User talk:Mabdul
|
October 2008 - February 2010 |
fyi
- Yeah, already saw this. Thanks for the notification. I left a message on his talkpage. You should also turn on the automatic welcoming at the ACC tool(in the preferences at Template Management) for welcoming created users. mabdul 15:38, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. Sure. Best regards. Wifione ....... Leave a message 15:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Norwegian road signs
Moved from Wikipedia:Files for upload- Are you serious? I know it says not to edit archived discussions, but I just have to make some comments on this. The converted files have the exact issues I experienced, which is why I said SVG didn't work. The lines are not part of the images. It's the EPS to SVG method that simply does not work. The intricate shapes aren't accurate, so they leave gaps between them, as well as weird shapes on some arrows. Also, you didn't split any of the images into a, b, c, etc. The PNGs I provided are far superior, and would've given you far less work to simply upload. Scalable means next to nothing when the image turns out so inaccurate.
- Anyway, after two months I don't give much of a damn any longer. Not that I don't appreciate the effort on your end, but I had made quite an effort as well, and this end result is thoroughly disappointing. I had already done what you did here, except that I'm not allowed to upload without registering. If the SVGs are replaced with the PNGs, someone else will have to edit the article. Not going to check here daily for another two months, sorry to say. 158.37.73.32 (talk) 23:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- I know that the convert has taken really long, but please don't bother me, since I'm in my exams and I hadn't found any time for tis task. I can still split the images, if you say me which one. I didn't do it, since these seemed for me one image/shield. The problem is with the svg, that there need to be only a small correction, which I'm thinking is okay as it is. Okay, 4 images (I already mentioned) have bigger display problems, although they are still enough to use. mabdul 23:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- FYI I requested a job at Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Illustration_workshop#Norwegian_Road_signs. mabdul 11:23, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
- Okay. If they turn out to be repairable, that would be nice. I was just quite disappointed to see that your images turned out exactly as the ones I converted myself. I could've provided them 2 months ago, and I specifically mentioned that they turned out problematic in my original request. The issue is that right now, they display the signs worse than the PNGs I provided.
The splitting issue regards all images that depict multiple signs. I had split them for the PNG versions. 158.37.73.32 (talk) 17:39, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
- Okay. If they turn out to be repairable, that would be nice. I was just quite disappointed to see that your images turned out exactly as the ones I converted myself. I could've provided them 2 months ago, and I specifically mentioned that they turned out problematic in my original request. The issue is that right now, they display the signs worse than the PNGs I provided.
- Could you reupload the eps files for the Graphic Lab-team? I don't have them any more since my harddisk of my laptop the day before yesterday... mabdul 18:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 10:26, 4 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Sir Armbrust Talk to me Contribs 10:26, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Webex.gif
Resolved
Thanks for uploading File:Webex.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:55, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
- heh, a PNG version was created. Great! mabdul 12:58, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
- No problem! I did take the description used in it and copy it over to the PNG file when I was uploading it, minus the {{shouldbepng}} template, of course. And yes, I did swap the file used on the page it was used on to the PNG version, so no worries! :D LikeLakers2 (talk) 15:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
- Why uploading a bigger PNG file instead of using Gif? There is no patent any longer on the gif-somat. so where is the use? mabdul 16:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 22:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Nathan2055talk 22:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of ZUNO Bank AG
Hi! This is just to let you know that I've de-prodded ZUNO Bank AG - I wasn't entirely sure why you had proposed it, and it seemed tolerable to me. You're welcome to nominate at AfD. Thanks! Maethordaer (talk) 15:36, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 19:27, 7 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
January (talk) 19:27, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
New Drive
Thank you
|
The Template Barnstar | |
| Thank you for the header template at wikisource. Theornamentalist (talk) 00:39, 10 August 2011 (UTC) |
Hey, so I noticed something with the template you helped me with and I was wondering if you could help me out. It seems that the section parameter is dependent on there being either a previous or a next parameter, so what happens is that a header without a previous or next, but with a section, is showing nothing, see this,if you click on edit, you'll see that the seccion parameter is filled, but not showing on the page. - Theornamentalist (talk) 13:54, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
- Heh, it seems that you fixed it by your own. What did you changed? I can't find any relevant in the history except a removal of an if (although this didn't has to do with the section. Maybe we should have purged the server... mabdul 15:32, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Abandoned Drafts
Unlike talk page messages, you are supposed to put the newer drafts on the top, not the bottom. ~~Ebe123~~ talkContribs 12:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- heh, okay. Is there any comment saying that? I found no instructions. mabdul 12:20, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Templates
I need help in expanding the templates as well as creating more of them. I will be mentioning a series of short comings and problems I have. I didn't want to bore you off with this info until you had the free time :).
