|
I see you know more about Tanzanian soccer, so thanks for "de-hoaxing" that. However, there are two hoaxes on the talk page with substantial age that I want you to restore. They are Howard's Law and Gold Tea. Alexschmidt711 (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Alexschmidt711. I know practically nothing about soccer, let alone Tanzanian soccer. However, it took very little investigation to reveal that there is some validity to those edits. They revolve around a misunderstanding of the English words "national" and "mainland" -- which is an error, but it is obviously not an attempt to create a hoax (as is the case with the vast majority of disputed edits here on Wikipedia -- especially among non-native English speakers.) It is best to AGF most edits -- including those that are in error. More often than not, errors are the result of simple misunderstandings. We need to be circumspect about declaring articles and edits as hoaxes and adding them to the hoax list. The list is purposed for the serious study of previous hoaxes, and we should be careful not to turn it into a game of detection which, in turn, encourages more hoax creation. I am not in favor of adding every minor bit of vandalism or obscure made-up article to the list (of which dozens are created every week) -- but rather only those which truly reflect serious hoaxing and have created an impact outside Wikipedia.
- As for the two articles that you mention above, they do appear to be hoaxes as stated at the AFDs. I have recreated the one at Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia/Gold Tea. For the other, the closing admin mentioned that you can contact them for recreation. If you have further questions, please let me know. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 08:20, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- How about Pichi no Shiro de Rokkuman to Pati, then? Can that be added to the list? 67.82.89.253 (talk) 18:04, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the new sources would suffice. Sorry for the error. I will keep trying and perhaps one day it will become noatable enough to have a article. TY Armorbearer777 (talk) 20:00, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see that there used to be an articled for Bill Thompson (television host), but that you deleted it as part of "Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup: remove double redirect for needed article)" way back in 13 February 2012. Can you give me a bit more info on that? Was there just a redirect that was deleted and not an actual article? Thompson was a notable TV personality in Phoenix, AZ. He passed away yesterday. On the Bill Thompson disambiguation page there's a broken link to the missing Bill Thompson (television host) article. If an article is needed, I am willing to write one. Thanks. --Jeremy Butler (talk) 16:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Jeremy Butler. Please do create an article about Bill Thompson. It was a only a WP:double redirect that was deleted. And, as far as I know, there has never been a valid Wikipedia article written about Thompson. But there absolutely should be! Thompson was an iconic figure in television history. I have have been terribly remiss for not at least making a small stub about him. (I grew up watching Wallace and Ladmo in the 1960s. And was present when he was inducted into the Arizona Historical Society's initial group of history makers along with Sandra Day O'Connor, Barry Goldwater, etc.) Let me know when you create the article and I'll be happy to help with it. Thanks. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Very cool. I didn't realize you had an Arizona connection. I grew up there in the '60s, too; leaving for college in 1972. So, you can imagine why I have a soft spot for Wallace & Ladmo! My dad was a lawyer there and pals with Justice O'Connor. Anyway. I'll get on the Bill Thompson article this weekend and let you know when it's up. Thanks. --Jeremy Butler 20:11, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
- Bill Thompson (television host) is back! Feel free to edit/enhance it. --Jeremy Butler 13:25, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. Nicely done. — CactusWriter (talk) 15:33, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, CactusWriter can you mention why the article has been deleted and what are the possible ammendments.
Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacinthJoshva (talk • contribs) 04:59, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, JacinthJoshva. The article Om narla was deleted for multiple reasons: 1) The language and style of the text was overly promotional rather than in the required neutral point-of-view for an encyclopedia (see WP:POV). 2) There was no credible assertion of significance presented. Please note that being a business owner or having published a paper are not significant assertions in itself -- but rather it is the what other independent reliable sources write about that individual which create an individual's significance. (see WP:NOTE) 3) Most importantly, all statements about living persons must be properly referenced to independent reliable sources (newspapers, magazines, journals, etc.). It is not enough for the text to simply be true -- readers must be able to verify the facts. (see WP:BLP) My suggestion to all new contributors is that they use the Wikipedia article wizard, which will help them to avoid these common problems when creating a new page. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:23, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, not sure if you remember this, but if you could remove the edits from viewing, which were performed on 24 October 2010, on my userpage, I'd be thrilled. It was back when I was known as Parasect/Cucumberkvp and I have since changed my username. I'd rather have someone who knew what was going on than asking someone else to do this. Thanks! --GouramiWatcher(?) 02:56, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
[reply]
- Sure, Gourami Watcher. That's not a problem. I have now rev/deleted the edits and edit summaries for that date so they no longer can be seen by editors. Of course, all administrators have the ability to look at rev/del edits. If you want to have the edits completely removed from administrator viewing as well, then they can be oversighted. There are only a handful of Oversighters on Wikipedia and they operate in strict privacy. To request an oversight, use the form at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight and explain that the edits reveal some personal information which you would like removed. I don't envision there being any problem for an oversighter to address it. Cheers — CactusWriter (talk) 15:14, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I think that removing its visibility from regular users is probably fine, as if the admins ever need to (which I don't think there would ever be any need), they should be able to view the edits. Thank you! --GouramiWatcher(?) 01:28, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was hoping I could get you to reverse your decision to decline the speedy deletion nomination of this article as it appears to be based on a factual error, namely fact that he now plays in the Bosnian Premier League. While this is of course true, Mr Duljević had already been playing in the Premier League for three years when the article was deleted by afd in March of last year, so its nothing new. See his profile on soccerway.com for confirmation if necessary. Thank you in advance. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:18, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Sir Sputnik. The original article for the 2013 AFD discussion made no mention of FK Sarajevo. And one of the two !voters in the discussion stated they would have no problem with recreation if the person played in a fully pro league. Therefore the article was substantially different. Now... I am unsure why Sarajevo is not considered a fully professional premiere league team -- the WP article certainly suggests that it is -- but I've just checked Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Fully professional leagues and found that project members believe that Bosnia does not qualify. Therefore, I will reverse my decline and allow another admin to address the CSD tag. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 02:12, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear administrator!
