User talk:TexasAndroid/Archive14: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:54, 24 August 2012

If you leave a new message on this page, I will reply on this page unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.

Deletion review for Aleksandrs Čekulajevs

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Aleksandrs Čekulajevs. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Metropolitan90 (talk) 22:04, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My only involvement was in handling a G7 CSD after the page was recreated. Looking at the history, that G7 looks valid. I have no particular opinion on the AFD close from a few days before, and see no point in my jumping into the current DRV. But thank you for the notice anyway. - TexasAndroid (talk) 04:59, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Hi TexasAndroid, thanks for your help moving Jonuz! Azylber (talk) 16:49, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NP. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:04, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rob De Luca

Thanks for the advice, but that's exactly what he did - just the new pic was deleted without discussion ( o.k. Wiki policies are Wiki policies, just would have been nice to have time to react) and that was when trouble started. More details on the Rob De Luca talk page.

Moonslide (talk) 12:02, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Professional Griefers

Thanks for message. Normally I respond positively to a reasonable request to recreate from an uninvolved editor, but it's not quite as straightforward here. The article was recreated and redeleted.

17:10, 10 July 2012 Favonian (talk | contribs | block) deleted page Professional Griefers (A1: Short article without enough context to identify the subject) (view/restore)

I'm reluctant to overturn another admin's decision, especially as his reason was the same as my second reason. The article had nothing about its subject other than it was by a notable group. Recreate as redirect to the group, perhaps? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:56, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*I* would be OK with that, but I'm not sure that it would please the creator. The A1 deletion you mention came after yours, and was of a complaint page that the original creator added (at the article site) complaining loudly. I would say that this was a valid A1 of the complaint page, and really should have no bearing on the validity or non-validity of your original A7. I would also disagree that the original would be valid A1 deletion. While it was not much more than a stub, what was there was definitely enough to identify the subject, which is precisely enough to invalidate A1.

So I would say that redirect vs article is an editorial issue, not a deletion issue, and I still do not see a valid reason for the original deletion. Sorry, just calling it as I see it. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The 12 cellists of the Berlin Philharmonic

Hi, I see you deleted this page under A7 back in December. I was wondering if you could provide a copy to me in my userspace. Since the group meets criterion 5 of WP:BAND (recording multiple albums for EMI) I would assume you'd let me reinstate a referenced page without going through DRV? Them From Space 23:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored it. Meeting a criteria of WP:BAND is definitely an assertion of possible notability, and that pretty much invalidates my A7 deletion. I would strongly suggest finding reliable sources, though, as I really doubt it would survive an AFD debate in its current form. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:04, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Micropharma

I am sorry not to have replied before. I had announced at the top of my user- and talk-pages that I was on wikibreak as from July 3rd; I am just back now. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 13:40, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Important Lineage

Hi, I must apologize ahead of time for not knowing my way around Wiki yet, but as a Martial Art enthusiast, I was interested in getting more information on Philippine Martial Arts, and Remy Presas, and noticed that an article was deleted from April of 2008 on an important figure named Angel Cabales (an A7 deletion?). I am working on our own martial art family tree and this type of information could be useful to me in my profession. There may be valuable information in this article that other martial artists can use for tracing their lineage as well. Again, I am new to this whole wiki thing, so I may be off base...please advise. Thank you for your consideration! (much respect and humble bow toward TexasAndroid-wiki-pro) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KodenKanMan (talk • contribs) 08:27, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The content can be viewed at [1] - TexasAndroid (talk) 12:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help

Thanks for moving the Ricki Lake article. -- James26 (talk) 21:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NP - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:28, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Veeam

You have deleted this page with (A7: No explanation of the subject's significance (organization)). I am ready to update the subject's significance. Veeam provide FREE and very useful tool for virtualization community. As of today, the tool is used by over 200'000 virtualization professionals (first release was 5 years ago). This tool is usually mentioned as #1 free tool for virtualization and cloud in various free tool reviews. I believe, this is significant and of interest to lots of people. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.167.136.133 (talk • contribs)

You are going to need to be able to show that the item meets Wikipedia's definition of Notability, not yours, sorry. Please read WP:NOTE for general information. At it's simplest, if you can provide references that are Reliable, Independent, and Non-Trivial, then you are well on your way to showing notability. All three of those requirements are critical for whether a reference shows notability. Blogs are not Reliable. Press Releases and company web sites are not independent. And a list of top tools is a Trivial reference. One or two full articles on the tool from reliable publications would go a long way towards showing notability. - TexasAndroid (talk) 02:49, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes - I fully understand that, and I am ready to provide references that would meet those requirements. How do I go about this? Who do I provide those references to? I am new to wikipedia :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.249.186.5 (talk • contribs)

First, create an account for yourself. You cannot create articles as an IP, and the following steps will need you to do that.