A small history lesson, I apologize if you know all this already. My understanding of the complicated history of EU is limited but... Three significant events lead to the formation of EU. (More info is at Treaties of the European Union#Ratified_treaties which has a nice chart.)
- Inner Six/Outer Seven era where a few of the post-ww2 era Western European countries formed a number of loosely related economic treaties. These were European Coal and Steel Community, European Economic Community, European Atomic Energy Community most notably.
- European Communities was formed in 1 July 1967 with Merger Treaty. The above treaties were amended and merged. This isn't currently represented in the template as I am unsure what the best way is to handle the complex relationship.
- With 1993-11-1 with Maastricht Treaty the EU we know today came into existence.
What I want the template to do is all I should do is provide it a date and it should pull the relevant membership info. In the case of France, EU field should show "I6" or "Inner Six" when a date after 1952 but before 1967 (dates of the treaties mentioned in 1 & 2 above) is given. It should return "EC" or "European Communities" for dates between 1967 and 1993 and show "EU" or "European Union" for dates after 1993.
As for the actual template done so far:
I created some documentation for the template: {{Membership/Sub/T/doc}} which should give a general idea. The templates actual use is probably a lot simpler than it looks.
Do also take a look at {{Membership/France}}. For France's historic relation with European Union consider the line:
|EUorg={{{EUorg|EU}}}
|EUpreorg={{{EUpreorg|EU/I6}}}
|EU={{{EU|Show}}}
|EUpre={{{EUpre|Show}}}
|EUmembership={{{EUmembership|1993-11-1}}}
|EUpremembership={{{EUpremembership|1952-07-23}}}
|EUsup={{{EUsup|}}}
The reason why I have parameters like {{{EU|Show}}}, {{{EUsup|}}} is to allow people calling the template to pass values to the fields or hide the fields if needed.
The {{{EUorg|EU}}} determines what template will be called when the "EUmembership" needs to be shown. It actually calls {{Membership/Sub/Flag/EU}}. This is the EU we know as it came to existence/effect in 1993. The {{{EUpreorg|EU/I6}}} determines what template will be called for the "EUpremembership". It actually calls {{Membership/Sub/Flag/EU/I6}} in my work. As mentioned above the "European Communities" Pre-EU era isn't shown in this current template structure which is wrong. I6 ceased to exist (more or less) with the merger treaty I believe. The complication is that EU has two "pre-era"s. I was thinking of using a switch (somehow) but then waited to hear what you think. More detailed info of EU;s expansion is at Enlargement of the European Union#Detail.
The structure is a lot simpler for other organizations where membership is merely joining the organization and pre-membership is the time period where countries prepare for the membership.
The other issue is when countries leave organizations or end up getting suspended. For instance Fiji left the commonwealth after joining and then rejoined but has been suspended twice so far. Or France left NATO's military wing until recently. Such cases aren't handled either. Might I add the complicated membership of UN security council temporary membership where countries join for 2 years only multiple times with gaps.
One last thing I want to handle is the dates when countries came to existence or ceased to exist. If someone tries to pass the date 1950s to check the membership info for say Estonia they should be receiving a message saying the country did not exist as a sovereign country. Or if someone tries to link to Czechoslovakia by passing a date in 2000s they should get a warning that the country no longer exists. Likewise a NATO membership for 1930s (before NATO existed) or membership for organizations like Western Union, Warsaw Pact in 2010s should return an error as these organizations ceased to exist.
So these are the problems that require template coding. I'd like to know what you think. I want to maintain a one (or more) template structure as I think having all these relationships in one template would generate a template that is far far too complicated particularly when it needs to be updated.
