User talk:Accounting4Taste/Archive 10

I re-read the policy on advertisement and I understand why my article was deleted. However, I would still like to put up a page about Osmocote that is more encyclopedia-like. Do you have any specific suggestions on what I should do? Also, do I need to completely start from scratch? I'm new to writing wikipedia articles. Btowngreenthumb (talk) 17:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)btowngreenthumb

Akaza Research

Hi, I am the one who made the article for Akaza Research. The resulting decision was to keep, and I am wondering if I may remove the big tag on top of the page, or parts of it that don't apply anymore (i.e. The lack of third party sources and notability since we established int he discussion that those are fixed and the article stays.)I am still working on the article, but the big announcement on top detracts from it in my eyes. You have been a great help in the past and I am wondering if you can give me some suggestions on what to do. Thanks. Idegtev (talk) 16:02, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

We have consensus at Barack Obama

... for certain details regarding William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko. See Talk:Barack Obama. However, a small but extremely active and dedicated group Obama fanboys are trying to WP:OWN and sanitize the article. Anyone who tries to support WP:NPOV and revert to the consensus version is threatened, called a sockpuppeteer, etc.

First, this has been an ugly situation for some time and more attention from admins is needed. Second, the Obama fanboys need to be brought under control. They do not own the article. WP:NPOV means proportionate representation of all significant POVs. The POV that is questioning Obama about his relationships with Wright, Rezko and Ayers is not a fringe POV. Editors who seek to include that POV in a balanced manner are not "Obama haters," and when they agree with one another, they are not sockpuppets. Please help. Kossack4Truth (talk) 21:52, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Bizstar

I have used the services of Bizstar and as a small business in the UK i found it very useful and feel that many similar business's could benefit from it the way i have, if you check out the site you will see all the features, i can be called at JMB Block Managment 0844 586 3252 if you wish to discuss with me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.145.108 (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Courtesy Notification regarding my recall criteria

Hiya. Just a courtesy note to say I've named you as one of the editors that I would accept a request for recall from. There's nothing onerous about it, and you don't have to do anything. It's simply to let you know that as I have added myself to CAT:AOR I needed some unfussed criteria for recall, and I believe your judgement fits that criteria neatly. Thanks! Pedro :  Chat  10:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Regarding The Money Masters

I saw that you deleted the page for the documentary The Money Masters. You may go sour just from seeing the subject of this post, but this is not entirely about the film itself. Rather it's Wikipedia's guidelines on notability that I would like to discuss -- and you seem to be a good person to discuss this with.

The Money Masters was deleted for lack of notability. Well, maybe it does lack notability if we are to very strictly go by Wikipedia's guidelines. I'm sure however that there are thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of articles in Wikipedia, with considerably less notability than this. I guess that's not a very firm argument however. One could similarly argue that there are tens of thousands of articles with errors, typos and factual errors, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't correct these errors as we strive to improve Wikipedia.

All right, well we have another problem with this. The Money Masters is a highly controversial movie, containing highly questionable content. For instance, in one section it relates of the banker Nathan Mayer Rothschild who after the battle of Waterloo is supposed to have carried through a major scheme of fraud in order to gain control of the Bank of England with the help of a trusted agent of his, Rothworth. A search on Rothschild and Rothworth on google will give you hits on hundreds of anti-semitic and other extremely dodgy sites. My guess is that a lot of things in this movie are very, not to say severely, dubious when you look into them. So, while the documentary goes viral on the internet (getting some 60,000 hits in a refined search), there is no place where the film's contents may be seriously refuted or affirmed as it could on Wikipedia. And so the film will keep on spreading on the internet unqustioned.

I think that it is important that this type of film is brought into the light and should not be allowed to continue to linger in the dark where it may feed the minds of anti-semites and neo-nazis. It is a pity that Wikipedia's guidelines are too rigid to allow such a thing to be discussed here. Is it reasonable that a film that gets 60,000 hits on google should not be held as notable even if no "reliable" sources refer to it? And even if it is grouped with conspiracy theories and perhaps even more awful things, isn't the best thing to bring it into the light?

I would like to note that the film does have at least some valid points: the film's over-all focus, the concept of fractional reserve banking, its roots and its endemism to the current shape of the global economy, should be openly discussed more. More importantly, this movie is not explicitly anti-semitic or racist. Still, stray accounts in it may lend itself to such and to other purposes.

