User talk:Accounting4Taste/Archive 24

Conquests (Civilization III Scenarios) is not a game guide, just a more in depth description of the conquests. OttomanJackson (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC).

Since there is no objective difference between those two things, I fail to see your point. Accounting4Taste:talk 14:33, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

New editor

Per your notes on his talk page, I'm equally concerned regarding User:Renkaw Gib's edits (having run into him when he reinserted some BLP violating material at Rebecca Adlington). I'm not too confident in an editor who's user name is an anagram of "Big Wanker" .... --Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 18:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I share your concerns; after having examined most of his week's worth of "contributions", I'm getting quite close to blocking him as a persistent vandal. Believe me, I will be keeping a very close eye on Mr. Wanker. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:17, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I see from your user page that you're also from Vancouver - with the weather such as it is today it seems the perfect time to stay indoors and monitor potentially disruptive accounts. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 18:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

<grin> See the top of the page; I'm out of town. It's much nicer today in the interior of BC, but I sympathize with your having to endure the ever-present rain. Could we have met at the Vancouver meet-up some couple of years ago? It might be time to have another. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I haven't attended a meet-up, but would certainly be interested in the future should the opportunity arise. Enjoy your time away! Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 18:39, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Threatening to block me

You're out of order, abusing priviliges as an admin. I fought a war to remove celeb on Jade Goody and now I am not aloud to place the word on anyone who is really notabole. Can't you smell stinking fish here???? Can't you see my point has been made. If Jade is a celeb, I am too and no other fucker who has done something for real IS. Renkaw Gib (talk) 19:33, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Final warning; play nice or get blocked. Suggesting that I'm abusing my privileges doesn't help your situation. Pay attention to every single person who has tried to help you here before it's too late. Accounting4Taste:talk 19:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

User:VerballyInsane/TB VerballyInsane 22:34, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

RE:Speedy deletion nomination of Khalil (entertainer)

Thanks for your thorough explanations! Before I re-create when more information is available, i'll work on it in my sandbox first. Candyo32 (talk) 23:01, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Songs From The Tainted Cherry Tree

Hello there =)
I noticed you were one of the administrators to delete Songs From The Tainted Cherry Tree. I was wondering if you would restore the page for me or give me permission to make it, i started an undeletion request a week ago here : Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 April 21 and im just waiting for someone to approve it for me.
Ive started the article here : Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Songs From The Tainted Cherry Tree and i believe it has met all the previous issues and meets with WP:NALBUMS.

Thank You =) (CK...... (talk) 20:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC))

From what I can see, the article at the Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Songs From The Tainted Cherry Tree link meets the requirements of WP:NALBUMS, although I admit I would be much more comfortable with this article being restored to article-space after it is actually released. Nevertheless, whatever permission of mine you require, you may have. However, you have a problem in that someone has already created, or recreated, a less-well-referenced version of the same article at Songs from the tainted cherry tree. My advice would be to use the version at [Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Songs From The Tainted Cherry Tree]] to create an article at a location with the correct capitalization -- I'd suggest the capitalization as "Songs from the Tainted Cherry Tree", which I believe would be the most correct, but the actual album cover should probably govern -- and then make redirects as required. If you require any help with this, feel free to leave me a note. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I've actually removed the SALT from the correct page name and moved the article there from the incubator. Now I'll fix the redirects; hope this is not going too fast for you. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Not at all, thank you very much for your help, it is much appreciated =) (CK...... (talk) 20:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC))

Whew! That was quite fussy, but I believe you will now find the most up-to-date version of the article at this spelling and capitalization: Songs from the Tainted Cherry Tree. I have tried to ensure that all capitalization permutations point to this version. I've also replaced your version into the incubator page; if you give me permission to delete it, which would be the tidiest thing to do, I'll do that on request. If you have any trouble with this in the future, please feel free to call on me. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

You may delete it right away, thanks again for all your help. (CK...... (talk) 20:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC))

My pleasure. I've also fixed the disambiguation to The X Factor (TV series) that was causing a little problem with the page. It may have seemed in the past that I had some sort of grudge against this artist; I hope my willingness to restore the article as soon as it met WP:NALBUMS will put that to rest. Honestly, it was all about the rules and nothing about the content. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:53, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't this have been discussed elsewhere, since it was incubated due to an AFD? (not that I'm complaining) AnemoneProjectors 21:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Apparently we were leaving each other messages at the same time. I have to admit that I have probably erred -- I was responsible for SALTing the title and would have had to be consulted, I think, before the SALT was removed. I just went through roughly the same process (as far as I remember, I started the AfD) with the single from the album in question, a few days ago, which left me thoroughly familiar with the details of the album, so when the user (above) asked me to take a hand, I simply did so. I thought it was fairly clear that the album had not met WP:NALBUMS at the AfD but I believe it's also similarly clear that it does so now (the single from the album in question is currently #1 on the UK charts and there are 11 citations/reviews from reliable sources) and so I guess I just was bold and saved everyone some trouble. I hasten to add that (a) I don't often do this sort of work, which is why you have found me unfamiliar with the details, and (b) if you really do think something else should have happened in a process kind of way, I would be happy to take charge of making that happen if that's what you desire. And again, thanks for doing the heavy lifting of seeing that the histories were properly merged; I'm obliged to you. Let me know your wishes. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, I'm not complaining. I won't revert you now, it probably does meet notability guidelines now. It has a pretty good background section, a good reception section, a complete tracklist, a cover, and a number one from it. I worked on articls for Leona Lewis's albums long before they were released, and they were never even considered for deletion. Her second album's article existed 4 months before the album was released, because it had a good background section, but that was all it had. AnemoneProjectors 21:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your forbearance; I agree that the article seems to meet WP:NALBUMS. You may find it amusing to know that I am either the best or the worst admin available to judge musical articles, because I don't even own a stereo and know very little about music. I rarely have had much to do with musical articles and was surprised to learn, more than a year ago, that not all albums were automatically entitled to articles if the artist was notable. Any concern I have in these matters is prompted when I see what looks like a determined attempt to advertise an artist who hasn't actually released any music, which is what I saw happening here; that, to me, seems like misuse. I'm usually happy to leave articles about established artists quite alone. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

(Towards Earlier Comment)
I do not believe the original delete or remade deletions you made were prejudice in one bit. To quote you "its all about the rules" and i completely agree. I harbor no negative feels towards the article or towards you and never did. Just so we are clear =) (CK...... (talk) 22:12, 27 April 2010 (UTC))

Deletion of Mitch Mckernan

I appreciate the removal of the article. One of the article's sentences was aimed at me, and was about to propose it to be speedily deleted when I noticed it was already gone. Thank you! Ginbot₈₆ 21:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Ashley Chiles