User:INeverCry act like a meta puppet of Banned user Iaaasi on Wikimedia Commons, and she deleted many old Hungarian historic photos and paintings from the medieval to pre ww1 era.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Iaaasi
Banned Iaaasi is a well known chauvinist romanian troll, who is known for his anti-Hungarian sentiment.
Here is the meta puppet's wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:INeverCry
Meta puppets must be deleted.
Bye!--Brelczer (talk) 15:16, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Brelczer, if you have concerns about procedures at Wikipedia Commons, than you need to discus them at Wikipedia Commons. INeverCry is an administrator there. However, any allegations must be supported by credible evidence. — CactusWriter (talk) 15:50, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Yesterday someone created page Drkahin: a short item re a Dr Kahin. As page title was plainly incorrect I moved it to Khandra Kahin, but that page has since been deleted. can you also delete the redirect? cheers IdreamofJeanie (talk) 16:47, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, IdreamofJeanie. Sure, no problem. Redirect pages for which the target was deleted can be tagged for speedy deletion as G8: Page dependent on a deleted or nonexistent page. — CactusWriter (talk) 15:41, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reginai93 (talk) 00:54, 19 September 2014 (UTC)Hi! I would like to recreate a deleted page entitled "The Grove by Rockwell". It will have similar content but with credible sources and have a neutral point of view.[reply]
- Hi, Regina93. I see that you are already working on several articles in draft space about projects for this development company. It's great that you will follow Wikipedia policies on Neutral point of view. Please first read the Wikipedia guideline on conflict of interest. At this time, I don't see the articles meeting our criteria -- they appear to be advertisements for the company and I doubt each individual project for the company is notable enough for a stand-alone article. I suggest that you follow the advice given by the editors who have reviewed your drafts. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 14:21, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't read Turnbull's book. If she's been paraphrased correctly, her choice of William and Nathaniel Brooks as the first settlers of Laguna Beach seems a bit arbitrary, given that the land had been inhabited for at least 11,500 years prior to their arrival. —Stepheng3 (talk) 18:59, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Stepheneng3, there is certainly a point to be made that many lands were peopled prior to the incursion of white settlers or European-style civilizations. And that dates of United States “settlement" are debatable — lying somewhere in the broad chasm between American Exceptionalism and Zinn-like analyses. Fortunately (or unfortunately), we leave that debate to historians — and simply report the evidence or consensus of reliable sources. It seems to me, that most historians place the settlement date for US cities in the modern era, emphasizing the material sense of civilization — i.e. the building of permanent structures as opposed to nomads or tribal villages.
- In the case of Laguna Beach, 1876 is the most common date provided. The earliest mention I’ve read was in Samuel Armor’s 1921 History of Orange County which also stated that Nathaniel Brook’s homestead was the first permanent structure and he was given the title of “Father of Laguna Beach.” He is officially considered the first homesteader. (Aliso Creek was the site of the first permanent homestead in the area in 1871 — but, as you may or may not know, the area around Aliso Creek was not part of the City of Laguna Beach until recently when the city annexed South Laguna in 1987.)
- Arbitrary? Possibly. But I don't think that a date of ~11,700BCE would truly reflect the concept of "settlement". Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:15, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for your thoughtful and courteous reply. I agree that reliable sources should form the basis of Wikipedia. There's a POV issue here, and I'm not surprised that the available sources lean towards the American Exceptionalism view of the matter. I certainly don't propose to put 11,700 BCE in the infobox; that would be just as misleading as the current situation. Do the sources actually use the verb "settled"? Even if they do, perhaps the best solution would be to follow the sources with respect to the year and replace "Settled" with a more accurate verb such as "Established", "Founded", or "Homesteaded", any of which would suggest permanent structures of the sort which the modern-day inhabitants might feel comfortable in.—Stepheng3 (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I've taken another look at some of the sources again -- and agree with you that the concept of settlement is too vague. Even if the term was somehow defined along the lines of the "first permanent homestead of the modern era, etc...", there would still be some dispute about that among the sources. I think that including a settlement date in the infobox or the history section is unnecessary. We have the founding date of a post office (1887) and the date of city incorporation (1927), and that should be good enough for the infobox. I should not have included it. In the History section, I propose to remove the idea of "official settlement" and, instead, replace it with a sentence about Samuel Armor's statement that Nathaniel Brooks, who purchased his tract of land, subdivided it and built his home there in 1876, was dubbed by Armor as the "Father of Laguna Beach." That way, the information is provided without making any judgement of our own. Sound okay? — CactusWriter (talk) 15:12, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Sounds fine. Thank you for giving so much thought to the issue. Perhaps the infobox documentation was partly at fault. At one time, it was written in such a way as to suggest that every settlement should have a "Settled" date and two incorporation dates, one for incorporation as a town and one for incorporation as a city. But (at least in California) cities seldom develop in this pattern. Best regards, —Stepheng3 (talk) 18:11, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We moved that article in the same minute, with me seconds behind you, so that it ended up pointing to itself with all the content deleted; but I have dug it up and straightened it out. I knew the form because I did the same thing to another Patriarch all by myself yesterday. Cheers, JohnCD (talk) 20:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Wow-- strange. I haven't seen that before. I did a recheck of the several patriarchs I did before Timothy I -- all of them went through okay (fortunately). But, in the future, I need to remember to recheck those delete/moves, just in case. Thanks for letting me know. — CactusWriter (talk) 20:27, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cactus, I was creating a page for "Justin Jannati" and you seem to have deleted it. Justin Jannati is a notable gentleman who has helped at our university profoundly. He has published articles which can be cited, stood in tenure as Law Society president and much more. At one of the meetings, it was suggested that a page be created in recognition of his works. May I kindly ask how we would go about getting this published without it being removed.