I would really appreciate to hear your views on this.

Nejtan (talk) 22:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

TheBrain Technologies & PersonalBrain

The organization (TheBrain Technologies) and software (PersonalBrain) is actually pretty big. Any chance you can bring the articles back if I show you articles in big newspapers and magazines, such as the Wall Street Journal or MacLife? --Enzuru 23:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Definitely, I'd really appreciate that. Thank you so much. --Enzuru 03:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Joseph Clough Wiki Entry

Hi there,

I recently spent a while trying to create my first Wikipedia entry, and I have just found that it was Speedily deleted. As I'm new to this, I am obviously not doing something right, and I obviously didn't convey the article in the way I wanted to.

Basically, the reason I wanted to create a Wiki page for Joseph is because he has seen some great regional (Liverpool) and national coverage recently, and as somebody who used to be treated by him, but is no longer in contact, I thought it would be great to create a page as it seems he is getting in the media more regularly now, including an interview on BBC radio. I don't even live in Liverpool now, but was impressed with his coverage, and thought I'd get there before somebody else did. I thought that this was OK, and I basically sourced most of my information on him from his websites and the press coverage so far, which is why it may seem unresourced.

I'm sorry if this is not OK, but how else do I create a page for somebody who is becoming better and better known within the UK? What would I need to take out of the entry I did?

Thanks very much for looking at this, I hope to have it restored (I'm sure you hear that all the time!).

Danny Dannystanton (talk) 14:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Rayquon Elliot

I declined the speedy delete because he was the subject of multiple articles about him from a reliable source (VH1). His article shouldn't be eligible for speedy because of that assertion. I don't have a problem with you prod-ing the article, but please don't speedy it. I don't plan to spend any more time on it. Royalbroil 00:57, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

"Larry Munsey" article

Hello, I don't think the "Larry Munsey" article meets the requirements for a speedy deletion. Mr. Munsey serves a great importance to Kingsport, Tennessee. He holds a political position. Mr. Munsey is an "alderman", which is the same thing as a board member of a city council. You need to fix the article, please. At least, make changes to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nortraiders (talk • contribs) 20:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

As I've mentioned in detail on your talk page, a member of a city council for a town of 44,000 is unlikely to be thought to meet our notability policy found at WP:POLITICIAN. You should be aware that repeated recreation of this article is likely to end up with it being SALTed, which is to say that it will be rendered impossible to create any article under this title, now or in the future. If you have any questions about Wikipedia policy, you can leave me a note. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

The Shadow

Thank you so much for your help! This is the first time I've tried to move something and I'm just glad I was able to figure out the process when it didn't work. There are a few redirect pages pointing at the old character article, but I shouldn't have any problems cleaning those up. Hewinsj (talk) 03:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The Suffering (film) page

Thank you for making me aware of the rule regarding the posting of films, and why the page for The Suffering (film) is scheduled to be deleted. All the best! Mohansen11 (talk) 22:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

p.s. I'm a mystery fan too, and collect Rex Stout. Mohansen11 (talk) 22:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Maidenhead Astronomical Society wiki page

Hi,

I'm new to this so please take into account my greeness.

I've added what I consider to be notable content to the wiki page which is similar in style and content to that of Birmingham Astronomical Society's wiki page. Maidenhead Astro Soc is noteworthy for its history and public events some of which I've put on the page [unless it is deleted by now ... I can't be sure what's happening as it all happens so quickly :-)]. I plan to add more history of the society together with more details about some of the more notable public events that many 'locals' attended.

Sorry to be a burden, and I hope that this situation can be resolved and that the Maidenhead Astro Soc page can be reinstated.

