User talk:Coren/Archives/2008/August

Moffat mountain rescue

The bot has picked up a submission as matching that of the history on Moffat MRT website at www.moffatmrt.org.uk. I am the team secretary and administrator of that website and give permission to use the information provided. I can also be contacted on secretary@moffatmrt.org.uk.

Can you authorise its use please?

Thanks

Robert

MiszaBot III (talk) 13:10, 3 August 2008 (UTC)2/8/08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Torwood (talk • contribs) 19:44, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Not a false positive, but....

Your bot caught me in the middle of splitting out some content from an overly long article (Observer effect into a separate article (Observer effect (physics). I'm about to resolve it, will remove the tag. Good to know there's a bot out there looking for stuff like this! Steve Carlson^Talk 06:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Howell Station

As designated, I took the text from the National Register of Historic Places,a nd is therefore in the public domain. Bwjsmartdude (talk) 21:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Premature rejection.

I was supposed to have ten days.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 00:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, RFAR remain open for up to ten days; but it is usual to remove them soon when they become mathematically impossible to be accepted. — Coren ^(talk) 12:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Three of them changed their votes during the process. If two of them refound their courage, and then another arbitrator who had not voted chose to accept, then I'd have it.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 12:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Look, that wasn't going to happen. Some of the original support the case had was because the arbs misunderstood Jimbo's comment to mean that they were compelled to take the case, which they were not. If you feel the case was rejected when it should not have been, then I would recommend making your case by email to arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. — Coren ^(talk) 13:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

So, in other words, it was a marsupial tribunal? Understood. Arbitrary committee indeed.--King Bedford I ^{Seek his grace} 18:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not going to double guess the intent of the individual arbitrators, nor would it be appropriate for me to do so. You may request a more detailed rationale by email from the Committee, at the address I've pointed out above. — Coren ^(talk) 20:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Martinphi-ScienceApologist

I've been away for the better part of a week so please forgive me for this late question. I received a notice on my talkpage regarding this old case from you on July 28. I'm not sure why. I glanced at it, and it doesn't appear different to me. Perhaps it is and I missed it. Could you let me know why you notified me? Thank you, Antelan 17:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

There was a new remedy enacted by motion; basically, application of general discretionary remedies to all pages related to "Pseudoscience, broadly construed". The reason you were notified is simply because you were on the involved parties' list. — Coren ^(talk) 18:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Merkey

You placed the most recent block on Merkey. I've posted a note on WP:ANI#Merkey about new editing to the bio. If you have any comment it'd be helpful. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

National Library for Public Health article content

Nlph220708 (talk) 10:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC) I've just created this new article about the National Library for Public Health at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_library_for_public_health and I have surprisingly found out that there are some copyright retrictions. The North Eat Public Health Observatory, institution I am working for as an Information Specialist is the owner of the document included in the article while the one found on the Internet has copied us. If you have any doubt, please contact us at:http://www.library.nhs.uk/publichealth/ContactUs.aspx Thank you, Library team

Inappropriate actions

I object to your protecting Female genital cutting from "editwarring" when you yourself were involved in the "editwar" (and naturally you protected it in your preferred state). I also strongly object to your removal of the NPOV tag when it is clear there is an unresolved dispute over the title. Blackworm whose user name really is Blackworm (talk) 17:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

The wrong version is always the one that shall be protected. — Coren ^(talk) 18:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Especially true when the "protector" is also one of the edit-warriors, I would assume. The absurdity of your pointing to that essay in light of this fact is astonishing. Also, please address the removal of the POV-title tag in light of the fact that there is no consensus for its removal. This is in direct violation of policy. Blackworm (talk) 18:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, and not that you actually seem to care, I protected the page upon my return this morning when I noticed the multiple reversions and before I could determine whether the tag was present or not. You're welcome to go complain about admin abuse at some other venue but I expect you will not be overly surprised that I will not entertain your fantasies here. — Coren ^(talk) 22:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Fine, I'll take your word that you also routinely protect pages in which you are involved in an editwar, in your opponents' favoured state also. Now, please address the removal of the POV-title tag in light of the fact that there is no consensus for its removal. This is in direct violation of policy. Blackworm (talk) 22:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

No, it does not, and it is not. The fact that you disagree with the title does not mean that it is not neutral; that tag is reserved for when there is a genuine problem with the neutrality of the title and not simply because some people would prefer it to represent a specific POV. The issue of the article's title has already been beaten into a pulp years ago and the current title (and the associated redirects) are a compromise. You are welcome to suggest renaming, and to gather consensus to do so, but if it was appropriate to place NPOV tags over every article containing something that someone disagreed with, the entire encyclopedia would be nothing but!