I'm curious as to why this page was actually deleted, as I complied with the speedy deletion bot's request and filled out the significance of this person on the talk page. Ashley Chiles is a local filmmaker who has been featured in local newspapers and has published documentaries, which is discussed in the article and talk page. Could you help me out and let me know what else I need to add to get this page back? Njohnson lim (talk) 19:20, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I did note the hangon tag and the material that you left on the associated talk page; however, your assertions didn't address any of the really crucial elements that are required for every Wikipedia article. Those would be an assertion of notability that is corroborated by reliable sources -- arm's-length, third-party expert sources writing in reputable publications who state that the individual in question is somehow better, more talented, superior to her peers -- in a verifiable way. That's approximately the same advice that you received on the associated talk page, and that advice was linked to the same policy statements as is this paragraph. You should be aware that you require neither my permission nor my assistance to re-mount this page; you can simply copy the deleted material from the page's history and return it. However, I strongly suggest that this would be a waste of your time; if you don't address these crucial issues, you will simply be repeating this conversation with the next administrator who deletes the page for the same reasons. I would advise you to master the material found at this introductory page and perhaps have a look at WP:Why was my article deleted? to learn more about the reasons why hundreds of new Wikipedia articles are deleted every day. Incidentally, I can offer a specific word of advice; considered entirely in relation to Wikipedia's definitions of notability, Ms. Chiles' familial relationships with notable people are more of a drawback than an asset. Notability in Wikipedia's terms is not advanced in the slightest by having notable relatives, etc. Best of luck with your future contributions; should you require further assistance with Wikipedia's policies, or if you would like the deleted content to be restored to a temporary "sandbox" page where you can work on it at your leisure, feel free to leave me a further note. Accounting4Taste:talk 19:37, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Here are some articles about Ashley from various austin sources: http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/consumer/entries/2007/12/13/working_not_ready_wedding_tips.html http://www.austin360.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/outandabout/entries/2008/10/03/full_glossy_8_r_1.html http://austin.gotidbits.com/tidbit/take-two http://www.weddingbee.com/2007/03/01/videography-the-super-8-option/ and some of her videos: (interviewing al gore) http://www.ladyflash.com/shortfilms/algoreshort.mov (prince performance) http://www.ladyflash.com/bday/cmbdayweb.mov should I add these to the article? Njohnson lim (talk) 17:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Since the article doesn't currently exist per se, that would be difficult. I would also recommend that you read and master the material found at this link that defines what Wikipedia regards as "reliable sources", as recommended above, because none of the above material appears to me to qualify. Blogs and forums -- or, indeed, any other source that doesn't exercise direct professional editorial control over its contributors, including Wikipedia -- are not usually considered reliable sources. Also, the reliable sources policy will be clear about the distinction between primary sources and secondary sources. Primary sources, such as videos of the subject which she has prepared, selected and presented, are not usually considered appropriate to bolster notability; Wikipedia relies almost entirely on secondary sources, which are, as I defined above, "arm's-length, third-party expert sources writing in reputable publications who state that the individual in question is somehow better, more talented, superior to her peers". Again, I strongly urge you to make yourself familiar with Wikipedia's basic policies and tenets before proceeding further. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:50, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I understand and have looked over, I thought that since the first-party videos were created by the subject of the biographical material, they would be classified as includable as per the reliable sources page, and also the statesman and austin360 articles are published articles in local newspapers. I see many other newpapers used as sources, so I thought that these would count as well. I'm familiar with the basic policies and have tried to make this article meet all of the criteria. I see that biographies that lack sources may be deleted, but I feel that i've provided enough sources(both first and second party) to qualify this article for inclusion into wikipedia. The first party source meet all criteria listed here and I don't see why they aren't being considered reliable sources. I want to work with you to get the article up to code. Njohnson lim (talk) 19:50, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Should I try and re-create the page with these added sources and try my luck with another admin? I'm not sure how to proceed. Njohnson lim (talk) 18:48, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to do that, by all means. When I look at sources from newspapers that say "blog" in the URL, I tend to discount them as reliable sources; I"m not sure why a gossip columnist would be considered a reliable source as to the notability of a filmmaker. I'm going away and won't be near Wikipedia for quite some time, I think, so my scrutiny and/or assistance won't be available to you; good luck with the recreation. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Deleting Article

Hi,

I'm at a loss how to proceed or if I should proceed with the article "Houston Al-Anon," which was recently developed/deleted. Articles about non-notable "organizations" are at a high-risk for deletion, yet I believe from an encyclopedic viewpoint the article has value. The subject admittedly has no 3rd-party references with no press coverage, although it is referenced as a resource by other organizations, only weakly. No books or articles discuss this "organization" to any or appreciable length.

I write to solicit your thoughts whether or not deletion should be a final step. The subject is an individual of a species of "organizations," but again without many or any external references. I don't foresee that changing to an appreciable extent. It is unique, and informative, however, but I'm at a loss as to whether the article should be re-attempted, and solicit your input.

A7 ("No indication of importance") suggests that an article about a species of "Al-Anon Information Services" would fare better than a specific animal "Houston Al-Anon." If that approach were taken, there would be cross-references, not external references. To use the McDonald's franchise example, it would be the different franchises cross-referencing each other, not outside observers making collective notice, so not sure this approach would be better, or worthwhile.

"Houston Al-Anon" is an "organization" that helps people anonymously.

Please advise. Alwebuser (talk) 18:55, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I think the most useful information I can offer you is found at this link relating to non-profit organizations, and I've excerpted a relevant paragraph for your consideration here:

"Organizations whose activities are local in scope (e.g., a school or local chapter of a club) may be notable if there is substantial verifiable evidence of coverage by reliable independent sources outside the organization's local area. Where coverage is only local in scope, the organization may be included as a section in an article on the organization's local area instead."

I've confirmed that there is an Al-Anon/Alateen article. Unfortunately there would even be a problem with adding a paragraph to that article. Since you say above that "The subject admittedly has no 3rd-party references with no press coverage" -- that in itself is a crucial reason why no Wikipedia administrator would ever allow such an article to remain in place and why the inclusion of such a paragraph into a larger article would be strenuously opposed. Reliable sources are a crucial non-negotiable element of every Wikipedia article. (You can find out more about this at this introductory article.)

I don't mean to say that the organization in question doesn't do valuable and useful work; merely that it, like so many millions of other individuals, organizations and concepts, doesn't meet Wikipedia's basic requirements for an article due to lack of sources. No value judgment about the organization's worth or utility is or should be implied; merely that it will have to find another place to store information about itself. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 19:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply and assessment. I take no offense at the article's deletion. I certainly recognize and appreciate the Wikipedia criteria.

