User talk:Phil Bridger

Please guide me how to retain my page on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samar Saeed Akhtar (talk • contribs) 10:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

October 2011

Please do not remove Biographies of Living Persons prods from an article unless it contains at least one reliable source or was created before 18 March 2010. If you oppose the deletion of an article under this process, please consider sourcing the article or commenting at the respective talk page. Thank you. Sorry for templating you, but Twinkle is awesome. Also, I'm refering to Hélder Godinho (it doesn't have any sources; external links are different from sources) and Daniel Stana. (also had no sources; again, external links are separate, since they usually give more info about the subject, rather than showing that that is where they got that information from) LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 14:12, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Please read the link in the template, and you will see that for WP:BLPPROD to be used it requires that "the article contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc.)". Maybe you should stop using Twinkle, slow down and check things properly before throwing templates around. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:16, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I honestly think Hélder Godinho would still be up for deletion per WP:BLPPROD, as the external link included seems to be a Spanish page, and therefore, would go on the Spanish Wikipedia, not the English Wikipedia. Perhaps we could transwiki that article to the Spanish Wikipedia? LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 14:24, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, no real need to tb me. I usually am watching pages for a while after replying. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 14:26, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Why on earth would we want to transwiki an article written in English to the Spanish Wikipedia? Once again, you don't appear to be thinking before writing. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:27, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Facepalm That is the point, of course. We could get it translated and then transwiki it. Either that or I see no reliable sources for that article. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 14:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I'd really people didn't use that facepalm template. It is really quite uncivil. It is tantamount to saying "you are being thick for not understanding me". Here, however, Phil is quite correct, and it is yourself who has missed the point.--Scott Mac 15:49, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Second that. Using that template is bad enough when you're in the right, but when you've totally failed to advance a valid argument and misunderstood the relevant policies... Alzarian16 (talk) 19:13, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

If the source is unreliable for English Wikipedia then it is just as unreliable for Spanish Wikipedia. Reliability is not a function of language, and the "English" and "Spanish" in the names of the Wikipedias refer to the languages in which articles are written, not the languages of the sources used. And, btw, that source is in Portuguese, not Spanish. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

You participated in the Jacobson Flare AFD, which is now restarted

You recently participated in the AFD for Jacobson Flare, which resulted in a deletion review, which got it relisted. I'm contacting everyone who didn't notice and participate in the new one already. [1] Dream Focus 06:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Dr. Mahalingam College of Engineering and Technology

Since you objected to my speedy on Dr.Mahalingam College of Engineering and Technology I'll leave it to you to decide what to make of the whole mess of Dr.Mahalingam College of Engineering and Technology, Dr. Mahalingam College of Engineering and Technology and Dr Mahalingam College of Engineering and Technology. You may think it's notable, but 3 articles worth? Bazj (talk) 16:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition

Nice! Definitely stealing that option where I can in future. Annoyed I never thought about it myself! Best wishes Haruth (talk) 17:15, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:ATHLETE

Hi, in regards to your edit comment here: [2] I just wanted to highlight to you that WP:ATHLETE states, "This guideline is used to help evaluate whether or not a sports person or sports league/organization (amateur or professional) will meet the general notability guideline, and thus merit an article in Wikipedia." Note that it covers sports league/organizations. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

It claims to do that, but I can see no criteria in the guideline that actually cover sports teams. I'm sure that if there were any such criteria they would include the common sense criterion that national teams of major countries in major sports should be considered notable. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:23, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

National Memorial Hall (Mount Herzl)

Year 1860 marks the exit from the walls of Jerusalem and the built the of the New Jerusalem where Jews began to establish military underground to protect the Jews who lived long before there was the State of Israel and fallen by protect the jewish homes. פארוק (talk) 18:29, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that partial clarification. Let's keep the discussion in one place, at Talk:National Memorial Hall (Mount Herzl), where others can join in. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:32, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

befor establish the state of israel it called: "ERETZ ISRAEL ( the land of israel )" or Palestine in your language. פארוק (talk) 21:10, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Once again, please keep discussion about a specific article to the article talk page. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:14, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Politics and Pop Culture In the United States