Yours,
Colleen WilliamsonProfilecreators321 (talk) 16:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello, Colleen Williamson. The biography article on Justin Jannati was deleted per Wikipedia's WP:A7 criteria because there was no credible assertion of significance. Please note that this in no way reflects on his work or the admiration of his fellow students -- it simply means that his accomplishments, as presented, do not meet any level of notability for an encyclopedic article. (Being the president of a university student organization or publishing a paper in a university law review are fairly commonplace. And, on their own, are of no particular significance.) It is a good idea to familiarize yourself with our guidelines at WP:NOTABILITY as well as Biographies of Living Persons. These provide a good overview of the kinds of things which might establish notability -- in particular, the necessary significant coverage of the individual in independent reliable sources. In addition, I suggest you read our policy concerning Conflict of Interest which strongly discourages individuals from writing about their friends, family or colleagues. If you wish, I suggest you use the WP:ARTICLEWIZARD to create new articles. It can help lead you through the process. But, in my opinion, an encyclopedic biography on this individual is premature. If you have further questions, please feel free to ask. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 17:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear CactusWriter,
Thank you for deleting the user pages I had created in error. These were the result of something in Book Creator that I am stuck on. Would you mind if I forwarded to you the email which I had sent to the Wikipedia email address? Or should I just post on this talk page? Perhaps you could help me out.
Thanks,
Swamixyz (talk) 20:36, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Swamixyz. If you have a question, feel free to post it on my talk page. — CactusWriter (talk) 23:18, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello again CactusWriter, Thank you for your prompt response. I didn't want to dump a lot on your page, however, it will give you a better history. The 1st email may not be necessary since your people have since deleted the unwanted pages. I think it's a relatively simple problem. BTW, was I supposed to indent 1 or 2 spaces for my 1st response? Here is the email thread (most recent first of course):
Extended content
|
Fw: Book Creator PLEASE, PLEASE HELP!!!! - continued - *UPDATE*
-OK, I put the delete code at the top of each page and thankfully your editors have now deleted all 6 of my 7 pages created in error.
-So now I’m prepared to begin the book again under just my User Name.
-However, I still do not understand what to type in the box labeled “Choose a storage location for your book” so that I may
save my book.
-My User Name is Swamixyz. Why does the Manage your book page reflect “User:Swamixyz/Books/”? What appended the sub-path/sub-
folder “/Books” to my User Name? Is that something I had added or is that how a book is properly categorized?
-Finally, all my previous attempts to Name and Subtitle the book failed, regardless of what I typed into “Choose a storage
location for your book”. That’s how I originally created 7 different User Pages.
Can you please just advise me a) what to type in the box “Choose a storage location for your book” and b) how to save your book
with a name?
I do not want to attempt to create another book until my main question (above) is answered. If for some reason you cannot respond
to this email, can you post the answers on my Talk Page?
Thanks again,
USER: Swamixyz
From:
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 9:17 PM
To: info-en@wikimedia.org
Subject: Fw: Book Creator PLEASE, PLEASE HELP!!!!
Can you please help me? I’m extremely frustrated trying to answer my questions:
How in the world do you get the “Manage Book” page to NAME your book?
I want to create 1 book under USER: Swamixyz. Instead I currently have 6 User pages created in error with all different versions
of the input I typed in the box under Save and Share. Exactly what am I supposed to type in that box in order to activate the
Save button?
I attempted to live chat. What the hell is a channel? I don’t recall creating a nickname beside my User name. So this attempt
failed!
The more I try to utilize all your online Help, the more confused I’m becoming. I am not a programmer but am quite computer
literate. How do I delete the 5 unwanted User pages? One help page says “type (had to remove code)" at the top of the page. At
the top of what page and where? Another help page says to "type (had to remove code)" again “at the top of the page” to have the
page deleted.
I currently have 6 articles collected under a nameless book (since I can’t figure out how to Save the name). Some User Pages
reflect –0- articles, some reflect 5 of the 6 total. I would like to delete all User Names except Swamixyz and be able to name 1
book under Username: Swamixyz. That’s it.
I love your site, but God forbid you run into a problem. You need to be a programmer to understand all these code entries
suggested in your Help.
I know you guys are busy but I would greatly appreciate your help please with the whole “Create a Book” feature. This is driving
me crazy and there is no tech support available apparently. I really wanted to live chat but couldn’t figure that out either since
there is no guidance provided. Thank you in advance for your help.
User: Swamixyz
From:
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 7:32 PM
To: info-en@wikimedia.org
Subject: Book Creator
Hello Wikipedia people,
I love your site and after using it quite a while I just discovered the “Create a Book” feature. I followed the steps exactly as
per your Help page. Thus far, I have added 6 articles to my book. However, I am getting very confused by certain
inconsistencies.
-Initially, when I clicked “Show my Book”, it only reflected 1 article.
-Eventually, somehow it reflected all 6 articles.
-Some of the articles which I had added were still open tabs in my browser. At one point, each page had the Book Creator dialog
box across the top. I just returned to some of these pages and the Book Creator box no longer appears on it. Why would that
occur? That prevents you from clicking “Show Book” or “Remove this page”.
-As previously stated, at one point my “Manage your Book” page reflected all 6 articles. At this moment, it reflects –0-
articles.?? My “User Page” does reflect all 6 articles.
-Each article added to my book that was left open reflects a different amount of articles next to “Show Book”. Some show 4 total
articles, some show 6 and one article (in my book) shows nothing because (as described above) the entire Book Creator box
disappeared!
-I have noticed if you open an article using a link from a “Search Results” page, it also will appear without the “Book Creator”.