I do plan to continue to contribute, and I look forward to your continued contributions (and deletions).

Best wishes and thank you for the time and energy you spent. Alwebuser (talk) 19:50, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding; it was my pleasure to answer your well-expressed question. If I can be of any assistance to you in the future, please don't hesitate to leave me a note at your convenience; the part of my contribution here which I most enjoy is being useful to others. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Definitely useful and helpful. I'll keep your offer in mind. Thanks again. Alwebuser (talk) 20:27, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Damn!

I wish I wasn't deleting this article, because "I'm really looking forward to the citation that backs up the statement "He was given a clean shit by all authorities" is pretty priceless (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing! I did feel a little guilty for not immediately deleting it myself, but, what the heck, it added a little to both our days and no harm was done, I hope. Accounting4Taste:talk 00:24, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

== Regarding you tagging article on Scott Ciment for deletion

I did followed your direction by putting a hangon tag and putting something on the talk page in defending the notability of the article but it was deleted never-the-less. I was wondering if there is a way to undelete the article & transfer it on my userpage sandbox, so I can iron out all the kinks? Pjt48 (talk) 00:12, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I've placed the material into a sandbox page for you and replied on your talk page. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:10, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Article on Colonel Danny R. McKnight deleted

Just curious as to why the article was deleted. The deletion log indicated the reason was G8 - dependent on a nonexistent page. Its been a while, but the last time I had visited the page, it appeared to be in perfect working order. 72.211.173.60 (talk) 01:38, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. As I understand it, the deletion was part of a process that you can find at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norm Hooten; it was part of a bundle of related articles. Please note also that the articles in question failed at a deletion review process about two days ago; I'll find that link for you and place it here in a moment. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:07, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

It's the first entry on the page found at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 April 29, for a Mr. Timothy Wilkinson; again, it's all part of a bundle of related articles. I should say that it may have been a mistake by tagging it as being dependent on a non-existent page; it would probably have been more useful to indicate that it was a faile that had failed an articles for deletion process. I'd originally thought that you asked me about this page because I deleted it, but upon examination I find that that was not the case. If you have any further questions that aren't covered by the record of the AfD or deletion review, feel free to leave me a note. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:09, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from MooMooBlackMoo, 3 May 2010

Personal Attack

{{editsemiprotected}} I NEED TO FIX ONE OF YOUR MISTAKES, ACCOUNTING4TASTE! YOU ARE ALSO VERY MEAN, ACCOUNTING4TASTE! YOU "LIKE DELLETING PAGES THAT PEOPLE SPEND HOURS WORKING ON"?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HUH? HUH? MooMooBlackMoo (talk) 22:03, 3 May 2010 (UTC) Not done: {{edit semi-protected}} is not required for edits to semi-protected, unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 22:23, 3 May 2010 (UTC) Also please be more civil on usertalk pages and avoid the personal attacks. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 22:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

tina kimmel

the article matched none of the deletion criteria like hot guy in study hall. the article of cosleeping and its author both articles were and had to be

"notable"

for me to be aware they existed! what did you delete two nice articles for?Tectaal (talk) 08:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Because neither topic met any of Wikipedia's basic requirements; notability has to be based on the arm's-length, third-party opinion of a recognized expert in the field, and I suspect you don't qualify. As far as Ms. Kimmel is concerned, since not every full university professor qualifies as notable, it's nearly impossible that a Ph.D. candidate would qualify as far as meeting the relevant standard. With respect to her article, you'll find more information at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How the Stats Really Stack Up: Cosleeping Is Twice As Safe; you should be aware that because this article has now failed an articles for deletion process, it will be immediately deleted should you attempt to recreate it. Your only option in this situation is deletion review. You might want to make yourself familiar with Wikipedia's basic requirements before proceeding further. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 19:01, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Gregg_Distributors

This article was deleted for failing to establish notability. I would like for it to be undeleted and possibly put back in sandbox mode so that I may append to it the grounds for notability and be reviewed again afterward. thanks!Distributer1 (talk) 15:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Gregg_Distributors

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregg_Distributors

This article was deleted for failing to establish notability. I would like for it to be undeleted and possibly put back in sandbox mode so that I may append to it the grounds for notability and be reviewed again afterward. thanks!Distributer1 (talk) 15:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

You'll find the deleted material at User:Distributer1/Sandbox. One word of advice that you may find useful: organizations (like charitable organizations and sports teams) that are supported/promoted by a company do not add any notability to the company itself, at least in Wikipedia's terms. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Understood, thanks for the advice and for placing it in Sandbox for me to work on!

One question. Cited in the pages references are two articles published by the Edmonton Journal. I realize the articles are about a sports team, which I understand doesn't led itself to the organizations notoriety, but doesn't the fact that it's the subject of two legitimate articles (cited as references on the page) from Edmonton's principle news publication give it some notability? I only ask this because I'm not certain it was clear that those citations aren't coming from the Oilers, but from a legitimate, third party news source.

It is actually a very well-known company that started in Alberta which employs hundreds & hundreds of people across western canada. It's actually quite notorious in western canada, just not particularly well documented on the internet... If you can, let me know if you think it's worth tracking down some other citations or if there's anything else you'd recommend to increase the page's chances of inclusion.

Thanks!Distributer1 (talk) 22:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note, and I'll try to give you useful advice. I looked at the two Edmonton Journal articles that you referenced (both just a minute ago and some time ago when I considered the article). The first is about Mr. Gregg and his involvement with the team (the second is only marginally on that topic). But that's the problem; it's about Mr. Gregg. The article would certainly be a reliable source to an article about Mr. Gregg, but the company in and of itself is not mentioned in a way that would tell us anything about its individual excellence. We don't learn anything about the company that casts any light on what it does from a knowledgeable source; the article is actually more about the hockey team than the distribution company. And the company doesn't absorb any inherent notability from being associated with a potentially notable person like Mr. Gregg. My recommendation would be to pursue one of two paths; (a) turn the article into one about Mr. Gregg, and find more citations about him personally, or (b) find a different source of citations than the Journal for the company; in considering a company like this, I would be looking for trade magazines that cover its territory, something like Auto Parts Monthly, citations that tell me that an expert source thinks the company itself is special or unusual. The company itself is frequently a source of information about such articles. Right now, if the article is about the company per se, the only material I would suggest retaining is the first three paragraphs, perhaps four (and citing the ISO assertion directly to the company's website or similar). The rest, about the company's charitable activities, is in Wikipedia terms talking about the company's self-promotional efforts; it's a form of self-publishing, and self-publishing doesn't confer any notability. (You would probably approach someone's personal blog with more than a grain of salt, for instance; Wikipedia is equally suspicious of primary sources.) If the company has ever won any awards or received some equal notice for its business activities, that would be very relevant information if appropriately sourced so as to be verifiable. I hope this helps you; I know it can sometimes be maddening to try and document something the importance of which is so obvious to yourself but strangely hard to demonstrate in Wikipedia's quite fussy and idiosyncratic terms. I've linked some useful background information into this paragraph to help you define useful terms. Please feel free to call upon me if I can be of any further assistance. Accounting4Taste:talk 14:57, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again, such excellent advice and rational tone leave me encouraged that wikipedia is in good hands. I think there's a way to make the article work, or perhaps, as you said, turn it into a Mr. Gregg focus, but I'll have to do some more digging and likely wont get around to that right away. In any case, thanks for your help and guidance.. Distributer1 (talk) 16:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Could you undelete a page and restore it to sandbox mode?

