User talk:Kudpung

Please sign your message.

Status: Unknown

Hi, welcome to my talk page!

The blue banner at the foot of this page is to remind you to SIGN YOUR POST.
I might not reply to unsigned messages.
I make plenty of errors - if you are here to complain , please assume good faith.
If I have erred, do tell me, but being rude will get you nowhere.
If you have erred, chances are I'll help you get round it, but I don't suffer fools gladly
Please click here to leave a new message.

On line now? It is 10:03 AM where this user lives near Udon Thani, Thailand

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thanks for your efforts to keep WP less full of spam. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:21, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wordpress article

Hi Kudpung, many thanks for the swift action on the Wordpress article and their authors. I was wondering if What Everybody Else Does When It Comes To Michael Kors And What You Need To Be Doing Different: Revision history could be related. Similar style of title and contents (different topic), username of author also styled similarly. I checked the link provided - the page seems not to trigger any warnings, but I'll remove the URL now anyway. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 06:05, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, Jake. Deleted and blocked. I don't think it's related to the stuff I found though. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:12, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. Let me know if there's anything I can help with your investigation. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 07:40, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled status

Hi, I'm not sure if there's some formal procedure for asking for autopatrolled status for another user, but I follow much of what Abu Shawka does in the way of article creation and editing (because his areas of interest are largely a subset of mine) and have every confidence in him as an editor. I ask this because this comment suggests to me that the reviewer is actually less knowledgeable than Abu Shawka, which makes it seem odd to me that the one is reviewing the other. Peter coxhead (talk) 22:18, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter. I'll take a look. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:24, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've often wondered about that reviewer. X-tools is not working properly at the moment but as soon as it up again I'll check Abu out and accord Autopatrolled if appropriate. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:40, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the attention! Peter coxhead (talk) 20:40, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca returns

Hi, I'm a friend of Wesley Wolf's and I've noticed that one of the IP addresses, 100.11.59.119 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) who you previously blocked for three months has become active again in the areas where they are banned, particularly the Junior Eurovision Song Contest. I would have reported them again, but I'm less familiar with policy on blocking sockpuppets given the original block wasn't indefinite, so I thought I would take the matter to you and let you deal with it. Thanks. — Tuxipεdia^(talk) 22:58, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:43, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects being changed into articles

While patrolling the back of the backlog, I've noticed articles appearing there that are redirects recently converted into articles (sometimes content forks) or disambiguation pages (often legitimate). I am pretty sure this is because I have redirects turned off on my page curation list. It worries me however, that this is also likely happening with other redirects that are not on the list of unreviewed articles. If these are not put onto the NPP list, they might not get checked at all and this would represent a major security breach for paid editors and other POV pushers. Is there another way that these articles can easily be found (i.e. redirects modified to be anything other than redirects)? If not, I propose that we suggest a change to page curation, or a bot, that automatically logs pages that are converted redirects as 'unreviewed'. Any ideas? or is there something I've missed that makes this unnecessary? — InsertCleverPhraseHere ^{(or here)} 02:27, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up Insertcleverphrasehere. I'm pinging TonyBallioni on this because I have to go out. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:32, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Insertcleverphrasehere, any redirect that is converted into an article gets sent to the new pages feed. As an example, if I recall correctly recently a French presidential candidate got redirected to one Adolf Hitler and when the vandalism was undone, she was in the new pages. We routinely get complaints about this by new reviewers at WT:NPR, but as you explained, there's a good reason for it :) TonyBallioni (talk) 02:37, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear. I wasn't sure if that was the case or if these articles I was noticing were simply redirects that had already been on the unreviewed list. Thanks! — InsertCleverPhraseHere ^{(or here)} 02:39, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History

The principle investment partnership of Thumb Capital is a continuation of a fund that has been in operation since January 1, 1988.

