User talk:Alexf

Wait! Are you here because your article was speedy deleted? Click here before leaving a message to find out why.

If you place a comment/question in my Talk page, I will respond here. If I placed a note in your Talk page I will be monitoring it for a short while so you can respond there. This helps keep the thread readable and in one place. Please create all new messages, at the bottom of the page. Follow procedure and always start a new section for a new message.

Cremagination Contracting

So Alex,

I looked at the reasons for Speedy deletion, Cremagination is a newly formed word that has already been trademarked and is in the copyright process. I want to know your expertise in business that you some how would delete my posting, but there is a page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_Records, who is obviously violating numerous infringement laws yet your site has published it? Doesn't quite make logical sense you will advertise and promote for a company who is clearing violating another company's rights yet my company is new innovative and is for the greater good of america? I think you may be zealous you are not the originator of Cremagination. It is too bad this is just Wikipedia as I would contest you on slander for violating my freedom of speech rights as I am the proper authority and owner of Cremagination Contracting so I control all rights to it. deleting my post only made your organization look bad as in a year time I know someone who has no rights in my company would be posting on my company! However, if my post is not changed I guess I want no affiliation to Wikipedia as someone of your stature deleted it in a matter of seconds?

DeShon Gray Managing Director DG Painting & Construction Cremagination Contracting — Preceding unsigned comment added by D2G05 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

@D2G05: Well, for one thing, it's not a good idea to ask about other pages of poorer quality existing yet yours was deleted. Also, it's a bad idea to create articles about your company, as it provides a conflict of interest. ZappaOMati 03:45, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

DeShon: Let's see, the article Cremagination Contracting was speedy deleted twice, once for not asserting notability, then soon after for being blatant advertisement. Your tone seems a little belligerent, but putting that aside for the moment, it seems to me you have not understood that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place for promotion. Have you read our basic rules? As an open encyclopedia than anyone can edit, you would agree that we need some rules, wouldn't you? At the very least, please understand that new articles have to meet the Golden Rule to be able to stay. Also note that pointing to similar articles doesn't work as each article must live on its own merits (but thanks for pointing the other one out, it has been since tagged for deletion). As for you mentioning your freedom of speech, it also seems you are confusing Wikipedia with the government. They are two different entities and Wikipedia does not have it the way you think it does. Have a nice day and feel free to ask questions. You may find the Tea House a good place to ask queastions. -- Alexf^(talk) 11:41, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh belligerent, is that so sir? You're the epitome of humor. It is an open encyclopedia? So you do not want to be one of the first to endorse the word Cremagination, it sounds like it was a bit too innovative for your tastes. I am sorry that cremagination was never created before, so who other to create the post about the word rather than its creator? It cannot even be bias when if you read the description of the company it is to help the likes of the people, by the people, I have a diverse and conglomerate of a staff I wonder how diverse backgrounds and demographics the administrator staff of Wikipedia is? I guess you guys just didn't like the message of the page. I do not need your site for promotion for I am sure it will be put in numerous dictionaries and other various informative writings. I am surprised at the lack of intuit from a person of your nature but then again where is your educational credibility. Obviously your site hosts companies who lack credibility and infringes upon others legal rights. I will stay up to date on anything that is recreated in the likes of Cremagination and if it is posted on this site I will have no choice but to seek legal action for like I said I am copyrighting cremagination, and your site will have to ask my permission to even have it on the site. Thank you for your lack of integrity and knowledge in the likes of newly created words for you kind sir are the people I have a distaste for. Ignorance however is bliss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D2G05 (talk • contribs) 05:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

You are always entitled to your opinion but please read Wikipedia:No legal threats so you understand that if you continue in that vein your account will be blocked. That being said, if you want to pursue some action, there is always Dispute Resolution. If you disagree with my actions or the admin community actions at large, you can always comment at the Admin Noticeboard. Have a good day and please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 10:30, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

want my article back

Vijay_Armstrong

Dear sir, i have created a page for Mr. Vijay Armstrong. Cinematographer. who works in Tamil Film Industry. India. And it is deleted. Here i am providing some Web links about him and his film Projects. (links removed. Not needed here but in article.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijayaragavan Lenin (talk • contribs) 19:41, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Userfied at User:Vijayaragavan Lenin/Vijay Armstrong. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 20:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

User:Mr. Anirban Sen Gupta and 'friends'

Thank God for you Alexf!!! :-) (for deleting the crap and blockin' the socks)
I had been chasing this 'editor' for hours and was just taking it to AN/I when I noticed that the pages linked to that picture had disappeared. They have also been mentioned at WP:COIN and SPI.

I was going to dump some more accounts here but I think (hope!) you've got them all. Small wonder editors get testy when €¥$t like this is going on! :-\

Thank you again! 220 of ^Borg 16:25, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

•   Please note that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Anirban Sengupta still exists, can I CSD an AFC page? 220 of ^Borg 16:55, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Deleted. Yes, you can CSD an AfC page if it warrants it. -- Alexf^(talk) 17:05, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you again, Alexf. Happy New Year! :-) 220 of ^Borg 17:20, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

NP. Didn't know the Borg assimilated gods too. Go figure. -- Alexf^(talk) 17:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Just saying thanks for picking up the G11s. Now normally I wouldn't have thrown down a G11 on something like User:MikkiTowns but it seemed to bear heavy resemblance to the style used by User:SuzanneTXC (and look what happened to her page)

You can see deleted pages right? Is there anything majorly different between SuzanneTXC and Mikkitowns? Just asking, not really criticising. MM (Report findings) ^{(Past espionage)} 16:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Could not/should not delete the page as it made a small reference to himself. No issues there. Just removed the spamlink and warned user. I looked at the Suzanne page and all I see is spam and that it was correctly deleted for being spammy as it was more spammy than this guy's. No major issues or anything in relation to this case. -- Alexf^(talk) 17:05, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I must have saw something else or I'm thinking of a different user to Suzanne. Eh. Thanks Al. MM (Report findings) ^{(Past espionage)} 01:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Airbus Group

Hello Alexf,

could you please delete the redircet Airbus Group. I need the page for a move because of this. Thank you in advance.--FAEP (talk) 17:02, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

 Done. All you needed was to tag it for Speedy Deletion. -- Alexf^(talk) 17:05, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I tagged it for speedy deletion, but sometimes it takes hours until sombody deletes the unused redircet, so again thanks!--FAEP (talk) 17:23, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

शोर ! SHOR TO BREAK THE SILENCE

Hi Alex,

• Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/SHOR

The content on shorlgbtq.com is own by us, it doesn't violate any copyright rules. There are plenty of LGBTQ orgs listed on wiki, I would like our page back. I will make the correct edits, but this is really disappointing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shorsocial (talk • contribs) 22:30, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

The site prominently and clearly states: "Copyright © www.shorlgbtq.com, 2013 All Rights Reserved", so indeed putting the text in WP is a copyvio. We take copyrights seriously in Wikipedia. You could make the text public domain, or you could follow the directions in Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. As it is, the article cannot be undeleted, because of said copyright violations. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 22:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

http://www.shorlgbtq.com/#!about1/c26q even though we have the copyright listed on the site, we also state on the story page you can use extracts as long as you quote the author and Shor, which is what we did. (ShorSocial) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shorsocial (talk • contribs) 13:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Not good enough. Copyright notice supersedes anything else. Please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials as indicated above, and please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 13:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I have commented on this at greater length at User talk:Shorsocial. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:28, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

That is a good and clear explanation. Thanks. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Query about speedy deletion of AfC page