Hi - I'm in the embryonic stage of trying to build some pages about hang gliding and paragliding. My "starting point" is a page on John "Ole" Olson, a name that anyone who's been involved in the sport recognizes (with a smile). And it got speedily deleted. Yes, I'm fumbling my way through this, and the user who tagged the page for deletion suggested I hook up with the Aviation or Extreme Sports group. The second seems like a better fit, so I'm investigating that. It is just woeful that WP doesn't even have an entry for Wills Wing, much less anything about the spectacular things hang gliders have done! Did you know HGs have flown over 400 miles cross-country? Yes I do mean GLIDERS, no motors! Anyway, I hope you're having a good vacation but are able to help on this. Come to Albuquerque and I'll hook you up with some amazing flying - Glenngnormanorg (talk) 15:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I have placed the deleted material into a "sandbox" page for you at User:Glenngnormanorg/Sandbox. It might be useful for you to know that I looked carefully at the article before deleting it, and found a couple of problems. One is that, as near as I can tell, Mr. Olson's books are self-published; self-publishing confers no notability. That's the same problem with the instructional video, as well as the fact that it's not about Mr. Olson per se. A person's own blog is the equivalent of self-publishing. The National Geographic article isn't about Mr. Olson and merely mentions his name in passing. An administrator examining this article would probably be discounting all those references and there really isn't anything in the way of reliable sources remaining to demonstrate notability. Have a look at the reliable sources policy and see if that helps you. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a note; I'll be checking in sporadically while I'm out of town. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:14, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

article deleted Peet Limited

Hello administrator, my stub article on Peet Limited was deleted. I understand its the role of administrators to patrol and remove articles which sometimes do not have sufficient information or meet the notability criteria. In this case, I have created the stub but it was deleted before I could respond or able to fix it up with more references or expand the article. That's OK. I understand administrators have to use a ruler over many new articles to weigh it against the wiki notability criteria.

I was wondering if it is still possible to re-create the article? I will expand on the article as it was just a stub with a few references to detail what the organisation does and contribute to the housing in industry. Let me know if you have any issues with it. Thanks. Visik (talk) 01:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

You'll find the deleted material at User:Visik/Sandbox. Our definitions of "reference" seem to be slightly different, based on what I saw; I'd recommend you have a look at the reliable sources policy before going further. The company's own website is not of much use in testifying to the company's quality, for instance. I suspect that the notability of this company will be difficult to document, but it could be possible -- my very brief search revealed nothing that would be of assistance to you. Best of luck with this; if you have further questions, feel free to leave me a note. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks for putting the deleted article on my user sandbox page. You maybe right, the primary source is abundant but the secondary sources are few and far between and this affects its notability. I will probably keep working on it (more secondary references) in my sandbox space until such time it becomes notable. Thank you very much for your assistance. Visik (talk) 05:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Forgot to add. Thanks for the page on notability. I have read it and understood whats required for companies stub articles in wp. Visik (talk) 06:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

OTR: list of Dragnet episodes

Hello Accounting4Taste, I saw your name listed on WikiProject Radio and was hoping for help. I'm a newbie looking for direction. I was thinking of making a list of episodes for the old time radio show Dragnet. First I wanted to know if it is appropriate to make such an article. Second, I was hoping you could give me some tips and point me in the right direction. I was also thinking of creating episodes lists for the Dragnet television series and wanted to get your input on that. Thanks. 64.40.62.87 (talk) 05:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, I found Wikipedia:Article wizard and think the new page should be submitted for review. I also found Wikipedia:New contributors' help page. So now I'm just wondering about the naming of the article. Maybe something like "list of Dragnet (radio) episodes" of something like that.

64.40.62.87 (talk) 06:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Hope it is OK with you for me to add to your sandbox. I added the Dragnet OTR episodes to your sandbox (after I tested on Wikipedia sandbox) but it does not show up. But if you "edit" your sandbox you can see the Dragnet episode list stuff (wiki markup language or whatever they call it). Again, hope I'm not violated some rule by posting in your sandbox. 64.40.61.19 (talk) 10:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I still don't know how to link to stuff on Wikipedia, so here are the URLs for the Dragnet episode stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&oldid=362064550 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Accounting4Taste/sandbox&action=edit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.40.61.19 (talk) 10:21, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note; I'll try to help you if I can. First of all, you didn't use "my" sandbox -- you used a general one that's available for everyone. I went in and retrieved the material you put there, and I've put it into what you can now think of as "your" sandbox. Click on this link to get there: User:64.40.62.87/Sandbox. I'll add more comments in a minute once I check on a few things. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Second: it's certainly all right to create an article that lists episodes of the radio programme -- possibly titled List of Dragnet episodes (radio) and later List of Dragnet episodes (television if you wish to continue in that vein. However, one thing that is crucially important is to have an authority. Where does this information come from, and what expert source says it is true? I couldn't find any way in the material I placed in the sandbox to check on that. I expect Jerry Haendiges' excellent episode logs would be a good authority; there are others. The point is that just copying over the list is only half the battle, what also needs to happen is that you have to provide reliable sources to demonstrate that the information is correct. I'd be adding those references before the material leaves the sandbox page, because it's not likely to last long without them; reliable sources are a crucial element of alll Wikipedia articles. Third: It's absolutely fine to continue to edit Wikipedia using only your IP address, but there are various advantages available when you create an account here; I recommend you do that. I haven't checked, but User:Joe Friday might be available for your use... or whatever suits you as a nickname. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:37, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately someone's beaten you to User:JoeFriday, but I'm sure your imagination will come up with something appropriate, if you want an account. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:43, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the help. I think I fixed the article so that it has the needed citations. I submitted it for creation and am now waiting to see what happens. Here is a link of you are interested. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/List_of_Dragnet_episodes_(radio) just want to say thanks again for helping this newbie through the process. It is very much appreciated. - 64.40.61.31 (talk) 08:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Re The Green Hornet (requested move)