Besides, at this point, the primary problem is the edit warring to place and remove the tag— not the article's current name. Your behavior, tu quoque notwithstanding, is edit warring. Raise consensus on the talk page. — Coren ^(talk) 22:48, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Again, you are confounding the issue of the consensus to change the article title with the issue of consensus that the dispute over the article title is resolved. The latter kind of consensus is needed to appropriately remove the POV-title tag. Also, your veiled assertions of POV pushing are incivil and inappropriate. If you wish for the POv-title tag to be removed, help find a consensus in the dispute. Blackworm (talk) 22:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Searchbot on Eros edits

The robot's quick! I was in the process of a series of edits, and it became aware of one of them before the series was complete. The edits should speak for themselves now. Thanks. Godheval (talk) 16:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Awesome bot

I am seriously impressed with the speed of spot (almost immediate) but you may wish to note this site as being a false positive. Keep up the good work. :) Abtract (talk) 18:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

 Done Added. Those seem to pop up at regular interval. — Coren ^(talk) 01:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Seidokaikan

I saw the same information on another website so I thought I could use it. Kaiser jkd (talk) 22:40, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you please help?

Hi... I don't know if you're the right person to ask about this, but you're a sysadmin, which is obviously very high up the food chain here. If my request is not of interest to you, or if you are not in a position to do anything, I'd be grateful if you could point me in the right direction.

There is a user named Tim who has developed something of an obsession with me. You're running the Alastair Haines case, so you can see that his response to the case against Alastair is to fire off an enormous broadside against me. No matter how many people have had a problem with Alastair, Tim insists on claiming that Alastair is only collateral damage in an ongoing feud between Tim and myself. A feud which does not exist, as far as I am concerned.

I could give you the background to why Tim is so fixated on me, but I won't unless you ask, because it's long and boring. But Tim is attacking me constantly in various different areas of Wikipedia, and his latest attempt to bring me into his idee fixe can be seen here.

I am trying to be a good Wikipedian. I'm doing my best to understand Wikipedia policies and comply with them. I admit that I lost my cool last Sunday, and did get into an edit war with Alastair and Tim. While I continue to maintain that I was the subject of attack in that case, my reactions to it were out of line, and I have no issue with the fact that I was blocked.

What bothers me, though, is that Tim is painting me as an ogre everywhere he goes. He insists on treating everything as though it is a matter of personalities, and won't allow me to simply act on content. I don't want to pursue dispute resolution against him, because frankly, I don't know if it's appropriate. This isn't a dispute about content for the most part; it's just Tim running all over Wikipedia shouting about how horrible I am and how everything is my fault (presumably even edit warring between Alastair and Ilkali).

I want to be a big person and just ignore Tim's incessant attacks and his fantasies about me being on some sort of vendetta against him. But now User:Jerryofaiken (who I suspect is a sockpuppet of Tim's, though I have no way of knowing for sure) has jumped on Tim's bandwagon and has accused me of perpetrating an "academic Holocaust". I'm Jewish, and having that sort of invective directed at me is particularly offensive.

Do I have any recourse at all? -LisaLiel (talk) 18:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

It would not be appropriate for me to get personally involved in the dispute, given that I am clerking an Arbitration case involving those editors. The best you can do, at this point, is to provide evidence in the proceeding case to your behavior and that of the other editors. Arbitrators customarily examine the behavior of all editors implicated in an arbitration case (whether as a named party or not), and they will examine both the provided evidence and the wider record when assessing what should be done.

I should point out that, regardless of your participation, the arbitrators will examine the interactions between the other editors and you given that you have been named in the case already. If you feel you have been improperly treated by others, then provide evidence to that effect in the existing case— that's your best shot at having the record cleared. — Coren ^(talk) 22:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Alastair

Pascal once wrote a long rambling note to a friend and then apologized for not having the time to make it shorter. Thanks for your note! I'll definitely hone it down. It's almost Shabbat, though, so it will be Sunday before I can do some pruning.