Hello, Alexf. I see that you deleted Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jerry Abramov under speedy deletion criterion A7. However, that criterion, like all "A" criteria, applies only to articles, and this page was not (yet) an article. As you probably know, a very lengthy discussion on deletion of declined AfC submissions resulted in a consensus to delete only after six months, to allow time for improvement. Is there a good reason for making an exception in this case? JamesBWatson (talk) 12:53, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Good point. The article has been nominated for A7. I was doing many A13s G13s and this one slipped into the lot. Restored. Note that it is still in CSD. You may want to remove that. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I myself found it because, while I was looking at G13s (which must be what you meant by "A13") I found another A7 from the same editor, and then found this one in his editing history, so I can easily see how the mistake was made. I should like to apologise for the phrasing of my message above, which with hindsight I see as rather patronising to an admin of your experience. I have seen enough of your work to know that it isn't necessary to explain to you what the "A" means, or that G13 was created by consensus after a long discussion. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

NP. I did mean to type G13. Thanks. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:26, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

solo ad

This page was deleted and should not have been. I can try to rewrite it. I am trying not to make promo of anything. I am trying to stay neutral. Can't understand how not to be obvious in advertizing or not. I am tying to figure out how to get as neutral as I CAN without advertising anything. I don't know what you meant by SPAM. It was never meant to be. If there is anything else I can do, tell me what I can do and I will start a new one , but the link was meant to be an example, not an ad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmintuck (talk • contribs) 01:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

A link to a non-notable company that provides a non-notable service (you have not asserted notability per Wikipedia's requirements), is spam per Wikipedia's definition. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 01:30, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Assistance on deleted page - JetVision

Good day Alex (Alexf)

I need your assistance please, I have tried (in my humble way - with a computer and limited knowledge) to write a wiki page about our company - JetVision (JetVision Holdings - our domain is Jetvisionairways.com).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JetVision I tried and put in information without trying to make it look like an advert. Unfortuanatly a young gent from NZ made a school project also called Jet Vision (Note spelled not the same)and that cause some issues on google sometimes.

I write to you as I see you have deleted our page: I did see the code error on why, and please forgive me but im not sure what it all means?

I wanted to ask our IT guy after the feastive season to work on it a bit more and perhaps add a picture or two.

Alex can you please assist me on either guiding me to fix my mistake or please re-launch the site for us.

Kind Regards Attie van Deventer JetVision Holdings, CEO, Chairman — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.13.94.60 (talk) 19:12, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I looked at the original page again and I see why it was deleted. There were several reasons, including the blocking of the original account name. You see, the entry for JetVision Holdings did not provide any sourcing whatsoever. What is needed are independent, verifiable and reliable sources. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and it strives to show only notable subjects. The request for cites and sources is to independently assert notability, which in the case for companies is covered in "Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)". Then we have the issue of your conflict of interest here. As an encyclopedia we need to maintain neutrality. Being intimately involved with the company makes it hard to be neutral. Maybe you should read "Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide" for more understanding in this issue. Lastly the username you had, JetVision Pty Ltd, run blatantly afoul of the username rules. If the company is notable and you would like to pursue this, I would suggest you ask questions at the Tea House, where helpful volunteers are standing by for you, then do a draft and request it be reviewed at "Articles for Creation". Creating an article directly in mainspace (meaning immediately published publicly as you did before), will guarantee that if it does not comply with the Golden Rule, it will be deleted, usually in a manner of minutes. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes, and good luck. (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 19:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Request to Restore article Fewclick speedy deletion

Please allow me to write about Fewclick, it was speedy deleted because, I believe I save the article before completing the article thus having no information, I understand it, so please restore the article so I could write a complete article on it. I can assure it is about the website fewclick.in a web search engine.

Thank you

It must be you refer to the deleted article Fewclick (it would be nice if you had provided a redlink as requested at the top of this edit page so I do not have to search through thousands of deletions to find what you refer to).

That was an empty article with no content whatsoever, so there is nothing that can be restored. Please do not create empty articles in mainspace as they are deleted promptly (as you already saw). Always work on a new article in a sandbox off of your user page, then either move when ready or better yet, request it be reviewed at "Articles for Creation" to avoid being deleted outright if it does not comply with Wikipedia's requirements. If unsure of what those are, you can read "Your First Article" and make sure it passes the Golden Rule. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 14:08, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Conservatorio Superior de Música de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires "Astor Piazzolla"

Thanks for your intervention, Alex. The user has helpfully pointed out that the text was taken from their website. I've checked that, and it does appear to be a copyright violation of that site anyway Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:47, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

I hadn't checked. I will as I do speak the language. I mentioned it did not look like an A7 or G11 to me, but copyvio is another issue. In any case the message was to her and her tone. -- Alexf^(talk) 18:55, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Alexf, for your understanding and for noting the notability of the institution, as well as for your opinions stating that the "the article was not a G11 and probably not even an A7". The main problem with the article was that it was left as a stub and, when I tried to complete it today, I found out that it had been deleted under a wrong understanding of the real situation. Nelidarocca (talk) 19:39, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Not exactly -- as noted in your talk page (please let's continue the discussion there to keep it in one place), it was also a copyvio and would have been removed for that reason. As per the institution, I know the notability, but you have not shown it properly. For any article to stay (besides not being a copyvio of course) it must follow the Golden Rule. This one did not. If you are working on creating a new article which is not yet ready, please do not do it in mainspace as you did. That publishes it publicly and makes it immediately subject for deletion if warranted. Instead, work on it in a subpage or sandbox then publish, or better yet, request a review at Articles for Creation to avoid these issues. -- Alexf^(talk) 19:47, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

I want my article back

I created an article for my film which is to start production in March. The film has just been announced and is even untitled at the moment. Contents like plot, cast, crew is not to be revealed at the moment, as we haven't started filming, we do not have posters or trailers. I was just about add more details to the page when it was deleted. That was my first article on WikiPedia, ie., I am a beginner, But I am sure that I have met all the terms & conditions. I hope you understand and undelete my page which was titled 'Untitled Diyab Project (2014 film)'. Thanks.

Sorry but it did not meet the requirements for notability under Future films, incomplete films, and undistributed films. Please remember this is an encyclopedia, featuring notable subjects, not a place for promotion.. -- Alexf^(talk) 17:12, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

You deleted my article for violating A7 which clearly states "...This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works..." This is a creative work right? If it is any other rules that I violated, please let me know... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diyab.Official (talk • contribs) 17:24, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, for one your username is in violation of the username rules. The article was about a non-notable subject. If you request a change of username and it is granted (please understand you do have a serious conflict of interest here), and you ask for it, I could userfy it for you to work on it outside of mainspace until notability is asserted. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 17:34, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Sigh...

Sorry about the User:Til Eulenspiegel stuff. I've already said that I won't respond to him/her again, I shouldn't have replied the first time. He/she bears a grudge against me from a long way back, and won't see anything wrong in the threats and gross incivility to both of us from User:Nelidarocca. Just there to make mischief really, unfortunate that you've been sucked in. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Um, you do know that when you link my name, I can see what you wrote about me, right? What exactly are you hoping to accomplish here? Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 18:08, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

That is ok. I have no problem with it. As I said before: Til, please do not hijack her user talk page. Discuss it with Jim, and if you have a problem with him, bring it to the proper board for external review, not in her talk page. -- Alexf^(talk) 18:11, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Alexf, I appreciate your latest posts. and I just replied again on my talk page: please, be sure to check it, since I dedicated some words to you and Til Eulenspiegel. And thanks again, to you and to Til Eulenspiegel as well, for having stated your objective and fair points of view: that is really professional and makes me again believe in Wikipedia. Nelidarocca (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Alex, I think it's best if I leave this one to you now. When I'm asked to apologise to someone who has accused me of ignorance, bias and shameful behaviour, and threatened to report me to the "authorities", I think it's time to walk away before I say something I might regret. Nelidarocca and Til Eulenspiegel both think it's all my fault, so it should give you a clearer run. Thanks, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:26, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I see your point. NP. -- Alexf^(talk) 12:57, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