-Finally, and the most annoying to me is; how in the world do you get the name and subtitle of your book to “Save”?!! Using the
“Manage your Book” page, the only way to get the “Save” button to activate is by typing something in the box under “Save and
share your book”. I’ve tried this a dozen times and the name and subtitle of my book never appear anywhere after I click
“Save”. Your Help page is not really clear on the saving part. It does not explain whether to type a typical path (such as
C:\Users\Bill\Documents) in the box under “Save and share your book” or what? When I first tried to Save using a typical path, it
did activate the Save button and I clicked it. Of course all this accomplished was adding the path to my User name on the “User
Page”. What are you expected to enter in the box under “Save and share your book”? I learned it does not save to the path of
your choice, so where are Books saved? I guess buried somewhere inside your browsers file? Eventually, I typed “Astronomy” in
that box which allowed me to click Save again, however the name and subtitle still do not appear.
Just FYI, during this whole process:
-I did not close or exit Wikipedia and then re-open it, or exit Firefox and re-open it.
-If the solution is “clear your cache”, does that wipe out the browsing history in Firefox? I like keeping the trail of sites
visited.
|
- Thank you very much for taking your time to read this. My apologies for its length. Hopefully, there is an easy fix to these things. Swamixyz (talk) 13:57, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Swamixyz, I realize that working these programs can be difficult when one first begins. So I sympathize with your frustration. But have you read all the help pages for the Book Creator program? I think the pages at Help:Books, Help:Books/for experts and Help:Books/FAQ can provide information for you. I don’t quite understand each of the problems you are having (I am only superficially familiar with the Book Creator function) — but if you are unable to find the answer in the Help pages, then I suggest you contact the WP:Help desk where editors can guide you. (By the way, indenting is done by typing one or more colons ":" at the very left margin, just before you write your text -- one semicolon for a single indentation, two semicolons for a double indentation, etc. This is described at WP:INDENT). Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 14:54, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The article I created, samhainophobia (fear of Halloween), was deleted because it wasn't reliably sourced. So can you recreate this article before Halloween gets here with proper sources, like from books, journals and scholarly works, just like you did at koinoniphobia? PlanetStar 21:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm sorry, but no I cannot. There seems to be only dictionary definitions for the word (thus it fails our WP:DICDEF policy). And no proper reliable sources which might meet the requirements described in the recent AFD. I'm afraid that that is one fear that will need be left outside on this Halloween. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 22:43, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear CactusWriter!
I've posted a draft of a page about Danish musician Nikolaj Grandjean.
First time it was declined because the sources (his official bio page on personal site) and IMDB (Filmography section) were "unreliable sources" and it wasn't a proof of his significance. I was asked to cite "reliable" ones such as music magazines, newspapers, record labels' etc.
So, I've updated that bio with other reliable sources. After second review it was deleted for the copyright infringement reasons (which particular part of info was infringing the removing administrator or techhelp weren't able to tell as draft was deleted already). I've checked for all the link to the sources and posted draft again.
You've reviewed it last week and also flagged it as infringement.
This time I was able to see that 1st time is was declined because text was taken from official bio page of a musician's site (even though I've provided the link for that bio in references, with numerous other more "reliable" sources in support; not to mention that I have blessing from the musician himself and this biography is "approved"; I also rewrote it to be more official, as the original is more of an essay), and 2nd time (when you reviewed it) - because it was the same text as on IMDB page bio (I am the person who posted that bio there, and it was two months later after I submitted draft to Wiki).
Could you please help me with this? What can I do to make it right? Should I cite the sources differently? I've read all possible guidelines and still don't understand why even though I've provided the reference, it is still deemed as infringement.
Thank you very much in advance!
Best, Kravitza — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kravitza (talk • contribs) 15:20, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Kravitza. I'm sorry that you have been having difficulty creating an article and I appreciate that you are attempting to abide by policies -- but Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and they must be removed immediately. I rechecked the deleted article that you created and can confirm that the history section contained text which was copied exactly (word-for-word) from two published sources: [1], [2]. Entire sentences were copied from the official bio. (for example: he instantly began writing his own material, instead of learning how to play known songs. and During recordings with Luke on a mountainside in Brazil, Grandjean gets quite handy with the recording devices and with close friend, opera singer Mikkel Lomborg by his side, he decides to start recording his material himself as a proclaimed singer. It does not matter that the text is cited, it still is a violation. And changing a few words so that the text is slightly altered would still be plagiarism. It is not only the words that are copyrighted, but also the original author's presentation of ideas. One suggestion is to follow the instructions at WP:Donating Copyrighted Material which allows the original author to contact the Wikimedia Foundation by e-mail from the website and formally release their copyright for the text in question. However, we find that text from official websites is generally unusable on Wikipedia because it is written in such a way that it promotes, hypes or advertises the subject -- therefore, it usually fails our policies on promotional language and neutral point-of-view. The best advice is to always write the text in your own words. That is, read the sources but then put the sources away and, without looking at them, write the article in your own words telling only the facts. Do not embellish the facts nor add promotional language. Then add references from independent reliable sources for each of the statements which you have written. I hope this advice helps. Let me know if you have further questions. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 17:13, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello CactusWriter, new editor Jilan raj ms recreated Sagar Das for the third time after been deleted twice for WP:A7 another editor opened this AfD/Sagar Das, in case you are interested and want to take action. He has a copy of the article in his userpage Jilan raj ms. Is there a template to notify him to stop recreating the article? Thank you. --Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 08:29, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Crystallizedcarbon. I moved their user page to a subpage and then left a brief explanatory note about this for the editor. I also commented at the AFD. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 17:14, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
why have you deleted the page?it was no attack page(the nonsense from the page comes from a vandalized version of List of The Land Before Time characters)please stop deleting it:I've written on it its no attack page--87.228.204.54 (talk) 10:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- User:87.228.204.54, please note that the page was tagged for speedy deletion -- although it was tagged as an attack page probably because of your introductory comments at the top, it should have been simply deleted as vandalism and inappropriate for an IP talk page. The Wikipedia guideline is that any Inappropriate content may be removed from any page in your user space, including your user talk page. This includes those pages which seem to condone vandalism as being 'humor' ...will generally be seen as having the same effect as condoning the behavior, and may also be removed. (See WP:UP#NOT) This is especially true for unregistered IP accounts such as yours. IP addresses might be or become shared -- such as yours which may have been previously assigned to a school account. As I am sure you can understand, it would be rude for new IP users to discover inappropriate material and vandalism already in place on their talk page. Therefore, it is a good policy to remove the storage of vandalism from IP address pages regardless of whether or not you currently find it funny. I would suggest that you register an account on Wikipedia which would allow you to create a subpage for collecting material. And remember to place the {{user page}} template on the subpage to prevent it from being picked up by search engines and mirror websites. In the case of the vandalism material on the IP:87.228.204.54 talk page, there is no reason for it to be displayed there since User:FunkMonk has created a subpage for it at User talk:FunkMonk/Amphitherium which you can access. If you have any further questions regarding this, please feel free to ask. Thanks. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:59, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Significant contributor to the internet and Fox Sports.