-- とある白い猫 chi? 02:13, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Kevin Sheekey Article
Hi! Thanks so much for all your help with this article! I appreciate you taking the time to read through it and offer your suggestions. I've gone ahead and updated the article. Could you please leave a short comment on the Talk page here, letting other editors know that you reviewed my draft and agreed with the revisions? Thanks! Ordwayen (talk) 19:48, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thought I'd let you know that someone was nice to come along on this article and do the "histmerge." I am going to begin looking for a Creative-Commons licensed photo next week. Thanks for your help! --Ordwayen (talk) 18:27, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Dysprosium Software
Sirs, I quote from Hitler and similar entities, "Now, the only way that remains for us is to use military force. We do not talk anymore." At last, you used the military power against my reasoning? Were you too busy to continue? This job of Wikipaedia is a hobby to promote knowledge of humans to objects that exist not a military endeavour. Sirs, Wikipaedia is declining in being reliable due to ever increasing use of militarism in it rather than knowledge seeking. How one can become sure that he is getting correct knowledge if he cannot become engaged in a peaceful dispute? I do not answer doubts you put forward since you blocked my way, abusing your position. You are confusing real objects with predicaments. That is all. I cannot fight back with the flood of confused people. Now I go and engage in another corner of this declining source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.15.234.49 (talk) 13:22, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Deletion of BOARD International
Hi Mabdul - I am failing to get the answers I need regarding the article "BOARD International". I was hoping you could assist me being that you were the most helpful and precise before. I am willing to change the necessary components, even start from the beginning if I have to, but an unaware right now what the first steps are. Thanks! Cpratt1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cpratt1 (talk • contribs) 16:17, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, I requested that an admin check the deleted versions. He said, that neither G11 nor G4 would really fit since the article has independent, third party references at the end. Sorry for telling now the following sentences: at the moment your article is deleted, but there is (maybe) a way to get it back. Go to Wikipedia:Deletion review and read it carefully (also the other requests for knowing what to write), and then request a review of the deleted article. Leave a Template:talkback (similar I left at your page) at the pages from the deleting admins at User talk:Causa sui and User talk:Fastily to the delete review. Hopefully they will revise the deletion. mabdul 23:49, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
The article Sami Turgeman has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. mabdul 22:37, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
AFC submission
- Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
- If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
Thank you for helping Wikipedia!
Heh, and I was only copyediting/fixing small issues... mabdul 10:43, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject Formula One
Hi Mabdul. Thanks for the changes you made. Unfortunately, they haven't really addressed the issue I was raising, which is that if you specify the "class" parameter as "redirect", "category", "template", "disambig", "file" or "portal", but don't specify a value for the "importance" parameter, the page is included in both Category:NA-importance Formula One articles and Category:Unknown-importance Formula One articles. As an example: {{WikiProject Formula One|class=template}} puts the article into Category:Template-Class Formula One articles, Category:NA-importance Formula One articles and Category:Unknown-importance Formula One articles. I think the original intention was that if you specified "class" as "template" (or "category", "disambig", etc), then the article would automatically be included in Category:NA-importance Formula One articles without you having to specify a value for "importance". Note that if you do specify a value for "importance" then everything is fine, i.e. {{WikiProject Formula One|class=template|importance=NA}} puts the article into just Category:Template-Class Formula One articles and Category:NA-importance Formula One articles. But I thought if it was simple to fix the template so you didn't have to specify the importance value for these class types then that was worthwhile doing. DH85868993 (talk) 02:46, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
This account has been blocked, since it's a spamusername being used in an effort to advertise a film from Kapok Pictures. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:01, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Jean-Philippe de Lespinay's article
Mbadul, could you please delete the two comments on the Jean-Philippe de Lespinay's page : "copy editing" and "quality standard" ? Thank you. Pat grenier (talk) 07:25, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
- I fixed many problems which were related to the wikify tag. But I do not want to remove the copyedit tag at the moment. Maybe ask at the WP:Help Desk or in the IRC for a review. I can't do this job since English in not my mother's tongue and thus I'm not that good. Alternatively ask at the Wikiproject:Copyedit, they have been highly specialized at these problems. Maybe they will only remove the tag without changing the text. mabdul 12:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Mr. Hito.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Mr. Hito.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Acather96 (talk) 12:06, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Resolved- Heh, you were too fast... I realized after the upload that I missed some fields. I updated the image. mabdul 12:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, that looks good now :) Acather96 (talk) 13:33, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
CustomInk Inky Logo
Hi,
It seems the URL for the image page got update and the thumbnail in the file history got updated, but the reference URL for the actual image didn't get updated, meaning the page didn't get updated. If there is something I can do to fix the situation I'd be happy to do that.