This arbitrary deletion saga is just one tree in a forest of arbitrary deletions with nearly daily complaints raised by new users in the "third world" all against the same one sysop, so that's the real elephant in the room here. The time tested solution to arbitrary abuse by those entrusted to responsibility, is to tighten the guidelines for everyone so they cannot be so arbitrary (aside from getting rid of bad apples who abuse their responsibility). Arbitrariness is what allows one so entrusted, to reward those he perceives as his "friends" and punish those he perceives as "enemies". Tighter guidelines keep a lid on arbitrariness by forcing everyone to be considered the same. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 13:18, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

If you have that opinion (and I have not followed your edits so I do not know if you have discussed this before), please let me remind you that this is not the proper place. Please open up a case in the proper admin boards and make your voice heard. Here we discuss edits I make, not general policy or comments on how to change it. There are places for that. Thank you. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:24, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I totally agree with Til Eulenspiegel, about what he lucidly described as an "arbitrary deletion saga". It is clear to me that any constant abuse of authority, as well as proved acts of cronyism committed by a clearly identified sysop must be brought to justice: otherwise, this will continue to happen, harming the reliability of Wikipedia itself. Nelidarocca (talk) 13:55, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

You keep talking about "bringing to justice". This gives the impression that you are talking about legal issues. That is not how Wikipedia works. I disagree with your perceptions. If you have an issue with an admin, this is not the place to bring it to. Please go to Dispute Resolution or to the Administration Noticeboard. The case is closed here. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

You've been whacked with a wet trout!

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

For adding an A7-person tag to Imam zadeh Hadi. That article is about a building and not a person. Sure, the grammar is improper but look at the pictures silly! --MrScorch6200 (t c) 01:35, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Ok. So fix it. -- Alexf^(talk) 01:53, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

I removed the tag already and FYI there is no such policy as "SOFIXIT" anymore; it is just a redirect to WP:BOLD. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:02, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Bold is what I meant. Imam is a priest. So it is a building named for one in this case. Hard to even understand what he's talking about. -- Alexf^(talk) 02:08, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems like a two-in-one article. --MrScorch6200 (t c) 02:25, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I just proposed it for deletion. --MrScorch6200

Advice on reproducing texts

Alexf, Since you helped me in the past regarding similar matters, I would appreciate now your advice about some aspects related to future articles I would like to write. How about texts marked as: "All rights reserved. The texts [...] can be reproduced [...] free of charge with the following credits: Reproduced by [...] permission of"? How should I properly reproduce them according to Wikipedia's regulations? What should indicate in my articles in those cases? Thanks in advance for your answer Nelidarocca (talk) 14:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

To be able to use text on Wikipedia, you need to have the rights to give it away and you cannot use copyrighted text. Remember that when you add text to an article, "you irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL," per the notice below the edit box. That means that anybody else can use the text for any purpose whatsoever, including commercial re-use of the text. Accordingly, make sure you have that level of rights over the text and intend to do that before donating the text. Please read about Donating copyrighted materials, and you can always ask the experts at: Media copyright questions. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:30, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Alexf, Thank you for your kind advice on the subject! I really appreciate it! Nelidarocca (talk) 15:13, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

List of didgeridoo players.

Hi Alex, thanks to inform me about my mistake. I think is a good idea to extend the list of international didgeridoo players all over the world and in my case, from Italy. The didgeridoo player i put in the list are all professional player whose work deserves to be considered, at least as a the name. I know that they haven't an internal link but if we dont start to extend this list there will never be any internal link, dont u think. in any case, have good job in wiki!

Gianni — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gianni placido (talk • contribs) 00:03, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Every entry must have an article written asserting notability. Just because they are professionals does not mean they are notable. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 00:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm concerned

Hi Alexf,

I'm concerned about some of your recent username blocks, such as blocking editors for username concerns who have never edited, or users with names that are only questionably in violation who have only edited in good faith.

Please keep in mind that the WP:USERNAME policy still reads 'Users who adopt such usernames, but who are not editing problematically in related articles, should not be blocked. Instead, they should be gently encouraged to change their username.'

Thank you, –xeno^talk 00:03, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

All are company or group names, denoting a role or shared account. Most I find through CAT:UAA which I patrol often and try to keep from growing too large and unmanageable, giving them a minimum of 5-7 days to respond or go to CHU, and in many cases much longer, until they can be removed from the category, either by blocking if a group or company name, or by removing the category if not a vio. Indeed, some have not edited. Are you suggesting we let them stay in the category page for months and months, let it grow to dozens of pages and become unmanageable as many other project categories? What do we do then? Of course, we could always use more eyes and more help there. -- Alexf^(talk) 01:34, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm suggesting that if they've never even edited, they should not have been put in the category or reported in the first place. It's unfortunate that people still don't see the forest for the trees. –xeno^talk 13:58, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I see your point. What happens is editors issue the standard warning about COI username. This has the category embedded so it is put there for following up. I do follow up and try wait a reasonable period of time for the to respond or go to CHU. Obviously, some of them have never edited and many never do at all. So they stay in the category page, clogging it, forever. I remove from the category when the name is marginal or a non-vio (e.g. joe at company). If we remove them when the name does suggest shared use, then we lose track of them even when they edit afterwards, and have to rely on future sharp-eyed editors. So be it. will be more lax/careful in the future. Thanks for your comments. -- Alexf^(talk) 14:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your consideration. Reminding good faith users that they should not patrol the user creation log and report users who have never edited would be good as well. –xeno^talk 14:08, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Nick-D, Zawed and Hawkeye7 look at recent releases

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:48, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

G10 deletion

Was People's Republic of Zhongtai really an attack page? It was only a biography in a loose sense, and neither overly negative or unsourced, at least when I looked at it. It seemed to be describing a trivial, non-notable event but that's not grounds for speedly deletion.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 14:07, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Reviewed. You are correct. Too hasty. Restored. Thanks for the HU. -- Alexf^(talk) 14:12, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Update: I went in further (I should have done it to begin with - self trout). Undid AfD closure and contacted editor. -- Alexf^(talk) 14:20, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Virgin Experience Days

Hi, I think you put a stop on the Virgin Experience Days page because we edited it with too much of an advertising slant? Sorry about that, I'm new to wiki and was just trying to update the page. What can I do now to get the page back and try again, with a more factual bias? Thanks, Jo (JoGillow (talk) 14:28, 16 January 2014 (UTC))

People's Republic of Zhongtai

Hi again, I'm still worried about this article and since I see below that you're going to be absent for a few days, I've posted a note on the BLP noticeboard to get another opinion, hope you don't mind. --Randykitty (talk) 12:39, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't mind. I went to the AfD and made my voice heard. Thanks. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Installaudio

I took the rare step of unblocking this user without consulting you about first since a review of his brief editing history found no evidence that he had been trying to promote any concern by that name, hence there was no reason for a username-based block. Indeed, I think he wants to edit about audio technology. We should give him the chance. And I apologize for not consulting you. Daniel Case (talk) 15:05, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

NP. I would probably not have been able to respond promptly anyway so you did fine. I see your reasoning. I have been out of WP for the last few days and will be for a few more due to work schedules. -- Alexf^(talk) 02:22, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Aviation Times

Hello Alex,

I would kindly like to ask how to successfully publish the article on Aviation Times ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Aviation_Times ). Since 3rd party references on it's author have been posted to prove the person is a professional on the subject. Please advise on how to successully publish it, thank you sir.