That instruction only applies to uncontested nominations, or rather nominations in the uncontested nomination section. If you want to tweak the words in that section to clarify that, feel free. I'll be busy for a while and may not be able to get to that for a day or two (assuming I remember to do it). As to what happens next, the discussion will play out, probably for a week or more, and then someone, most likely and admin, will make a decision based on the content of the discussion. The most likely decisions are to move, no consensus to move or to relist for additional discussion. I'm not sure that you will have to do anything more. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:43, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Accounting4Taste. You have new messages at Jéské Couriano's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Request for Help United Service Organization Vandalism

Can you take a look at the United Service Organization page. Someone using IP address 75.133.70.94 keeps vandalizing it subtly by changing the founding date of the USO, upping the date by one day repeatedly. I had noticed it and added a supporting reference that confirms the correct founding date. That doesn't seem to have helped.

Thanks.

Contributingfactor (talk) 15:21, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note and for taking an interest in this article. I've reverted the latest instance of the date being changed and warned the IP editor. Unfortunately there's not much I can do in the sense of freezing the page in place. I'll try to keep an eye on this over the next while and revert/warn the editor until I have to apply a block, but please do also keep your eye on the page as well and either roll back the vandalism yourself or leave me a note. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hello Accounting4Taste,

I am the new manager at [Sticviews] and have seen that a previous attempt to create a page was unsuccessfully, probably due to failing to meet your standards. I assure you that the most professional attitude will take taken when creating a new page. Furthermore, the page will not be for spamming or advertising purposes (Which I am sure you deal with a lot) but instead to serve as a point where our accomplishments can be recorded. We are an established company, have been growing quickly, and have been in the business since 2006.

Please do allow us to compose a draft page for you to review and hopefully we will meet you standards.

Sincerely, Alan Okpechi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanokpechi (talk • contribs) 21:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

First of all, you require neither my permission nor my assistance to remake a page; simply create what you wish to say and mount it. All new pages receive scrutiny from a variety of editors and administrators, certainly not always me; if you merely repeat what you've said before, you can expect to have this conversation with someone else. The article I deleted was pretty much 100% advertising so I'm glad you've decided to avoid that in the future. I should also say, though, that Wikipedia is not here to "record your accomplishments"; Wikipedia is here to provide information about things and people that are notable. If your purpose here is to record your own accomplishments, that's really a form of advertising; what's wanted here is what experts outside your company have to say about its accomplishments. (If you want to record your own accomplishments without the necessity of fitting in with Wikipedia's requirements, I recommend a blog or the purchase of advertising space.) Being an established company, growing quickly and having been in business since 2006 are all ultimately irrelevant in Wikipedia's terms. What matters, and I recommend these two specific policy pages to your attention more than the other links in this paragraph, is notability and reliable sources. If your company is not notable according to the Wikipedia definition, the article will be deleted; if the notability is not documented in a verifiable way by reliable sources -- arm's-length, third-party experts writing in reputable publications like books and magazines -- the article will also be deleted. Material that is not backed up by reliable sources and which is based on personal opinion -- such as the excellence of a company or product -- will almost always be deleted immediately. You may want to look at this basic introductory material (also here) for further background information on these crucial elements of every Wikipedia article. Since you've been clear about your relationship to the company in question, I'll also recommend that you look at our conflict of interest policy and our autobiography policy. Thanks for your note, and my best wishes for your company's success and your future contributions here. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:15, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for responding, I've read over the information you suggested and know that now is not the best time to create a page. I would like to in the future when we are more prepared. Thanks again. -Alan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanokpechi (talk • contribs) 15:06, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Chitoka Webb

Good morning,

Like many people on here, I spent awhile creating an article about Chitoka Webb, and I want to take the steps to change is so it meets the criteria for Wikipedia. To start, Would it be helpful if I provided links from the Nashville Chamber of Commerce, which mentions Chitoka Webb's work in Nashville? Also can I use ezine articles? Thanks for taking the time to respond.

UnityResidential (talk) 13:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I looked at the history of this and found that an article about Ms. Webb had failed at an articles for deletion (AfD) process within the last month. You can find the record of that process at this link. Since the topic failed at AfD, under Wikipedia's rules any new articles about Ms. Webb become immediately eligible for speedy deletion for that reason alone, unless the new article is a truly significant improvement that addresses the specific reasons the topic failed in April. It is likely that you would have the best success by creating an article off-line that contains considerably more in the way of reliable sources than the previous ones (which contained, to all intents and purposes, no useful citations at all). My advice would be for you to thoroughly understand the concept that Wikipedia calls reliable sources; what Ms. Webb has to say about herself, or what her company has to say about itself, is not useful here. Similarly, e-zines are not likely to meet our requirements for editorial oversight. You can use a "sandbox" page -- for instance, at User:UnityResidential/Sandbox, which will be available to you if you click on that link -- and create a draft article there, then submit it to WP:Deletion review when you're ready. I will add that I am troubled by your username, which seems to indicate that you are an employee of Ms. Webb's company. This raises red flags with respect to conflict of interest; it is possible that you will be (a) required to change your username, and (b) to refrain from contributing to articles with which you have a conflict, unless you are very clear about the conflict policy and follow its requirements rigorously. The relevant policy is found at WP:COI and I also recommend WP:AUTOBIO to your attention. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 15:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

What about this? Chitoka Webb is an entrepreneur who owns a health care agency that provides services to developmentally disabled individuals. She was featured in the Nashville Business Journal's People on the Move section for her the work she does with her company, Unity Residential Services. Webb serves on the Board of Trustees of Clover Bottom, a State Of Tennessee institution for the developmentally disabled in Nashville, Tennessee. Webb also serves as the North Nashville President of the Nashville Chamber of Commerce.

ShooterBoo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC).

I very much doubt that this is sufficient notability to enable the article to remain, but you shouldn't take my word for it. As I explained above, this needs to go to WP:Deletion review; compose the article in the sandbox page I pointed you to above, and submit it to deletion review giving that address. Good luck with that. Accounting4Taste:talk 19:39, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I used the "Sandbox" yesterday, and the article was, again, deleted. Is it possible that with the sources that were used, which were the only credible sources I could find, don't make Chitoka Webb notable, according to the standards of Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShooterBoo (talk • contribs) 17:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

ShooterBoo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:48, 21 May 2010 (UTC).

