User talk:Sandstein: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:00, 12 April 2012

Welcome to my talk page!

Please place new messages at the bottom of this page, or click here to start a new discussion, which will automatically be at the bottom. I will respond to comments here, unless you request otherwise. Please read the following helpful hints, as well as our talk page guidelines before posting:

Please add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your message. This will create an identifying signature and timestamp.

Do you have a question about arbitration enforcement? Please read my FAQ at User:Sandstein/AE.

If you're here to inform me of a mistake I made while on administrative duty, please indicate which article is concerned by enclosing the title of the article in two sets of square brackets: [[example article]].

If you are looking for my talk page's previous contents, they are in the archives.

Start a new talk topic

My Ears Are Burning...

[1]. Singling me out for the WP:NOTAVOTE essay, eh? Maybe I should have said "SNOW" - duh. When you want to get verbose in a deletion decision, focus on the content, not the contributors. Cheers, Sandstein... Doc talk 03:52, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't mean to discomfort you, but it's my habit in complicated closures to explain which opinions I disregard and why. Sandstein 06:02, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem! Saying "I've discounted the SPA votes, the ivotes, etc. ..." without actually naming anyone specifically tends to lessen the potential for drama, usually, from what I've seen. Sorry if I was a bit brusque. :> Doc talk 06:16, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undelete article Journal of the European Royal Society (JERSY)

You confused unproven personal opinions in the delete debate for a proof to delete. The article actually meets WP:NJournals guideline to the letter, and it is in the spirit of an encyclopedia as well. The subject of the article is a properly registered journal of a historic value according to WP:NJournals. Also, the delete action was taken after exactly 7 days into the debate, which is the required minimum time. Why the hurry, besides the fuss on an article that meets the only relevant guideline? No real arguments to delete were offered other than insinuations and references to irrelevant guidelines. Please undelete or/and enable a routine undelete debate. 69.163.243.64 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:22, 6 April 2012 (UTC).[reply]

It would be easier for me or others to help you if you could provide more useful information, context, links and/or diffs about your request. Please see the guide to requesting assistance for advice how you could improve your request to increase the likelihood that it is answered to your satisfaction. Sandstein 16:30, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not here to make it easier but to make it right. That said, the above request: is in English, is brief, does include necessary context, does comment on the content and not the contributor. So it complies with the guide to requesting assistance. Should you still insist on a link to an article you deleted just a few hours ago, then you are either mean or senile and this is pointless. 69.163.243.64 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC).[reply]

What I meant is, can you please link to the deletion discussion or to the article? (See also the box at the top of the page.) Sandstein 06:54, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ASMR

I was just wondering why you deleted the page about Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response, I experience this sensation and would just like to know why it wasn't fit for a wiki page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.216.170.138 (talk) 07:38, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please link to the article or deletion discussion? It would be easier for me or others to help you if you could provide more useful information, context, links and/or diffs about your request. Please see the guide to requesting assistance for advice how you could improve your request to increase the likelihood that it is answered to your satisfaction. Sandstein 07:44, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page icon

Hi Sandstein, When you get a chance, would you mind updating the little lock icon to use the full protection one rather than the move protection on on Jim Hawkins (radio presenter)? Regards,
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 16:10, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't normally bother with lock icons as they are purely cosmetic and 99% of readers and editors (me included) can't tell one color icon from another. Sandstein 16:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"99% of readers and editors" ...Citation needed...68.81.76.1 (talk) 00:44, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undelete article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Reynolds_(politician)

Please undelete the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Reynolds_(politician)

This article has been deleted as part of an ongoing cyber-bullying campaign; one of the antagonist organisations behind this campaign even boast of this success on their website.

Previous installations in this campaign can be seen when looking through the history of this article where slanderous and defanatory edits have been made that were undone by other website viewers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.20.153.69 (talk) 18:47, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the community decided to delete the article in the discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Reynolds (politician). What you say does not address the reasons advanced for deletion in that discussion, and so I cannot accede to your request. Sandstein 20:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested action?

Hi there, as you have some history with the editors on the Prem Rawat article, I thought I would ask you my question, and skip having to fill in all the backstory to some other admin. In the last few hours, it seems that the usually tense atmosphere of the article's talk page has degraded past the point of acceptable, after 2000 words of discussion on a completely unnecessary point, I suggested asking RSN if Rumiton's source was reliable, he said that was a good idea, but he didn't like how I worded it, and on the Prem Rawat talk page he has now called my action "extremely stupid". He also stated that this was going to cause escalation, and right on cue Momento (who hasn't said a word in over 2 weeks) shows up and suggests I'm deliberately lying, even though it's all right there on the talk page. I'm not sure how to handle the situation. Do you have any suggestions? -- Maelefique^(talk) 08:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't have the background knowledge or time to read all of Talk:Prem Rawat right now, sorry. All I can do is to refer you to the general advice at WP:DR and, if necessary, WP:AE - there are I believe arbitration sanctions applicable to this topic. Sandstein 09:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC

Thank-you, the reminder about sanctions has given me a direction to go, I have filed my complaint here, and I fully appreciate that the Prem Rawat article has an inordinately skewed "value to Wikipedia/Time taken up by admins" ratio. :) -- Maelefique^(talk) 16:24, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreement with deletion (A-fu Teng)

Hi, I disagree with the deletion of the article A-fu Teng. I'm the creator. Please review, while I may not have included enough references in a timely manner, a look at the corresponding Japanese/Chinese articles can yield many non-English references. If you revert the decision I can add the links in Chinese language quickly as references. Besides the English link provided is from a reputable source, a simple research will tell you it's from Chinese Television System, one of the largest media in Taiwan. It would be a shame if someone with 900 million fans (See this link from World Journal using a translator if you must: http://www.worldjournal.com/view/full_news/13327972/article-%E3%80%8C%E7%A6%8F%E3%80%8D%E9%9F%B3%E5%82%B3%E8%85%A6%E2%80%A6%E5%A5%B9%E8%AE%939%E5%84%84%E7%B6%B2%E5%8F%8B%E7%98%8B%E7%8B%82-?instance=tw_bull) cannot get an English wiki site because sources aren't in English. Wikipedia:Verifiability also doesn't say anything about non-English sources being non-notable. Just because one cannot find anything in English doesn't mean it's not notable. While I understand you are doing your job, I feel this is very lazy/disrespectful on your part. Had you Googled the Chinese name you will get over a million hits. That's hardly un-notable. If you can't read Chinese, and that's perfectly fine, you shouldn't leave the decision to a more qualified user/administrator. Timmyshin (talk) 01:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 01:56, 12 April 2012 edit Timmyshin (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users 97,448 edits m →‎Disagreement with deletion (A-fu Teng) ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:00, 12 April 2012 edit undo Timmyshin (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users 97,448 edits →‎Disagreement with deletion (A-fu Teng) Next edit →
Line 50:		Line 50:

	== Disagreement with deletion (A-fu Teng) ==		== Disagreement with deletion (A-fu Teng) ==
	Hi, I disagree with the deletion of the article [[A-fu Teng]]. I'm the creator. Please review, while I may not have included enough references in a timely manner, a look at the corresponding Japanese/Chinese articles can yield many non-English references. If you revert the decision I can add the links in Chinese language quickly as references. Besides the English link provided is from a reputable source, a simple research will tell you it's from [[Chinese ~~television~~ ~~system~~]], one of the ~~major~~ media in [[Taiwan]]. It would be a shame if someone with 900 million fans (See this link from [[World Journal]] using a translator if you must: http://www.worldjournal.com/view/full_news/13327972/article-%E3%80%8C%E7%A6%8F%E3%80%8D%E9%9F%B3%E5%82%B3%E8%85%A6%E2%80%A6%E5%A5%B9%E8%AE%939%E5%84%84%E7%B6%B2%E5%8F%8B%E7%98%8B%E7%8B%82-?instance=tw_bull) cannot get an English wiki site because sources aren't in English. [[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] also doesn't say anything about non-English sources being non-notable. Just because one cannot find anything in English doesn't mean it's not notable. [[User:Timmyshin\|Timmyshin]] ([[User talk:Timmyshin\|talk]]) 01:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)		Hi, I disagree with the deletion of the article [[A-fu Teng]]. I'm the creator. Please review, while I may not have included enough references in a timely manner, a look at the corresponding Japanese/Chinese articles can yield many non-English references. If you revert the decision I can add the links in Chinese language quickly as references. Besides the English link provided is from a reputable source, a simple research will tell you it's from [[Chinese Television System]], one of the largest media in [[Taiwan]]. It would be a shame if someone with 900 million fans (See this link from [[World Journal]] using a translator if you must: http://www.worldjournal.com/view/full_news/13327972/article-%E3%80%8C%E7%A6%8F%E3%80%8D%E9%9F%B3%E5%82%B3%E8%85%A6%E2%80%A6%E5%A5%B9%E8%AE%939%E5%84%84%E7%B6%B2%E5%8F%8B%E7%98%8B%E7%8B%82-?instance=tw_bull) cannot get an English wiki site because sources aren't in English. [[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] also doesn't say anything about non-English sources being non-notable. Just because one cannot find anything in English doesn't mean it's not notable. While I understand you are doing your job, I feel this is very lazy/disrespectful on your part. Had you Googled the Chinese name you will get over a million hits. That's hardly un-notable. If you can't read Chinese, and that's perfectly fine, you shouldn't leave the decision to a more qualified user/administrator. [[User:Timmyshin\|Timmyshin]] ([[User talk:Timmyshin\|talk]]) 01:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)