Peter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peto.figi (talk • contribs) 14:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

I am not an article reviewer/publisher. That is what a dedicated staff of volunteers work the beat at AfC. I noticed the article you mentioned: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Aviation Times was declined three times. I also noticed that you removed the decline notices. That is considered vandalism and was reverted. If you want an article published, then you have to follow the rules. Unless it complies with the Golden Rule, the article will not be published. Also, if you are associated with the blocked User:Aviation Times, you should declare your conflict of interest up front. Please remember to read the notices (especially the one at the top of this edit page, namely #3 and #5) and post any new section in Talk at the bottom, and sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 14:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't realize I deleted that, I thought I would publish it as a unrelated user, but it was already created - it's not really easy to grasp how wiki creation works, sorry for that, didn't mean to vandalize. I think I understand how I'm suppossed to post proof now, I posted it in the references everytime, when I was suppossed to post it to talk too? Okay, thank you, Alex, again, I'm trying to grasp the concept of how this all works. Peto.figi (talk) 07:24, 21 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peto.figi (talk • contribs) 07:21, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/List of German painters

Template:Editnotices/Page/List of German painters has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. John of Reading (talk) 19:38, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

The return of the Bradford IP on Sega Genesis

Hi there.

It seems pretty quack quack obvious that this IP (77.97.151.145) is the same as the previous IP disrupting the page [1] - not counting the editing style, he geolocates to Bradford as the previous one did. Is this grounds for a block based on socking, disruption, or both? Chaheel Riens (talk) 13:44, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

May be. If you have a case, please report it at AIV, and of course also warn them properly. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Delete Article

Hi Alex I am new in Wikipedia, just write an article and you delete it. Link : A.I Watch

I am the owner and creator of A.I Watch and all the words that was write only by me. I see the link that you find and they are some similar words in this article because every website copy paste our explanation and specifications about our smartwatch from our website and the Crowdfunding platform where we present this project.

Also I have a another question how I can add pictures in the right side of the article example : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timex_Datalink

Please keep me inform asap how I can go further and make the A.I Watch article appear.

Thanks

Best Regards Damien Douk General Manager A.I Watch — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damiendouk (talk • contribs) 17:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

You should not be writing articles on subjects you have a conflict of interest on. The article was basically a copy of a web-page. We take copyright very seriously in Wikipedia. It read like an advertisement which is forbidden, and it had no independent reliable sources to assert notability. For the image question, you could read our Help files but we prefer to have the images uploaded to Wikipedia Commons so they can be used across projects. Note I removed your email address from the message. Not only we prefer all interaction and discussions in Talk Pages instead of private email, but it is a bad idea to put email addresses in open websites, unless you like to receive unwanted spam from address collectors in the Internet.

Holy Ghost (album)

Hi. I've declined your speedy as Marc Ford does have an article. I make no comment on the notability or lack thereof of the album... Peridon (talk) 15:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

G13 feeding

As it's been complained about, HasteurBot is going back to the standard plodding rate that it's always been at. Thank you for taking proactive action in working this backlog. Hasteur (talk) 19:42, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

@Hasteur: IMO you are doing a good job, even it sometimes comes too fast. Tough to keep up but I try in my lulls at work. -- Alexf^(talk) 19:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Un-deletion of Mr. Lucci

Today a person flagged Mr. Lucci wiki page ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Lucci ) I couldn't find your "red" you asked it to be marked with. Mr. Lucci was deleted for advertisment and or promo. I read your guidelines and none of the phrase words were used nor was any of the information hear say as I linked verifiable facts where citing was needed or recommended and by creditable sourses such as Billboard, Amazon, Allmusic etc. The error I did make was editing the film part this morning as I recieved a call that I mispelled a name and gave the wrong summary and that I would have the correct info within the hour, so I put TBA and in the notes stated I edited section until correct info was obtained. 20 min later I'm tagged and 30 min after that deleted. I can change or remove the film section if that will satisfy the complaint which resulted in the entire page being deleted. Kindest Regards - Candace --CandaceCollinsConnect (talk) 01:29, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't clearly understand your comments. What do you mean you couldn't find "my red"? Do you mean a redlink pointing to this article: Mr. Lucci? The article was deleted for being promotional (G11) as you were informed. It had a very short bio of Mr. Lucci (totally unreferenced) and then proceeded to list all of his recordings, and gave the method of contact advertising his website, twitter account, etc. Even after removing all the promo material, then it would have been tagged (and deleted) for not asserting notability. Please understand that it has to meet the notability requirements under WP:MUSIC, which it did not. -- Alexf^(talk) 01:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

It was refrenced obviously not enough but the page was a day old, on the social media twitter sound cloud, I did that on Lil' Wil and Dorrough page bc I thought it was needed to verify the famous per on, error on my part. The bio wasn't short, it was his early life and then the albums below with information pertaining to his life and the awards that album made. Can I request a copy of my page then please, if your not going to un delete it?--CandaceCollinsConnect (talk) 06:01, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

@CandaceCollinsConnect:It has been copied to a sandbox for you to work on at: User:CandaceCollinsConnect/Mr. Lucci. Understand that in order for an article to stay (besides not being promotional and being written in a neutral tone), it must comply with the Golden Rule. Good luck. -- Alexf^(talk) 12:11, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

@Alexf Thank you--CandaceCollinsConnect (talk) 22:48, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Joyism

Although I do have followers of this religion, I accept that I will need a more encyclopedic article, along with a larger audience on top of what I have, of the religion. I request that you keep the article up for the next twenty-four hours, as I have put an effort into the article and would like to migrate the information to another domain. If you are not willing to keep my article of my religion up permanently, please consider my request so that I may spread Joyism by other means. Thank you for your consideration and may you keep happiness with you. Here is the requested link. TheGreatEli (talk) 04:04, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry but Wikipedia is not for things you made up. Get it mainstream like all the other religions, get sources, then try again. -- Alexf^(talk) 10:35, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

How is a new company supposed to be represented in Wikipedia?

Alex, Hello and thank you for taking the time to keep Wikipedia up to date.

I started a new page for my new company but it was deleted: [[2]]

How is a new company supposed to be represented in Wikipedia?

How is the Smartificial Intelligence page, that was deleted, different from any other Wikipedia company page like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Chemistry

What needs to be changed/updated so that it will not be deleted? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garyramah (talk • contribs) 17:44, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Any article has to follow the Golden Rule if it is to stay. Obviously if it is new, it may not be notable yet. Also understand that because is not a valid reason for deletion discussions. If you believe the article you mention does not assert notability as you are implying here, just nominate it for deletion using one of the methods available to you. Please remember to read the instructions at the top of this edit page and as it says there, start a new section for any new subject and sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 18:42, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Delete Article about the Searchmachine Metager

good day, you delete my article about the meta search machine Metager. I can not understand why, please give me a short feedback. Metager is a german hosted meta search machine and i was wondering that there is no article about the english one here on wiki. so i started a new article. Greetings Bluimlilac (talk) 15:23, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

The notice left in your Talk page by the nominating editor explained it clearly, and told you what to do about it. To summarize it again, the article did not assert notability. Every article must follow the Golden Rule. This one did not. It had no independent sources. -- Alexf^(talk) 15:29, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to add sources for notability to the Destination DIY entry

Hi!

You recently deleted the entry for Destination DIY because there was not enough information indicating its significance. I did not create that entry, but I have listened to the show and believe it is significant. The show has received coverage as a notable radio show by media outlets The Oregonian, Oregon Public Broadcasting, Portland Monthly magazine, and Sustainable Business Oregon. Sunset magazine named the creator of the show, Julie Sabatier, as the "DIY Queen" of Portland.

I am new to editing Wikipedia, so I'm not sure if this is the correct process to getting an entry un-deleted. If there is someone else I should be contacting, please let me know. --Sarahmirk (talk) 05:40, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Sarah, there is really nothing to restore as it only had one short sentence as follows:

"Destination DIY is an independently produced public radio show and podcast which features stories about all kinds of creativity."