Thanks for your note. I personally think that Ms. Webb is not notable according to Wikipedia's guidelines, as you suggest. However, there is a problem that you might not have been aware of that affected your experience of yesterday. You didn't use the less-public sandbox page I directed you to, at User:UnityResidential/Sandbox, you used the all-purpose general sandbox found at WP:Sandbox. The all-purpose sandbox is wiped clean, at a minimum, every 12 hours, but I understand that items there rarely last as long as an hour -- because many, many people use it to test things out. I looked at your editing history and the history of the all-purpose sandbox, and your edits lasted about five minutes. There have been approximately 400 edits of that all-purpose sandbox since that time, which gives you some idea of how busy it is. If you want to use the "user subpage" sandbox at User:UnityResidential/Sandbox, I'm fairly sure that that will last long enough for you to do whatever you want to do. I think you might be wasting your time, since as I said I just don't think she meets the notability guidelines, but I didn't want your experience to be affected by something that would have been a surprise to you. I hope you find this useful; if you have any other questions about Wikipedia policies or processes, feel free to leave me a further note. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your input, advice and opinions about Chtioka Webb as a Wikipedia article. I believe this is actually what needed to be said. Oh, you're right, I wasn't aware of what affected my experience with the sandbox. With all the links, I must have been confused, but I appreciate the clarification now. In fact, I'm going to take your advice and not waste my time on an article about Chitoka Webb. I did one last bit of research, and after using LexisNexis, I could only find information regarding criminal court cases and civil lawsuits against Chtioka Webb, which probably still wouldn't be sufficient to have for a wikipedia article. Thank you so much once again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShooterBoo (talk • contribs) 23:27, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

re judy mikovits

she was one of the lead researchers in this study....nominated a top find in 2009 http://discovermagazine.com/2010/jan-feb/055 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandrake99 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

As I indicated, feel quite free to add actual information like this to an article about her. You don't need my permission or my assistance to create an article that tells us about her. The key is that articles have to contain information, and you pretty much have to put it there yourself if you want the article to remain here; it's no one's job here to go looking for it if you won't. Best of luck with your contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:38, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Lunches for Learning

Hi, I (IgorMoskvich (talk) 23:19, 21 May 2010 (UTC)) was trying to create a page for a nonprofit Lunches for Learning. Im sorry if I didnt place my Q in the right place, I am trying to learn wikipedia, so please forgive me and I hope you can help me. After less than an hour I see it was deleted because you didnt see its significance... Now, i tried to explain everything this organization does and that it is completely grass-roots. How else can i convey its significance? Here is a copy of the article. I am new to creating/editing wikipedia, however Ive enjoyed countless hours of twisting my way through wikipedia until my eyes hurt. I would like to conform to whatever rules or regulations there are, however at this point much seems ambigous. Could you please advise me as to the proper creation of a page? I have several references from Online sources as well as printed publications, and even the Associated Press. the ref's get kind of confusing and I dont know how to tie it in since an error message comes up. PLEASE HELP. I greatly aprecciate your help in advance.. here is a copy of the article you deleted. Lunches for Learning, Inc is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization founded in 2004 and incorporated in 2005 by Ron Hicks. The Lunches for Learning organization is also listed as an incorporated entity in the republic of Honduras, where it predominantly operates. The scope of the Lunches for Learning program is to help break the cycle of poverty in rural Honduras by providing nutrition and nutritional supplements to the impoverished children in public schools and kindergartens. The primary objective of the program is to encourage children, who would otherwise have to leave school to seek food, to attend school and receive a basic six-grade academic education (adequate in exponentially increasing the chances of a decent future above the poverty level for an individual in Honduras). In exchange for the children attending school, Lunches for Learning provides and supplements a daily lunch for elementary school children by utilizing the cooperative efforts of individual contributors, corporate sponsorship, and the government of Honduras. Currently, the Lunches for Learning program accommodates 21 schools and 1,256 children. Lunches for Learning, Inc is entirely staffed by volunteers in the Unites States, and the only employees of the program are Honduran citizens who serve in providing essential management and administration of the program. Thus, administration/overhead costs are very low. In addition to its main goal, Lunches for Learning also helps facilitate the efforts of the World Food Program (WFP) and the Family Allowance Program (PRAF) with activities ranging from building hand-dug water-wells to building kitchens to helping transport legumes, corn, rice, and cooking oil necessary for producing meals. (Accounting4Taste:talk 15:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC))

Thanks for your note. My apologies for seeming to delete some of your comments above, but they had snarled up the format of this page such that I couldn't figure out how to unsnarl them without returning to an earlier version. The reason I deleted the page in question is because I did not feel that it met our notability guidelines; however, I will say that it was a fairly close decision. My feeling was that since the few appropriate references (newspaper pieces) were all entirely local that the oroganization had not demonstrated the kind of widespread impact that to me meets the definition of notability. The relevant standard is at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and I'll quote a bit of that here; "If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability.". Since you ask, though, I'd be prepared to go forward in one of a couple of ways to help you. First, if you want, I would place the deleted material into a "sandbox" page where you can work on it with slightly less urgency and see if you can add any citations from a wider area you may have to bring it within our guidelines. I'd also be prepared to undelete the article and immediately submit it for an articles for deletion or AfD process. If you opted for that, you would have the benefit of a wide variety of opinions as to whether the organization was notable, but the process has a much more final ending; if the community's verdict is that the organization is not notable, the article would not be allowed to be recreated without significant demonstrable improvement. If you wish either of these options, just leave me a further note. I should also say that the purpose of the organization, or its charitable function, is not of much relevance to this conversation; organizations with good intentions are held to the same standards as all others. Best of luck with your contributions and feel free to call on me further, now that I'm back from my weekend away. Thank you for your reply.