I was astounded to see that the ambassador we were engaging, User:Epistemophiliac, is the chair of the Campus Amb. steering committee. I think you're right about Campus Ambassadors being ill-conceived. EEng (talk) 22:19, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Phil Bridger. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 02:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

This is a message to Mihir, but I think it concerns everyone involved in the IEP. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Dial-the-Truth Ministries

Hi. Thanks for adding those secondary sources to the article. I have a question, though: Where in Media, Gender and Identity: An Introduction is DTTM mentioned? I looked through that book on Amazon, and couldn't find mention of it. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 22:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

On page 225, as stated in the citation. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:07, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Talk back

Hello, Phil Bridger. You have new messages at 4meter4's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

India Education Program

Remember you and I were in a short exchanged at AfD with someone re concerns about "Campus Ambassadors" and so on? I thought you might be interested in this. Admirable goals, of course, but worrisome... EEng (talk) 12:47, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Researcher's Barnstar

		Researcher's Barnstar
		I am both pleased and honored to present you with the Researcher's Barnstar in appreciation for your superb work in finding sources showing suitable notability for the article Fahd Ballan. Excellent work in addressing systemic bias! Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 05:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Concerning Pilot Polder Andijk Thank you for your work quicly made nicely made Laurentleap (talk) 13:29, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		For rescuing two of my yet unfinished articles on Indian Legal Organisations from deletion. I am new to Wikipedia (3 months old) and would take some time to develop the skills of writing an entire article all by myself. Suggestion for the Wiki Community: I believe that articles should be allowed to be created(even one liners) and a 10 days time frame given to develop the same. This is so because a so called editor must have felt that some important topic has been left out and the same needs to be worked upon (and maybe he knows very less on the subject). Keeping the same as a user project wouldn't really help because if it is published then maybe the first paragraph may be created by some other person altogether. DebashisM (talk) 14:10, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

removal of proposed deletion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Lagrange

This person has done nothing noteworthy, this page is clearly a blog and/or self-promotion contrary to 'what Wikipedia is not' rules.

references

Hello, could you please point me towards the precedent that meant removal of all youtube references from the article Libyan Hostage Situation 1984? Gailsedotes (talk) 10:16, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Anyone can post to Youtube with no editorial oversight, so it can't be considered a reliable source for anything. The general principle is explained in our verifiability policy and the guideline on identifying reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:14, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Backbone.js

You PRODded this, and I deleted it. That has been questioned on my talk page, so I have restored it and now notify you in case you wish to consider taking it to AfD. According to the requester, it is more important tan the one-line article made out; I am going to post a note at WT:WikiProject Software to see whether anyone there is interested in exanding it. regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:32, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Arthur Nozik

Hi Phil,

You removed the PROD from Arthur Nozik - I've put it forward for AfD, since I still haven't been able to find anything that demonstrates he passes WP:PROF or WP:GNG. You may have found sources that prove otherwise, but either way I thought you might want to weigh in on the discussion, it's at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur Nozik‎. Cheers, Yunshui 雲‍水 13:44, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

November 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from RKSD College Of Pharmacy, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. Clarkcj12 (talk) 01:56, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I did not create that article, so am entitled to remove the speedy deletion tag. Please don't throw warning templates around when you are the one acting in breach of policy. I would advise you to make sure that you have read and understood the speedy deletion criteria before tagging any more articles, for example WP:CSD#A7 clearly says, "not including educational institutions", when describing what articles it applies to. By mistagging articles in this way you are not helping Wikipedia, but rather driving away potentially good editors. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:04, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry, I didn't see that part when I last looked at it. I am sorry about that mistake I didn't see the part about it not including educational institutions. I also thought you were the creator of the article. I am so sorry about that.--Clarkcj12 (talk) 18:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Malik Karamat Ali Khokhar