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim.Hostetler (talk • contribs) 13:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
- Sry, but I'm not really sure what do you mean. The description file of the logo got an update by User:Armbrust as you can see here. If you mean that you don't see the new logo at the page of the article, bypass your cache of your web browser by pressing [F5] on your keyboard. mabdul 01:17, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
When I access the link to the logo on the CustomInk Logo.jpg page it shows the correct thumbnail but when you click it, it goes to the old logo which means the logo hasn't been updated. It also hasn't be updated on the CustomInk page. --Jim.Hostetler (talk) 12:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
I apologize for any confusion with this. In order to make sure the logo is coming up correctly and without the black background, I've created a new version which you can access at this link:
experience.customink.com/CustomInk-Inky-Wiki%20logo.png
This one should always have a white background and should be the logo that gets uploaded. Thank you Jim.Hostetler (talk) 18:59, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- Okay I don't know what did went wrong. I recognized now that the background was wrong. Since this upload was nearly two months ago, I can't remember if I had to convert the image and made a mistake (so the filetype fits) mabdul 20:44, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Resolved
66.131.199.156 (talk · contribs) wrote at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 September 13#Common Dead:
That is enough to meet WP:Music guidelines, and the obscurity of the artist in hand with the apparent bias of the article's challengers is really the issue here.
As a participant at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common Dead, would you explain how you came to the conclusion that Common Dead fails WP:MUSIC? In other words, what was your opinion of the sources? This is essential to determine whether the article should be relisted or kept deleted. I am inclined to support relisting but am willing to be swayed if the "delete" votes did not consider the sources sufficient or reliable enough to establish notability. Cunard (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
- Resolved
- As the DR states now: "Common Dead – "Delete" closure endorsed due to a lack of consensus for overturning it." So nothing to do for me. (my opinion isn't changed/different from the AFD process) mabdul 23:00, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation
ResolvedIt's not mine. Check the article history for the author.©Geni 03:22, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
- Heh, yes. I see. You should have made another edit and changing the "author"/"requester" field of the template. I'm using an JavaScript helper and this looks in the placed code and "thought" that you was the requester. I placed the message at the correct talkpage now. mabdul 09:21, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Article Creation
I have not created any article. This is a false allegation on me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.48.210 (talk • contribs) 13:41, 24 September 2011
- Sry, but I have neither placed a notify-message at "your" talkpage, nor did "your" IP contributed to a AFC draft. Maybe you are talking about another IP you used before. Many ISPs change regular the IPs of their customers... mabdul 13:17, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: User:Kai402/SnapLock Industries
Hello Mabdul. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Kai402/SnapLock Industries, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: user is still active, there is no policy against holding unfinished drafts in user space, and no applicable speedy reason. When userspace drafts are nominated at WP:MFD, the usual consensus is not to delete unless they have been abandoned for at least six months. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:48, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Jack P. Greene entry
I've been trying to create an entry for the historian Jack P. Greene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Jack_P._Greene) but my submission has been wrongly declined twice: reviewers have assumed that I have copied and pasted the text from an external source but I am the author of the article and thus the copyright holder. Could you please help me resolve this issue? Please advise. thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.227.217 (talk) 12:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
- Please send a mail to Wikipedia and explain your situation. At Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries is explained what has to be in the mail and where you have to send the mail. Please read also WP:OR. If this is done (and you get the OK from one of the OTRS stuff, you should check WP:WIKIMARKUP to learn how to use wikimarkup and style your draft better. mabdul 13:21, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion contested: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gordon Brown
Hello Mabdul. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gordon Brown, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a test page. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 18:58, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion contested: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/flesh for the beast
Hello Mabdul. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/flesh for the beast, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G6 is for uncontroversial maintenance; the deletion of a potential article is not uncontroversial. Thank you. Logan Talk Contributions 19:02, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 06:07, 2 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Monty845 06:07, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
CSD A7 on Marcus Eoin
Hey, wanted to let you know that I challenged your CSD A7 on Marcus Eoin. He is part of a notable band, while the article may suck, its not so bad that it qualifies for A7. Given the age of the article, and his possible notability, it really should go to AfD if its gonna get deleted. Monty845 15:05, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
user: Godissupreme / Article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Rajput_Ganpal_Foundation
Dear M Abdul I got PHD degree in Insyclopedia and current affairs. I wrote an article [2] twice with removal of all controversery notablity or third party reliablity issues but it is pity that each time you come forward and dis-approve my article with no logices. Be informed that article written about the Organisation was hardly esatblished nine months ago and all necessary references with strong proof have been mentioned in the article. So be kind enough and instead simply refusing my article, guide me where problems lies so that i could remove them ? Even i contacted live chat helpers and they considered my article a valid writing.