(IgorMoskvich (talk) 17:11, 24 May 2010 (UTC)) Ok, I did a good bit of updating and modifying. could you please tell me if this conforms and if it is now eligible to be posted as a "real" article. the link to my userspace draft - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:IgorMoskvich Please let me know you opinion, I aprecciate very much your help. P.S. I dont know what imbecile keeps placing vulgar photo content on this page, but could you please block him out, since he places this "autofellatio" graphic right next to my post. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.11.107.41 (talk) 17:12, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I find my vulgar little friends are best ignored, since nothing they do here can last long. I looked at the draft. There is quite a bit there that someone will cut rapidly (some is irrelevant or belongs in another article, some is unproven and probably unprovable). I still think this is likely to be "speedy-deleted" because, as I said above, there doesn't seem to be the breadth of coverage that I would look for; this organization seems very local, and that works against notability. But I know you are working in good faith to try to bring Wikipedia this information; I suppose I'd suggest rolling the dice and using "move this page" to put it back where I first found it to see what happens. It's unlikely to come under my scrutiny again so I expect you'll have to deal with someone else about this. You may want to be prepared in advance; I suggest looking at policies to which I've directed you above, because arguments based on those policies carry all the weight here. Best of luck with your contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 00:10, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you again for your advice. All the facts that are mentioned there are, in fact, provable. It is listed as a 501(c)3 non-profit and the organization has to undergo a costly and extremely thorough government annual audit in order to maintain its tax-exempt statu. Also, in reference to 'breadth of coverage' what do you mean?could you please elaborate on this? I speculated that by mentioning Honduras, its current impoverished status, and more specifically the scope of the Lunches for Learning program this should cover all the relevant bases(i.e. politics, need for, results, etc). And in regard to the organization , I would like to note that it is far from "local". It is incorporated in the U.S., and Honduras;recognized as an international NGO (non-government organization), and has contributors from almost every state in the U.S. as well as Honduras. Would you say this covers the bases? How do I upload/place a photo (logo) ? I aprecciate all your help and advice and look forward to hearing from you. Thanks again. (IgorMoskvich (talk) 02:30, 25 May 2010 (UTC))

Thanks for your note. I rather doubt that you can "prove" the material in the section marked "Origin" -- you can attest to its truth, but third-party confirmation of those statements will be pretty much impossible. As well, statements like "The Board of Directors is also aware that current progam sponsors/contributors expect their donations to benefit the children in the most timely manner as possible," to select one at random, are unproven and unprovable -- you cannot have an independent citation of what is known by a Board of Directors, nor have you documented the expectations of donors -- which donors? where did they say so? what's the definition of "timely"? These are the kinds of questions that are asked when articles are examined, and material that cannot answer those questions by reference to a verifiable third-party source cannot remain. Material about the economy of Honduras, since it can be linked to at Honduras, is not appropriate in an article that's not about the country. As far as my definition of "breadth of coverage", I would be looking for evidence that newspapers, magazines, etc., (arm's=length sources) in an area approximately the size of a quarter of the U.S. had had things to say about the organization that documented its notability. Two widely-spread citations, such as Los Angeles and Miami, would probably be sufficient. In cases where all the documentation is from a single city, that indicates to me that the organization's notability is not sufficiently widespread to qualify. I'll have to look up the specific link for uploading pictures/logos, but you should be aware of Wikipedia's copyright policies before you try that step. If you upload a logo, you must be able to document that you have permission to use it during that process, and those rules are strict because the potential for damage is so high. Merely uploading the logo and saying "I'm allowed to" is probably not going to suffice. I hope this helps you understand the ways in which articles are scrutinized here; I also hope you realize that when I say something is unproven/unprovable, it has nothing to do with whether or not I believe you're telling the truth. Wikipedia would insist on an independent citation that the sky was blue, frankly. Good luck with your work here. Accounting4Taste:talk 12:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

You can start learning about the rules in connection with logos at WP:UPLOAD. Accounting4Taste:talk 12:59, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of "NowGamer" article

After writing the NowGamer article, and it having been available on Wikipedia for weeks, I find this morning that it has been deleted by yourself, and from the explanation provided I see no good reason why this is the case. Navigating to the page produces the following explanation for the deletion:

"No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content): Article about a web site, blog, web forum, webcomic, podcast, browser game, or similar web content, which does not indicate the importance"

Now excuse the bluntness, but if you actually read through the article that previously resided at the page before you deleted it, I would say it is fairly obvious as to it's significance. I cannot find a way to access the deleted page to retrieve the direct quote, but if you researched the topic before clicking "Delete", you would find that NowGamer is a multiformat games portal, much in the form of IGN or Gamespot, both of which have articles here on Wikipedia. NowGamer is operated by Imagine Publishing, a large UK magazine publisher who produce many well known magazines such as GamesTM, Play and Retro Gamer, and the website features content from many of these magazines.

I trust that this has sufficiently explained the significance of the article, and I request that you reinstate the original article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.86.54.25 (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I certainly did read the article before I deleted it; its significance is considerably less obvious to me than it is to you. I'll suggest, to match you in bluntness, that you completely overlooked two crucial elements of every Wikipedia article; our notability guidelines and the definition of reliable sources. All Wikipedia articles must have reliable sources -- the opinions of arm's-length third-party experts writing in reputable publications like books, magazines and newspapers -- to back up any assertions about the company's excellence. Since I saw nothing except blog posts (which don't meet any standard for editorial oversight that would allow people to determine the expertise of the writer) and the company's own press releases (completely useless in the context), I believe it was quite reasonable to conclude that the article was not about a notable company. You can find the relevant standard at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies); I'd ask that you master those concepts before suggesting that I didn't apply them. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:42, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

DJ Surge-N - Page

Hi there,

I was actively working on writing up an article on the above DJ (DJ Surge-N) however in the process, it got deleted.

First of all, I do understand everything written on your page, and I also got an email from another person. But in my rush to at least provide a 'basis' on which to work on (a simple summary/establishing background), I didn't get a chance to carry on due to its deletion.

You said: "No explanation of the subject's significance (real person, animal, organization, or web content): Article about an eligible subject, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject"

I say: You didn't give me a chance to establish further. The beginning of the article which I wrote, was only that: The beginning. I was planning on elaborating and going as further as showing all releases from the DJ, unfortunately however, due to time zones and me not always spending time on the internet, I cannot do it instantly or continuously until completion up to date.

I also say that this DJ is a real person, a subject which has rose to prominence over the years, the resultant surge in fanbase and explosion of musical ideas.

That being said, I would appreciate it if the article was to be undeleted. I did use the -hangon- option, but even my message on the talk page didn't get through - I was meant to be adding the official logo next until the page got deleted.

If you search DJ Surge-N on google, you will find some reviews, and also comments and the like.

Cheers Surge-N (talk) 16:17, 25 May 2010 (UTC) Surge-N

Thanks for your note. You may find that if you create an article in a "sandbox" page -- for instance, at User:Surge-N/Sandbox, which you can access by clicking that link -- you can work on it without as much pressure until it's ready to move into the main body of Wikipedia. There were a lot of problems with the article I saw and deleted, but the main one was crucial -- nothing I saw or found met any of the guidelines of WP:BAND (click the link for information), which is the relevant standard against which articles about musicians are measured. There's also a big problem if, as I suspect from the match between your username and the subject of the article, you have a conflict of interest about this particular topic. Writing articles about yourself and your work is strongly discouraged here. If you want me to restore the deleted material to the sandbox page noted above, I'll do that upon request, but you should be aware that you're pretty much wasting your time unless you can conclusively prove a way in which this individual's work meets the requirements of WP:BAND. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 16:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

DJ Surge-N

In the AfD you state that "there is a suggestion that the number of YouTube viewings is an assertion of notability". I think you may be referring to my removal of the CSD-A7 tag on the basis that there was a "credible claim of significance (2.5 million views)". Please note that I didn't suggest this was a sign of notability, merely that it is a "credible claim of significance". Per the criteria for deletion under A7, significance is a lower standard than notability, and any credible claim of significance means the article is ineligible for deletion under A7.

