User talk:Andyjsmith

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by when more than 2 sections are present.

Speedy Deletion

Hi! I know the Skyy John article does not meet criteria, but i will fix this by tomorrow. You can delete if you want, but preferably i'd just ask you to leave it in this state for 1 day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sukbhirsinghsangha (talk • contribs) 22:41, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should click the "contest" button on the speedy notice then add your comments on the Talk page. andy (talk) 22:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

E-Book

Andy,

I haven't seen you make comments regarding deleting my edits on the page in question [e-book] so I thought I would start a dialog with you here.

I'd appreciate it if you could advise me on how best to update the e-book in page to correct the inaccuracies it contains and to also, perhaps, include additional listings of e-book awards including the one that I proudly represent.

You see, the e-book page says there are two e-book awards out there and it's just not true.

The e-book page currently says: Two yearly awards for excellence in e-books are the EPIC eBook Award[37] (formerly EPPIE) given by EPIC, and the Dream Realm Award[38] for science fiction, fantasy and horror e-books. Both awards have been given since 2000.

Here are other awards that indicate that "Two yearly awards" is incorrect because they are not listed and so not counted:

Global eBook Awards (my favorite at http://globalebookawards.com) eBook Crossroads (http://www.ebookcrossroads.com/awards.html) Frankfurt Ebook Awards (from planetebook.com but since 2002 has been defunct) Publishing Innovation Award (has a Wikipedia entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publishing_Innovation_Award) ARe Best of 2010 ebook awards (http://www.arecafe.com/events/active/ares-best-of-2010-awards/)

MULTIPLE FORMAT AWARDS

These are for awards for ebooks that are in more than just ebook format but many of them will accept ebooks:

New York Times Notable Books of the Year National Book Awards National Book Critics Circle Awards PEN/Faulkner Award for Fiction Man Booker Prize for Fiction Agatha Award Edgar Awards (Edgar Allan Poe Awards) Hugo Awards Philip K. Dick Award American Book Award Commonwealth Writers Prize

So, I think it's safe to say that by trying to update the e-book page to show there are more than "two yearly awards" is actually an altruistic move on my part.

And, if it's good form for Wikipedia to actually show a list of these ebooks, then we should include more of them. If these two that are listed should not be listed, then they should all be deleted so that no one awards competition gets more value than another by being listed here instead of not.

What say you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Meshmarketer

Outing

I know that you are trying to maintain integrity on an article while dealing with an editor that has a COI, but please note that delving out personal information is in violation of WP:OUTING. I've deleted the edits in violation and adjusted your comments accordingly. Please be very careful how you move forward about this. Claiming a COI is OK, saying who it is is not. If you have any questions let me know. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 20:59, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. "Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person voluntarily had posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia" - well, he posted such a link. andy (talk) 21:20, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MA in philosophy = expert in physics?

dearest andy, this is your first comment copied-pasted: "Utter drivel. Fails WP:FRINGE. Oddly enough no reliable sources either." and your latter comment: "Please do not try to use wikipedia to promote fringe theories." and from your own user page: "This user has a Master of Arts degree in Philosophy." .. i was wondering, how does having an MA in philosophy allow you to be an expert on 'fringe theories' in physics? .. just wondering.. another thing, it's not fringe - it's actually conservative .. but i guess you wouldn't know that with an MA in philosophy.. what else, your behavior toward my article would be considered 'trolling' on other forums.. so dare i label you a troll since you seem inclined to label me 'fringe'? ^^ labels are not very productive especially when they're inaccurate.. if i were you, i would consult some experts about what is considered fringe in physics.. ..just a suggestion for your future reference..&Delta (talk) 23:50, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any "theory" that takes as its starting point a need to rewrite fundamental laws of physics clearly meets the requirements of WP:FRINGE. And please be civil when talking to other editors. andy (talk) 07:38, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wilma Pang

Since you AfD nom it, and I have done some work on it to try an save it (cause I think she meets GNG), it would be cool to hear your input on the work so far, to see if am hitting in the right direction or is futile. Thanks!--Cerejota (talk) 01:46, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She is so notable in her community, that AT&T uses her for directed marketing: [1]. I think we should be careful to avoid biases against people not of European descent who mostly speak to communities that don't speak English. If we can have this John Elway Stadium, notable only for being named after a legendary football star who went to the high school it was built for two whole years, I fail to see how she fails the criteria. I think you are asking too much quantitatively and failing to see the matter qualitatively.--Cerejota (talk) 01:06, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I resent your comment about racial bias. Please comment on content, not on the contributor. andy (talk) 09:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chill dude, you have misinterpreted me. Systemic bias is not racial bias, and I apologize for not being clear - I assumed you would have at least read the link I provided in the AfD. Please read wikiproject page for clarification, WP:CSB. Also, kindly don't template the regulars.--Cerejota (talk) 09:42, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, I refer you to this in WP:BIAS:

"Establishment of Notability: Notability is more difficult to establish in non-Anglophone topics because of a lack of English sources and no incentive among anglophone participants to find sources in the native language of the topic. A lack of native language editors of the topic only compounds the problems. The lack of sources and therefore notability causes articles to wind up going through the deletion process of Wikipedia."--Cerejota (talk) 09:46, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll template anyone I want to, particularly people who put comments such as "I think we should be careful to avoid biases against people not of European descent" on my talk page. andy (talk) 09:47, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Andy

Dear Andy, Thank you very much for Your hard work regarding editing and filtering out rubbish "wiki" articles. I appreciate Your contribution into it. I am sorry that I have not had time before to discuss with You all these things. I am gonna have to say that first of all, I find some Your comments rather offending especially Your words "wild speculations"and "apparently feasible, if somewhat dodgy, proposed technology". I am the creator of all topics related to Alexander Mayboroda and his amazing inventions etc etc. Being humble and meek Alexander Mayboroda did not want me (I am his well-wisher) to put this up on Wikipedia, but i insisted on it for a number of reasons. First of all, one has to be qualified to judge whether a technology is applicable or not whether it is dodgy or not. I appreciate Your interest in space related topics but ARE YOU QUALIFIED TO MAKE THIS TYPE OF JUDGMENT? Alexander Mayboroda has been granted two patents by WHOM? by he Russian Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks. Marwick was granted patents by the American Authorities...Just to let You know (if You ask me) that Russia has been number one in terms of space stuff. So are You saying that You know more than the russian space authorities who grant patents? If so. God bless You...I dont believe You. If you are saying that it is all rubbish...Can You give me Your calculations refuting the numbers given in Mayboroda's projects? Would You mind providing me with a verifiable scheme of calculations that confirm that all this is a wild speculation? Of course, You are not gonna do so. It is simpler to say ..Oh...it's all rubbish..to hell with it..I cant get it..it is not possible...let's get it deleted...and so forth.. Secondly, if You know nothing about Marwick and Demetriades I feel sorry for You...Please, read 1.Demetriades S.T. et al. The use of atmospherie and extraterre strial resources in space propulsion system. Electric propulsion conference, March 1962. Calif. Northrop Space Laboratories 2. Demetriades S.T.J. Brit. Interplanet Soc., 18, No. 10, 392 (1962) 3. check this out as well "PROFAC - Propulsive Fluid Accumulator:Nuclear Air Scoop". bisbos.com 4. W. Meylitsev. Non-rocket space. Well, almost non-rocket… Tehnika Molodezhi No 07/2011

Please, talk with Mr Freeman Dyson, Mr Louis Friedman, friends of Mr O'Neill?. Are Your familiar with these names? If not, well....

Please, let me also know where I can lodge a complaint against Your rude behavior and Your strong comments undermining the whole meaning of Wikipedia. I would also like to complaint against laziness of some other people who although do not want to figure out how wipo web-site works, however, make very bold statements...or just because they do not know the original language of an article they claim it to be false...Is this democracy? Those people live in Germany (a "democratic" country ) and they do not show any respect to the main principal of democracy which is the presumption of innocence. Please,kindly note that the article about Accumulating space device (ASD) has not been finished yet and needs citations...I have tried to put citations but it did not work for some reason..maybe you have already blocked me..

Anyway Thank You for reading this.

Your humble servant Ivan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.165.102.124 (talk) 17:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to participate in the deletion debate about this article. andy (talk) 22:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A5 on disingenuous

You have completely misunderstood A5. --Penbat (talk) 09:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly so. andy (talk) 09:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Mayboroda

I removed your Prod of Alexander Mayboroda because of the comments by Ivan.sychev108 on the article's talk page. I converted it to an AFD with your original Prod reasoning as the AFD reasoning. I stated that I do not have any recommendation yet. GB fan please review my editing 16:18, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks andy (talk) 16:26, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

E-book device use on airliners

I was surprised that you reverted my contribution. I think it is a well known fact that the use of electrical devices are disallowed during takeoff and landing. I don't think a citation is needed, just as there is no need to give a citation for the sea being blue. I provided a citation for completeness. Edward (talk) 21:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was a sweeping statement and requires references. The one you gave was irrelevant. andy (talk) 22:34, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Business plan

Hi. Can you let me know why the edit was removed in Business Plan entry, second para (after text "a 3 to 5 year business plan is essential.") . The edit added content where a [citation needed], and I think it was relevant? but I might be wrong here? Good luck. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.132.148 (talk) 09:05, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because there is no way that reference counts as a reliable source and in my view was also quite possibly inserted as a spam link. andy (talk) 09:38, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I understand... Re: Reliability of Source. The source itself references to a reliable source, which is the book by Pinson, Linda. (2004). Anatomy of a Business Plan: A Step-by-Step Guide to Building a Business and Securing Your Company’s Future (6th Edition). Page 20. Dearborn Trade: Chicago, USA. I presume that hence the source is reliable, but otherwise the book by Pinson Linda must count as a reliable source, in which case I wonder if her book details could be put as the source in that edit entry? Your advice?