That was it, with no encyclopaedic information and no sources. If you want you would have to start the article from scratch. Good luck. -- Alexf^(talk) 12:35, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Ah! Thanks for the info. I will get started on making a better entry for it. Sarahmirk (talk) 15:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit of User:Elijah Black Johnson Watson

Hello. I understand that the user above was blocked. However, he has made an edit to his talk page after the block, and the contents of the edit was unrelated to the block and was not an unblock request. Since I don't know what actions to take, I'm posting here. Thanks. KJ ^{click here} 17:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Page blocked. Usual avenue is to request at ANI unless it is serious vandalism, then atAIV. -- Alexf^(talk) 17:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I help you

Sir, Alex sir iam created for a new article page cinema gallery and Newly a started for a License in declairation is please helping alex sir. it is a newly started from a cinema gallery article page not unlawfull in using to english wikipedia.please helping sir i wanted to a newly created for a cinema gallery.sir please unblocked request accepted here this page.it was created in developing this page and after a better for this page on respectivly usefullness on english wikipedia.i wanted to me for alexf sir helpfullness.--Malayalamcinema (talk) 17:57, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Malayalamcinema,11:25,04.February.2014.

I barely understand what you are talking about. You have not added the name and link to a page as requested. Looking at your signature and your name I see you have created a talk page with no article. Please do not do that. If you are unsure on how to create an article, please read "Your First Article". If you are not comfortable writing in English, then the English Wikipedia may not be for you. We have many other Wikipedias in many languages (Malayalam maybe?). As for writing pages that are acceptable and allowed to stay, make sure the subject and the article comply with the Golden Rule. Good luck. -- Alexf^(talk) 18:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I didn't get clear why did you delete the page that i have created ?

Hi Alex,

I hope that you are doing well.

I am working in "Sheikh Hamdan Bin Rashid Al Maktoum Award for Medical Sciences" and "Hamdan Medical journal" is a part of it, that's why i have created a page in wikipedia for it :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamdan_Medical_journal

Today, we have discovered that you have deleted the page, and honestly we don't know why ? shall we add a link/icon on the website "hamdanjournal.org" leads to that page at wikipedia? or how can we correct the "Unambiguous copyright infringement" which you have mentioned, for ex. shall we edit the paragraphs?

I will be waiting for your reply ASAP.

Best Regards, Amir Amin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.110.254.152 (talk) 06:01, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Amir, you cannot copy anything verbatim from that site as it clearly states all text is: "© Copyright 2012 - 2013 HMJ - HAMDAN Medical Journal. All Rights Reserved".

We take copyrights seriously in Wikipedia. You could re-write the page not copying from the site. Also you say "we have discovered...". I take this to assume that you work for the organization. In that case you have a conflict of interest. Maybe you should read the simpler: Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide which gets the point across and explains what it is and what to do. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 12:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

War Room Inc speedy deletion

Hello there,

I am sending you a message because you speedy deleted my page I have been trying to write about "War Room Inc" for a week now. It is unfair for two reasons : first no one is "following the case" and your are the third person that deleted my article, and then when I make modifications to apply again willing to stick to the wiki policies, I am still under the tag for deletion and the person that blocked me is not taking into account my modifications. They are gaining notoriety here in Vancouver, they do an outstanding work and I don't understand why they could not have an Short Wiki article about them.

Please do something about it, and thank you for your time,

sincerely

--Charles MayhemBC1 (talk) 17:50, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Let's see: Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#war_room_inc gets declined because the article was denied as spam. A user by the name of War Room Inc was blocked for violating the username rules (spam again). As per the article (in mainspace): War room inc, it was speedy deleted twice under the deletion reasons A7 (notability not asserted) and G11 (promotional). Obviously there is an issue with this article and you do not seem to understand it. Maybe you should read the rules so you are clear on what is acceptable and what isn't. The main guiding principles are explained in the "Five pillars'. Every article to be able to stay, besides being written in a neutral tone, must follow the Golden Rule.

"... They are gaining notoriety here in Vancouver..." is not a reason to have an article. We do not go for trending or "gaining notoriety" but for "being notable" as defined in Notability (organizations and companies).

I do not understand the meaning or importance of as you say: "following the case", which in is immaterial. As editors, we all must follow the rules, as Admins, all we do is enforce the rules. As an open encyclopaedia, you must agree that some rules are needed. Granted, they may seem daunting to a beginner. That is why there are places like the Teahouse where you can ask questions and get guidance.

On another issue, why are you editing with multiple accounts such as User:Charles Mayhem and User:Charles MayhemBC1? Are you familiar with the issue of Sock puppetry? this is a very important no-no in Wikipedia, that could get your account blocked. Please explain. -- Alexf^(talk) 18:56, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

User:RomanStocker

Hi Alex. Since it seems extremely likely that this user is Prof. Roman Stocker, I've lifted the username block - I've also left him a note suggesting he avoids adding links to his own webpages himself. This is just a courtesy note to let you know. All the best, Yunshui 雲‍水 14:44, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

OK. -- Alexf^(talk) 15:00, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Kita-Kon

I was not finished editing, and was waiting for my account to age a few days so I could add pictures and proper references.

I need this page back to finish it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TJ Destiny (talk • contribs) 18:34, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Kita-Kon was deleted because it lacked soources to assert notability. I see you have been working on this in somebody else's sandbox at User:Ulatron84/Kita-Kon. Maybe you can make sure it complies with the Golden Rule while in there, before publishing to mainspace where it will get deleted. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 18:54, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting!

Thank you for helping out with deleting a page in preparation of a move. Have a kitten! Nitrolinken (talk) 13:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Addendum: I'm not sure why my wikilove was deleted; I wanted to express my thanks for helping out with G6 deletion. In any case, should you see this again: my thanks were most certainly sincere. Nitrolinken (talk) 11:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Not meant to delete but to restore previous removal of content. Yours went with the bath water by mistake. Cheers! - Alexf^(talk) 11:49, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

What happened to the Pon page?

Put it back. --StupidFeminist1999 (talk) 05:35, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

It was speedy deleted for lack of assertion of notability. It had no reliable sources listed. If you want I can userfy it but be aware that for an article to stay it need to pass the Golden Rule. --Alexf^(talk) 11:38, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for blocking the user named "Shittyencyclopedia"! WikiPolice66 (talk) 22:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Alexf^(talk) 23:10, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Revdel needed?

I don't think this person really wants their pay stub receipts here. Could be wrong, but I think revdel might be appropriate. Thanks. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 15:18, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Done. -- Alexf^(talk) 15:54, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

An lolcat for you!

WikiPolice66 (talk) haz givn u Lolcat! Lolcatz promot teh WikiLovez and hoapfully thiz one tuk away ur sadz. Spredd teh WikiLovez by givin sumone else Lolcat, or if tey hav one, give a cheezburgr for teh Lolcat 2 snak on!

Spredd teh goudnez of Lolcats to all cheezburgr buddiez by addin {{subst:Lolcat}} to their talk paj wit frendli messuj to all!

u suck

Why did you block me!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.15.50.149 (talk) 14:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

You are incorrect. I did not block you as you are an IP Address, not a person and that IP address has never been blocked. Now, if you are talking abut a user account and asking why was it blocked, I could answer if you had told me which account you are talking about. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 15:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Removal of tags

This is vandalism? You surely have better templates to use. I won't revert for the time being, but do take care to read this and explain yourself, which you didn't (you reverted via Rollback). GotR ^Talk 14:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Wholesale removing of sock tags in multiple user accounts within the space of minutes looks suspiciously like vandalism. You want to discuss it first, then stop doing it and open a case at ANI. -- Alexf^(talk) 14:44, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

They are my accounts, and it was established that none of them were used to disruptive ends. >"looks suspiciously like vandalism. You want to discuss it first, then stop doing it and open a case at ANI"< If it does not meet the strict definition of WP:VAND, it isn't. ANI is not the most efficient route, so please direct me elsewhere.