Martin Mbandrews (talk) 20:06, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi there; please refer to your talk page, at User talk:Mbandrews, where I've gone into more detail. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Need some help and a assistance

Hi there. Don't know if you remember but few months ago we talk for few times and i asked you to help me in resolving a problem with an article about a band that is notable but from some reasons there were some users who thought that the article should be deleted. I renew the article which is now on my user page User:Drokstef/Sandbox and i think that now it has all the reasons to stay up and it's a very notable article which deserve to be reback in his own place. That i should ask you to help me with the deletion review process, because i'm a novice in this kind of stuff and i don't how should i proceed in a deletion review process. I would really appreciate your help. Many thanks Drokstef (talk) 21:54, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, and my apologies for the delay: I've been away from home and without Internet access. I have never nominated an article for deletion review before, but I'm prepared to do it as you request. I've read the instructions and it tells me that the first thing to do is to discuss the matter with the deleting administrator, so I'm going to do that -- I'll keep you informed as I proceed. I should also say that based on what I see, it might actually be NOT a good thing for you to comment to the extent that you did in the original AfD process. I believe the article now meets WP:MUSIC and by simply pointing that out, and following the instructions, I can give the article a fair shot at being allowed to be reposted. You are, of course, free to do what you like; that's just my impression of what the best course of action would be, and as I said above, I've never done this before. If you have any questions or comments, I'll be looking for them here; I will alert you on your talk page to this thread. Accounting4Taste:talk 02:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Ipse dixit

Please could you delete this article it redirects to an authentic page but its talk page shows that it's just recreation of deleted material [1] --Bit Lordy (talk) 21:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

== Ipse dixit ==

Please could you delete this article's talk page. It's just recreation of deleted material. [2] The redirect should stay. --Bit Lordy (talk) 21:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

What you have done, seems fine. Many Thanks--Bit Lordy (talk) 21:49, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of my posting

Hi,

This is all new to me. I guess the parameters of your system deletes without any human interaction. The deleted work was "Biblical Calendar" my user name is michaelidarecis.

Please look over the information and let me know if you can reinstate this.

Best regards,

Michael Idarecis

(a) No, I won't reinstate this; (b) I've explained at greater length on your own talk page, which I presume is the human interaction you were looking for. That note will be found at User talk:Michaelidarecis. Accounting4Taste:talk 23:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Raymond Burr

Thanks for your kind remarks. I get the impression that Burr was a fine human being, but felt compelled by the era to conceal his homosexuality. A sad situation but not uncommon for the time.THD3 (talk) 23:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

THE QUEST

HELLO, GOOD DAY SIR OR MAM,I AM SENDING YOU THIS MESSAGE BECAUSE 1. THE ARTICLE IS ABOUT A TRUE PERSON, A 16 YEAR OLD RAPPER, IF U WANT 2 FIND INFO ABOUT HIM, U SHOULD GO TO SOUNDCLICK.COM AND TYPE IN LIL FLE FLA, AN GO 2 JAMGLUE.COM AND SEARCH DODGEST, AN LISTEN 2 SOME OF HIS MUSIC, ILL BE AWATING HIS 10 ALBUMS COMING OUT IN AUGUST. BUT I WONDER HOW LONG THIS WEBSITE HAS BEEN AROUND.. GOOD DAY SUR OR MAM AN I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOU AGAIN. AND U HAVE DA BEST USER PAGE —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elsiv (talk • contribs) 20:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

tHEN

HI, WELL HE IS A NEW ARTIST AND HASNT BEEN on tour yet or on the charts, but i thought that u have to have an album before u make the charts. put he is coming out with 10 acapela albums, becides whats so wierd about a 16 year old making 10 albums in 1 year, and actually jamglue.com and soundclick.com are free Mp3 communities. but i think its funny that a 16 year old rapper has a beef with 2 actors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elsiv (talk • contribs) 20:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

So, therefore, he doesn't qualify under the standards at WP:MUSIC and he's not notable. Try again when he becomes more famous -- much more famous. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

infO

hi again, when u post a article , where do u get the light brown boxes where u put da contents and the picture of the artist. since there is a artice im going 2 post later. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elsiv (talk • contribs) 21:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not absolutely sure I know what you mean by the "light brown boxes", but you can use material from another page by finding something you need, using the "edit" page function, copying the material, pasting it into a new page and then changing the name. So if, as I gather, you want to create an article about an artist, go to, say, the article on Flo Rida, go to the editing page, copy what's there, and change the names and other information when you edit it. One word of warning, though; so that you don't waste a lot of time and effort, you might want to read up on how to create an article in WP:Your first article, so that you understand the standards that apply to new articles; so far, you're batting zero. If you want to work on an article, you can use a sandbox page -- click on this link -- User:Elsiv/Sandbox -- to get to a page where you can work on an article until you get it ready. If you have any further questions, feel free to ask them here. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