Then you can try using the Article Creation Wizard to help you create your new article. - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Does it make any difference if the article already existed, but is currently deleted? Is it possible to undelete it instead, and add the required references (instead of creating the article from scratch). Thanks for all your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.167.136.133 (talk) 19:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that there is an old deletion discussion that resulted in a Delete, it's likely best to create it out of user space and get it reviewed before it is moved to article-space. If you would like, I can userify it for you so that it can be worked on in user space before without threat of further deletions. It would really be best, if you want that, to get an account created before I userify. IP addresses are subject to change. You've commented from a couple of different ones in the course of this conversation (I'm assuming that all the above comments are from one person). If you create an account, all your work will be attributed correctly to you, and I can put the old article in one place where it will be availible to you no matter how often your IP changes. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:37, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, yes I have created the account a few days ago - hopefully this post gets tagged accordingly. Please userify the article, and I will see if it has anything worse keeping (I have not seen the deleted version before). Yes, all comments above were from me :) Thank you!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vmexpert (talk • contribs) 20:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. It's now available at User:Vmexpert/Veeam. I've also brought to the front the last version from when it was deleted by a full deletion discussion. This is likely the most robust version in the history. But the whole history is there if you want to sift through to see if there is something else of use there.

Please, please read WP:CORP and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veeam. If you want to make an article that will not just be deleted again, you are going to need to show that the company is notable. See my comment earlier in this discussion about what is needed for a notability reference. At it's simplest, one or better two full articles in reliable industry news sources about this company would help tremendously. And I mean independent articles, not ones based off of press releases. If you can find a few sources like this, you'll have gone a huge way towards getting past the reasons for the original deletion.

The old deletion debate is still in force, and unless you can show that the company has become notable in the time since, the article is quite likely to be deleted once again if you move it back to article space. - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I would like to run the updated article by you if I may, before moving it to the article space. Could you please keep this discussion on your page until I am done, as it has all the links and suggestions I need. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.249.186.5 (talk) 14:48, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I generally only archive my talk one or twice a year. Since I already archived once at the end of June, I'll most likely not archive it again until around the end of 2012/start of 2013. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:13, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Wesley West

You deleted Wesley West. I had started it, but got pulled away for a few days. I have the content and want to re-do it. You okay with that? Thanks, User:Cersevcu (talk) 13:59, 31 July 2012

Premature move of userfied deleted article

A new user The-anyel has moved the deleted article Dolchamar, which I had gotten userfied, back onto mainspace. I was supposed to run the article by you before moving it back to mainspace. I assume that The-anyel simply didn't understand what userspace articles were. (Their explanation of the move was "It is not a user, it's a band article".) I've explained what the situation is and asked if they want to collaborate on improving the article. My thought is to let the article sit where it is for a couple days and see if The-anyel replies. If they do want to collaborate on improving it, Article Incubator might be a better option. I also have no objection to moving it back to userspace ASAP. Naŋar (talk) 19:23, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's been fixed already and moved back to userspace. Disregard the whole thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naŋar (talk • contribs) 20:29, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Tuva people

Hi, Can you tell me why the Tuva people entry has been deleted? I am an inexperienced user so will understand best if you make it explicit and layperson's English. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oueeza (talk • contribs) 14:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All that was there was a redirect, no actual content. It was deleted as it was created by a banned user. When a user is banned, they are not allowed to edit. Not anything. If they return and edit, when it is discovered that they are the banned user, all of their edits are subject to removal/deletion. - TexasAndroid (talk) 16:34, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my incorrect tagging

