On another note, whether or not 150 words is very short, short, or long... is also subjective. In any regards, I agree that I should have chosen to discuss this with the article creator to ascertain intentions. At this point, the article resides at Crystalate Manufacturing Company. If an article about the substance is desired, the creator can appropriately spin it off from the company's article, supported by proper sourcing. Thanks, Cind.amuse 15:56, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I came across this discussion. Cindamuse, you were overzealous with speedy deletion in this case. It's only for unambiguous cases, and quite obviously the company made the product and there was ample context to identify the subject of the article. Please don't go looking for reasons to delete articles unless absolutely necessary. Fences&Windows 12:54, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I certainly appreciate your input, but stating that I was overzealous is stretching it a bit. It is recommended that A1 CSDs are held off for at lease 10-15 minutes. I came upon this article an hour after creation. I've never been known to go looking for reasons to delete articles. The article as created clearly attempted to present two separate subjects, as confirmed by the creator on the talk page. Based on the article's two subjects, the intended topic of this particular article was rather ambiguous. I don't believe that there was ample context to identify the intended subject of the article. The creator even stated as such, that the article covered two subjects, i.e, a polymer compound and a company that makes products with that compound. The subject could have been the polymer compound, with a list of companies that use the compound in their products; or the article could have been about a company that subsequently uses the compound in their products. The two subjects are not synonymous. The article unambiguously fell within the A1 criteria for speedy deletion. Again, I appreciate your input here, but I disagree with your assessment of the situation. Best regards, Cind.amuse 13:18, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have to concur with JohnCD and Fences. This stub was very clearly about the trademark "Crystalate", as it stated this outright, and that this trademark applied both to the plastic brand Crystalate and to the manufacturer Crystalate Ltd. (among other, longer names; now a separate article) and made it clear that they were not entirely synonymous. Innumerable articles are written like this unless and until there is sufficient material and sources to maintain separate articles on the trademarked product/service and the similarly or identically named trademark-holding (or -licensing) company that produces it (e.g. the New York Times and the New York Times Company). Instead of arguing further that you were all in the right in tagging this for speedy deletion, maybe reconsider, since you're being told otherwise by three other editors now. Since it obviously really, really bugged you that the article could be split into two topics but hadn't been, you could have done the work to split the article yourself, or tagged it with {{split}}, rather than attempting to destroy it. PS: The original stub was not about Crystalate as a substance; sources have yet to be found that even identify it on that level, though the U.S. Patent databases are a good place to start. It was about the trademark. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 21:05, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Honestly, I'm not troubled by this at all. I welcome the dialogue as a natural process of collaborative editing. As stated above, the article made no mention of which company owned the trademarks, leaving the assumption to the reader. It also didn't link the two organizations outside of the name differential. I agree, the subjects were not entirely synonymous, as I clearly stated above. I am really not arguing anything. It's a mere conversation involving again, collaborative editing. While voice inflection cannot be determined online, please know that I'm not phased, concerned, or troubled in the slightest. Really, it's all good. As far as doing the work myself per WP:SOFIXIT, please note that I did in fact, work to "fix it", by splitting the article, in order to differentiate between the two subjects. I intentionally moved the article about the organization to a target presenting such, in order to allow you to present the content about the polymer in the Crystalate article space. I simply deferred to you in this regard. It would have been inappropriate of me to do a copy/paste of the content that you provided in order to create a second article. The move that I performed split the article appropriately. After all is said and done, I agree with JohnCD above in stating that discussion would have been appropriate in this case. Please accept my apology in failing to do so. Best regards, Cind.amuse 21:43, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Ah, I see what's going on. The confusion on my side of the internet is a result of the ambiguous writing shown in the run-on sentence. i.e.,
"Crystalate is an old brand name for early plastics, and the company that owned that trademark (and derived ones like Super Crystalate)."
should be edited to either:
1. Crystalate is an old brand name for early plastics, as well as the company that owned the trademark, (along with derivatives, like Super Crystalate). or
2. Crystalate is an old brand name for early plastics. It is also the name of the company that owned the trademark, as well as products like Super Crystalate, from which it is derived. Cind.amuse 22:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough, and I'm not here to bicker. I think why this turned into a long multi-party debate is that you didn't go the SOTFIXIT route initially, but the deletion one, which you seem to realize wasn't the optimal choice; and judging by just the recent, unarchived stuff on your talk page, you have quite a number of rejected SD taggings, suggesting that your take on the criteria needs to be adjusted more generally, that's all. You seem to find this or that to be "unambiguously" in support of your view in various of these discussions, yet the fact that a critical discussion is happening in them at all means that it pretty much by definition isn't unambiguous. "It's subjective" is your other common response; well, everything about Wikipedia is subjective, us being humans and not machines. It's not a particularly helpful response to concerns raised. Hope this helps. I'm not attempting to foment a big argument, but rather to help you forestall some future ones. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 17:57, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • In order to provide a thorough assessment of my CSD tagging, please feel free to view my CSD log anytime. While my goal on Wikipedia is to never arrive, but rather progress through the learning curve, I am confident in my abilities. While I don't patrol NP quite as often as in the past year, you will note that the percentage of declined tags shown in the log is relatively small, with clear rationale when kept. The term subjective, simply refers to rule by consensus, based not on set rules, but personal opinion. Together, we're not wrong or right, but just share a different point of view. I respect your opinions. Really, it's all good. Best regards, Cind.amuse 00:35, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE drive invitation