se

when i ment light brown boxes, the boxes that all the contents r in an the picture of the artists cd cover. thanksElsiv (talk) 22:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Reworked page on Rebecca W. Keller Hello, I have reworked my article on Rebecca W. Keller, adding several citations, ISBN numbers for published books, deleting some material, etc. It is in my sandbox at User:Writerms/Sandbox. Is it okay to ask that you take a look at it to see if it is now soundly in keeping with Wiki guidelines? Or, is it best for me to put it up as an active page first? Thank you much, Writerms (talk) 22:22, 27 June 2008 (UTC)Writerms

TRX Suspension Training

I understand your point but please work with me to keep this page alive, after all im attempting to provide this encyclopedia with useful information regarding a new fitness training style, that has been patented, verified and talked about by such sources as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, ESPN the Magazine and many many more. So again i want to avoid posting an AD but do wish to provide information regarding suspension training via the TRX both terms, ideas, and practices that have all been trademarked copywritten and patented. After carefully reviewing and re-reviewing the page, there might be one section in question, everything else has been pretty much been styled after existing corporate pages. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by JadamFAI (talk • contribs) 22:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

p.s. sounds like the only solution might lie within removing TRX from the page title and content. This would make the page simply Suspension Training, but i still feel a reference to the TRX should exist considering its the only item used in such training and again both concepts have been created by the same source. The page i created also came with a full list of users, most of which have verifiable testimonies on fitnessanywhere.com but im almost positive can be searched on their own sites archives such as the New York Times and Wall Street Journal articles featuring Suspension Training and the TRX used to impliment the practice. Thanks for your speedy response by the way, your help is much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JadamFAI (talk • contribs) 22:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to give you the impression that I agreed with you; I hoped, and hope, to provide you with information, but that's not the same thing. I felt that what you posted was an ad, and deleted it as such; since you had posted the same ad four or five times in 24 hours, and apparently ignored a number of warnings and notices asking you not to do that, I have blocked both Suspension training and TRX Suspension training from being recreated for a considerable length of time, so what you suggest will be impossible unless you first undertake the WP:Deletion review process -- and I seriously doubt that you'll be successful at deletion review as matters now stand, because you're essentially trying to wedge your advertising in here. My sincere recommendation is that you find some other website upon which to post this material -- unless, as I suggested, you can find some way to contribute to an article about the general principle that underlies your product, there seems to be no further course of action that will be useful for your ambitions here. If you have independent references, as you say, from sources such as the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, etc., etc., then it is barely possible that there will be a reason to unblock the recreation of this article. However, I'm unable to tell by how you said what you said whether these august news sources have given an arm's-length third-party expert opinion on your product, and that's what would be required. Please, as I suggested, read WP:Why was my article deleted? and WP:SPAM before you continue, so that you'll understand the very essential policies that you seem to be determined to violate here. And if you have further comments, by all means leave them here for my further attention; I am not unwilling to work with inexperienced editors by any means, but only if they work within our guidelines. Accounting4Taste:talk 23:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I am exactly as you say an inexperienced editor and please dont misunderstand My intentions. At first yes i blindly created a page with many AD like flaws...harmless mistakes, but my, as you say "repeated attempts to wedge my ad in" are meerly attempts to oblige by wikipedia guidelines consisting of many gradual edits. It is my deepest concern to get some sort of neutral page up that simply defines suspension training, i have completley coped with leaving out any product information because even though the TRX has been referred to many times by many substantial sources as a Revolution in the fitness industry, i understand that we are not Yet anything like macdonalds or coke, so all i strive to do is create a reference for the training itself which im happy to say we also have copywritten. there will be no links or personalized references on my new page (hoping to work with you on getting suspension training its own clear and safe page) thanks again for working on this with me, im not some trigger happy spammer trying to wedge in ads...and in fact the very reason i relocated as far as page names went was me attempting to make a more neutral page...thanks again JadamFAI (talk) 23:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll reply on your talk page at User talk:JadamFAI at greater length. Accounting4Taste:talk 23:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Awesome Thanks...see ya there JadamFAI (talk) 23:58, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I am curious as to why you had an article about me deleted as irrelevant? My name is Andy Lambros and the article was about my history, as I was the original child actor who appeared in Oscar Mayer's Fisherman Bologna commercial which ran for over 30 years. If you go to YouTube or many other venues and type in "Oscar Mayer" I am sure you will recognize the commercial and its impact on pop culture. It is nice to have this on Wiki, as many people often inquire about it. 74.62.196.123 (talk) 09:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