Had the most poignant piece on Ray Rice situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmartin17 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 20 November 2014
- Hi Dmartin17. The page Katie nolan was tagged for speedy deletion because it did not meet the Wikipedia criteria for a "credible assertion of significance" for a biography. This is typical for recent internet personalities and youtube bloggers -- especially if the sources presented are only youtube videos by the individual rather than reliable sources about the individual. Please note that biographies on Wikipedia need to be referenced to reliable independent sources which discuss the individual in significant detail (not simply mention them). This is especially true for biographies of living people -- which have much more stringent standards. I suggest you review those those blue-linked pages to get an understanding of what is required. It is also a good idea to use the Article Wizard when creating an article -- this will help you navigate the Wikipedia guidelines as well as receive help for experienced editors. In the meantime, I have recreated your article at Draft:Katie nolan for you to work on so that it meets encyclopedic standards. If you have questions, feel free to ask. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:40, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmartin17 (talk • contribs) 09:23, 21 November 2014
This film article was tagged and speedied as lacking content, yet its info box contained content that could have led to expansion and sourcing. Just letting you know. Schmidt, Michael Q. 06:05, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Michael. Thanks for the courtesy notice. The article was actually deleted as a test page -- but you are correct that there was an infobox with information. It's always fine with me if you want to restore something like that. I've gone ahead and done it for you, added an intro sentence and tagged it for lack of refs. Cheers and have fun. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:28, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you. I'll find some more sources. Be well.
 Schmidt, Michael Q. 10:13, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for restoring my talk page(I thought of keping an archive of my history here because ill leave soon)but I have one question:could you undelete User:87.228.204.54 as well because if I restore the talk page,i don't have space from putting the retirement templates.thanks--87.228.204.54 (talk) 10:23, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no compelling reason to restore the page -- which was deleted as vandalism by another administrator. There is also nothing that currently prevents you from placing a template on the page. Please understand, though, that because the "user page" is actually an unregistered IP address, that page is only temporary and will likely change once that address has been assigned to a different user. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:00, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I noticed you just changed the block settings for Hayatgm to revoke talk page access and deleted their user page under CSD G5. While I support the original indefinite block, having had some interaction with the user, may I ask why you did that? The user did not, as far as I can tell, abuse talk page access, and the userpage was created before the user was blocked. --Richard Yin (talk) 17:59, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Richard Yin. Thanks for pointing out the time line for that user page creation. When I investigated the G5 tag that an editor had placed there, I did misread the page as having been created after the indefinite block because of the 11:35 time sig on the page (which would have been after the block) - and interpreted it as block evasion and puppet recruitment. However, you are correct -- the editing history shows it was created 5 hours before the block. I have restored the page and talk page access. Considering the almost year-long history of that user's problematic edits (especially copyvios) and their lack of response to any invitations to talk, I doubt there will be any improvement. Sometimes competence is definitely an issue. But, of course, there is always hope. If there is anything further you would like me to do, let me know. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 17:41, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Re: this, sorry about that--I should have looked more closely at the time stamps. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:35, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem, Cyphoidbomb. I made the exact same mistake. (See my reply above to Richard Yin). The difference in time stamps and the editing history times still trips me up sometimes. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 17:45, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking for information about the open source project GLyphy, and followed a search result that started with "GLyphy is an opensource project (licensed through Apache License 2.0) that implements a signed-distance-field (SDF) text renderer using OpenGL ES2 shading language." which was exactly what I was looking for. To my surprise you deleted the page under A7, despite the fact that the project is open source and not tied to any company or brand O_o ... can that page be undeleted again? It's a fairly significant bit of software to the font design world, and might require some text rewriting, but definitely not an article deletion. Thank you -- Pomax (I do not have a wikipedia account) 19:26, 13 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.156.54.244 (talk)
- Pomax, the single sentence that you quote was the entirety of the article page when it was deleted. It asserted no significance for the topic. (Please note that simple existence of a computer program is not enough for inclusion -- its significance needs to be asserted, and established by independent sources.) The other paragraph in the article was removed because it was a copyright violation -- and thus cannot be undeleted. However, there is nothing which currently prevents an editor from recreating the article as long as it meets Wikipedia criteria for[[{WP:N]] by being the subject of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. If you wish to write the article, I suggest you use the WP:Article wizard which can help new editors navigate the Wikipedia requirements for encyclopedic articles. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:36, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello!
You deleted this template as deprecated - could you delete its doc subpage too? It is also fully superseded by Croatia Yearbook 2013 and is now obsolete too. GregorB (talk) 15:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Deleted as a WP:G7 request. — CactusWriter (talk) 22:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
... find {{Danskefilm}}, and the three {{DNFc}}, {{DNFn}}, and {{DNFt}} useful. Best, -- Sam Sing! 08:43, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, those will make linking quite a bit easier. I appreciate your pointing them out.. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:32, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cactus Writer
Thanks for the editing you did recently on Aalborg Defence and Garrison Museum. Well done taken into consideration that you obtained most of your information from newspapers. However, this is also the problem. False information on the hangar has flourished during many years, and this was picked up from more newspapers in Denmark, maybe also to a degree supported by the museum.