Thanks for time and care. Regards. --Godissupreme (talk) 07:16, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Godissupreme (talk • contribs) 07:07, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
user: Godissupreme / Article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Rajput_Ganpal_Foundation
Respected Abdul Thanks for reply. However, i just need your one word to guide me ( what should i do with the article written about an organisation just came into existance few months back and no electronic, print or internet media knows about it ?). Yes one thing i have to prove, all documents from government, resolution passed by the community who esatblished organization. i can give their official scanned documents. If it was some ancient historical organisation or product, i must provide notablity and verifiablity from third party proofs. Hope you feel symathetic on me. thanks--Godissupreme (talk) 07:48, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
{{db-copypaste}} vs {{histmerge}}
I think your using the wrong template to request histmerges. {{db-copypaste}} requests that the article be deleted to make way for a clean page move, and does not request a histmerge. If carried out as defined on the template, the newer page will be deleted, and the old one moved over it, with no merge. That will cause the edits since the copy paste move to be lost. Instead you should request a histmerge using {tl|histmerge}}. Monty845 14:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Signature Image on Paul Shoup Wiki Page
Appreciate your comments regarding licensing on the Wiki page Paul Shoup regarding the signature image. Can you peek at my new comments and let me know your thoughts. Wjenning (talk) 00:06, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
Articles for Creation barnstar
|
The Articles for Creation barnstar | |
| Thank you for your work in improving the AfC templates, and for your work in reviewing submissions. It has been a pleasure working with you. Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 21:46, 9 October 2011 (UTC) |
About the article btowc
HI! Can you help about the issues related to the User:swapnali1902/Btowc converting to wikipedia main article? And how to improve this article? Asmita yendralwar (talk | contribs) 07:52, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi,
- since you have not added ANY word to that "article", I dont know how this article is about. How about adding some sentences and finding some references? mabdul 10:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Nothus Miserum
Mabdul:
Thank you for your review of my recent submission: Nothus Miserum.
I understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a dictionary.
When I began to draft my submission, I looked for a model within Wikipedia that could serve as an example of an acceptable submission. I found Modus Operandi, a Latin phrase used in police jargon.
I do see that Modus Operandi appears in Wiktionary as well, with a link stating "Wikipedia has an article on Modus Operandi."
I plan to resubmit my entry to Wiktionary, again following Modus Operandi, and hope for better results.
However, I am having difficulty finding the entry point to the submission path for Wiktionary.
Can you direct me?
Thanks for your consideration.
Paul Amrhein — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.247.78.12 (talk) 11:39, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello, I was asked to comment by mabdul. In addition to what mabdul said about Wikipedia not being a dictionary, judging from a Google search and the fact that your source is a blog post you wrote, it would appear that the phrase was originally coined by you. Wikipedia is not a place to publish original thought, so it's unlikely you'd ever be able to make that article. Please write about other encyclopedic topics instead. (Incidentally, Modus operandi is an acceptable article because it goes into detail beyond just the definition, but as your subject does not appear to be a pre-existing, widely used phrase, this is largely irrelevant.) wctaiwan (talk) 12:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of xxxterm
All references to Wikipedia policies You provided are about the web content. Do You really see no difference between the web browser and the sites You browse with it? Your page states You've written the articles about several proof-of-concept web browsers including Agora, so You might have noticed this difference before. So what the hell is going on?
I know, the notablity of most software for Unix-like can be disputed, but why abusing the speedy deletion if there is a proper AfD process if You suspect xxxterm to be not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czarkoff (talk • contribs) 12:00, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know that tagging it with webcontent might not be correct, but there is no better tagging under A7 in WP:TWINKLE. As you already noticed, that I'm really aware of the notability of web browsers. Please check the Agora article and others I wrote or am writing (like the User:Mabdul/Microsoft Mobile Explorer), all are referenced at least with some independent references and thus proved notability. You have only added one reference and this is primary source. mabdul 12:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- Please check the history of the xxxterm article, it was written just yesterday night. I didn't have time yet to add references. May be You first add refertences and only then write the text they would prove, I do it the opposite way. Anyway, thanks for not deleting the article instantly. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- No I didn't checked the history. But that's the reason why there are WP:Userspace draft and an article wizard to create and improve the article so good that notability is shown. mabdul 19:31, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- Please check the history of the xxxterm article, it was written just yesterday night. I didn't have time yet to add references. May be You first add refertences and only then write the text they would prove, I do it the opposite way. Anyway, thanks for not deleting the article instantly. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Actually I did not get the meaning of ANY word Asmita yendralwar (talk | contribs) 08:30, 14 October 2011 (UTC)