If you read the Wikipedia policy at WP:ENTERTAINER, you might understand why I thought it was unlikely that anyone would consider that you'd made a significant contribution to the history of entertainment or to popular culture and thus deleted the article (I didn't have it deleted, I merely deleted it; that's one of my jobs here). I recommend that you find some other website in which to immortalize your 15 seconds; for instance, IMDB has no requirements for notability or even accuracy for its contributors. Accounting4Taste:talk 13:54, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Gee. Well, now you've angered Andy's wife. My name is Dawn Lambros and I'm not as nice as my husband is. I would like to know where in your "list of protocols" rudeness is allowed? You referred to my husband's background as 15 seconds of fame? Let me explain something to you. Andy's "15 seconds," as you have referred to, has done more for the entire commercial entertainment world than YOU ever will. He is the reason for billions of dollars in ad revenue generated, and there are plenty of "pieces of documented proof" to substantiate this fact. His commercial is listed in the Guiness Book of World Records, Duke University's advertising encyclopedia volumes, and hundreds of articles have been written about his contribution to the entertainment business world. It's not the fact that you removed the article that has me so angered, it's your high and mighty attitude and your arrogance that are intolerable. I can always find a real editor to add his materials back in again, but there is no excuse for your condescending behavior. When a person elects to become a part of a company or community, that person had darned well better show users some respect. THIS MEANS YOU as a part of Wikipedia. I know the day of true customer support is gone. But not today. Not only are you arrogant, but your facts are wrong. As soon as you can show me that "dismissive arrogance" is a part of your "guidelines" I will begin boycotting Wikipedia immediately. I also happened to notice that other commercial child actors such as Rodney Allen Rippey and "Little Mikey" are in the wiki database. Why are they allowed to remain and Andy is not? Sounds like discrimination to me. If you are looking for "proof of authenticity" I think you should view this link: http://www.kraftfoods.com/oscarmayer/omm_history9.htm - If Andy is "so insignificant" why is his commercial listed on Kraft's website as a monumental part of their history? Is Kraft a small company? Are you going to tell me Kraft is insignificant? Your notation was hurtful, harmful and insulting to say the least. I am considering reporting this to a higher level at Wikipedia. 74.62.196.120 (talk) 19:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing. You be sure to have a nice day, now! Accounting4Taste:talk 22:46, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism...?

You're welcome. :) AHRtbA== ^Talk 23:17, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy delete

I wasn't sure what to do, since Rsunn had already removed one speedy tag. Is there a place that I can learn how to properly tag speedies? I know that the {{speedy|''text''}} probably isn't optimal, but I didn't know what else to do. S. Dean Jameson 01:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi there: Thanks for your note. I'm not absolutely sure which article you're referring to, but I gather it's one that I deleted even though the speedy tag had been removed. I think you might benefit from having a look at Wikipedia:Template messages -- there are six or seven common speedy templates that most people use. All tags are enclosed in double curly brackets, like {{ and }}, and begin with "db-" -- the db stands for "delete because". The most common dbs are person, web, nocontext, nocontent, corp, spam -- and a few others. One thing you can do is, when you see a tag that looks right, click on the edit key and see exactly how the person has made the tag. If I can help any further, let me know (but I'm going offline now; nevertheless, if you need more help, I'll track down a tutorial for you. Accounting4Taste:talk 01:23, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

It was that one about the DJ Danjaru. You just now deleted it, and I don't think he had time to remove my tag this time. Thanks for the link, and I'll try to more properly tag (instead of using the generic one I did before) in the future. Regards, S. Dean Jameson 01:25, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