However it is not true, that the hanger was taken down and transported from Holland to Denmark during the war. It may be true as a recent study says, that a blister halle was moved from Holland to Aalborg. But the hanger is a Junker Halle, which was a standard hangar used by the Germans during WW II.
For your in formation I established the museum in 2002 and has run it as manager since then and until end of 2013.
Orla Kops — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.21.139.143 (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Orla Kops. Thanks. I appreciate your explanation. I had an idea that there might be a problem due to your insistent removal of information, but because you failed to include an edit summary or communicate your intention there was no way for us to know. Removing sourced text without any explanation is often seen as vandalism. Therefore, it is best practice when editing Wikipedia to always use the edit summary or the article talk page to explain your actions. Please note that Wikipedia articles can only use information which is verified by independent reliable sources -- that is, we follow a policy of verifiability, not original research. You may be correct about the origin of the hangar -- however, without an actual reliable published source, we cannot use that information. (All editors on the internet are essentially anonymous -- anyone can claim to be anyone -- and therefore we do not, nor cannot, use any editor's word as "truth." As I am sure you can understand.) I am willing to forego inclusion of the Holland detail for the moment. I don't consider it a particularly essential point. But if you know of published sources which can be used to explain the history or expand the article, please add them. Any additions you make must be referenced by reliable sources. Good luck with your editing. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 00:15, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We now have a complete set of (still quite stub'ish) list articles on Robert Awards (quick view: {{Robert Awards chron}}). I've used {{Ill}} as far as I had the time, so if you're sitting around not knowing what your next ten new articles should be  there are dozens of redlinked film/actor/director subjects that needs translation. -- Sam Sailor Talk! 13:26, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for helping to fill in so many of those Danish film redlinks. It's been a while since Erik, Blofeld, Lugnuts, a few others and I started the Nordic cinema task force back in September 2008 -- so it's wonderful to see the article work keep expanding. I don't really have as much time as I did back then -- when Piil was on always on my desk and DFI was a quick link away. Nor any shortage of an article backlog. (The administration stuff has taken its time drain over the recent several years.) But I'll keep your "subtle suggestion" in mind. Thanks again for the good work. If you have questions about anything at all, let me know. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:29, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
hey this is for Chitra Group of Institutions page which you recently deleted this page belongs to my company chitra group. all the content which was used here was under me as I owe that website http://chitragroup.co.in/ I would like to request you that you should undo deletion of my page please, I make shure that the content on that page was permitted by me. being the ceo of the Chitra Group.
you can check the admins of our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/chitra.group1. if you require some editing on this page I will surley do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagarsachan12 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello. The bottom of the page at http://www.chitragroup.co.in states "All Rights Reserved © Chitragroup.co.ins”, and the bottom of every Facebook page states "Facebook © 2015”. Wikipedia can only use text which is released for all public domain use — usually by a creative commons compatible license. And it does not accept text which has been copied from any copyrighted site without direct written permission to the Wikimedia Foundation offices. If you wish the material to be undeleted, you will need to follow the instructions about this at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials . However, please also understand that even if text is granted permission for copying, it still may be inappropriate for Wikipedia and may require editing or removal. For example, it will still need to meet the criteria for notability, verifiability through independent sources and non-promotion among other things. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:23, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- if you firstly undelete the page I will quickly change the details as per required — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagarsachan12 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Administrators are not permitted to restore copyvios -- restoring a copyright violation would be a violation in itself. And it is unnecessary because the pages from which the information were copied are freely available for referral. — CactusWriter (talk) 00:03, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
--Oralofori (talk) 00:45, 24 March 2015 (UTC) Hello there, I hope you're doing fine. Kindly take a look at this article that has the tag of copyvio. Changes have been made to it and I need your help with removing that tag. Do let me know what you think of it so far and thanks: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Mensah&action=edit&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro[reply]
I don't understand why the page - Matt Henshaw - was deleted, the page was new, with new links and information from Europe and the UK? This was my first attempt at a wikipedia page, I spent a whole evening on it, and now I don't even know where or why it has gone?! I don't want to be disillusioned with editing wikipedia this quickly. 707 Music (talk) 01:54, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi CatcusWriter, I have reversed the delete, as the version deleted was completely different with different references. Another AFD should be conducted prior to deletion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:02, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, Graeme Bartlett. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:39, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This article is create protected. I am an WP:AFC reviewer and I'd like to accept Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tony Grey. Can you do some admin magi for me? ~Kvng (talk) 21:26, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Kvng. Because the new article no longer has any copyright violation (which was the original concern), I have removed the protection. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:48, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see my page has been deleted. I do understand the reason why; I had just hoped to fill in context for the links to my name from other pages on Wikipedia that currently link to... nothing. I will go away now and work on becoming famous and influential so that someday someone else will fill in my page. :-) Thanks CactusWriter. Jmcintyrepfds (talk) 18:42, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Jmcintyrepfds, I'm glad that you do understand the encyclopedia's policies on autobiography and conflict of interest. Please also note that redlinks do not mean a standalone article is always appropriate -- but rather that one might be in the future. (See WP:RED) Of course, you're always welcome to contribute directly to Wikipedia in other areas of your expertise. It's understandable, though, if you're currently busy becoming famous and influential. :-) As Aristotle wrote: “Patience is bitter, but its fruit is sweet.” — CactusWriter (talk) 17:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CactusWriter, I had started creating article on one of the famous wildlife photographer of India. I had put some initial details of the same with references but Deletion Tag was been put immd. I had contested to hold the same but it looks like the article is been deleted. I personally feel that this article is required on Wikipedia and I do not have any personal interest or relationship with Bhushan Mate. Bhushan is great photographer, a stage actor who has played roles in Marathi Play. Can you please reinstate the article and help me to improve on that? Thanks....Coolgama (talk) 05:25, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Coolgama. Yes, the article was deleted per WP:A7 because there was no credible assertion of significance. Please note that this is not a criticism of the individual. It simply means that their work or credits as listed -- for example, being one of many photographers in a local group, being related to someone notable, or appearing in a movie -- are not significant assertions. Nor do self-published websites and press releases make credible reliable sources. I have restored and moved the page to Draft:Bhushan Mate so that you can work further on creating a biography. However, if any assertions of notability cannot be supported by independent reliable sources, then the article will likely be deleted again. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 17:45, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks CactusWriter for restoring. I will certainly work and improve the article and submit for review....Coolgama (talk) 05:28, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CactusWriter,
