User talk:Joe Decker

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kirkoconnell (talk | contribs) at 16:50, 22 May 2012 (→‎Drake Jensen Questions: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please help. The John Austin (songwriter) page should not have been deleted.

The following article should not have been deleted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/John_Austin_%28songwriter%29

All of the information contained in the article "John Austin (songwriter)" is factual. John Austin meets the notability requirements, having worked with many artists of notability, and having released publicly documented works for over 20 years. Paste Magazine has written feature articles on John Austin, and JA's album "Busted at the Pearly Gates" received an honorable mention in Paste Magazine as one of the most important albums of 2002. Please contact Paste Magazine's editor-in-chief Josh Jackson to verify.

Please put the article John Austin (songwriter) back up on Wikipedia. Thank you. 98.117.242.142 (talk) 16:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. First, you need to take this up with the closing administrator, which I've seen that you've done.
With respect to Wikipedia's specific policies about notability, usually the core of the question is not whether we believe the notable, but what we have in terms of reliable, secondary sources. The Paste magazine feature article, and something else of that order in terms of coverage, would certainly make the case. You claim seems sensible, e.g., [1], which is far short of a "feature article" but a lot more than the editors in the above discussion found.
What I suggest is that you list out a three to five of articles like that. Article name, article author, magazine name, publication date. If there's an on-line version of the articles a link is helpful, but it's not specifically required by policy. Present that evidence to the closing administrator. He or she may decide that the article can be recreated on that basis alone, or may take the question to our "deletion process" review for you based on that evidence. Select the three to five articles that spend the most time talking about Austin and/or his work, the usual bar is two or three articles that provide in-depth"coverage", it's more effective if you don't dilute your argument with additional articles that provide passing coverage. Best of luck, I'd love to see that article back, if it can be, as our policies require for living people, written based on reference to reliable, secondary sources. --joe deckertalk to me 16:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sydneysider1979

Hi Joe. I was wondering how we can delete on Wiki the section where it says this page has been deleted? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_graham?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter Does it automatically update? If so, after how long? If not is there anything we can do to get rid of it, as a Twitter post on Google keeps linking to it. CheersSydneysider1979 (talk) 10:35, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, that never goes away. I don't know how to address fixing it, those messages are very helpful when working with recovering deleted articles, etc., and I'm pretty sure it's built-in. I'm sorry if that's causing trouble. --joe deckertalk to me 22:53, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Joe. No worries. All good. I've requested with Google a url removal, so got it covered :-) Thanks very much. Sydneysider1979 (talk) 08:38, 19 May 2012 (UTC)Sydneysider1979[reply]

Expired BLP Prod

I'm noticing that Ghufran Raghib is expired (at least the 2nd time it has been around an unreferenced BLP loop) but not appearing in Category:Expired proposed deletions of unsourced BLPs. Any idea why not? AllyD (talk) 22:44, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes.  :) There is a ... "wont fix" flaw in the Wikimedia servers in which categories created by templates are not updated until an article is edited, even a cache purge won't change it. (WP:NULLEDIT, for example, notes this.) This has been kinda a thorn in my side for the last two years, and it's something I'm actually trying to get some support for fixing, one way or another, there's a discussion I recently started here on that very subject, you might want to take a peek.
Category:BLP articles proposed for deletion by days left has a similar problem, things all get put in there, but the sort key never updates, and so is wrong more often than right.
WP:PRODSUM doesn't distinguish PRODs from BLPPRODs, and lists things in template placement time (which is kinda confusing), but does actually provide a good way to find the backlog. --joe deckertalk to me 22:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS, want me to take care of that particular article? --joe deckertalk to me 22:55, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for that; I didn't know about the null edit and it worked a treat. (If this particular article reappears again, I will probably take it to AfD rather than have it stuck in an eternal recurrance of BLP prodding and re-creation.) I take your point in the discussions, it does seem daft to have time-based category aging that doesn't actually work. AllyD (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Heh. I've salted that article title for you, given the timing of the recreations and the continued unwillingness of the creator to discuss the question (so far as I was able to determine), I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a third and no more successful attempt. --joe deckertalk to me 19:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:The need for coordination. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 17:15, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
Thank you for coming up with a test for determining how WP:PERSISTENCE works in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Casey-Lyanne Kearney and such cases. Bearian (talk) 17:36, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and thanks to you and Ultra for asking a great question. Cheers! --joe deckertalk to me 23:35, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joe, I've just created the above article about a Canadian animal rights advocate. She's a well-known AR advocate in Canada, and former director of the Toronto Humane Society, but there aren't a huge number of sources, so she's borderline notable for WP. I've just read through the AfD – Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liz White (politician) (2nd nomination), which you closed as delete and merge – and didn't realize it was so recent, so I thought I should let you know as a matter of courtesy.

Can the article stand as it is, or should I go through DRV? I would like to keep it because we lack articles about women in general and Canadian women in particular. This would be the only article we have (that I know of) about a Canadian woman animal rights advocate. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Slim! Thanks for the courtesy, and I totally understand how you could have missed the AfD with the disambiguator. I really would prefer you go through DRV unless you have a little more in the way of sourcing, it's a little too close (in terms of what's shown in the way of sources) for me to feel it wouldn't meet the same fate in a similar discussion. Sorry for the extra lap, please let me know if there's anything I can do to help, and I'll try and take a look myself for additional sources tonight when I have a little more time. --joe deckertalk to me 23:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Joe, thanks for the reply, and I do see your point. I'll take it through DRV and see what happens. I may not have time to do that this evening, as I'm in the middle of trying to find sources for Animal Alliance of Canada, but if not tonight, then I'll do it tomorrow. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:57, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's great, there's no deadline. It may be morning before i get to looking myself. --joe deckertalk to me 04:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Triage/New Pages Feed

Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.

The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:31, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Drake Jensen Questions

Hello Joe,

You seemed to be the fairest person I have seen comment on this so I thought I would ask you about it.

I am really sceptical of Wikipedia right now. This Drake Jensen article seems to be a no brainer to me. I have checked out all the sites that mention any claims and they all seem to be publicity sites designed to make claims for people. He states he has gotten air play on over 100 radio stations... but every reference to that I find on the internet is a verbatim statement that he himself releases. His producer who is supposed to be of note does not have him listed on her production page and she claims to have been a sound engineer for the Beatles besides others and yet she does not have a Wikipedia article? Also, some of the people who commented on the delete page appear to be Gay rights activists. I mean, I don't care who people sleep with but this seems to be almost shameless self promotion at this point. None of the keys points mentioned as to why it should be kept seem to be verifiable. The websites that post information about him are of dubious bias at best. I really didn't think I needed to post that strong of an argument. I do not want to put the article up for deletion now and I realize that maybe my tact wasn't properly set for a debatable deletion, but can you at least independently look at the claims in the article and see if you can find ANY real backing for them. I cannot. The only thing I can verify for sure is that he is a gay country singer. He seems to self produce albums that seem only available for download. And he seems to claim to have been played on 100 radio stations but the evidence I have of that are websites quoting almost verbatim the claim itself without sources. It seems like a vicious cycle of "it's true because this says it is".

Anyway, I understand if this is outside of what you want to do as a causal user of Wikipedia, but I am seriously debating leaving the platform if clear bullshit can stick because a few people say it is good.

-Kirkoconnell (talk) 16:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]