• From what I gather at that link, the tag I used isn't bad, I just need to make sure I fully understand the legitimate reasons for speedying. Thanks again! S. Dean Jameson 01:33, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, that's something that takes a while to learn. How I got started was, I got very familiar with the rules that apply to people and looked at new pages that were people's names, because that's a very large category of new pages. One key factor to look for is an "assertion of notability". For instance, "Joe Blow is the most famous XYZ in Poland". If there's no assertion, then it doesn't pass WP:N. Of course, it's frequently possible to add the assertion yourself, if the article seems to fit in other ways and seems to have the potential to be a useful article -- it's frequently just a question of doing a quick Google for a reliable source and adding it to the article. Anyway, there are some specialized notability rules that relate to people, like pornographic performers and academics and professional sports figures, but by and large it's fairly easy to tell who's notable and who's not. If you're absolutely sure, tag it -- if not, you can leave it for someone else to look at, it will probably not go unscanned by another editor. After you master the notability of people, the rest you'll probably pick up along the way -- it's pretty easy to discern db-nocontent, db-nocontext, db-nonsense and db-vandalism (remember that hoaxes, like saying that Joe Blow is king of the world, qualify as vandalism).

It's kind of funny, because to get the tag I used, I just kept putting things in curly brackets, and previewing, until I got one that worked. I knew about the | in between because of wikilinking, so I used that, and voila! it worked! I have recently just been looking through the "recent changes" link to the left, and found a few new pages there. I'll definitely keep in mind the advice you give above as I start dipping my toe further in the water of looking over the new articles. Thanks again for all your help, A4T. Regards, S. Dean Jameson 17:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

One recommendation -- if you're tagging a brand-new page and leaving the message on an empty talk page, I suggest it's a good idea to add a standard welcome message above it; sometimes this will be the toolkit that a new user needs to create a useful article. I use welcomeg, and welcome messages are tags that you should "subst" -- so, in double curly brackets, subst:welcomeg.

And if you have any questions -- I'll help if I can. Good luck and happy tagging!! Accounting4Taste:talk 04:56, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I see that my Wake Field article was deleted, and see no good reason why the link for SDP Park still exists. Can you please explain to me why my article was deleted and the other exists? Jets88toon (talk) 05:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Jets88toon (talk) 05:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Whatever the other article is about, and I haven't read it, it has to be more notable than an article about someone's back yard. If you can show me a couple of articles in newspapers or magazines about your back yard, fine, we'll talk and I'll be happy to help you further. Other than that, I think you have very seriously mistaken what Wikipedia is for and how it works; please check out Wikipedia:Why was my article deleted?. And, to discuss your argument, the policy at WP:WAX is relevant. Accounting4Taste:talk 12:57, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

hey

couple questions on my talk page if you get a chance. (suspension training) JadamFAI (talk) 18:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

updatedJadamFAI (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

My Bag Cares

Within 10 minutes this page was taken down for being an advertisement. This article was put up as the beginning of a longer to article to merely show a vehicle that is being used to help prevent global warming. These types of movements should be documented and the information is very valuable. I would appreciate the article going back up again quickly so that we do not need to go through this process again. AGAIN these types of articles are extremely important for public knowledge as it helps to reduce the effects of global warming.

Arazara (talk) 19:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I regret to say that I don't share your opinion, at least not based on the article I saw, which was pretty clearly advertising for a bag. If you have reliable sources that somehow document the notability of this particular bag -- for instance, articles about it in newspapers and magazines written by experts that testify to its particular excellence -- by all means get back to me. You may find our policy at WP:SPAM to be of use and, if you have any further questions or comments, you can leave them for me here. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I would like to have the opportunity to rewrite the article so that you can see that it is not for advertising purposes. I would however also like to note that there are many brands on wikipedia that have not been taken down. They don't appear to be advertising and are up there for informational purposes - as will mine along with more resources. For example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_west Thanks so much Arazara (talk) 13:26, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I've created a page at User:Arazara/Sandbox for you that contains the deleted material. I just wanted to mention that the argument "They have a page so we should have a page" doesn't carry any weight here (see the policy at WP:WAX for details); each page is assessed on its own merits. If you feel there's a page here that doesn't meet our criteria, feel free to tag it for deletion or improvement as appropriate. By the way, the page you cited is for a chain of stores in 60 countries, which seems at first glance to have more notability than an individual product.