Would you consider rewording your AfD proposal appropriately?

Cheers,

Thparkth (talk) 19:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I've just done that; I hope my edit reflects your point and I'm happy to be more clear about exactly what you said. (Let me know if my edit has still not represented what you suggested.) To me, that doesn't seem like a credible claim of significance because I think it would be very easy to inflate such a figure, but I will certainly admit that your experience with YouTube is more knowledgeable than my own -- anyone's would be -- and I expect the point is worth making. Sorry for your extra trouble and thanks for bringing it to my attention. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:01, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for updating it. Not a big deal anyway. The thing is, for csd-A7, it doesn't matter if the figure is inflated or not - it doesn't need to be true. It just needs to be credible. I'm sure you understand that by removing the tag I'm not saying the article shouldn't be deleted (I may well vote to delete it at the AfD!) - just that it's not obvious and uncontroversial enough a judgement call to be speedy deleted. Some articles deserve a fighting chance at AfD in my opinion. Thparkth (talk) 20:05, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

And may I add that I'm grateful that you fixed my stupid typing error too on the user's talk page. Really, I should have looked at it; I'm obliged for your assistance. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:04, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

It's a pity that you deleted the article. But I appreciate your reasoning behind it. Even so, I still think there was credibility. Perhaps not so many sources as you would like, but the fact there is at least two should be something. From the top 100 yesterday, DJ Surge-N went into the top 5 for at least one of his remixes. If you had a look at this link I posted previously (http://www.mashup-charts.com/artist/?bootlegger=DJ_Surge-N) and look at it now, this should suggest that there is a fair significance with regards to the subject. And also, the YouTube views (above 2.5 million) is not an inflated figure. It is a true figure, and the exact number of views is higher, but that is for only one particular video-remix. Collectively, there are over 4 million listens. And a conflict of interest on the basis of my username being 'Surge-N' doesn't necessarily suggest that I am the subject in question. Thank you. Surge-N (talk) 02:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)Surge-N

You can remain anonymous

Whenever you post a template such as {{indef}} or in this case the 48 hour block on a particular user talk page, I believe you don't need to sign below it. On the other hand, the extra notes were required to be signed (which of course you did), so that was obviously correct. mechamind90 20:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Historical pederastic couples

Were the archives of the talk page intentionally left undeleted? I wasn't sure whether guidelines say to delete archives, but I found it a little strange. Regards, {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 08:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention; I've deleted them. No, it was just an oversight; I've deleted a LOT of pages, but cannot remember another case where there were archived talk pages. As far as the guidelines go, I believe that all talk pages of deleted pages are fair game, archived or not, and can be tagged as such. Tags weren't required, though. I'm much obliged to you for noticing this loose end and dealing with it! Accounting4Taste:talk 13:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Geegain

Hello,

Wikipedia have deleted it on 2008 so on 2010 I have modified it for a better article and post. After few days, It has been deleted again by you. Can I know the reason for deleting the page Geegain?

Thank you, pnm123 Pnm123 (talk) 10:55, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. The page in question was deleted because it did not contain a suggestion that the website in question was notable and, more importantly, because there were no reliable sources that would allow anyone to verify any of the assertions in the article or to confirm the expert opinions of arm's-length, third-party sources stating that the website was notable. You can find out more about these ideas in this article and this introductory material. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 13:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Thank you for your reply. Can I get the source of the article? So I can add it to my sandbox and move it when it is notable. Pnm123 (talk) 19:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure to be of assistance. I've placed the deleted material into a page at User:Pnm123/Geegain. Good luck with your endeavours. Accounting4Taste:talk 20:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Pnm123 (talk) 19:00, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Edric Zohar

Hi I talked to Gogo Dodo and I think I established good reasson on why to publish about this person

1. He was the one how worked on the expansion of USB flashDrive in the US 2. Global MEdia IT published a 3 page story about his life 3. He is well know among IBM employees who worked on the project

Also, I am currently writtin an reaserch paper about USB flash Drivers and his name came across several times

Regards

Paolo Fredick (talk) 21:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. You should know that you require neither my permission nor my assistance to recreate such an article; if it doesn't contain reliable sources, it's likely that the article will be deleted again. You should also know that since this article has been deleted twice already today, it's getting close to the point where an administrator may "SALT" the page, or make it impossible to recreate it without going through a process like deletion review. I'd advise working on such an article off-line, or in a sandbox page, and being very sure that it meets our standards before you continue. #2 above might be useful as a reference to an article; I have to say it's probably not enough to support notability single-handed, but it would significantly contribute. The rest doesn't seem useful to me unless you can substantiate it with reliable sources. You may want to consider an analogy that I have found helps people understand the level of notability that is required to be the subject of a Wikipedia article. If Mr. Zohar was an athlete, he would either have to be competing at the highest possible level of amateur competition -- the Olympics -- or else be playing for a fully professional team at a national or international level. Ask yourself if Mr. Zohar's notability is at that level; this may save you some time and effort. Check out this article for a useful introduction to the concepts of notability and reliable sources that you're running up against. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:55, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

DJ Max Julien page was deleted

Hi

I created the DJ Max Julien page and it was deleted. I don't really understand why, because he.s a DJ for over 25 years. Still a label head. Work to help young canadien to make a name in music. He also come from a well known family of actor (ALain Zouvi is his brother)

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathou (talk • contribs) 15:56, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. You don't need my assistance or my permission to recreate the article; however, If you merely re-mount the same article without improvements, I strongly expect you'll be having this same conversation with another administrator. Perhaps you should have a look at Wikipedia's notability standards; in my opinion, and in the opinion of the editor who tagged the article for speedy deletion, Mr. Juliien doesn't meet them. The other major problem was that the article contained no reliable sources to document any of the multiple assertions (a person's own website, promotional materials, etc., don't count as reliable sources). Mr. Julien's length of career and his family connections don't contribute anything to establishing his notability. You might have a look at the links in this paragraph and at this introductory article for further background about what I'm talking about here. Best of luck with your future contributions. Accounting4Taste:talk 17:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)