User talk:Kevin

Listen dude, I don't care about any of these guide lines and rules. Why are you changing my stuff back??

Better get with the program. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.204.207.173 (talk) 04:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Note re deletions

I am deleting articles that have been listed as unsourced for over 6 months, and have had no substantive edits for 6 months either. I am happy for any admin to restore these articles, so long as some kind of source is added such that the article complies with WP:BLP. Kevin (talk) 04:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

The next batch of articles are here - User:Kevin/Unwatched. Any that receive attention before I get there will be left alone. Kevin (talk) 21:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

You're knocking out articles about Vice-Presidents, Prime Ministers, etc., foreigners of course. Why can't they be left till someone gets around to dealing with them in good time, as long as there's nothing contentious about the entry? Or why can't you do something positive yourself rather than divert people who think they'd be better kept from other activity? Opbeith (talk) 20:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, to clarify the muddled wording - "who think they'd be better involved in other activity" Opbeith (talk) 10:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Foreigners? Do you have any idea where I'm from? Do you have nothing better to do than accuse others of racism? Kevin (talk) 20:25, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't accusing you of racism, simply of promoting ignorance. Opbeith (talk) 10:19, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Clive King

I've seen your note on the content and references I added earlier. He's important, so I'll make him a priority to get sorted out. Please remove him from your list.--Plad2 (talk) 00:36, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

And BTW, he's in the Children's Literature Project and we are getting around to fixing, sorting or (presumably) deleting our unreferenced BLPs. May I suggest that you refrain from adding any more BLPs from this project to this or future lists?--Plad2 (talk) 00:54, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about the list - none will be deleted by me at least without checking. There's quite a few that have had references added recently. Kevin (talk) 00:56, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Lynda Stipe

I found some articles - reviews mostly - with her name as part of her band. I think it should be merged into Oh OK, and redirected, instead of an outright deletion, as students may actually look for information on her. Bearian (talk) 06:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Sounds OK. I would have redirected myself if I knew which band was the best redirect target. Kevin (talk) 07:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Sai Baba of Shirdi link issue

Dear Kevin, since you were involved in a former discussion on Kevin R. D. Shepherd [1] I was hoping you could provide me with direction whether my complaint about a Kevin R. D. Shepherd link could be considered inappropriate or whether there is justification for the link to remain. My explanations are provided on the Sai Baba of Shirdi talk page. Thank you for any advice you can offer. WikiUserTalk 15:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

User name

Is your former usenamn User:Rdm2376 ? --78.70.221.227 (talk) 22:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes. I changed back after some RL issues with outing were resolved. Kevin (talk) 22:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

... for the sprot on Beth Stern. Enough is enough already. Cheers Tvoz/talk 06:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

IRC cloak request

My IRC nick is kevin_g. Kevin (talk) 03:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Dominik Trojan deletion

Hi, could you please userfy a copy of this article you have recently deleted? If the only remaining issue is to add sufficient reviews of his works (in particular for the film he has directed), then this seems easy to rectify. I was expecting the AfD would appear to be "inconclusive" rather than "delete" and a simple tagging for improvement would address any need for more reviews to meet ARTIST, considering the repeated arguments of "fails PORNBIO" when PORNBIO does not apply to film directors.

If I am to sufficiently improve the article, it would be helpful if you could explain why interviews with him in QX Magazine, another by RAD Video and a review of one of his performances in QX Magazine, are not currently sufficient to address ARTIST #3 considering that these organizations are independent of him or his publishing house. Cheers Ash (talk) 06:08, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I've userfied it at User:Ash/Dominik Trojan. I'll look at your question in a bit. Kevin (talk) 06:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Anja Juliette Laval speedy deletion

Kevin – what the hell, dude?

You speedy deleted this page without so much as an AFD. It is not an "attack page", but simply biographical info about an award-winning porn performer who appeared under that name. This is uncalled for and I would like you to reverse it. The merits of the case for deletion can be reasonably discussed through an AFD. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 07:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I deleted it because it is both negative in tone and unsourced. Like it or not, being a porn star is viewed negatively by much of western society, and the article was not reliable sourced. Do you have a reliable source for the article? I would be much happier restoring it if I know it will be sourced shortly. Kevin (talk) 07:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Laval at IMDb shows a solid acting portfolio. I recommend de-PRODding and moving the discussion to AfD to give a chance of improvement. Your comment presuming that being labelled a "porn star" is automatically defamatory is an unnecessary assumption based on your own prejudices rather than consensus - celebrities reveal far, far worse on "Big Brother". In future please let such PRODs run for the full 7 days, then there can be no post-delete dispute.