Actually, the history is a great deal longer, but I'll try to figure out a way to compress this.Tim (talk) 23:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Likewise. Thanks also for the tip about using the talk page. Can make case in talk, use evidence page like footnotes. Understood. Alastair Haines (talk) 00:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

False positive by CorenSearchBot

CorenSearchBot strikes (out) with Islands in the Stream. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that tagging Alexander State Forest for a short sentence paraphrasing statements of fact (location, date of establishment) with cite was arguably a false positive. --Kkmurray (talk) 02:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Incorrent CorenBot

I am hoping it was OK to remove the CorenBit reference from this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Care_assessment. On the referring page we have added in the reference to the GNU Free Documentation License: http://www.housingcare.org/jargon-care-assessment-103c3.aspx Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johndillonmission (talk • contribs) 10:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Remove corenbot ref

I am hoping it was OK to remove the CorenBit reference from this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/care_options. On the referring page we have added in the reference to the GNU Free Documentation License: http://www.housingcare.org/jargon-care-options.aspx Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johndillonmission (talk • contribs) 11:21, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Guild of Drama Adjudicators - copyright

I believe that the concerns surrounding the content of this article (re copyright) have now been addressed.Kwib (talk) 11:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Content for submission on: Ron Rocco

Content for this submission provided courtesy of the artist from his site at: http://www.fine-art.com/ron_rocco/booth.htm

Rr192 (talk) 13:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)rr192@columbia.edu

EIOLCA

Sporadicautomatic (talk) 22:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)sporadicautomatic The EIOLCA page was flagged by CorenSearchBot because of likeness to a page on another wiki. The referenced page, http://ddl.me.cmu.edu/ddwiki/index.php/EIO-LCA, is covered by the GNU Free Documentation License, and the new page references the old, so copyright issues should be covered.

Locws International

Some of the sentences on the website (www.locwsinternational.com) are similar to my own because I've been referring to Locws international publications for reference, I'll cite the publications on my page. Thanks, Christian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christian Lloyd (talk • contribs) 11:00, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Homalozoa

I changed the text and deleted a few sentences of the article I wrote on Homalozoa that were copied from http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/echinodermata/homalozoa.html, so is it fine now or do I have to change more?

Lucas the scot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucas the scot (talk • contribs) 12:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect judgement

Hi, the corenbot mistook the page on LinqToRdf for a copyright violation. It was in fact merely transferal of free content from one wiki to another. Regards AABS (talk) 23:24, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

James Bertram (Carnegie secretary)

I have amended this material. I don't think there is any copyright issue now--Alan (talk) 21:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Cartoon Pakistan

It is a relay/time shift version of CN India. Only with a sight change in a few programs and different adverts. Gqegg (talk) 08:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Matthew Key

As Head of Media Relations for Telefónica Europe, I have started a new page listing biographical details of our CEO, Matthew Key. Initially, the copy is from our homepage (http://www.o2.com/about/key.asp) but will be improved and edited in time. If you need further information, please contact me at simon.lloyd@o2.com. Many thanks, Simon SM Lloyd (talk) 10:08, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Colin Steele

Help ma bob ! - Alternatively the web site you cite has copied the official site of Colin Steele. Bottom line this is not copyright material as I could gleam as much from the CD sleeve (which I own). I would suggest that we leave all this. Happy to field any copyright questions.thanks{James William Devlin (talk) 22:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)}

Edmonton School

None of the text is in violation of copyright.Kyle1278 (talk) 16:53, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

False positive

Papal election, 1119. Savidan 23:21, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Andi Neate

Ha ha - just been accused of plagiarising my own words, in attempting to establish new page for Andi Neate. Wikipedia didn't pick up the link to "Artist Profile" at the Acoustic Kitchen; Acoustic kitchen have used the info I distribute about this performer (which is fine). Any suggestions re establishing separate page for Andi? Or is forever stuck in the section for Acoustic Kitchen?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scary Biscuits (talk • contribs) 17:09, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

SearchBot

Just thought I'd let you know (as requested in the bot message). That the search bot tagged Lahor Tehsil as a copyvio of http://india.smashits.com/wikipedia/Lahor. This site is a mirror of wiki :-) Pahari Sahib 02:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

 Done Added to the list of known mirrors. — Coren ^(talk) 04:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

about codewit global network

i searched for this organization here and i didnt see it and i then write about then. i dont think it has all information as contained in the other siteJudemary (talk) 14:30, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Sierra Leone

CorenSearchBot noticed that there were common phrases between my wikipedia article and the "plagarized" article, because both quoted phrases from a third document, namely the Security Council Resolution both articles were referring to. Also, I believe that the phrase "substantial copy of" should be reserved for cases of substantially more than 20 words. See Talk:United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Sierra Leone.Goatchurch (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Why Delete Chalok Lam

I don't understand why the page Chalok Lam was deleted. I had originally copied form a page (that I had written) on another site. I thrn completely rewrote and redesinged the page. In the middle of this the page disappeared. If you can explain why that would be great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigb100 (talk • contribs) 19:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

CorenSearchBot - NHS Direct and NHS Direct Wales

The former article dealt with an entity which has now become two separate entities thus will be starting off with some similarities but will probably become more dissimilar as they develop. --MBRZ48 (talk) 03:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Re Malcolm Page (footballer)

copied all text from Malcolm Page then turned Malcolm Page into a disambig - may have been the wrong way round? but all links etc. taken care of Epistemos (talk) 05:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Right

Right (: . ——Martin^phi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 06:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Peter Dalglish

Note that OLE Nepal's website's contents is CreativeCommons.