FYI, contacting him via User Talk may be futile, given it has set the Wikibreak enforcer to New Year's Day 2015. GotR ^Talk 14:49, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Please don't delete the Bubzbeauty page! She is notable enough to be on Wikipedia and my article has proper sources!!! Kewtea (talk) 20:27, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Anestasia Vodka

Hey Alexf,

I was just put in charge of reformatting and editing the Anestasia Vodka wikipedia page which was taken down in December. Would you consider removing the block after reviewing a new version? The last person didn't really have the proper information. I'm new to Wikipedia, but i'd like to help get my family's company a proper working wikipedia page. Any help or advice you can offer would also be greatly appreciated. I'm reading through "Your First Article" now as well. --Kelay28 (talk) 13:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)kelay28

You have a conflict of interest. Please read the linked page to understand what this means. Also read the policy on neutrality and paid editing. If you only read one page of these, then I would point you to the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide page as the most concise to explain the issues involved. -- Alexf^(talk) 22:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Unblock request of Pudkinbooks

Hello Alexf. Pudkinbooks (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, 166.137.240.51 (talk) 11:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

What you have done there is considered vandalism. Please do not change template text. Doing it again will lead to an IP block. -- Alexf^(talk) 12:23, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Heather Taves

Please see this request at WP:RFUD concerning Heather Taves. Per WP:CHANCE, I have requested undeletion of the article, which was clearly not "nonsense, advertising, slander, or a copyvio," so I maintain should not have been tagged A7 and deleted, at least not nearly as speedily as it was. Improvements were clearly being made to the article (including by me) in the hour just preceding its deletion. The accomplishments of the subject certainly suggest notability, and references (such as this) should be easily found and applied to the article to make it encyclopedic. Dwpaul ^Talk 22:41, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Article had no sources whatsoever. If you are going to work on a new article and leave it in mainspace this way, you have to expect it will not be accepted. You should work it in a sandbox instead. Article has been userfied at User:Dwpaul/Heather Taves. Good luck. -- Alexf^(talk) 23:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

I was not the creator of the article. I was another editor trying to improve it, and was making rapid progress when it was (very) speedily deleted. I have nom'd many an article for speedy del myself, but I do encourage you to consider WP:CHANCE and WP:DEMOLISH before executing on them. Thanks for the userfy, though as I said, it was not "my" article. (Guess it is now.) Dwpaul ^Talk 23:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new Featured and A-Class content Book reviews: Rabaul in World War II and Australia in World War I

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:55, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Please review

Dear Alex,

Could you please check the following article ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Hamdan_Medical_journal

You have deleted it before, and i have reviewed and followed the rules that you have mentioned.

Best Regards, Amir Amin Alyaffei (talk) 06:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry but I am not a reviewer (no time). I see your latest attempt has been rejected. It is the same as before. Unless you assert notability it won't be accepted. -- Alexf^(talk) 11:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Crocodile in Water, Tiger on Land

Hi Alex, I am new to Wikipedia, so apologies in advance if my formatting etc. are incorrect. I wanted to know about Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Crocodile in Water, Tiger on Land I saw a cached version of the article, and the information in it are correct and verifiable as far as i can tell, being a longtime follower of this webcomic. I see there is a G13 on this, which I have learnt signifies an abandoned article where the author did not make changes required by the editorial team. Is it possible for you tell me what the editorial requirements were so that I can try and contribute and fill in the gaps to the best of my abilities? Crocodile in water, tiger on land is an important cultural chronicle of Indian society today, and as a reader I feel it deserves a Wikipedia page. Of course, you and the editorial team remain the best judge for that. Thank you very much, TGWW Theghoshwhowalks (talk) 16:55, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

I do not understand why you are consulting a cached version when the article request is fully visible (check the link above). The reviewer declined it due to lack of assertion of notability and he clearly explained why (with links to follow). You say the information you saw is correct and verifiable. It may well be but it is not shown in the article. Unless an article passes the Golden Rule it cannot stay If you want to try again, go ahead. Work it out in a subpage of your user page and when you think it meets the requirements submit it to Articles for Creation. -- Alexf^(talk) 11:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Philippine Syndicate

Hi Alex, This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Ducalburl (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2014 (UTC)the Philippine syndicate comprise the whole Philippine underworld in general,it does not constitute one single organization in the style of the italian mafia but rather a collection of criminal groups popularly known as the Sindikato,it more like the camora operating independently from each other but they do cooperate in bigger oprations and thier territories overlap,like the mafia they have their own bosses known as Ninong[1],talk to the common people in the street and you'll hear whisper of their name the Sindikatos,this is not a mythical crime group but an every day reality in the Philippine underworld lastly i did not create this page im only contributing to it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ducalburl (talk • contribs) 17:22, 23 February 2014 (UTC) why you want to delete this page it is an expose of the Philippine

underworld dont hide the dirty truth about the crime empire corrupting the Philippines please don't delete this informative article i suggest you improve on it not delete it you'll be doing a great injustice to the Filipino people if you delete this expose article

yes it will be unjust to delete this article,you will be covering up a powerful crime underworld in the Philippines this sindikatos are very active and are operating in THE open but is not expose so they are very bold especially the akyat bahay groups to delete this article is to deny their very existence we want justice and i want the SINDIKATO EXPOSED PLEASE DO JUSTICE BY LEAVING THIS ARTICLE AS IT IS — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitestango92,619 (talk • contribs) 20:09, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Tomlara219 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 23 February 2014 (UTC) the sindikatos is certainly true its not a figment of the imagination i enjoyed reading this article pity if it get deleted i can attest to the existence of this organization

please dont delete this informative page it is true i have a family member who is a member of the estribo gang they have bosses being called sindikato — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.210.117.206 (talk) 20:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

i dont know who malusia22 is im not a sock puppet please don't malign me please present evidence properly before accusing someone of sock puppetry repeat i have no connection to this sock puppeteer i want justice i created this article as an investigative work,not to suck puppet good day sir — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atariraoul (talk • contribs) 20:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

ive read the article and i could say i was surprise to find out that a large mafia like organization existed in my country,but this gangs do exist and i know the sindikato is real but didnt know it is in type of yakuza type organization,im glad some one is exposing this secretive criminal association,i hope this article is not arbitrarily deleted i can contribute to this article by finding references on those gangs listed in the sindikato groups i know some of them do operate especially the akyat bahay gang and the dura boys please give this article a chance so that the people will be inform about this dangerous criminal groups in thier midst thats are sowing criminality and lawlessness in the street — Preceding unsigned comment added by Usurpbrawl (talk • contribs) 12:33, 24 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.210.117.206 (talk)

I think you guys have me confused. Having not linked the article (even though it is requested and required), I assume you are talking about this article: Philippine Syndicate. If that is the case, you may have noticed it I deleted it on Feb 21 as G6 to make room for a rename. It was subsequently deleted as G5 by User:Kusma. Please take the issue with him, and after that, it you do not agree with his response, you can take it to Deletion Review. Please be advised that in that case you will have to make better arguments than you have done here. Wanting to show "the dirty truth" and "wanting to have them exposed" are not sufficient reasons to be in an encyclopedia. Notability is. -- Alexf^(talk) 15:35, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just a bit of follow-up, but these are all obvious sockpuppets of User:Malusia22. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Diao Aiqing dismemberment

Hey there,

Saw that Diao Aiqing dismemberment was speedily deleted. It looks like the material has been recreated at 1996 Nanjing dismemberment; I wasn't sure if this should be guides for speedy tagging that page as well, so wanted to get your opinion. Regards. PaintedCarpet (talk) 15:55, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

It is totally unsourced, so you should tag it. -- Alexf^(talk) 16:25, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

CineFunTV Page

Hi Alefx, Hope you are well. One of my colleague wrote an article on CineFunTV but it was deleted because it was suspected as an advertisement. I believe it was more of my colleague's unawareness of Wikipedia and its rules.

Do you mind if we edit the content and post it on Wikipedi for your review and approval? Should you think it still has objectionable content then please do let us know because we do not intend to do any advertisement on Wikipedia but would like to share the success story.