Dr. Seeta Kulkarni page marked for deletion

Hi - Dr. Seeta Kulkarni (1915-1999) passed away in 1999. Couple of questions, how do we change the page to be for Late Dr. Seeta Sakharam Kulkarni and what are the rules of biography in this case. If you search for "Seeta Sakharam Kulkarni" in books.google.com you will find Dr. Seeta Kulkarni's reference in "Who's who of Indian Writers 1999" by Sahitya Akademi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahitya_Akademi) page 640. As you can see she has extensive publications in Marathi language. Here are some details:

Kulkarni, Seeta Sakharam (Smt). K. Vinaya. Marathi writer M.A; B,ED.; PH.D. (all Poona Univ.). Hindi Shikshak Sanad; C.P.ED. (Govt. of Maha.). b.17.7.1915, Kendu, Pune Dist,. Maha. Teaching, retd Teacher, now freelance writing. mt. Marathi. Pubs. 6. Bhaktiparna, 93 (poetry); Ramayan, 90 (crit); Krantiveer Jairam Baba, 73; Vadal Kanya, 94 (both biog.) Visited USA in personal capacity. Add. 1353, Shukrawar Peth, Natu Bagh, opp. Bharat Bhavan, Pune-411002, Maharashtra.

Dr. Seeta Kulkarni was a teacher at MES Waghire High School early in her career (1945-1955). Recently on August 20th 2017 a new auditorium and a division of technical education was dedicated in the name of Dr. Seeta Kulkarni at MES Waghire High School Saswad India (https://www.facebook.com/meswhs).

Please advise how to proceed. Thanks.

Jitendra

All you need to do is edit the page and provide reliable sources. See WP:RS and WP:CITE. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:17, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And do note that "Who's Who" publications do not qualify as reliable sources. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 08:05, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mohamed Sohail - Page deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because I did not create that article with an intention to promote myself or any of my articles that I have written. The article was pure facts, stating who I am and what I do. The main reason I created the article was that as a sports Journalist, I apply for accreditations for several reasons such as to cover a match or to get an interview with someone of high status. The first thing the organisers do is to do a background check on me simply by doing a Google search. Many times the process for accreditation has been delayed due to the fact that my name isn't really out there on the internet, which forced them to ask me for my credentials for proof that I am a Journalist. This article will help me and the media officers out there to see my full data which is full of facts that had been supported by evidence.

And unfortunately, ThatSohailGuy, that's precisely the reason why we're not going to let you have a page on Wikipedia. Consider using social media instead, such as LinkedIn or Face. Better still, build your own website on an online builder in 30 minutes, and get it it hosted for only $3 a month. Sorry. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've been already blocked by another admin. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

Question on External Link

Hi Kudpung - I updated Seeta Kulkarni page based on your suggestions. The automated bot reverted my edits because of External Links I included. The two links included were: "Who's who of Indian Writers 1999" by Sahitya Akademi The Official MES Waghire High School, Saswad Facebook Page I have seen similar linked used in other Wikpedia pages. Can you confirm that these links comply with the policies and advice next steps. Thanks for your help. Jitendra

FaceBook is not a reliable source and will be automatically removed. That leaves the article without any sources and it will probably be deleted. The article also needs to be written in proper English, but perhaps wait for the outcome of the deletion discussion before sending any time on it apart from finding sources. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:59, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jaymie

Greetings, I would like to request the following page be restored please:

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

I am happy to help if needed. Thank you. Jellypony (talk) 03:05, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) See WP:REFUND. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 08:46, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but no, Jellypony. The article has been specifically blocked against recreation. You are welcome to go ahead and create a new article from scratch as a WP:Draft, but it would not be appropriate for the original author to take the credit for any of the content. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:57, 8 September 2017 (UTC)a[reply]

A classic

[1] — fortunavelut luna 09:44, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for blocking this IP

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/41.77.91.207 it has a block but no reason why it was blocked Flow 234 (Nina) talk 22:24, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct. No reason was published. Arbcom is aware of the issue. Thank you for your interest in administrative matters. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:29, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rangeblock FYI

Hi, Kudpung, I see you blocked IP 2601:5cc:101:5deb:18ec:4581:cb9c:8828, used by Kumioko, for three months. Good call, of course. Generally, a whole /64 range will be allocated to a single user, and in this case it's obvious that all the edits from the 2601:5CC:101:5DEB::/64 range are from the same person. One of those edits was made after your block.[2] I've blocked the whole range, also for three months. Regards, User:Bishonen | talk 07:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Bishonen. Thank you for this. Note however that careful reading of the current threads at WT:RfA will show that I never inferred anywhere that this was Kumioko. That idea, which nevertheless may not be entirely false, was made by another user. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:54, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. No, I made the inference from myself. Bishonen | talk 08:23, 9 September 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Not wrongly, of course, Bishonen. Frankly I think all posts coming from him should be deleted. He's banned by the WMF. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:36, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