BTW, I messed up capitals the first time, and ended up with a Peter dalglish article, which I later realized I could simply have moved. Could you erase that one, please? Thanks!

yamaplos 17:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence Complete

Could you take a peek at my compressed Alastair/evidence and let me know if it is succinct enough? Thanks! Tim (talk) 20:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

pages European Railway Review, Eurotransport and European Pharmaceutical Review

${\displaystyle }$

response to warning of possible copyright / plagarism; each of these pages are very deliberately similar in language, structure and content as they are all sister publications, by the same publisher, and have all been written by the same person, ie me Sairre (talk) 09:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

NHS Direct & NHS Direct Wales

Hi. I am a little confused by your move of the NHS Direct article to NHS Direct Wales. NHS Direct is a service that operates in England with a similar service, NHS Direct Wales, operating in Wales. If the intention is to have a combined article then it would make more sense for NHS Direct Wales to redirect to NHS Direct as the second name lacks a geographical restriction. However, if you want to retain two separate articles then I suppose that we could keep the current article history at NHS Direct Wales and copy & paste the relevant information back into NHS Direct for the England service. Regards. Road Wizard (talk) 06:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah. I now see that MBRZ48 (talk · contribs) attempted to split the article into separate English and Welsh articles on 18 August 2008 using a copy & paste. I would recommend restoring the article to NHS Direct as that one should remain in place despite whatever happens to the Welsh article. Regards. Road Wizard (talk) 06:46, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. I assume from the lack of response that you have no objections to restoring the previous article name. Unless you wish to make a comment in the next 12 hours I will use the {{db-move}} template to request a reversion by another admin. Regards. Road Wizard (talk) 17:14, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

12 hours?! NHS Direct and NHS Direct Wales are now not two badges of the same service but two different (but similarly named) services provided by two different entities. The article as currently existing is now substantially incorrect and outdated with regard to Wales. Reversion to two separate articles therefore seems to be the correct action.

jones maruri cello guitar duo

I recently posted an article about the Jones Maruri cello guitar duo as they are not listed in wikipedia. This was removed as I copied the text I found about them on the internet from the cellist's web site . They are known throughout the world as can be verified using any internet search and have also recorded most of the literature for this unusual and attractive combination. I do not understand why they are not listed here ?

Cellomusicfan (talk) 22:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hollitech contents

Hi Coren,

Any way i modified the contants now, hope now this conforms to the wikipedia rules.

Regards,

NY Partner (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)NY Partner (talk) 10:24, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Jae (given name)

I created Jae (given name) by splitting off non-Dab-suitable entries from Jae (disambiguation), then lk'g to it from the Dab. There are a lot of these waiting to be done, so recognizing that pattern of title-relationship as an exception might be worth programming in. On the other hand, if it becomes annoying for me, it won't kill anyone to save the revised Dab before the g-n page is there to satisfy the link. (Unless a bot starts suspecting just-added rd-lks in Dabs as a form of spam!)
Thanks for your effort already invested, in any case; you bot-drivers seem to be doing a lot of needed stuff!
--Jerzy•t 06:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

If you're going to be doing those yourself, I can simply put you in the bot whitelist and it'll stop bugging you. — Coren ^(talk) 12:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Claudine BARRETTO or Claudine BARRETO

I created a new page for Claudine as some people knew that the correct spelling of her last name is BARRETO with a single T, while some spelled it as BARRETTO with double T. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fetch dickson (talk • contribs) 05:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Songs From The Blue House

Dear Coren

The text on the Songs From The Blue House page is adapted from the official band web site, and is copyright the band, *not* High Barn Records. The band have given permission for this text to be used.

Keith —Preceding unsigned comment added by Farnishk (talk • contribs) 18:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I wish to grant Wikipedia permission to use material from my sites, www.thechildrenrock.com and www.jimib.com but do not wish to place a statement to that effect on my sites. Thank you, (Wow2210 (talk) 04:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)).

