User talk:Acroterion/Archive Q1 2009

thylacine

"The largest measured specimen was 290 cm (9.5 ft) from nose to tail"

My freind, no Thylacine was ever, or could be ever, NINE FEET LONG. This was a typo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.198.31.5 (talk) 21:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

According to the article, the average adult was six feet long. Nine feet for the largest specimen would not be out of the question, and it's specifically stated in the reference. It's not a typo. Acroterion _(talk) 22:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Thlacine

"The mature Thylacine ranged from 100 to 130 cm (39 to 51 in) long"

That's not even half of nine feet.  

Look at this article: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gregheberle/AdobePDF/Thylacine/ThylacinePaper2004-P1-5.pdf

Really, the source article is wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.198.31.5 (talk) 22:08, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

See [1], the ref in question. The article discussed the body as 100-130cm long, then a tail of 50-65cm. I think the ref above deals with the body only. Feel free to discuss on the talk page, but don't just take it out. I personally think 9-1/2 feet is a stretch (in both senses), but you'll need to find something solid to justify its removal. Acroterion _(talk) 22:13, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Your ref states a max of 2.1 - 2.7m. Given the hazy state of knowledge, I'd argue that something on the order of "some individuals exceeded 2.5m in length" would be reasonale, but it should be discussed on the talk page. Acroterion _(talk) 22:16, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New Year Acroterion I hope your new year is good —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mayme08 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Best wishes to you in return. Acroterion _(talk) 16:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Jefferson County photos

• Happy New Year sir, just wanted to let you know that I enjoy your wonderful photos of historic sites in Jefferson County! it's nice to see these beautiful old structures well represented on Wikipedia. --Caponer (talk) 00:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, my wife and I had a nice afternoon roaming around the county looking for former Washington family places. A surprising number are for sale, but I think even a discount price is beyond our means, unless I have some unsuspected DuPont or Rockefeller connections. Acroterion _(talk) 01:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Deleted

I am trying to add an article about the height increase process, what is the problem exactly ? It is a scientific method . Is there some way i can do that, without being considered spam or advertising? I didn't use any names or products in my last submission. Why was it deleted ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Papaki74 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

You appear to be promoting www.growth-flexv.com; the text promotes products, and while you've removed some of the spam, it is still an article that promotes growth supplements. This has been your clear intention from the first, blatantly promotional article, and you appear to be trying to find a threshold of acceptable promotion. Acroterion _(talk) 18:36, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello about my page

Im currently new to this, and I do not know why it keeps getting deleted...

I wanted to write this:

<rv space-consuming article>

Oh and I wanted to add this"

• Libraryvids - Temporary offline - Coming soon

To http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_sharing_websites on "User generated video sharing"

Thank you, Benjamin Vogt

You have several problems: you're using Wikipedia to advertise, you're writing about a non-notable website (or at least you've provided no evidence of notability), and you have a conflict of interest. The language is unacceptably promotional. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or creating notability. The website isn't even available! I suggest you wait: if the website comes back, if it succeeds, and if it becomes significant enough to warrant references in multiple independent third-party media with a reputation for fact-checking, then it will be suitable for inclusion. Acroterion _(talk) 00:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Ciaran Redmond

Why did you delete the article Ciaran Redmond? --Mikhailmikhail (talk) 02:20, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Mikhailmikhail

Because it is a nonsense article and does not make a plausible case for notability. Please do not re-create it again. Acroterion _(talk) 02:32, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Well, that was nice of you. At least he used {{uw-joke}}... Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:46, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, although we should wait to judge in another 36 hours or so, as I gave him a 48-hour block. He appears to be someone who's too young to understand how to behave, so I'm giving him one last chance, in case he wises up. Acroterion _(talk) 16:03, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Ip

Is it possible for an admin to monitor which all accounts log-on to wikipedia from the same IP address ? --Areastrips (talk) 19:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

For users with accounts, that's not possible: that function is reserved for checkusers, and it's only when there's good cause to do so, not as a matter of fishing. Of course, anyone can see what a given IP does when not logged in.

About my recent edit

-- i feel the article is important because it describes the usefulness of a top 100 free download PC game website. It is crucial and SIGNIFICANT because we as a Wikipedia community need to know about these kinds of websites on Wikipedia.

The cheapo —Preceding unsigned comment added by The cheapo (talk • contribs) 00:50, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

But does it meet the requirements of WP:WEB? That was not indicated. Acroterion _(talk) 01:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

--Sure it does, I gave reliable resources. Also, it is important because it gives you some good websites to download games and that website easily stands out from the crowd making it SIGNIFICANT.

--The cheapo (talk) 04:46, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Read WP:WEB again, along with WP:COI, WP:SPAM, WP:V and WP:RS. You must assert (and back up) that the site has received multiple notices in independent media. You did not. Self-referential links to the site do not suffice. You appear to be using Wikipedia to promote an apparently non-notable website, and you appear to have a conflict of interest. Acroterion _(talk) 12:50, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

--Whatever dude, I feel like it is good, notable, reliable, sufficable, not just for advertising, and SIGNIFICANT. I did read those, but I feel that it can have its own article for the reasons above. It obviously does stand out from the crowd. I read what you told me to read, now you can pay me the same respect by reading my article. It is however, deleted, so you will need to look in the deletion log. Actually READ the article this time. --The cheapo (talk) 02:25, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I did, when writing my comments above. I will note that dozens of similar articles are deleted every day, and it most certainly did not stand out. The important thing to understand is that others must find it significant, and then find cause to write about it in independent media. If that hasn't happened, then by Wikipedia's definition it isn't notable, and therefore ineligible for inclusion. Simply insisting in caps is no substitute for references. Acroterion _(talk) 02:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletions Of My Work

I was wondering why you were deleting my pages before I could add references and such? Please enlighted me to this, as I am working as hard as I can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MyBeautifulZygote (talk • contribs) 03:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

You are creating hoax articles. By the way, the Wachowski Brothers are Andy and Larry, not Andy and Mike. Acroterion _(talk) 03:04, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

They were good ideas though, right?