I note that this was another occasion where you deleted an article within 24 hours of the PROD being raised. I hope you are having second thoughts about doing this for articles that are not the no-brainer-vandalism-type. If you persist with these types of early deletion (the alerts show up in Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography/Deletion but may take 24 hours or more to do so) I shall have to assume your deletes demonstrate a deliberate pattern. Ash (talk) 11:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

You would do well to assume a lot less about my prejudices as you perceive them. If you do not understand how being mislabelled as a porn star could hsave a negative impact on a person, then you need to open your eyes. Kevin (talk) 20:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, as you claim to be following policy rather than your own prejudices, then please point to the current consensus that supports speedly deletion (which consequently allows no other editor time to improve the article) specifically for actors appearing in pornography rather than letting PRODs run for the conventional 7-days. You may find the WP:PORN project helpful. Ash (talk) 21:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, being labelled as a porn star could be harmful to an individual if they are in fact not a porn star. This should be fairly obvious to anyone. When there is the potential for harm, and no sources, deletion is a reasonable course of action. Of course, if a source is then provided the article can be undeleted. This has absolutely nothing to do with any prejudice on my part, and is firmly supported by the policy on biographies of living persons. Kevin (talk) 21:35, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I note you have not pointed out a Wikipedia consensus that supports your viewpoint which is apparently not based on prejudices but on a "fairly obvious to anyone" rationale. As the deleting admin deciding to skip the normal 7-days and not allowing the article any chance of improvement, you must take responsibility for checking your assumptions. For example a quick check on IMDB as I have done above, to see if this is a well-known porn star and there is every reason to expect reliable sources to be added within the 7-day period (as Iamcuriousblue pointed out above). Based on your statements here, I believe that you will continue deleting any weakly sourced pornography articles on principle shortly after they are PRODded rather than, say, raising an AfD. Such behaviour is not based on consensus but on what you feel is obvious. Is that a fair summary of your position? (I will probably not be able to reply for 24 hours, so you have plenty of time to consider the issue.) Ash (talk) 21:57, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't see that anything useful can come from continuing this discussion. We do not agree, and probably never will. Kevin (talk) 22:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedying my prods, and a useful tool

Hey there Kevin. I noticed that you had speedily deleted a couple of articles that I had prodded with what is essentially CSD G10. I'm perfectly fine with that, though I don't think there is too much harm allowing people to try to save these for another week. But if you're interested in checking out some of the articles I tagged, here is a useful list. I found these articles by checking the intersection between Category:All unreferenced BLPs and various other categories, one at a time. I thought that you might want to give that a try. Best wishes, NW (Talk) 07:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that - it's a better tool than the one I had been using. You're probably right though, it might be easier all round to leave them prodded. Kevin (talk) 08:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Randy Mixer Speedy Delete, too Speedy?

Hi,

The original article was pretty much a stub, unfortunately it was not flagged up on enough project alert lists for someone to add a few sources. As there is no doubt that the GEVA was won in 1992 ("Gay Erotic Video Awards 1992". Adam Gay Video Directory. 1993.) and this actor (also performing as Cody Feelgoode and Paul Alexander) is credited with over 70 titles () with most of his work being between 1992-4. So he passes PORNBIO and is "historically" interesting enough to be worth an article. In this case the PROD was on a faulty premise, as this was not a "negative biography" it just needed sources.