Compare our page:

Malik Karamat Ali Khokhar is the former MPA of PP-160 elected in the year 1993. He was also a candidate for PPP-128.His wife died in the year 2011 of a protracted illness in a private hospital.

with the source. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 22:18, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Type H Sword for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Type H Sword is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Type H Sword until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:27, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Ba'ath

This is a duplicate of this. Arab Ba'ath Party (al-Arsuzi) should be deleted regardless of Arab Ba'ath Party being redirected or not. — Jean Calleo ^(talk) 22:19, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Don't be silly. How can WP:CSD#A10 possibly apply when the two titles point to articles about different topics? Phil Bridger (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

There was no need to insult me. I found both of the articles as non-redirects, holding the same content, what else should've I done? /rhetorical — Jean Calleo ^(talk) 22:47, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

That might be how you found the articles, but it's not how you left them, so they were no longer duplicates. I've made a basic start on sorting out the mess that you left. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:59, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

...mess that I left? Please watch what you're saying. And look at the page histories. — Jean Calleo ^(talk) 23:04, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Dark Tower film adaptation proposed deletion

Can you please explain to me the circumstances of removing the proposed deletion tag from The Dark Tower series film adaptation? I believe it is very clear that the page should be deleted. It completely opposes all Wikipedia:NFF guidelines. This is why I proposed it for deletion. I made a very detailed and particular case for why the article should not exist on Wikipedia at this time and should be merged into The Dark Tower (series) until such time as principle photography on a Dark Tower movie begins. However, User:Jmj713 did not make a case against the facts I laid down. He/she simply reverted my proposed deletion and said the article had many sources. Having many sources is not a case against the facts I saw for deleting the page. Nor did Jmj713 discuss the notability guidelines for The Dark Tower series film adaptation. This user simply used editing war tactics to protect a page they created which blatantly opposes Wikipedia film notability guidelines. As I said they reverted my edit to propose deletion without discuss the allegation for deletion. You said that an article can not be "A WP:PROD tag can't be reinstated once it has been contested" and yet user Jmj713 did not contest the edit, they simply reverted it without properly discussing the reasons for proposed deletion.Danleary25 (talk) 18:33, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Please see WP:PROD for the instructions for using the proposed deletion procedure, in particular point 2 in the introduction: "If any person (even the author him/herself) objects to the deletion (usually by removing the {{proposed deletion}} tag), the proposal is aborted and may not be re-proposed." (my bolding). If you want to get this deleted you need to start a discussion by following the instructions at WP:AFD. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:43, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Jacopo Saltarelli

Jacopo Saltarelli is completely non-notable. He lived with his brother, a goldsmith. He is reputed to have been an artists model. He was twice charged with sodomy, on one occasion with someone famous. Charges were dropped. Nothing more is known about him.

The reason why his article gets a few hits is simply because there was a link to it from the article Leonardo da Vinci's personal life. It is natural that people reading the section of the article that deals with that case, and seeing Jacopo Saltarelli linked, then follow the link to find out more. But there is nothing more. All that is known about Saltarelli is in the article about Leonardo da Vinci's personal life.

The information is highly relevant to the article on Leonardo, because:

• the sodomy charge is the only fixed date in Leonardo's life at that time,
• because his various biographers have speculated that the court case had a profound effect on him. It has been suggested that he became celibate as a result, and argued that he simply became cautious about his (presumed) homosexuality.
• it is absolutely the only thing that we know for certain about Leonardo's sexuality, and sexual involvements.

As for Jacopo Saltarelli, he wasn't a famous goldsmith. He wasn't a famous artist's model as no known picture exists of him. He wasn't even a famous prostitute in his own right. His only claim to fame is that he might have been laid by Leonardo da Vinci.