French translation request

Hi -- you're listed as being willing to translate from French to English, so I wonder if I could trouble you to look at a sentence for me -- my French is fairly weak. The sentence (which refers to some failed glacier drilling by Louis Agassiz in the 1840s) is "Digne d'éloges, ils n'ont cependant guère servi qu'à décourager les glaciéristes: les difficultés de l'entreprise leur parurent insurmontables, alors qu'une technique défectueuse leu en exagerait seulement l'importance." Google Translate gives me "They were, however, praiseworthy, but served little to discourage the glaciers: the difficulties of the undertaking seemed insurmountable to them, whereas a faulty technique would only exaggerate their importance." One correction I can make is that "glaciéristes" should be "glaciologists". What I can't tell is whether Flusin is saying that the glaciologists were a little discouraged, or were not discouraged significantly. I can't tell whether "them" refers to Agassiz or the glaciologists referred to; and I don't understand the point of the last clause. If you have time, I'd really appreciate your help with this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:10, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike. Google is getting good. The machine translation is fairly accurate and with good prose. A glaciériste is an alpinist/mountaineer specialised in climbing glaciers and frozen waterfalls. exagérait is the present conditional which translates as would which in the larger context (I don't know the story) would appear correct (pun not intended). I don't know who 'they' refers to - mountain guides? I would need the full text to competently claim that translation is perfectly accurate. Like me, Google can't second guess what Flusin is saying; his French which was written over 100 years ago is very different from modern French. For an analogy, compare Charles Dickens' 18th C English with what we write today. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:24, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I agree some context—at least the preceding sentence—would be very helpful, on several counts. I guess “them” to be someone who informed the drillers of the faulty technique, possibly with a constructive (hence “praiseworthy”) suggestion for improvement—but that’s only a guess. At any rate, I‘m pretty sure “served little to discourage the glaci[ologist]s” is wrong: ne … guère is “scarcely” but ne … guère … que is usually “nothing but”. So my (tentative) reading is that the researchers were discouraged, their technical problem being the proverbial last straw. (Shouldn’t “leu” be “leur”? That might have confused Google somewhat.)—Odysseus 1479 22:37, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) I'm surprised Google is that good! Here's the whole paragraph, which I think is all the context that's needed:

Les premiers essais de sondages profonds furent effectués sur l'Unteraagletscher; ils sont dus à Agassiz et remontent à 1840-1842. Digne d'éloges, ils n'ont cependant guère servi qu'à décourager les glaciéristes: les difficultés de l'entreprise leur parurent insurmontables, alors qu'une technique défectueuse leur en exagerait seulement l'importance. Au cours de ses trois campagnes, Agassiz employa uniquement le procédé par "percussion". Aprés avoir, dans ses deux premières campagnes, perfectionné sa méthode, il réussit, en 1842, à forer, en six semaines, un trou de 8 centiètres de diamètre et de 60 mètres de profondeur: les frais et les ennuis furent tels qu'il abandonna ses recherches dans cette voie et que personne ne songea à les reprendre.

I'm working on History of scientific ice drilling, and there's a remarkably long gap in the literature between Agassiz's attempts to drill through a glacier in the 1840s (via "percussion", which means hammering at the ice, rather than cutting with a rotating drill) and the next recorded scientific drilling efforts in ice. What I would expect this to mean is something like "Agassiz's efforts were praiseworthy, but did little except discourage other glaciologists, who thought the difficulties of the undertaking seemed insurmountable, although the faulty technique [that Agassiz employed] made the situation seem worse than it was." But I can't be sure it says that. What I would like to add to the article is a sentence saying "Agassiz's demonstration of the great difficulty of drilling deep holes in glacier ice discouraged other researchers from further efforts in this direction, and it was decades before further advances were made in the field". I don't think I quite have support for that yet, though, unless this paragraph says that. (post ec): Odysseus1479, your reading is a bit more encouraging! What do you think of the whole paragraph? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:49, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, 'They' are the premiers essais. So I would interpret the source language to mean:

Although praiseworthy, they hardly served to encourage the glaciologists....