So that you don't waste your time, I suggest you ensure that your revised article meets the notability requirements and contains multiple instances of reliable sources -- independent, arm's-length, third-party expert sources publishing in major media that assert the notability of the topic in a verifiable way. If you have any questions about Wikipedia policy, feel free to leave me a note. Accounting4Taste:talk 14:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I appreciate it.

Arazara (talk) 14:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Breathe Carolina

AndrewMarkworth recreated a page Breather Carolina three minutes after you deleted it. Thought I'd let you know. --mauler90 (talk) 21:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Igor Pavlov (Computer programmer)

Once it was already deleted, but now somebody recreated it, and he done it in not a very polite manner by the straight copy-pasting of User:Yuriybrisk/Proposed article for Igor Pavlov (programmer).

As in our previous discussion we agreed that it was not ready yet and I'll be working on it.

I believe that User had done a copyvio by not mentioning the source used as requested by GNU FDL ("the authors of the work must be attributed"). I leaved a note to him, but if you can remove the article. --Yuriy Lapitskiy ~ 17:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Snake moves

Hi Accounting4Taste, Good to see you're still at it. Perhaps you could help me with something. Three days ago I proposed a number of page moves among the snake articles that nobody seems to oppose. I've been able to execute many of the moves myself, but of course it was only a matter of time before I came across one that I would need an admin's help on. It's this one:

• Rainbow boa => Epicrates cenchria

If I run into any more, I'll add them here. Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 10:52, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 19:24, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Order of Finnegans

Dear friend,

As you probably Know, Enrique Vila-Matas is (with Javier Marías) the most prestigious literary writer in Spain, the most famous and important Spanish writer for French and German reviewers, etc. He is the founder of this group that is getting attention all around the world. All the members are in the top 10 of the literary prestige. They are creating (with the Joyce excuse) like a Bloomsbury group. Even Paul Auster asked about it. Please, reconsider this fast erasing.

Yours,

G. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Genji11 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I'm sorry to say that there was no evidence within the article I read of any "attention all around the world", or indeed any attention from anyone outside the group -- there were no reliable sources attesting to any notability of the group in question in a verifiable, and there was no assertion of notability. The membership of notable people in a group -- assuming that the individuals in question are notable, which was not verifiable -- does not automatically confer notability upon a group. Feel free to re-make the article but, unless you can rectify those deficiencies, it is highly unlikely that the article will be allowed to remain for anything more than a brief period of assessment. If you have questions about Wikipedia policy, you can follow the links within this paragraph, read Wikipedia:Why was my article deleted? or leave me a note. (I'd also be prepared to recreate the deleted material for you within a sandbox page so that you can add the references that you assert are available; just let me know.) Accounting4Taste:talk 17:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear friend,

The relevance of Enrique Vila-Matas is as simple as typing its name in google. If google is not a good source, type it in the most important newspaper (El País, www.elpais.com). In the same website you can ask for the order and you will get articles on it. To see if Eduardo Lago and the others are important enough, I'd recommend to do the same. I understand you may think I'm the one who has to prove that I'm right but I'm not so concerned about it. I did it because I found there was a blank in the wikipedia but I can't fight for what I assume as obvious: That if the members of a group are so important (and in this case this point is a question of general and basic culture) the group itself is very important. Think, for instance, that Sting, Bono and Bruce Springsteen become the founders of a group to venerate a classical musician and every year they go (with followers) to follow a ritual. Won't it be in the wiki? Sure. Everyone know who a singer is. What about a writer.

I hope you understand my point. If you still think I'm wrong, probably you are right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Genji11 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

As you may have already realized, it is not sufficient to indicate that information outside Wikipedia is available that bolsters the notability of material included in articles -- that information must be referenced in such a way that the reader can decide for him/herself the weight to assign to the references. You are therefore correct to observe that "I'm the one who has to prove that I'm right" but, if you're "not so concerned about it", neither am I. Regardless of how simple it is to google these sources, it's your responsibility to do that, and to add the sources to the article, if you want to have the article in Wikipedia. If this topic is sufficiently notable to be the subject of a Wikipedia article, then sooner or later someone will spend the time to look up the references and make them part of an article. I assume that you have no further interest in improving this article but, if you decide you want the deleted content to work on and improve, feel free to leave me a note; my offer to restore it to a sandbox page for you is at your service. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:03, 3 July 2008 (UTC)