The person who created the article has left Wikipedia. The other person who worked on it, Haiduc, who has continually manipulated the biography of Leonardo wherever possible in order to prove pederasty, doesn't seem to have been around for a few months. I checked these people out before putting up the banner.

You have seemed to have decided that the removal wouldn't be controversial. I suggest that if you put the banner back, you will find that it is fairly uncontroversial, because, as I have said, he is non-notable, and the information is already merged in the article where it is relevant. No-one will look up Saltarelli for any personal fame. We only have his name because it was in the court record. As I wrote earlier, it is pointless to have an article on every prostitute who might have had a liaison with a famous customer. It is ridiculous. Amandajm (talk) 23:02, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

OK! The leading sentence to the article now makes his total lack of notability perfectly clear. It states:

Jacopo d’Andrea Saltarelli (b. 1459) was an apprentice goldsmith and male prostitute, about which nothing is known except the details of court records of several charges of prostitution, in one of which Leonardo da Vinci was among the accused.[1]

Amandajm (talk) 23:28, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

If you think that this should be deleted rather than, for example, redirected then the place to dicsuss it is WP:AFD, where everyone can join in the discussion, rather than my talk page. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:13, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

suicide angels CSD rever

The original csd was "contested" by me. At the time I viewed the article, it was not blank (the author blanking had been reverted by another editor, before the author CSDed the article themselves).

As the page was not blank, I replaced the blank CSD with the notablity csd (as the page has previously been CSDed on those terms).

As I am the person that placed the new CSD, and the person that reverted the old CSD, I don't think that qualifies as "contesting".

Gaijin42 (talk) 17:19, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Try looking properly. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:39, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

MM., however, there was a CSD on the article at the time I modified it. I just changed it to a different reason. In any case, the author blanked, (reverted by someone else), so I am not sure does your contesting a notability CSD, mean that it can no longer be CSDed due to author blank? In any case, I shall AFD as there seems to be arguments on both sides. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Asian Avenue Magazine

A magazine is not a company? Say wha?? Hairhorn (talk) 22:52, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

A magazine is a company??? Phil Bridger (talk) 23:11, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

AfD for Häfele

Just FYI since you removed the CSD tag... I put an AfD for Häfele up. If you want to comment the discussion is here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Häfele I'm also doing the same thing for Pt. G.B. Pant High Altitude Zoo, Nainital here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pt. G.B. Pant High Altitude Zoo, Nainital Regards, Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 01:04, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In José Joaquín Flórez Hernández, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page El Tiempo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Tokheim - removal of Speedy

I have replaced the Speedy template you removed from this page with the comment "contest speedy deletion - "one of the leaders in this market" is an indication of importance/significance". If it is indeed notable then citations need to be provided to indicate this. If you wish to contest the deletion please do so on the article's Talk page rather than removing the template. Thanks Vrenator ^talk 10:12, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

References are not required to avoid speedy deletion under WP:CSD#A7, only an indication of importance. The place to discuss deletion based on a lack of sources or notability is WP:AFD. I am not the article creator, so am perfectly entitled to contest speedy deletion by removing the template with an edit summary. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:29, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Rana Jashraj

Hi!! I have avoided putting underlines and bolding of statements in my further comments on AfD of Rana Jashraj.--- Jethwarp (talk) 05:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Mohamed Mursal Sheikh Abdurahman

I tagged the Mohamed Mursal Sheikh Abdurahman article as needing some serious work, and you reverted that edit with the comment "revert disruptive tagbombing." While you may object to the tags, you didn't fix any of the issues described, nor did you explain why you thought the issues weren't applicable.

For instance, the article should absolutely be tagged as an {{orphan}}, as it has zero incoming links from articles.