The old, clumsy (by today's standards of prose) guère/qu'à contruction as explained by Odysseus1479 also concurs with my iterpretation. Therewith also revealing the word glaciéristes to mean 'glaciologists' in this context rather than adventure climbers. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:03, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I was hoping for. Thank you very much for your help! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:43, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, You have the support you need for 'it was decades before further advances were made in the field' in et que personne ne songea à les reprendre = 'nobody considered/bothered continuing with it.' Well done for writing such a complex article and such care for sourcing. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:01, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Yes, my guess was off base; “they” are clearly the first attempts, creditable but discouraging. The French Wiktionary indeed says glaciériste is obsolete, superseded by glaciologue. If writing a direct translation, I would replace “importance” with “significance” (or, in keeping with the old-fashioned style, “import”): notable for consequence more than magnitude. Regarding Google, I believe its algorithms work on phrases or clusters of collocations, producing less disjointed, more idiomatic-seeming results than word-by-word translations. AFAICT it‘s barely less prone to get the wrong end of the stick, but much better at producing a plausible-sounding reading.—Odysseus 1479 01:16, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) last fall Google introduced a new AI-based translation system. this longish NYT piece from last December talks about it; here is a post from Google last fall describing it Jytdog (talk) 00:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this, Jytdog. Interesting reading - both articles. My company's product and services has nothing to do with linguistics per se, but our ability to meet the unique multicultural client base in our region has put us in the forefront of our branch of industry in Thailand. I'm the only polyglot in the firm, but our sales office staff are now able (after I trained them) to handle hundreds of email enquiries in many languages. All thanks to Google. Downside? All the traditional translating agencies are fighting for survival. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:26, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

you trained people to use google translate or how to be fluent enough to be dangerous? just curious! Jytdog (talk) 03:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A little bit of both, I guess ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)

:) Jytdog (talk) 03:38, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

So, if i understand i gotta create pages to those not notable groups? But if those groups are not notable enough to have pages, what should i do? (i'm asking for advice, not war ...)

see the banner at the top of of this page. Please smarten up your language when you discuss matters here (as you have been warned elsewhere) and treat Wikipedia as a serious encyclopedia and not as a list of your favourite K-pop bands. In short there is nothing you can do other than write Wikipedia articles about them that will pass our notability standards. You have been asked also many times : please sign your posts.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:01, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The Eaton House Group of Schools

Sorry to bother you, I just want some clarification on this: It says in WP:WikiProject Schools in reference 2 that 'Elementary/primary, and UK prep schools do not normally qualify for Wikipedia articles and will generally be merged by an experienced editor to their respective school district (USA), or locality page'. In this case then, would you say this article is notable? Would it qualify for deletion, or does this represent an exception? I am asking you due to your Coordinator status on WP:WikiProject Schools. Thanks! One Of Seven Billion (talk) 13:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi One Of Seven Billion, The place to ask is really WT:WPSCH where it would attract more opinion. Firstly, however, it is debatable whether this is about a group of schools or about the company that owns them. Secondly, In both cases the article suffers from one major misconception: that a plethora of just any sources on the Internet - including obscure sources in Italian news websites - amounts to notability. Controlling the 89 so called references is a time sink to the voluntary work of our editors, and most patrollers on seeing such a list will be alerted and will olny check the first five or so before tagging for deletion. The effort in this article has clearly been to provide the non notable primary schools with a 'quality' Wikipedia pagei, while circumventing the Wikipedia accepted norm that primary schools of any kind are not notable in the sense of being eligible for a stand-alone in our encyclopedia. As a company, it is really nothing out of the ordinary and has done nothing exceptional to justify an article about it. The mentions in the sources are routine reports about activity on the financial market. Finally, the article as it stands now, has the ring of a desperate attempt to get its subject (either the holding, or the schools, or both) into Wikipedia with the object of promoting it/them. It also has all the hallmarks of a work commissioned by the schools' owners and is likely to be listed at WP:COIN where it will probably be deleted or at best, reduced to the stub it was here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:47, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And now German

I went to look for help with German, and you were listed there too, so if you don't mind I have another translation question; my German is worse than my French. The table on p. 69 of this source has some headings I don't understand. What is the difference between Randgebiet and Achsiales Gebiet? And what are the two columns underneath them? I think Bohrung must be the depth of the drilled hole. Is "den Profilen" the expected depth of the hole, based on some calculation? The background is that these holes were drilled to try to establish the thickness of the glacier, and Blümcke and Hess may well have calculated, or had some other grounds for expecting, a certain depth to the bed of the glacier. Another possible issue is that not every hole they drilled actually reached the glacier bed -- mechanical problems sometimes prevented them completing a hole. Perhaps the two columns indicate the difference between the depth of the hole and the depth of the base of the glacier, so the difference is essentially how close they got to the bed. Or perhaps the table only lists the holes that did reach the bed.