Perhaps you would like to un-delete so I can add these sources and reformat the article, particularly as you chose to delete within 24 hours of the PROD being added rather than waiting until 2010-02-23 as would be the normal procedure to allow folks time to improve the article? Ash (talk) 11:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, but not till tomorrow. Admin actions and iPhones don't go well together. While enlightened people like us know that being a porn star is not a negative thing, many others hold more conservative views, hence my being extra careful with this unsourced bio. Kevin (talk) 11:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Richard C. Longworth

Well, you got rid of Richard C. Longworth despite sourcing and substantive additions - tell me he's not a notable journalist. Fortunately I'm not that bothered to see a journalist who copyrights his own CV go. Now you've got people like the Vice-President of Burundi on that list. But who's going to be bothered to check out a monstrous list like that to see what might be worth helping improve. It's a sort of moral blackmail. If you want to scrap what people don't manage to get to look at, go on. It all helps persuade people who have trouble abandoning Wikipedia that we might just as well go and cultivate the garden. Cheers. Opbeith (talk) 00:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

So you were being facetious with your final argument to delete? Kevin (talk) 00:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Semi-facetious. I think the explanation was there. When I updated the article from various sources including his website I never thought to check that he would copyright his own biographical details. Then the stuff from his own site plus some more (which wasn't copyright) was removed from the article. That was when I thought to myself that a journalist who doesn't believe that freedom of information applies to himself isn't worth bothering about. As far as I'm concerned he can sink or swing by his own principles, I've wasted my time trying to establish that the man was notable (which he is, and the original proposer simply couldn't be bothered to make any effort to check out the subject). That doesn't mean that deletion shouldn't proceed without checking the updated status of the article and the notability of the subject, whatever the comments. Opbeith (talk) 08:54, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Plaxico

That's fine, but where did my edit go? I can't find it in my contribs. Doc Quintana (talk) 00:27, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I think User:Xeno deleted the revision. Kevin (talk) 00:36, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. I don't get why, but I guess it's not worth fighting about. If someone uses the "Plaxico" terminology on AN/I again, i'll just be insistent that they don't in case someone does not know the context. Doc Quintana (talk) 17:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Mao Dongdong

I`ve just discovered that my article regarding Mao Dongdong has been deleted. I know it was about a young child whose only claim to fame was a notorious ancestor (Mao Zedong) but I was just a bit disappointed. It was my first and, thus far, only contribution as an article. It was minor and admittedly I was using it as an educational tool for contributing to Wikipedia. I must say it was a real eye-opener to realise the effort involved in creating and maintaining articles on the site. However, I understand and accept the reasons for its deletion. It has certainly reinforced my belief that my role as a Wikipedia contributor is best served as a corrector of facts, spelling and grammar as it has been in the past.--Yameogo (talk) 11:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Melvyn Grant

KEVIN - WOULD YOU PLEASE REPLACE MY PAGE . MELVYN GRANT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.105.36.239 (talk) 13:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately this article was copied from a page on www.nme.com, and was a copyright violation. As such I am unable to restore it, but you are welcome to rewrite it in your own words (although you will need an account first). Kevin (talk) 03:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Kevin - I am Melvyn Grant. I admit to not fully understanding how Wikipedia works, or the terms you use, but I'm trying. Although someone else started my page, I edited and added to it, in my own words, and all the information was correct and not copied from another place and in no violation of any copyright. It was there for public use and for anyone who wanted some information about me. I intended to add more information as time allowed. I would appreciate any help in restoring my page. The page was not copied from www.nme.com. It was the other way round and nme.com signs that the text was taken from Wikipedia 83.105.36.239 (talk) 13:08, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Hi Melvyn, thanks for explaining that. I can't believe I missed NME's disclaimer, very sorry about that. The article is back - Melvyn Grant. Before someone else points it out you should probably read WP:AUTO, which contains help on writing about yourself.

Sorry again, Kevin (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Kevin, no harm done. In fact you've given me a much needed prod to get and understand a bit more on how it all works. Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.105.36.239 (talk) 14:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Arma Shahidi Fitzgerald

Hello Kevin,

I'm a bit confused and am curious if I could get some insight on the Arma Shahidi Fitzgerald page. When it was first put up for deletion it was incomplete but I was able to get various resources that were relevant (newspapers, news, magazines, etc.) I had included the standard beauty queen title holder template and all and was surprised when it was deleted with all the sources and information that was added. I look forward to your insight into either why it was deleted or hopefully, how to have it reinstated.