If you want to improve the article, then improve the article—but don't just remove tags and think that that helps anything. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 02:38, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback - Your comment in the Moses ka Moyo AfD, More sources have been found

Hello, Phil Bridger. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moses ka Moyo.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CSD notification

The page National Centre For Cell Science looks like it may be a valid CSD, but I prefer not to delete a page unless the creator has been notified. I understand that sometimes automated tools fail to do the notification for some reason. Not sure if that was the case, but could you make the notification?SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Done. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:33, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, now deleted.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:56, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

University of Concepción Student Federation

You questioned by Speedy, perhaps rightly--cpmnsoideromng the utterly non-encyclopedic contents, I've nominated it for AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Concepción Student Federation DGG ( talk ) 05:29, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of PAF Fazaia Degree College

Hello Phil! I think you didn't see the article Pakistan Air Force schools and colleges and also the history of Fazaia Degree College, Faisal, to ascertain the background of my rationale for the speedy nomination of subject article and removed speedy tag instead of contesting it. --SMS ^Talk 07:42, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I have restored the speedy tag on this article that you deleted. --SMS ^Talk 19:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

And I have removed it again, with an explanation in the edit summary and a change of the redirect target. A redirect doesn't have to be from an "official" name, but from a name that a reader might possibly use to look for an article. If you really think this should be deleted, after reading and understanding the edit summary and my comment here, then start a discussion at WP:RFD rather than edit-war over a speedy deletion tag. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:56, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I will never edit war over it. Your action of removal of speedy tag seemed a little rude to me and also you didn't reply to my first message that made me revert your edit. --SMS ^Talk 21:01, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, contesting deletion is not rude, but a difference of opinion. Secondly, reinstating a reverted edit is edit-warring - see WP:BRD for best practice. Thirdly, editors here are all volunteers, usually with limited time available, so you should wait for more than 12 hours before expecting a reply to a message. Fourthly, you provided no valid speedy deletion rationale per WP:CSD - the process for deleting redirects that don't meet those criteria is to start a discussion at WP:RFD. Do I need to carry on till I match the apocryphal story of the Oxford don overheard starting a sentence with "seventeenthly", or is that enough for you to reconsider your approach? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Shaikhpur, Handaur, Pratapgarh

Sorry about that - I got mixed up on the deletion types (IIRC, there's another one that, if the originator removes it, it gets automatically put back by a bot?). The removal of maintenance templates was improper in any event, however; I should have just restored those. Allens (talk) 01:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Use of trademarking and MEDUS Study in Accropode artcle

I'm doing research on harbour construction, so have followed the links through the Breakwater_(structure), Seawall, and Accropode articles. In the Accropode article itself, I note that the Trade Mark symbols associated with Accropode have re-appeared, despite your earlier request that they be left removed. Several of the underwater image filenames (Artificial reffs with the ACCROPODE(TM) IDMer 1.jpg et seq) in this article also feature the same trade-marking and are all marked with what appears to be a copyright or ownership logo of 'IDMer'. IDMer states on its website (http://www.idmer.net/index.php?langue=en&id_cat=) that is it a company "...that specialises in the expertise of maritime civil engineering structures, and assistance for the construction of one layer armouring for breakwater with concrete blocks: ACCROPODE™, CORELOC TM and more...".

Secondly, I'm surprised to find each of these three above mentioned articles contains a more or less identical section, with duplicated images, entitled: 'Advanced Numerical Study'. The original source article, which was presumably a primary source and written in Italian, is no longer available at the link given (http://www.diciv.unisa.it/docenti/dentale/medus_.php) for the University of Salerno.

As a novice editor, I'm still struggling to catch up with Wikipedia's extensive set of policies and guidelines but to me there appears to be a question over self-promotion here. Inspeximus (talk) 14:48, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Reverts

Why do you support Wiki Hounders ? - Jihje Or (talk) 12:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't, but I do support the removal of spam links added by obvious sockpuppets. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:37, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Brosix

Hello! There Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brosix (2nd nomination) is now going on. As both sides of discussion have different views on the outcome of this discussion you participated in, I would kindly ask you to join AfD to state your opinion in more explicit way. Thanks in advance. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 00:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

AFD: Chris Moore (businessman)