Deletion review for New Cold War

An editor has asked for a deletion review of New Cold War. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review.   user:j    (aka justen)   16:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

To encourage a discussion with you on this deletion, I think it'd be helpful to just post the reason I wrote for deletion review: Deleted as original research by the closing admin (under CSD G6), when the result of the discussion was no consensus for delete. I believe the closing admin substituted his judgment for that of the nearly fifty participants in the discussion. I understand that the job of closing a deletion discussion is to weigh arguments not based on quantity but based on our policies, but as best as I can tell, four participants raised concerns with synthesis or original research (two of which came in very late in the process, about three hours prior to close). Meanwhile, at least four others felt it was strongly sourced and cited. That's out of at least 46 participants. I don't believe in tallies for determining outcome, but I do believe it can help gauge whether or not any consensus has been reached: by my count 21 participants advocated for keep or some variant thereof, while 26 advocated for delete or some variant thereof. Certainly, I think many people, including myself (as the first editor of the article) and the nominator for deletion, believed there was no consensus for delete.   user:j    (aka justen)   16:43, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I've responded there. — Coren ^(talk) 20:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Stein Rokkan Prize for Comparative Social Science Research

For some reason User:CorenSearchBot tagged Stein Rokkan Prize for Comparative Social Science Research as a copyvio as soon as I created it, even though it's not copy-and-pasted and is properly referenced. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Michal Morey

Its a fair cop but I have changed every word of it--Streona (talk) 10:24, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The Battle of Neretva

Moved 'The Battle of Neretva' article to 'Battle of Neretva (film)' page. This should reflect better the subject of the article, and avoid confusion with the 'Battle of Neretva' article. Gaston200 (talk) 11:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

RIU Seabank Hotel Malta

I got the following message for the entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIU_Seabank_Hotel_Malta:

The CorenSearchBot has performed a web search with the contents of this page, and it appears to include a substantial copy of:

   http://www.seabankhotel.com 

I am the webmaster of this website and give permission so the website address is used. My email is by@seabankhotel.com. Is that enough to have the listing unchanged?

Thank you Boboxjordan (talk) 09:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC)Boyan Yordanof, 25 Aug 08

To Have And To Hold, To Choke Until Cold

bot picked up a tracklisting as being copied. how strange, Winter.skin (talk) 03:38, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Your oppose

Hi. Just to clarify, I have bags of contributions to RfA. --Dweller (talk) 13:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 15:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I Dream of Meanie

I apologize for being such a dumb fellow. Ihave rewritten the contents without copying.Daxterooney5 (talk) 14:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Copyright Bot

You should have it automatically exclude mirrors of wikipedia. I copied some content from one article to another as part of a disambig/stub creation process and it accused me of copying work. prat (talk) 06:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Mike Page

Why was this article deleted? He is a legit rapper, and all of the facts are on the website. (Fetyle07 (talk) 01:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC))

Treatment for depression

Thanks for all that. I thought it was going to be a lot easier. If there's a next time, I'll know better. --Ronz (talk) 23:14, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, history merges are a pain but often unavoidable. — Coren ^(talk) 23:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

about rahim blak

yes, this article is very affirmative, but i think thats all links in biography means, thats not only a curriculum vitae, I'd be very grateful if you could give some thought to this before deleting this article.

with regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Artinprogress2 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Porn star deletions

Hi, Coren! I'm wondering about your reasoning was behind deleting Tim Barnett (porn star) (2004), Anthony Gallo, and Vladimir Correa? All three articles have been around since 2004 or 2005, all had over 25 edits in that time, and at least Gallo was a reasonably sized article (the other two less so). I recognize the "no assertion of notability", but I would think the sheer time the articles existed would mean they should go through AfD rather than speedy. Just curious what you think. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I looked at the articles as they stood now— people rarely place speedy requests on older articles— and they were falling far from WP:PORNBIO. Feel free to revert me if you think some of those are salvageable, though. I was hacking at a big CSD backlog and didn't look deeply into article histories when the tag appeared to be on point. — Coren ^(talk) 00:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Hm. My concern is that PORNBIO isn't a speediable criterion. If it's okay with you, I'd like to restore Gallo Barnett, as his article is the most developed of the three. I'm not *as* concerned by the other two, but I'm not sure I personally would have followed through on the speedy. Just my opinion :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:13, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

It's not, but the complete lack of assertions was, on its face. But like I said, salvage what you feel is salvagable— especially if you feel that the lack of notability is a correctable failing. — Coren ^(talk) 01:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

In particular, I think that the bit about the accusations of rape and suicide really need to be sourced. — Coren ^(talk) 01:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The Leaving Trains