-- Regards Amit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitsrathore (talk • contribs) 00:01, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I am not a reviewer. Read Your First Article to understand what we are looking for, then post it at AfC for review. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 01:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

IN reply to your email

Hi Alexf,

IM a little confused, all I want to do is add a page on Surface Jet Pumps. I wasn't putting the name in a promotional way but that is the company I work for name and I want to add information about our product? I have no idea how im supposed to do this so am just looking for help, it really isn't very clear anywhere on this site, who I can contact or who can help me add to WikiCaltecLtd (talk) 13:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

There was no email. I do not know where you get that from. What you do have is a notice in your user talk page recommending you request a change of username as the current one violates the username rules as it denotes a company or organization. As per writing about your company or your employer, please read the Conflict of Interest Guidelines. As per getting help, besides the nice and thorough (i.e. full of links to follow) welcome notice in your user talk page, you can always ask at The Teahouse. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:11, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

WANT MY ARTICLE BACK

That article deserves to stay. Tasha Tah has over 2 million views on youtube and she is currently on the UK Asian Urban Charts. I strongly delieve that you have made a mistake — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roxy241 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

No need to shout. Yes, need to link to the article in question as requested. I searched and found Tasha Tah which I believe is the one you are referring to (please understand I process hundreds of articles a day). If that is the case, it is not your article but Wikipedia's. The article was a BLP with no sources whatsoever. You are claiming she has some kind of notability (YouTube is not a reliable source), so you would have to produce independent verifiable sources for that. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 19:00, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I am using reliable sources and yes I will fix it up and she is a valid person/celebrity to do a page on. Please can I have my Article backRoxy241 (talk) 15:40, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Article was userfied at User:Roxy241/Tasha Tah. Do not re-post as-is, and until it complies with the Golden Rule, else it will be deleted again. Good luck. -- Alexf^(talk) 17:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Question

I reported a vandal editor, and have reverted him twice so far in the last half hour. He did it again. Is there a 3RR regarding rv of serial vandalism for a 3RR article, or is 3RR waived when dealing with what I judge to be serial vandalism? Thanks, Quis separabit? 19:26, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, User:Diannaa denied the block request as a matter of content dispute not vandalism. So unless you have any other advice, I guess you can disregard this message. Quis separabit? 21:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

I was out the rest of the day. I do not know the details, but if it is a content dispute, then she is correct. -- Alexf^(talk) 23:44, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Of course she knows best as an admin I guess. However, back to my question. As per [3], the editor reverted to his version twice despite being told by other editors what he was doing wrong. So, is this a case where if it should recur, another revert would trigger 3RR? Thanks. Quis separabit? 00:22, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that would be 3RR. Appropriate for AIV IMO. -- Alexf^(talk) 00:39, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Quis separabit? 01:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Anonymous Philippines

we the hackers of anonymous Philippines has been inform by one of our members that you and your so called friends in Wikipedia has been bullying him and prosecuting him and his articles in your web page,well in response we the hackers of Anonymous Philippines has decided to teach you guys a lesson so be ready with your deletion buttons so that you could clean the mess we will do to your beloved web page we don't stand for online bullying so be ready for war-hackers of Anonymous Philippines — Preceding unsigned comment added by Testbevy (talk • contribs) 13:08, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Not A7

Peja Architecture was a rubbishy page - someone else nominated it for deletion as a test page - but you deleted it A7. I don't think that was appropriate, as A7 applies to a very tightly-defined group of articles, which don't include "architecture of a city". PamD 17:17, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Maybe you are correct. Looked like somebody trying to get their info across, in a silly way. Did not look like notable to me. -- Alexf^(talk) 18:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Yo yo money boy

Ar you joking? Fyi: i have nuked his files on commons :) --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:42, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Not really. He did not link to any websites or did any spam here. Looks to me like kid's user page talking a little about himself. Crappy text and not very "professional" I'd say but I do not see it as a G11 violation. How do you see it as overly promotional? -- Alexf^(talk) 12:46, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Maby i bring up the issues on AN, the first time that a such speedyreq was declined... The user is uploading self promo photos and only edites his userpage on enwiki. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:49, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

FWIW, I spotted the tag on there earlier and declined to take action on it - it didn't strike me as what we would normally consider excessive promotion, and I considered removing the tag myself. Doing so would certainly be within policy. However, that said it's looking a lot like this user isn't here for any constructive purpose. I'll leave him a message and see whether he's interested in doing anything helpful; if not a WP:NOTHERE block might be necessary. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:55, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

It looks that way and it is a good idea. The page itself did not warrant a G11 as it was at the time. -- Alexf^(talk) 14:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Paczki

If I type in Paczki now, I don't go to an article. I'm not sure what your page move accomplished.--Asher196 (talk) 16:12, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I did not move anything. I only removed the old named entry as requested(G6). Somebody else did a move to Paczki, I guess after you looked. -- Alexf^(talk) 17:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok , thank you.--Asher196 (talk) 19:30, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy - faster than light!!!

If you prod for a speedy deletion, which invites a reply, you could at least have the courtesy to wait long enough for a reply. Le petit pâté de Pézenas was deleted while I was still writing a reply, which you clearly didn't consider and clearly had no intention of considering. Too fast and based, it seems, on your ignorance. Do some research, slow down. Emeraude (talk) 14:15, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok. As it was, it warranted deletion. Do you want it userfied? No problem with that. -- Alexf^(talk) 14:18, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

No. I want it reinstated. You gave a deletion rationale as "Obviously invented". How can you say that. It's not invented, so I can only presume you have been overcome with prejudice or laziness. There are two good references in the article. One would require you to acquire a book, so I'll let that pass. The other is online (though the programme itself is currently unavailable) and states: "The four remaining chefs must hold their nerve as they cook for Michelin starred legend Michel Roux Jnr. Michel cooks the classic Pate de Pezanas a sweet, spiced mutton pie served with pickle." If it had not been so peremptorily deleted by someone who couldn't be bothered to check, I would have gone on to expand the article with details from the Michelin Green Guide, Rick Stein's book and TV series on his canal voyage through the region, the tourist office, etc etc. If you still think they're "obviously invented", look at the website of one of the makers. Emeraude (talk) 15:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I looked at the website of one of the makers. This convinced me. Restored. Go for it. -- Alexf^(talk) 15:49, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. (And if you get a chance, try them. Delicious.) Emeraude (talk) 15:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I will next time I'm in the area. -- Alexf^(talk) 15:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

ASTROEMAIL

We updated the Morin ‘s wiki page with one new published from our february 2014 issue, survey about his life and especially with date received from french births archives we researched. We only left reference of the issue,adress, as citation and name of author. It is normal and minimum attitude to signal the source for readers. We couldn’t be guilty about any conflict of interest for that.We are not guilty too if nobody did not the same research like us before. You should be pleased that a research magazine updated free this page with valuable information.Astroemail (talk) 15:24, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

The issue here, besides the username issue and the conflict of interest for which your account has been blocked, is that what you are referring to is a clear case of original research and not posting independent sources. Regardless of how "valuable" the information is, it must be properly sourced. -- Alexf^(talk) 16:37, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Bionomic Ergonomics

my page was speedily deleted, Bionomic Ergonomics. it had a link to an eBook in the posting that was a paper written on this specific effects of seating on the human physiology and neurology. the website that the eBook or paper is on is a company website. i would like to unblock this page but i am unclear as to the process to do this, forgive my ignorance as I'm not so well versed in the protocols here but i believe this information is relevant for today's workplace and the information can be useful and helpful to many suffering individuals. 165.228.34.158 (talk) 21:58, 3 March 2014 (UTC) Bionomic Ergonomics

"Useful", "relevant for today's workplace" and "helpful" are terms that have no bearing in Wikipedia. As an encyclopedia, not a magazine, articles have to assert notability. Basically every article has to meet the Golden Rule in order to stay. -- Alexf^(talk) 00:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Help!