While requesting that you follow WP:CIV and WP:NPA, may I direct you to WP:NOTAB - Any Biography: (1) The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times; (2) The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field. If you feel that Chris Moore passes this criteria, and there are WP:RS to support this, then please do so within the debate. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 00:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Central Provident Fund (South Africa) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Central Provident Fund (South Africa) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central Provident Fund (South Africa) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Association for Contextual Behavioral Science

Consensus in this discussion was clearly that the sources available do not meet the requirements of significance of coverage, independence and reliability. Please reconsider you closure. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Comments that there were no sources are disputed by the existence of those sources, which are linked to from the AfD page. Using the links provided in the discussion, I put in three cites to independent sources which provide some information - other sources are available. Sometimes it is possible to miss what is there, and that is what I assumed had happened with those who were saying there were no sources, or that the sources were not dealing sufficiently with the organisation. I feel there may be an argument in how best to present ACT and ACBS, and how our articles on them should be linked, and perhaps some thought can be given to merging Association for Contextual Behavioral Science into a section in Acceptance and commitment therapy; though the argument that there was not enough sources to establish notability for ACBS I didn't think was proven enough to delete the material completely. That people may not have found or looked at all the sources is not in itself sufficient reason for deletion when adequate sources are there. This source, for example, has an entire paragraph in a dedicated section on the organisation, written by two independent authors and published by Oxford University Press. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 00:07, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I have started a merge discussion at Talk:Acceptance_and_commitment_therapy#Merge_discussion, and will inform the participants of the AfD. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:48, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Jack O'Dwyer

Hi Anjwalker,

User:Opjack271 (Jack Odwyer) has been in touch with me regarding his dispute with the PRSA and attempted edits on Wikipedia, though I haven't been able to find any detailed dispute page on the issue at a glance. It's clear many of his contributions violate copyright issues, No Original Research, Notability, multiple accounts and so on and so forth, however the PRSA issue caught my attention.

He told me Wikipedia:Notability was used to prohibit him from making this addition, but I see now this was probably because he was nominating a new article for creation even though one already exists. He also said WP:Verifiability was used, however - even though Wikipedia discourages the use of press releases - it seems like the official statement from The Press Club is the most reliable source for an encyclopedic comment like "The Press Club issued a public statement saying they were disappointed by PRSA's behavior." However - again at a glance - it appears unlikely such an encyclopedic comment was made and the content Jack contributed probably fell under the category of Verifiability policy for "likely to be challenged."

I guess what I'm getting at is that I will encourage Jack to stay off of Wikipedia. His inexperience and bias has been disruptive, however there is an acorn of encyclopedic content. O'Dwyer is a notable figure in the PR field, the PRSA wrote a 23 page statement and The Press Club responded - I feel there is information that can be added by a neutral party. What do you think?

King4057 (talk) 19:25, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Ram Narayan Sharma

Thanks for helping with notability. I can't pull up your source, can you let me know if he's also recognized as a poet there? I ask because we also have Ram Sharma and I'm trying to determine if they're one and the same. I also asked at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics‎ so no worries if you don't know StarM 02:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Angélica Lozano Correa AFD Tag

Phil,

I hope you did not restore the AFD just because I might have inserted the wrong Tag? i did not see any arguments in the deletions discussion page. Also, the article does read like an essay on the topic. Maybe, a 7 year old's essay but that's how complete the article is. Wikishagnik (talk) 15:58, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

The AfD tag needs to stay on the article until the discussion is closed. If you want to withdraw the nomination then just say so at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angélica Lozano Correa and someone conversant with our procedures will tidy things up. And no, this doesn't read anything like an essay by a seven-year-old or anyone else. It's simply an encyclopedia entry that, like nearly all of our articles, could do with a bit of improvement. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:05, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

La Pyramide

Kindly add the sources you found. I sure as hell didn't find any of that when I Google Books'ed. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Team Gallery