• You speedy deleted this article at 23:13. I have no opinion on the article, which is not in my field, but a User:Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry was appealed to Deletion Review and restored by the same admin at 15:34. I assume you accidentally failed to notice the article log. I have asked that the discussion at Del Rev be reopened, [1]. But perhaps you'll simply restore it, and, I suppose, take it to AfD. DGG (talk) 02:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

  You're right that AfD is a better place for it; especially since someone already expressed doubts about its suitability for speedy. Sent there. — Coren ^(talk) 03:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Kenta Shinohara

Could you get me the article text for the article Kenta Shinohara, which you recently speedy-deleted? The guy's either notable or just shy of it, so I'd like to take a look at the old versions to see if I can expand either into a decent stub on the guy. For GFDL reasons, restoring it to User:Erachima/Kenta Shinohara with the history intact would probably be ideal. If there's nothing I can use, I'll just get request it be deleted from my userspace.

Thank you for your time. --erachima talk 03:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

There wasn't much to restore, but you can have at it. I know little of manga-kun, so you might have better luck than me finding sources to establish notability. — Coren ^(talk) 03:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. That actually will be marginally useful, since I didn't know the bit about his assistance on Gintama before, but it looks like I'll have to write from scratch. In the meantime I'll redirect his name to his main work Sket Dance. --erachima talk 03:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

New Zealand medications & their interactions with massage

Hi, you recently deleted my page, and I'm wondering why. I believe that the information that I've added to Wikipedia is completely appropriate for an encyclopedia. What's your basis for this deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by David McQuillan (talk • contribs) 04:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Is there any way that I can get the content back? It is original information that's not held anywhere else. I went through a process with my students today to generate it, and would prefer not to repeat the same research process. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David McQuillan (talk • contribs) 04:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Response to what you have

This may come to you as an annoying surprise, but your user page is screaming for a response:

1. He had only one major publication.

Depends. 46 Old testament books and 27 new testament books within hundreds of years of each other.

1. It was in Hebrew.

A common myth; the Gospels were originally written in Aramaic. The last 7 books of the Old testament were written in Greek.

1. It had no references.

There are numerous events in the Bible with verifiable historicity; Jesus' existence, Babylonian captivity, Darius' kindness...

1. It wasn't published in a refereed journal.

Hell, back then, what was? Lol, nothing to answer there.

1. Some even doubt he wrote it himself.

God did not write it; humans wrote it. It was authored by God. Written on paper by humans.

1. It may be true that he created the world, but what has he done since then?

A God who intervenes to make us do only good, makes the achievement of actually doing good deeds meaningless - theres no contest.

1. His cooperative efforts have been quite limited.

It is easy in a team that fails for the worst member to blame the best member.

1. The scientific community has had a hard time replicating his results.

His results are his, not of humans. The fact that they canot be replicated give weight to the idea that they are his and not human.

1. He never applied to the Ethics Board for permission to use human subjects.

Lol, another joker. Well, who gave permission to the Ethics Board to be in charge? And who gave those people in charge to be in charge, and so on?

1. When an experiment went awry, he tried to cover it up by drowning the subjects.

He gave them ample chances to escape the flood, as did Noah, and gave them one final one when Jesus descended into hell to cut of the head of the devil.

1. When subjects didn't behave as predicted, he deleted them from the sample.

Again, same with the flood.

1. He rarely came to class, just told students to read the book.

If he came to the class, then what would distinguish the righteous from the unrighteous? By not attending, you can see who is motivated by trust and who is motivated by proof.

1. Some say he had his son teach the class.

True for Christians. But heres what many fail to understand in mainstream, trinitarian Christianity: Jesus Christ is God. Son is archaic for meaning "being of". I am a son of Britain or a son of America. Does that mean that America or Britain impregnated my mom? That's not true - that's impossible!!!

1. He expelled his first two students for learning.

God told them not to eat of the tree - they refused such a simple task. God asked what happened, and they replied with childish behavior of "she made me do it" (Adam) and "the snake told me to do it" (Eve). It is therefore not surprising that God expelled two people who failed such a simple task and with little sorrow with a childish blaming nature.

1. Although there were only ten requirements, most students failed his tests.

As Jesus Christ says, "narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it". Seriously, how many people try to be millionaires and how many actually succeed?

1. His office hours were infrequent and usually held on a mountaintop.

Just because one does not respond, does not mean one does not listen. His office hours are in fact whenever you pray.