Thanks for you time! dericksc (talk) 21:52, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Primarily it was deleted because nobody made an argument to keep the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arma Shahidi Fitzgerald. Having read the links you added, I am not convinced that any show notability. Most are reprints of the same article, which is a very brief passing mention. That said, I can undelete and relist the deletion debate if you like. Kevin (talk) 09:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Kevin for your response. Yes, if you would be willing to undelete it and reenlist it into debate, I would be grateful. I can make some additional changes to it as well. She is an international beauty queen which gives her celebrity status, so I feel she qualifies for notability, but I'll check my sources as well. Thank you so much for monitoring Wikipedia. dericksc (talk) 21:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

OK. The article has been undeleted, and the AfD relisted. Kevin (talk) 23:44, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

You'll need to act fast - there are now 3 arguments to delete, and any passing admin may choose to close it again. Kevin (talk) 02:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Protected talk page

I've PRODed Gabriele Cattani for deletion and am unable to notify the creator (User:Curps) as their talk page is fully protected. As you were the last person to edit their talk page, would you be able to notify them of the PROD? Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 15:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

That's interesting, Twinkle obviously edits through that protection without telling me, I never noticed it was protected before. I wouldn't worry, Curps is long gone. Kevin (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Okie dokie - just wanted to dot my i's and cross my t's on the PROD nom. Thanks for checking!--Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 20:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Susan Roesgen

As a result of a sock hunt, the troublesome accounts have been blocked. Perhaps it's time to drop it down to semi-protection? Gamaliel (talk) 22:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I've dropped it back to semi, no point giving them a free pass. Kevin (talk) 22:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Gamaliel (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Ed Esber

Ed Esber, is that you? I rewrote the opening to the Ed Esber page to make it less like a personal advertisement. Ed Esber himself (he refers to "I" and "me" in the history logs) reverted it several times to his promotional ad copy. Now you have reverted it to said promotional ad copy...are you working for Ed Esber?

My version is pretty balanced. Ed's isn't.

Mine:

Edward M. Esber, Jr. is the former CEO of Ashton-Tate, prior to its sale to Borland. Esber was involved in founding VisiCalc and presently works as an angel investor in Silicon Valley.

Ed Esber's self-written peacocking that you restored:

Edward M. Esber, Jr. was a personal computer pioneer who laid the foundation for a revolutionary industry. Esber is credited with being the marketing guru behind two of the personal computer industry’s best selling application programs at the dawn of the personal computer revolution; VisiCalc and dBase. Ed Esber convinced IBM Corporation to take microprocessors seriously, which led to the introduction of the IBM PC using an Intel Microprocessor. Esber later went on to pioneer the marketing of the first software that made buying a personal computer for business viable, VisiCalc. Esber later was the CEO of Ashton Tate, one of the three leading Personal Computer Software companies of the 1980s (along with Lotus and Microsoft). Then, Esber ran the Creative Labs, the U.S. subsidiary of Creative Technology. He is or has sat on the boards of over 30 companies, public, private and educational. Ed Esber is now an Angel Investor investing in exciting new companies in Silicon Valley. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raindog17 (talk • contribs) 06:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

You forgot to mention the bit about "subsequent ruin" that I removed. Are any of the facts in the longer version incorrect? Kevin (talk) 08:02, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Agee

Hello Kevin. I disagree with the result of this deletion discussion and I would like to recreate the article, as I think that Chris Agee meets our criteria for authors.

The evidence:

• International Who’s Who in Poetry 2005, 13th Edition - original entry available at Google Books
• The book of Irish American poetry: from the eighteenth century to the present
• A father left bereft - The Irish Times
• World Literature Today
• The New North - culturenorthernireland.org
• Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment
• Aspects 2009 Irish Literature Festival
• Dublin Book Festival
• Franco-Irish Literary Festival
• Irish Writers Online

All in all, Agee has an entry in specialized printed encyclopedias, his books were published by several poetry publishers and his books/anthologies were reviewed in an Irish national newspaper and in a specialized literary journal - World Literature Today. Furthermore, his work has been noted by several literary festivals and he is a member of editorial boards of several magazines. All of it is easily verifiable using reliable sources, mentioned above. Could you please userfy the deleted content here? I'll also notify the editors who participated in the discussion. If you disagree with my intention, I'll take the issue to Wikipedia:Deletion review for further consideration. Thank you, have a good day.--Vejvančický (talk) 12:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Userfied at User:Vejvančický/Chris Agee. Kevin (talk) 22:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

talk, I didn't know that Chris Agee was being deleted, but then most of us don't know about most of the deletion processes going on in quiet. I quite agree with you about Chris Agee. I know of him mainly because of his role as a bridge between English language poetry and the poetry of Bosnia, and his anthology Scar on the Stone, with translations from the likes of Ted Hughes. All meaningless. You're fighting a lost cause, Wikipedia relishes devouring its children. Opbeith (talk) 20:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

