User talk:Deepfriedokra

welcome to my talk page!

Valentine Kornienko

Hi! you tagged article Valentine Kornienko with "Prod blp", but the subject of the article is clearly dead, so it isn't BLP. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And just marked the wp:bio s not living. Dead, like my brain. thanks. Dloh cierekim 23:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hakki Ögleman

Hi, Thanks for your welcome message on my Talk page. I have a couple of questions that I hope you can answer:

First: I think most of the tags (orphan; no inline cites; needs categorization) that were initially placed on the Hakki Ögleman page I created by Wikipedia editors have been addressed. Is there a way that I can now remove those tags?

Second: I notice that when I place inline cites that refer back to an earlier full citation, the new citations take on the footnote number of the old citation. So you might go through the article and after inline citation #6 you then see inline citation #2, which seems a bit disorienting. Is it supposed to look like that, or am I doing something wrong? I had expected the citation would be (in this example) #7, and then the actual citation would say Ibid. I guess this way is more economical though.

Thanks for your help.

TumayT (talk) 01:13, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@TumayT: U R welcome. Yes, if the issues are addressed it would probably be OK to remove the tags, though you might want to wait for another article reviewer to do that. Yes, the cite scheme is confusing at first, but economical. They put a lot of thought into the system, and it works much better than the works cited formatting I learned in school. Dloh cierekim 01:33, 19 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't ask for a redirect to a non-existant section in a mostly unrelated article

I asked for a deletion to make space. Simple enough. --Niemti (talk) 02:02, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps i did not see the edit summary for that. ~~Since there was no rationale~~ i did not see the ratioanle in the original CSD, I did not have enough info. My apologies. Dloh cierekim 02:03, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CocoaPods notability

Thanks for reaching out and doing the work you do! I have one question atm, which is regarding this tag:

Do I understand it correctly to mean that there should be more references to screencasts/blog posts/etc? And if they’re not created by me can I safely add them myself?

Eloy Durán (talk) 11:17, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Marie Ruoff Byrum

try to source

Your request for undeletion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Marie Ruoff Byrum. JohnCD (talk) 23:03, 23 December 2013 (UTC) JohnCD (talk) 23:03, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Message for saving the Hantu Laut article

Thank you Wikipedian for letting me create this article on a draft. You can reply me if you anything further to say.

Puma sajuk (talk) 20:03 23 December 2013 (UTC) @Puma sajuk: Very pleased to help. Happy editing. Dloh cierekim 03:13, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea Mendiola

I was looking for an appropriate CSD tag for this article when I saw the talk page. You apparently have seen this person before, I just had a laugh at it. It looks like she copied the references from Selena Gomez and pasted them into the references for her page. Pretty smart for a 10 year old girl. Bluefist^talk 00:34, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I just deleted this this afternoon. And look at all the accomplishments. Dloh cierekim 00:36, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking through your contributions to see when you would have seen her before, and found this. I find it funny that some 10 year old girl feels the need to be on wikipedia no matter what, even by breaking rules. This whole thing just gave me a good laugh. Bluefist^talk 00:38, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's her mom. I can't see a child coming up with the fake ref's so easily. Sad, really. But funny. If you saw the work page i made to keep track, you know how sad-funny this is. Dloh cierekim 00:42, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The interesting thing is that by the time I got her warned and an SSI report made out, another admin had deleted the last iteration and blocked her. Dloh cierekim 00:45, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Louis Joseph Posner, reliable sources, etc.

By way of further context, you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Lawline. What88 is a suspected sock. One of the similarities linking the two is that, when Lawline's efforts failed to steer Posner and related articles in a particular direction, he blanked them and undertook to have them deleted. JohnInDC (talk) 15:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@JohnInDC:I think he started Louis Joseph Posner, and it makes up the bulk of his edits. Then there is a related article that he has struggled to delete. He's is probably blockable 'cause of the earlier legal threat block. I reread the Louis thing and kept feeling like Louis is NN. But there have been other edits and it might pass an AfD, so there it is. Dloh cierekim 16:00, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You had been spending some time on this and I wanted to be sure you understood that things might not be exactly as they were being portrayed to you. We'll see how the chips fall - JohnInDC (talk) 16:10, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Dloh cierekim 16:14, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At this juncture, we need to focus on the AfD for the Posner article, rather than coming up with conspiracy theories. Thanks. User:What88 18:03, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]