Thank you for your help with moving White Collar 1 to White Collar-1. I was unsure of how to do that so I made a separate page on accident. Unfortunately, I made significant edits to the White Collar-1 page before it was deleted, and the old White Collar 1 page does not contain these edits. Is there any way to relocate that revision history so I can restore these edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aznchoco1 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Aznchoco1. I have moved your second version of White Collar-1 to your userspace. It can be found at User:Aznchoco1/White Collar-1. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 18:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Much appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aznchoco1 (talk • contribs) 20:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, Michael! That is kind -- although I really only added a few sources. — CactusWriter (talk) 15:21, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think I did "enough" for Çanakkale 1915 ? Schmidt, Michael Q. 06:53, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, you certainly did. I'm glad to see the AFD was withdrawn and the article kept -- an easy decision. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 15:23, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there,
Sorry to bother you but as I am trying to increase the Micronational presence on Wikipedia. I started an Article in my sandbox User:Johnatmicronews/sandbox about the Kingdom of Catan. I have reasonable thoughts to think that the sandbox article is ready for publication. However when I tried to publish the foresaid article. I could not edit the page as it was a "protected page". I am new to the site so don't really know what that entails, however I get the general gist that it can not be edited.
To give you some background to me, I am an independent micronational journalist who is writing articles about many different micronations.
As I said I am new to this site and any help you could offer would be greatly appreciated.
Kind Regards,
Johnatmicronews (talk) 10:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Johnatmicronews, please read Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. The pages on Kingdom of Catan and Republic of Catan were speedily deleted and protected because of repeated attempts to recreate them in violation of Wikipedia policies on notability and referencing. You and friends may find that creating internet pages about a make-believe kingdom is of interest -- and that is fine elsewhere on the internet -- but it is of no encyclopedic value here unless independent reliable sources demonstrate it to be. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
.
Hi, you deleted my page "Iboom Media" this morning: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iboom_Media It was my first try at an page and I didn't know I had to add anything to the "talk" page. As I was attempting to put some information into the "talk" page, the article got deleted. It had reliable references and links. Is there anything else that is wrong with it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onlinemeister (talk • contribs) 10:25, 2 June 2015
- Hi Onlinemeister. The page on Iboom Media was deleted per the Wikipedia criteria on no significant assertions and no advertising. There was no credible assertion of significance of the company and all the "references" provided were only press releases written by the company. Please note that simple existence of a company is not enough for it to be notable, but rather it must have received significant coverage by independent reliable sources. Press releases which are used solely to advertise the company are not proper references. I suggest you use the WP:Article Wizard when trying to create an article -- it will help you understand the necessary requirements of an encyclopedic article on Wikipedia. Regards. — CactusWriter (talk) 15:04, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I am interested in creating a page for Community Change, inc. I see that one was deleted. How can I avoid this happening? — Preceding unsigned comment added by C0l3rs (talk • contribs) 14:00, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi COI3rs. The Community Change, Inc. page was tagged and deleted because it violated the Wikipedia policies concerning copyright violation and advertising. The text was copy/pasted from a published website and was not only written from a non-neutral point-of-view, but was unambiguously promotional. To create an article, I suggest to all new users that they use the WP:Article Wizard. This will provide helpful advice on the guidelines for an encyclopedic article. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 15:01, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CW, if I may abbreviate! I see you've just blocked this user for copyright violations. As one who has been working with him on this problem, can you let me know what the latest violation was that precipitated this? Thanks! CrowCaw 18:56, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
-
- Hi, Crow. Yes, I'm afraid it had reached that point. I had been following your efforts and appreciate that you were achieving good results. But this other copying from outside sources has now become more problematic. We will see if the editor wants to discuss and understand the problems. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 19:05, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- It appears that TGG23 has finally begun to read and understand the policies on copyright. They have suggested that, in the future, that they will refer to you for answers concerning copyright problems. If you wish to continue monitoring this user for the time being, then I think they can be cleared to be unblocked. I realize it is an imposition on you and it is fine if you decline. Would you care to continue providing them help or are there other concerns we should discuss? — CactusWriter (talk) 15:53, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, Crow! If you have any problems, please let me know. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 17:18, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Except some recent wrestling articles and Pan am Games articles that were duplicated from the 2011 ones, I don't see any other copryight issues in my case. I work for more than 8 years and I never had issues of this kind before. TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 23:52, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- This is the list of every articles that had some copyright issues: Jevon Balfour, Michelle Fazzari, John Pineda, Justina Di Stasio, Genevieve Morrison, Braxton Stone-Papadopoulos, Philippe Guertin, Maxim Bouchard, Barrett Martineau. TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 00:01, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Is that ok?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Pineda TheGreenGiant23 (talk) 00:10, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, that seems fine. (I made a couple of corrections in grammar.) In cases like that, it is always best to read the sources, then write the text in your own words. Even when words are changed, there can be a copyright violation if the entire passage is constructed in the same manner. The Wikipedia essay on WP:Close paraphrasing provides a good introduction on how to avoid that. — CactusWriter (talk) 02:18, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
I am new to Wikipedia as an editor,
you recently took down a page I made for my grandfather Asteris Kovatzis.