I need to remember to check page histories before I tag. Sorry for my carelessness. I'll do better next time. BusterD (talk) 18:49, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NP. I actually deleted one myself, then caught on a later one that there was deleted history, and went back and double-checked the ones I had already deleted, finding that one needed to be restored then reverted to the valid redirect from the history. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TDB Acronym

Referance original message: "Hello, I'm TexasAndroid. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page TDB, because to me it seemed If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thanks, TexasAndroid (talk) 05:17, 8 August 2012 (UTC}"

Tnspaceboy's reply: Yes, you did make a mistake. No, this is not inappropriate for an encyclopedia. It is a legitimate reference for this acronym to also stand for to an online radio show. If people search for this acronym they should be able to learn that in popular circles it is commonly referring to this onine station in addition to the other info on that page. Such information is relevant for an encyclopedia. Thanks, Tnspaceboy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tnspaceboy (talk • contribs) 12:40, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but no. Disambiguation pages on Wikipedia exist for the purpose of helping direct to different pages on the project, not to the internet at large. If the topic has an article, then it belongs in the disambiguation. If it does not have an article, then it does not belong. Disambiguation pages are expressly not for external links, which is what your entry was. As long as it is just an entry for an external link, then it is spam, attempting to direct traffic outside of Wikipedia, which is not allowed.

So, if you want to have the topic listed there, your first step needs to be to have an article. And there you run into another barrier, notability. There is no indication in the slightest that your topic meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. Please read WP:BIO for these requirements. Unless you can show that the topic meets these requirements, then any article on him is likely to be deleted, and you are right back to where you are now. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Takes_America/San_Antonio

I'd like to invite you to participate in this event.--v/r - T P 21:26, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Trichuris trichiura

A tag has been placed on Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Trichuris trichiura requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for four days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. T. trichiura Infect me 21:42, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for expediting that. T. trichiura Infect me 14:44, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I only created it because there were multiple files in a red-linked category. After you filed it for speedy, I looked a little closer. I saw them all created by one editor, and you removing them. When I went to ask the tagger why he had tagged them like that, I discovered him retired after a block. So I could not get any explanation for the tagging, and thus was unable to make any better evaluation on whether or not the tagging was proper or your removal was proper. So I just went ahead and deleted the now empty category. <shrug> - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:59, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jessica Ghawi

A tag has been placed on Jessica Ghawi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, image description page, image talk page, mediawiki page, mediawiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, or user talk page from the article space.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DASHBot (talk) 18:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your participation

Regardless of its outcome, I wanted to thank you for taking the time to participate in the DRV on Margo Rey. I appreciate it. Best regards... Vertium ^{When all is said} _{and done} 16:44, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Baker Art Gallery

I'm curious why you changed a category from Category:Columbus, Ohio to Category:Museums in Columbus, Ohio. Their is no museum, and the buildings were torn down.
Roseohioresident (talk) 19:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

XXX in YYY does not mean that XXX is *still* in YYY. Past XXX in YYY still can belong in the XXX in YYY category. Especially if there is no "Former XXX in YYY" category, and there are not a lot of those. It was a Gallery, and to me in the normal subcategorization of cities gallery implies museum. That said, I've adjusted the categories a bit. - TexasAndroid (talk) 19:38, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

pot belge

Hi TexasAndroid. Way back in prehistoric times (2007) you salted pot belge. I would like to create this page as a useful redirect to Pot Belge. Can you undo the salting? Thanks, Pichpich (talk) 16:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Pichpich (talk) 18:27, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Riley Schillaci

I am the PR agent for Riley Schillaci.

You erroneously changed the information contained in th beginning of the bio for Riley Schillaci. Riley is indeed a professional female sword swallower, and her ranking as one of less than 20 women sword swallowers in the world can be verified on the Sword Swallowers Association International web site (http://www.swordswallow.com/performers.php). Riley has performed in Canada, and is known in countries outside of the continental USA. So she is indeed internationally recognized.

The changes that you made to the wiki page, are being considered libelous. Your actions break the slander and libel laws in many states. Please refrain from further edits to Riley Schillaci's wiki page, and leave it to the friends and fans.

All further interactions between myself and yourself, should be sent directly to swswriley1@yahoo.com

Thank you for your cooperation,

Johnny Nukes swswriley1@yahoo.com www.rileyschillaci.com