A ranting matyr. Just what I've always wanted. Kevin (talk) 22:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations. The deletion of this article was the triumph of an alliance of philistinism and arrogance. Opbeith (talk) 22:30, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

(i've seen worse AfD's) apparently, no one thinks much of that Irish anthology - find some more reviews or an anthology or award and it will be a keep. (oh and flag it Article Rescue Squadron) Pohick2 (talk) 23:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

i've improved the article a little at User:Vejvančický/Chris Agee; would you care to give it a second look? (work in 3 anthologies, and bio in harvard magazine) Pohick2 (talk) 02:49, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I've recreated the article. Thanks for your assistance, Kevin and Pohick2. No need for angry or ironic comments. --Vejvančický (talk) 11:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Rochelle Owens

by all means, i was wondering why that was deleted, (i don't see the offense there, but i agree labeling could be annoying) it is a verifiable reference, could you leave the ref part as an external link? Pohick2 (talk) 23:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

ok, check out the selective editing of "offensive words", is that ok? Pohick2 (talk) 23:46, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Works for me. Kevin (talk) 00:20, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Question

What should we do with the last vote at this RFA where an IP signed for a user? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:32, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't do anything, as it doesn't look like an attempt to skew the debate. It's most likely a mistake, not logging in or something. Kevin (talk) 03:37, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Changes to page

Hi Kevin, just wondering why you made the changes to the Herbal Magic page. Are you a volunteer? Wondering if you could state it on the talk page. Thanks! --Luna sky (talk) 14:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Just noticed your edit summary for removing deletion. Thanks! --Luna sky (talk) 15:05, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

BLP contentiousness proposal

Just so you know, I've made a proposal at BLP in which I mention your name and disagree with your interpretation of policy. I'm not gauntlet–throwing, just trying to let you know in case you would like to respond. Best regards, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 21:46, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Square Enix Music Team layoffs

Here's your source:

http://www.squareenixmusic.com/musicnews2.php?subaction=showfull&id=1267549876&archive=&start_from=&u —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raizen1984 (talk • contribs) 03:04, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Given that the title includes the word "rumour", I think we will need to wait for a better one. Kevin (talk) 03:06, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Antonio Vivaldi

Hey there Kevin. I undid your protection of the Vivaldi page, per this ANI thread. I hope that's all right with you. NW (Talk) 04:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Didn't see that thread. Kevin (talk) 04:25, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Or notice that he has unfortunately died, apparently. Kevin (talk) 04:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

BLP discussion

Hi Kevin! If there is any consensus at at all, it is that the entire discussion has become a tangled confusion, and as a result both proponents and opponents of the issues under discussion are abandoning ship. None of us want this. It is still not clear which way consensus will fall and your contributions to the discussion are invaluable. However, In an attempt to keep the policy discussion on an even track, some users have decided to start the ball rolling for clarity by creating a special workshop pages. The first of these is for the technical development of a template at WT:BLP PROD TPL in case policy is decided for it . The taskforce pages are designed keep irrelevant stuff off the policy discussion and talk page, and help a few of us to move this whole debate towards a decision of some kind or another. The pages will be linked in a way that watchers will still find their way to them. This move is not intended to influence any policy whatsoever; It is to keep the discussion pages focussed on the separate issues. Cheers. --Kudpung (talk) 23:29, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I too am abandoning the RFC ship. With large and important issues it is an especially poor way of making decisions. The community has had ample opportunity to come up with a means of dealing with the issues I brought to a head, and they have failed. This is not so much a failure of those at the various discussions, rather a lack of a reasonable decision making process. Once I have dealt with a couple of things I am working on, I intend to pick up where I left off in January. Kevin (talk) 23:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)