Tourskin (talk) 04:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Have you considered that you might have missed the point of humor? — Coren ^(talk) 12:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Armenian placenames

Hi Coren,

the reason I want these articles moved (7 left now: Lusarrat --> Lusarat, Musalerr --> Musaler, Karmir Gyukh --> Karmirgyugh, Lerrnanist --> Lernanist, Prroshyan --> Proshyan, Jajurr --> Jajur, Garrnarrich --> Garnarich) is a transliteration issue from Armenian to Latin alphabet, which is covered by the naming convention WP:ARMEN. The main issues here are the Armenian letters "ռ" and "ղ", for which the preferred transliterations are "r" and "gh" (see the column "simplified transcription" in the table), but alternative (and not widely used) transliterations are "rr" and "kh". I don't think a discussion on these specific articles is necessary if there is already a naming convention. Markussep ^Talk 07:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I understood the intent, but in many cases "improper" transliterations are preferred over "correct" ones when they are more commonly used&mdash. I'd really recommend talking it over on an appropriate noticeboard to get some consensus behind you (which may be trivial if there are no objections); and chances are you'd get an admin to do the moves if you do that alleviating the need for the deletions of the redirects in the first place. — Coren ^(talk) 12:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

All of these places are small and relatively unknown, I doubt there is common use in English for either of the transliterations. Anyway, I'll put it on WP:RM, and see if it gets comments. Markussep ^Talk 13:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Swiss made software

Hi Coren

The page "swiss made software" has been deleted by the bot because of copyright reasons. As I am the owner of the copyright and granting the right to publish to Wikipedia, I'd like to re-create the deleted page.

Can you please advise me, what I need to do to get the page re-created?

The label has now been adopted by 70 companies. "swiss made software" has become an international movement and label for good software, made in Switzerland. Please google "swiss made software" for references. The reason of the reuse of text from http://www.swissmadesoftware.org/members.php is due to the fact that it reflects the law for the usage of "swiss made" and needs to be exact wording. See also swiss made for similar phrasing.

Best Regards, --Haldimann (talk) 12:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Please read the guide to requesting and formalizing permission to use copyrighted works on Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest. — Coren ^(talk) 12:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. In this case, I'll work through the the guide to requesting and formalizing ... and will then give it another try. --Haldimann (talk) 10:24, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

World Changers/IWU Controversy

First, thanks for tagging the note on my talk page. Much appreciated. Secondly, I have rewritten a (smaller) section on this citing my entry to the actual book in question. Could I trouble you to look at it? Indiana Wesleyan University#World Changers Eastshire (talk) 13:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate you working with me on this. As far as sourcing the adoption of the book for the class, I'm a bit stuck. It appears IWU is trying to fly this under the radar. I have confirmed this two places: via e-mail with the Alumni Department, which I don't think is citable, and by browsing through the IWU bookstore which shows the book as required. Unfortunately, I can't directly link to that page because it is generated after making java script selections. Do you have any advice? Thanks. Eastshire (talk) 14:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I saw it on Wikipedia but it wasn't sourced so I wanted to verify it :) Eastshire (talk) 14:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Excessive bail

I got a message from your Bot that it was copied from a Yahoo article. I copied much of this from another WP article. It is possible that (a) the original article had been copied from the Yahoo article, or (b) Yahoo copied from us. In any case, I promise to fix it by cleaning and re-wording ASAP. Bearian (talk) 16:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Nathaniel Benchley

Hello: I uploaded the photo of Nathaniel Benchley again, and I changed the license on it to make it available to use on Wikipedia. The photo is from his estate, who gave permission for it to be used online here. I hope this satisfies all requirements. K72ndst (talk) 18:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

editing Global prescience page

While making the entry for global prescience into a sub topic of prescience, I created a second instantiation of the same page mistakenly. It was dumb mistake and I wish to only have on page which I would like to continue working on with others. Neodante (talk) 20:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Your bot is accusing me of copying things I didn't copy :P

It told me to inform you about it. See here. The page it links me to contains lots of names of Wikipedia articles - rst20xx (talk) 00:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

BetterTrades page deletion

This page, which I created yesterday, was summarily deleted. This is my first page on wikipedia that I've started myself. I saw that other companies in the same industry were keeping pages, and I saw that other, smaller companies had pages with less content and fewer references. I cited those competitors and other pages in the talk page of the BetterTrades article. I also did some independent research, and the terms "bettertrades" and "better trades" in March got a combined total of around 16,000 searches in google alone. The term "bettertrades," unmistakably the brand name and registered trademark of the company, was 6,500 searches. I think that these thousands of people searching for information about this company need a good, neutral, non-marketing source of information about this relevant, huge, and growing company.Westcoastbiker (talk) 14:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)westcoastbiker August 28, 2008