He was a particularly influencial member of the greek community in London and even more so in Greece where there is a bust to him in Kiato town square, (his town of origin where I linked his name.)
I am very new to Ths and as a result very bad at editing wiki pages as it seems complex.
you deleted the page under suspicion of advertising and I can assure you that he is long dead and I intend to sell nothing of his, I just wish to pay homage to my grandfather and satisfy the want for many elderly Greeks to see him online. I don't know how to go about reposting the page but it said to message you.
i would appreciate your help.
thanks.
OllieLondonBourne
Ollielondonbourne (talk) 12:15, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello, Ollielondonbourne. I understand that the rules for writing a Wikipedia article are complex. And this is especially true for our new editors. So I am sorry that this was your first experience in editing here. But there were two problems with the page you created. First, and most importantly, you created it by copying text written by someone else. (As evidenced by the attribution you included at the bottom of the page: Written by Theo Andrews Ph.D., M.Sc., B.Sc. Posted by Grandson Oliver Sotirios Bourne) This is a copyright violation and, unless the text is released into the public domain by the original author, it must be deleted immediately. Second, the same text was also deleted twice due to overly promotional language. This means that the article was not written in a neutral point-of-view (a core necessity for an encyclopedic article) and the words were overly effusive and editorializing. This is often the problem when writing about a topic for which there is a Conflict Of Interest and a Personal Agenda (which you admit to having). I have no knowledge of Asteris Kovatzis, but he may be a notable figure. The best way to proceed is: first, to read the bluelinks that I have provided above, then write an entry in your own words listing the person's career or notability and include references to independent reliable sources. It is best for new editors to use the WP:Article Wizard which will help you to understand the necessary attributes of a Wikipedia article. Good luck with your editing. — CactusWriter (talk) 16:23, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
...for your support over at my RfA. I shall do my best to be worthy of it. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 05:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello CactusWriter
If you had bothered to read the article you would have seen that the article related to a person who was deceased. Therefore it would be pretty impossible for me to write it about myself. I was very new to Wikipedia and created a small page related to a person of interest in our community. It amazed me how intimidating Wikipedia editors/administrators like yourself are and how a small page which may be of some interest to people, can be bombarded with deletion messages from the other side of the world. It has completely put me off Wikipedia for good. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrickmurphyus (talk • contribs) 20:42, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Patrickmurphyus, you are correct. I am sorry. I posted a message about autobiographies to you when I meant to post a message to you about conflict-of-interest. Unfortunately, individuals with a conflict-of-interest often fail to recognize their own bias toward a subject -- and misunderstand the notability requirements for a encyclopedic page on their chosen topic. The result is usually speedy deletion -- and hurt feelings on the part of the editor. It is important to understand that the notability requirements are not a reflection on the quality of any individual, but merely whether there exists enough reference for an encyclopedia article in Wikipedia. — CactusWriter (talk) 21:01, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry about this, I'm not sure of the timeline of when you had blanked your User talk page, the exchange there did make it clear that this was not an autobio article. I'm not actually sure if there was a genuine conflict of interest here, but as I stated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick U. Murphy, I do not believe he merited a Wikipedia article, based on our policy. BTW, CactusWriter, do you close Afds? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:19, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- It's been closed. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:25, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay. Thanks, Shawn. — CactusWriter (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Sir,
We need you to remove our deleted page including page title from all search engines. We saw unprofessional, wrong comments after deleting our page like copy write infringement and other comments like that. We respect our work and need you to remove everything about this page from Wikipedia as soon as possible. We are looking forward to your fast action. Sincerely, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akaviani (talk • contribs) 21:01, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
18 July 2015
Dear Sir, We need you to remove our deleted page including page title from all search engines. We saw unprofessional, wrong comments after deleting our page like copy write infringement and other comments like that. We respect our work and need you to remove everything about this page including page title from Wikipedia as soon as possible. Page title is : A Kaviani MD,FEBU We are looking forward to your fast action. Sincerely, Akaviani — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akaviani (talk • contribs) 21:07, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hello, Akaviani. Please note that when anyone creates a page on Wikipedia, it is no longer theirs -- they do not own it -- but rather the rights are released to the public under a Creatice Commons License. Therefore, when you created the article Dr. Kaviani , MD, FEBU about yourself and pushed the "save page" button, you licensed it for anyone else to edit it. The article was appropriately tagged for speedy deletion by other editors because of issues concerning the subject's Notability and Promotional text -- and most importantly, the text was copied from another website without prior permission which is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. There were no unprofessional nor wrong comments. The article was subsequently deleted for concerns. Wikipedia does not control any internet search engines. Search engines, like Google, operate independently. I assume, though, that traces of the article will disappear from search engine results over short period of time. — CactusWriter (talk) 23:20, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CactusWriter,
Per your recent involvement with Jithu jena (talk · contribs), I though you might also be interested in:
All seem to be the same editor, promoting themselves. Just FYI, in case you hadn't noticed them. - 220 of Borg 01:14, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, 220. Thanks for keeping me posted. It looks like User:Prasanjith might have forgotten the password to their previous account. I also noted that Jithu jena denied being a sock account. If there are further attempts to introduce the name into Wikipedia, then the page can be salted and an SPI started for the socks. Otherwise, I'm content to let it ride for the moment. Cheers. — CactusWriter (talk) 14:42, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was reviewing the history of the Mega Man 8 page and clicked a red link, and it took me to a page which had been hoax-deleted called "Pichi no Shiro de Rokkuman to Pati". I instantly assumed it was Mega Man fanon, and therefore thought about taking the source of it to the [www.megamanfanon.wikia.com Mega Man Fanon Wiki]. Could you provide me with this deleted page's source, so I can move it to the fanon wiki? Cheers! 67.82.89.253 (talk) 18:04, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
|