I tagged a sentence in the Team Gallery article "often credited with a major role in the development of the careers of such notable young artists" for failing verification. Can you confirm whereabouts in the citation it says this? ThanksTheroadislong (talk)

Ok I thought I might be missing something kind regardsTheroadislong (talk) 23:29, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I fixed it just before getting your message. I would point out that Gardar Eide Einarsson is pretty clearly notable, per these books and these news articles. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I've requested an article [3] All good wishesTheroadislong (talk) 23:54, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Phil Bridger. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 19:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Matata Ponyo Mapon

His article cites two stories as to him dying in that Katanga plane crash. Neither article[4] however says[5] that Mapon died. Only that an advisor to Congo's President did and that Mapon was wounded. Please note also that the second article is dated four days after the crash....William 15:48, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't claim that Mapon died, but that Augustin Katumba Mwanke, who is clearly notable as a former provincial governor and chief advisor to President Kabila, did. The Mapon claim was made by The Bushranger. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Lynette Nusbacher

Man, I know it is sock puppetry, but im only making reference to Nusbacher's former name. Its fact and should be included. Here's a source from IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1655167/). Sorry if i got a bit personal earlier on, just trying to improve the encyclopaedia like you. (Green-Halcyon sock puppet) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.76.242.24 (talk) 11:46, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

The former name already appears twice in the article, in the relevant sections linking Nusbacher's work under the former name to the current name. The main point now is that you shouldn't be making disputed changes without consensus. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Please do not remove Biographies of Living Persons prods from an article unless it contains at least one reliable source or was created before 18 March 2010. If you oppose the deletion of an article under this process, please consider sourcing the article or commenting at the respective talk page. Thank you. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:04, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Please read the policy that you are invoking. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:06, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you remove Biographies of Living Persons prods without addressing the issue, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. You do not understand blpprod. I am not claiming the sources are not good enough to establish notability. (Although I think they likely are not). BLP has very specific requirements to avoid legal liability, those requirements are not being met. You need at least one RS to keep a BLP article, and you DO NOT HAVE ONE. Do not revert the blpprod template again without adding a reliable source, or you will be blocked. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Stop being silly. Worldcat is a perfectly reliable source, and, anyway, WP:BLPPROD only requires that no source of any kind is in the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:13, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

It specifically states reliable source, and there are several pages dedicated to discussing this. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:15, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

reported to AIV. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Iran football PRODs

Hello Phil. You seem to be missing the point that these articles have been prodded because they are unreferenced and have no indication of notability. Nothing exists on Wikipedia without these requisites. As I'm sure you're well aware, WP:OCE is not a valid reason for keeping articles. Is there another reason to keep them? 46 articles is gonna be one big AfD... Cloudz679 21:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Playing at the third level of Iranian football is an indication of notability. And my statement wasn't that other crap exists, but that other articles are routinely accepted as notable. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:24, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't know whether you put all those pages on your watchlist, but I will be sure to let you know when I AfD one to test the water. Cloudz679 05:45, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

John_Augustus_Abayomi-Cole

FYI, the article John Abayomi-Cole is a redundant duplicate of a much better article: John_Augustus_Abayomi-Cole. I think the stub should be deleted, or redirected. I've reinstated the delete proposal. Let me know if you continue to have objections. --Salimfadhley (talk) 19:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Then it's pretty obvious that this should be redirected, not deleted. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:33, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

By the way, you just beat me to the redirect - I'd spotted this about 20 minutes ago, reformatted and copied across the one good reference (as the one thing worth merging) and then got caught twice in edit conflicts. PWilkinson (talk) 19:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Copypaste is not included in {{article issues}}

With respect to this edit you should be aware, for future reference, that copypaste is not included in article issues and needs to remain a separate tag. Dpmuk (talk) 05:40, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Jhenda redirect

Hello! If redirecting it to Zenda (Marathi film) is suitable than deletion as per the PROD i placed, its okay. But what do we do with Talk:Jhenda? §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 20:26, 17 April 2012 (UTC)