I also discussed this issue with JohnCD (talk · contribs), the user who marked the article for notability issues. After a conversation on his talk page, he directed me to you, as the one who deleted the page. As the writer, I'd be fine with citing more independent sources, which I described to JohnCD. I also have no problem with changing the wording to further neutralize the content. I can soundly demonstrate that the quality, neutrality, and notability of this article are consistent with Wikipedia's standards. Regards, Westcoastbiker (talk) 17:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC)Westcoastbiker

Would you want me to restore the page to your user space so that you can work on it first before trying to post it? This way you can make certain that it complies with our inclusion guidelines before someone else fainds fault with it and deletes it. — Coren ^(talk) 17:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

It would be fantastic if you would restore the page to my user space. How would I go about getting an Administrator or equally experienced person to edit it before I post it so that I can be sure that it won't arbitrarily be affected immediately when I put it back up?Westcoastbiker (talk) 18:28, 28 August 2008 (UTC)westcoastbiker

I'm not sure if you restored the BetterTrades page for me as you said, since I can't find it in my account. If I'm missing something important, or if you're just delayed, I'd like to know so I can be sure about the progress. I'm trying to stay on top of the stuff I do here. Thanks.Westcoastbiker (talk) 13:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)Westcoastbiker

I'll restore it for you sometime during the day when I get a minute. — Coren ^(talk) 13:48, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

eye on Acid attack

Hi Coren, I'm sorry to bug you with this but my on-wiki time is extremely limited at the moment and I was wondering if you wouldn't mind casting an eye over Talk:Acid_attack#Motivation_of_Attackers and the companion reverts [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]. Would you mind keeping an eye on all parties here? I have already pointed out what I consider the problems with the disputed section and solutions to them[10]. Do contradict me if I'm wrong here. Also there may be a connection to the current problems at Human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran where some parties are also involved--Cailil ^talk 14:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

PS I sent you an email about another matter a while ago, did you get it?--Cailil ^talk 14:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Yoga Month

The page you said I copied http://www.atoneyoga.com/events/eventcalendar/?eid=601 is page that has the press release posted about the event. the idea of a press release is to get more awareness to an event - hence why i created a wikipedia page. a wiki is a means of spreading news. Loveobx23 (talk) 14:31, 29 August 2008 (UTC)loveobx23

Actually, not quite. Press releases are just as protected by copyright as other works and also need explicit permission. However, even with permission, press releases are almost never appropriate for Wikipedia; they are unfailingly promotional in tone, are not properly sourced, and are not encyclopedic in tone. Contrary to your misperception, Wikipedia's purpose is not the spreading of news, but that of writing an encyclopedia. — Coren ^(talk) 15:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Peter Damian's 31 hs block

Hi Coren. Judging by the hour I guess you're not longer online. In case you come back, could you please reconsider your block of User:Peter Damian ?

Yes, calling someone an "idiot" is not precisely polite, and he was rather work up, but... isn't that the most normal of reactions to the way he appears to have been treated ? I actually think that he was civil enough given the circumstances: his work of creating encyclopedic articles on topics most of us wouldn't be able to write about (and please consider also the time that he had invested in it) was being hampered by administrators deleting his articles within hours minutes of being created, and giving him warnings for not being gracious about it. - If you ask me, it was not Peter Damian the disruptive one.

Is it really more important to be polite at all times, not matter what, than to help and make things as easy as possible for our most valuable contributors, those who actually writte the encyclopedic content ?

I have posted to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Epistemic Theory of Miracles, to discuss it futher there. - Regards, Ev (talk) 00:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll comment there about it, then. — Coren ^(talk) 00:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Glad you're still with us, Coren. - Ev (talk) 01:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for removing the block but my objection remains. See the comment on my talk page, and on WP:AN. I don't see any similar admonishment of the camp guards for their behaviour. [To Ev], again note it was not within hours that this behaviour by Stifle began, but within minutes. There seems a distinct double standard between what the guards are allowed to do (pretty much anything) and what is permitted of the inmates. But as you see from my talk page, I am no longer an inmate. Peter Damian (talk) 08:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I corrected the hours to minutes. Timeline here. Regards, Ev (talk) 23:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

World Federation of United Nations Associations Youth

Hey,

the CorenSearchBot has just deleted my article about the World Federation of United Nations Associations Youth because it is basically an identical copy from the official WFUNA Youth's web page. This is because I am the author of the website. My name is Dania Röpke, you can conntact me for varification at [11] or coordinating.committee@gmail.com.

Best, Daniko (talk) 15:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Right to vanish

I'm invoking this now, please. User Peter Damian (the talk page has already been deleted) and also my other (legal) account, User:Hinnibilis. Thanks. Peter Damian (talk) 21:40, 31 August 2008 (UTC)