Dear Alexf,

Thank you for explaining the reasons for deleting my page (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Standing Commission of the Red Cross and Red Crescent), I'm sure you get a lot of angry people writing you. I am a first time user and am only doing it because my employer (the Standing Commission of the Red Cross and Red Crescent) asked me to make them a wikipedia page based on their own website (which is also why many of the words, sentences and information are taken from this website). As a first time user (and somewhat computer and technology inept) , it was very difficult and time-consuming to at all make this page. I understand why you deleted it, but I was wondering if you could undelete so that I could get a chance to at least save it in a word document so I can continue working on it and maybe try to re-submit it later. I know I should have saved all my hard work in an external document or something but I was not aware that even if it was not accepted it would be completely deleted. I very much hope you can help me as this is for my work and starting everything again is going to get me in some trouble. If you also have some advice on how i can avoid copyright issues, as my bosses ([redacted for privacy issues]) wants me to use the wording from their website and have read and approved everything written in the article.

Thank you very much for your help and I hope I can see my work again soon as my heart almost stopped when I couldn't find it in order to work on it more,

Best regards, Louise5678 Louise5678 (talk) 11:17, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I hope I have left you a red link (I'm not quite sure what that is) and I hope it is easy for you to understand which page it is. I am also not quite sure if I am writing to you in the right place or if I have signed it properly, so please accept my apologies for being such a wikipedia idiot.

P.P.S. it now seems in a space of minutes that I have somehow accidently re-submitted nothing on the standing commission page and it isn't showing up as red anymore. I'm very sorry about this and I hope you still easily find the page that you deleted. (I have to admit I am slightly freaking out right now, I really hope you can help me and I haven't lost it all forever)

You have an issue with a conflict of interest here. Please read the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide to understand the issues involved. Also, you must read the section on Paid Editing. As per undeleting and returning the text, unfortunately I cannot do that because it is a copyright violation (your site specifically says "© 2012 Standing Commission") and we take copyvios very seriously in WP. If you want to learn about Wikipedia, you can start at the help pages or ask questions to the friendly folks at the Theahouse. -- Alexf^(talk) 11:57, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your speedy answer. I am so confused and so worried right now. I checked out the pages you told me about, I am an intern so I am not actually getting paid for this (I don't know if that is relevant), and if it is a conflict of interest to write about an organisation when they request me to do so, how do I do it? Who is allowed to do it? The ICRC and IFRC both have their wikipedia pages and the Standing Commission of the Red Cross and Red Crescent(which is a part of the Red Cross) wants to have an informative page as well. It is not meant to be a commercial or biased page, merely informative. I was also wondering where on my page it says copyright 2012 Standing Commission, is it under the sources? I honestly do not know what to do right now, I very very much need that work back. If I had known that it could be speedily deleted I would have saved it in a word document so I could figure out all the issues there. The article wasn't even published, I thought it was a work that was saved until I edited it and got it accepted. I also need the table (with the names of previous members) for other work. To me, no matter how much I read, wikipedia is completely confusing to me (I don't even know how to find this page again if I close it) and I have just lost two months of work, is there anyway that I can solve this? Should I get the Red Cross to send a letter or email to say that it is not copyright infringement if you send it back? I'm sorry to bother you with so many questions, I'm sure you are quite busy, but I am in a difficult position here. Thank you very much, Louise5678 (talk) 13:04, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok, so you are not paid per se but you still have a serious conflict of interest. As the second bullet in the Plain and Simple COI page says:

"* Do not edit articles about yourself, your family or friends, your organization, your clients, or your competitors".

It does not really matter if you are paid or not. You work for the organization, therefore you have a conflict of interest. Even if you do not get paid, you are working for them and they are asking you to write about the organization. That page also says:

"Editing Wikipedia with a conflict of interest is strongly discouraged. Paid advocates should not edit affected articles directly, and should instead post suggestions on talk pages and noticeboards."

Again, please seek guidance at the TEAHOUSE. They are the folks that do this all the time. I do not have the time to instruct you in the finer points of Wikipedia, as my function is to enforce the rules and that is plenty of work already. All I try to do here is to start you in the right direction. (You should also read the "Five Pillars of Wikipedia" if you are serious about contributing to the encyclopedia. As per your question of the copyright message, it is a the bottom of the web page for your organization. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Oh, as per your last question (should they send a letter...), please read Donating Copyrighted Materials, and be advised, that when you post here, you are agreeing to post anything under the CC-BY-SA license, which allows other Wikipedia editors to copy edit, refactor, or otherwise redact the material to make it more encyclopedic. This also means editors can, and will add sourced material about the organization, warts and all, because once it is posted in Wikipedia, you do not own it anymore. -- Alexf^(talk) 13:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I've got this page on my watchlist after the Peja architecture comment above, and had a look at this out of curiosity. @Louise5678: Firstly: "where on my page it says copyright 2012 Standing Commission"? At the bottom of each page of the Standing Commission's website it says that: that means that no-one is allowed to copy that material. Nothing can be added to Wikipedia unless it is freely available to be copied, distorted, reused in every imaginable way, with no limitation except that Wikipedia must be acknowledged as its source.

Beyond that: I noticed that there is a brief mention of both the Standing Commission and the International Conference in the article International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, but there wasn't a heading making that clear (there is now), and there were no links from Standing Commission of the Red Cross and Red Crescent and from International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent. There are now links from both of those, to the right section of the article (if your connection is as slow as mine you may have to wait a few seconds for it to find the right section). That has now increased the accessibility of information about the two bodies. You could check that the information in that section is correct. If anything is wrong, please don't edit it yourself - as Alexf has explained, Wikipedia has a set of rules about "Conflict of Interest" - but add a comment on the talk page to say "In the xyz section it says abcde; this should say fghij, here is a reference to a source supporting this, etc". Some kind editor will then look at what you've said and change the article if/as appropriate. (I'll probably have it on my own watchlist, at least for a while). There seems to have been quite a lot of editing activity on this very long and old-established page, but not much discussion on the talk page in recent years. I hope this helps, and that this unfortunate first experience with Wikipedia editing won't put you off having a go at editing as a private individual outside your internship: it's a fascinating hobby! PamD 17:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

The existence of those two redirects doesn't prevent anyone from creating an article on either of the topics in future, but it at least provides access to some info about them for now. PamD 18:00, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear PamD, thank you very much for explaining things, that was very nice of you. I will try not to be discouraged and explain the situation to my employers. Maybe one day when I have figured out wikipedia (well at least a little more than now) I will try to be an editor again! Again thank you for your help 80.94.146.20 (talk) 09:42, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Why are you nominating my article for deletion.What is wrong?

What is the problem you are nominating my articles for deletion,i request to you kinndly remove these tag which you did with these 4 article thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balochi tamur (talk • contribs) 14:30, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Why? The notice left in those articles (which you did not link to as requested), makes it clear that they do not have reliable sources to assert notability, be it the films, or the film's director(s). It is all explained in the nomination and the links left there. See WP:NOTFILM. Please remember to sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). -- Alexf^(talk) 14:39, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Page Deletion

Dear Alex,

I'm writing to you because i do not understand why you deleted the article that I just wrote, about Gang Recording Studio. I read everything that you said about the reasons why you delete articles, but still it does not make any sense to me. This studio is even quoted on the wikipedia page of the Daft Punk but has no information about it. Feel free to check it out. I am just trying to make little step forward to universal knowledge, everything in this article is true, I gave as many references as i could. But there is only few information available online even if its one of the biggest studios in Paris. Also, I used many famous recording studios as an exemple such as Electric Lady Studio Ocean Way Recording ... If there is anything i should change about the article please let me know, but i think it would be a waste not to write about this place.

Thank you for your time,

Best regards,

Yanis