Anyway, any help you (or a TPS) can give me would be great. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:45, 10 September 2017 (UTC) With a bit more work I now think the "den Profilen" is their calculated depths; and Randgebiet/Achsiales Gebiet are holes drilled at the edges of the glacier and in the middle. I still can't tell if this is a list of holes that reached the bed of the glacier, though, so if you can see a clue to that it would be very helpful. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:06, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Mike, the source you linked to is not available online. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:04, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird -- it works for me. I think I mostly figured it out, though; thanks anyway. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:25, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mike: I get this 'This item is not available online ( Limited - search only) due to copyright restrictions. Learn More »' Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:40, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie:: I can see it; probably restricted due to Kudpung's locale. Gebiet is "area", Rand is "rim" used to modify as "peripheral-", achsiales, now spelled axiales, is "axial-". Modern dictionary gives Randgebiet as "fringe" or "outskirts". So the two columns are literally peripheral area and axial area. But that doesn't seem to help much. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:58, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Going back and re-reading your post, I think your surmise that "holes drilled at the edge [periphery] of the glacier and in the middle [axis]" matches the German pretty well. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: Randgebiet is primarily used in a geographical sense but is also used for an activity. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:08, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- Bri left a translation of a couple of paragraphs on my talk page, and I think it's now as clear as we can get it. Thanks for your help. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:23, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Unfortunately, OTRS is backlogged again and I just now I'm responding to a ticket ticket:2017081610011261 relating to Cambridge International School, Cambridge. This is just a heads up to let you know that I told them that the situation seems currently under control and while they can write to us if problems re-emerge, realistically we don't have our backlog under control and directly contacting you would be advisable. Is let me know if this is not acceptable.--S Philbrick (Talk) 01:14, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sphilbrick. All I know about this is the short discussion on Talk:Cambridge International School, Cambridge. There is not much I can do in my capacity as an admin without knowing more. Unfortunately I don't have access to OTRS because my permission was removed due to inactivity (ironically while I was in the middle of handling a case), and by all accounts it's very difficult to get this permission back even for admins and trusted users, so I never bothered about OTRS since. With all respect to yourself, I don't think OTRS is generally well managed, particularly as paid spammers are allowed to have OTRS status. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:02, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You probably know that I'm not permitted to go into details without getting permission from the people who emailed us. It is my opinion that you do not need to know any more; I thought your advice was spot on but if the incident doesn't go away and reoccurs, I will look into getting you additional information but if you were to guess at the contents of the email you would almost certainly be right.--S Philbrick (Talk) 02:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sphilbrick, Sorry if I did not express myself well, I wasn't actually asking you to provide more details. In fact the article is a stub and there hasn't been any movement there since 17 Aug. I don't have a clue who has contacted OTRS or what they might be requesting. All schools are on my watchlist and if anything gets put in there that shouldn't be there, John and I are pretty quick to remove it. Let me know if I can help though. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:39, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sphilbrick.Sphilbrick.Can we just put an edit note at the top of every school article "We don't care who diddled who, please don't add it to the article"? Because pretty much, we're gonna have to rethink BLP or spend inordinate amounts of time fighting with outraged children and parents.John from Idegon (talk) 02:47, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dye & Durham Corporation Wikipedia Page

Hello

We're trying to create a Wikipedia page for Dye & Durham Corporation located in Toronto. It is a 143 year old legal tech company and the page was deleted after creation. Can you please advise on the right process to do this? I have trimmed down all verbiage that may seem promotional but there is definitely something I've been missing. Please help. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashrajdhillon (talk • contribs) 14:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yashrajdhillon, this is clearly a commissioned work and an attempt to enhance the subject's image through presence on Wikipedia. See WP:COI and WP:PAID. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 21:52, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The company is not just in Toronto but in BC to for sure because I've used them lots. They have a corner on many land titles issues. Probably a notable topic, but let someone disinterested write it up. Legacypac (talk) 23:35, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. My concern is with promotion and paid editing. Operating strictly within our policies and guidelines I'll do anything in my powers of persuasion and tools to stamp it out. I'm sick of people enriching themselves and their clients on the back of my and others' volunteer time developing and maintaining this encyclopedia. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:47, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Central American Americans and South American Americans

These terms do exist, just look them up on google. Otherwise they can just be retitled.--Prisencolin (talk) 02:16, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bluedot Technology Ltd.

solve this issue this is incorporation register company...Ismailim (talk) 07:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]