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors

The latest GOCE backlog elimination drive is under way! It began on 1 July and so far 18 people have signed up to help us reduce the number of articles in need of copyediting.

This drive will give a 50% bonus for articles edited from the GOCE requests page. Although we have cleared the backlog of 2009 articles there are still 3,935 articles needing copyediting and any help, no matter how small, would be appreciated.

We are appealing to all GOCE members, and any other editors who wish to participate, to come and help us reduce the number of articles needing copyediting, as well as the backlog of requests. If you have not signed up yet, why not take a look at the current signatories and help us by adding your name and copyediting a few articles. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words".

>>> Sign-up now <<<

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 08:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

email request to be an ambassador

Hello, Cindamuse. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Ncsjfreed (talk) 23:26, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Razavipoor paradox

some helpful discussions were held on DISCUSSION part of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salirp (talk • contribs) 10:10, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The above referenced article has been nominated for deletion due to a lack of notability established through significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The article has been presented to the community for discussion to determine whether or not it will be kept or deleted from the encyclopedia. You are welcome to participate in this discussion. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions. Thanks, Cind.amuse 10:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you hold off on CSD's for a moment while I write a response?

Thanks!--GnoworTC 08:39, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    • As indicated in my post at [WP:RPP], and the notice at the top of the page, I understand the communities concerns. Here are the frustrations:
  1. Initial user that raised these concerns pointed to WP:SPAM which is inapplicable to userspace content (as I understand it).
  2. Initial user did not provide any notification of modification to my userspace. Had the user brought this to my attention before or after the modifications, I think the situation could've gone entirely different.
  3. I posted a notice at the top of the page, the full text of which indicates I myself may believe there's a policy violation, but I'm unaware of the particular policy. At least three users disregarded this notice, and preferred a destructive edit as opposed to dialog.
  4. I was in the process of trying to offer removal of outside links & phone numbers (per above link to WP:RPP) to avoid potential violation.
  5. I was once part of this destructive editing myself (through the use of Huggle).
    • I feel my most productive work has been on Huggle. And this incident shows me how even a veteran user might react to the "click-of-a-button" mentality that members of the community use when trying to preserve the encylopedia. User's could put a lot of time and thought and even consider policy, and all of that can be undone by the click of a button. And fighting for it may be more than it's worth for some users. It is for me.
    • I used to love using all the vandalism and CSD tools at my disposal, but the speed at which they allow us to react to split second decisions about content can have some rather awful effects. I hope the community at some point reconsiders the use of these tools and also policies like WP:BRD. I feel like I know the outcome of this discussion, which is one of the reasons I'm halting further discussion. I doubt most first-time editors to Wikipedia know where talk pages are, or even where history pages are inviting discussion. They just see the mysterious disappearance of their edit.
    • When an edit is well-intentioned, but violates policy, the community reacts to it in the same way as vandalism (e.g. revert, or CSD). The same tools we use to chase of vandals chase off editors. Like myself.
    • I appreciate you reaching out to me, and I have requested copies of the deleted content. I've also requested deletion of the remaining pages from my attempt to perhaps not help the Wikipedia, but instead help the world. I realize that's not the purpose of this project, nor is it welcome here.
    • P.S. I thank you for opening a dialog, but unfortunately, it falls under "too little, too late." Your comments on my talk page seem to indicate you stopped reading at "this may violate policy." I thought this notice invited dialog, but apparently it only provided ammo for CSD. Rather than pointing it out to me and giving me a chance to respond, I got ambushed by a CSD attack (note, a check of my contribs might have shown that I would've been likely to respond quickly, as I had just made a recent edit regarding the topic). I would have hoped that common courtesy would allow a reasonable period for users to justify userpage content and make appropriate edits to resolve policy concerns. Again, "delete first, ask questions later" is not a principle I can uphold.--GnoworTC 16:24, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

  1. ^ http://www.ispr.gov.pk/front/main.asp?o=t-press_release&id=1696
  2. ^ http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=37695&Cat=6&dt=3/23/2011
  3. ^ http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Regional/Islamabad/23-Mar-2011/President-confers-awards-on-mly-officers
  4. ^ http://www.defence.pk/forums/land-forces/94-news-discussion-6.html
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cindamuse&oldid=437894464"