No. Please stop making things up and publishing them on Wikipedia. Acroterion _(talk) 03:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Shannondale Springs

It's always easier to work with subjects you know a bit about...thanks for fixing my error. Nyttend (talk) 04:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

It's a highly confusing place - before I wrote the NRHP article I had no idea that the old resort ever existed. I'm not sure there's anything but rubble to photograph, but I might try before the leaves come back. The location's undisclosed by NRHP, but it's a clearly marked place on Google Earth and practically everywhere else, so I'm not sure what the Park Service thinks it's trying to do. The place shown in the picture burned down a couple of years ago - it's a mile to the south and about 500 feet higher on the hill, in a sprawling suburban subdivision. Thanks for organizing the WV pages - I meant to do it, but hadn't yet found the time. It's much better now. Acroterion _(talk) 12:52, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK suggestion, an article you created

Hello Acroterion. An article you created, U.S. Capitol Gatehouses And Gateposts, has been nominated at T:TDYK for main page exposure as part of the Did You Know? column. It was just under the minimum character limit for DYK so I added a sentence from one of the sources. If you could check out the nomination here, ensuring that the hook used is okay and that the fact used in that hook is backed with an inline citation (which I think it is) in the article following the fact's appearance, that would be most excellent. --IvoShandor (talk) 03:42, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I appear to have goofed up the URLs for the refs - they're very similar and very confusing. However, all fixed, and the hook is now referenced to the right source. Thanks for the DYK nom! Acroterion _(talk) 04:26, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

The White House is made of the same material, presumably of better quality, but painted white ever since the War of 1812. The tobacco order and corncob order columns in the Capitol are also Aquia sandstone. Working all that in seems a little much: perhaps a better tack would be an article on Aquia Creek sandstone, which is why I made it a redlink. Acroterion _(talk) 04:38, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

An article on the sandstone would be great, if I can think of an alternate hook for the gatehouse/gateposts article utilizing all that I will post it, if you come up with one, do the same, the limit on hooks is something like 200 characters I think, so it'd be a tall order. I saw the article and thought it just had to be on DYK. Wikipedia is great for interesting articles about obscure topics, in this case not even really obscure, but topics that are less obvious. If I have time I might clean up the photograph a little bit too.--IvoShandor (talk) 08:08, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do about the sandstone - there seem to be some sources for that. I go back and forth on the images - I used to crop the edges out of HABS images, but I decided I kind of liked the annotations on the negatives. However, I have no objection to cropping it out. Acroterion _(talk) 11:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Moravian Academy

When it's an article on a subject I'm infinitely more familiar with than you, I would hope you would at least partially defer to me on what's going to contribute most to an understanding on a topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.172.52.183 (talk) 04:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Please do not insert unsourced material about apparently non-notable people. Just because you "know better" is not sufficient. All material must be verifiable. See also WP:NOTE for notability requirements. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Also, you are edit-warring to have your way, which is intensely discouraged. Acroterion _(talk) 04:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for opinion

Hi, I and my fellow editors are facing a deadlock on a issue of removing/toning down few lines on 'Allegations of Human Rights violation against the Indian Army' under 'criticism of the operation' section in Operation Blue Star article, concerns include WP:NPOV, WP:SOAP & WP:V, the summary of dispute can be found at [2]. I would request you to kindly go through the article and please let us know your views/opinion at the talk page of the article so that npov, balance and undue weight concerns may be looked into and a consensual solution may be found. Thanks LegalEagle (talk) 05:54, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for removing commas

Thank you for removing the commas in Marquette National Forest and elsewhere. I fixed many of these myself but you got there before me. Lightmouse (talk) 19:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing all those units in all those articles. I'll be sure to do it that way from the beginning so you'll be spared at least a few unit conversions! Acroterion _(talk) 19:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I have a simple tool that adds metric units with just one click. If you want to use it, just add:

importScript('User:Lightmouse/monobook.js/script.js');

to the bottom of User:Acroterion/monobook.js. Then clear your cache using the instructions on that page. Then go to an article and press 'Edit this page' (the options are only visible in edit mode). Look in the 'toolbox' on the left below 'What links here' and you will see a blue command 'Add metric units'. Let me know if you need help. Regards Lightmouse (talk) 11:39, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Bla-bla and everything is gone: wiki/Soir

Thanks, but I get a message from someone else, while it's you who deleted the page. So lets guess: One is sending me to the other, or something, then I have to study some guidelines for sometime. Yes, I'd that a few weeks before; and the one I gave a message, said he was not responsable for it; go away, try some other people, start an edit-war, study a month on the rules; so only advanced wikipedians can get trough, etc. What are you guys/girls doing here destroying other peoples work that easily? I'm not a wikipedia expert like you and neither won't I study for that. I'm just a bit more than an avergae user and had quite good input about all there was to find about the subject. So please let that up to others who have more input on that page..??!

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

So I don't have more info and if you don't leave the page, or put it onto a list so others can attribute to it, then it will be gone for nothing. Cooperation on wikipedia instead of corporate competition between colleagues?

Then, as far as I know, Drupal doesn't ask money, so that commercial argument of yours is strange. Apache is used by many and if commercial, it's used by most non-commercial orgs. Both have extensive wikipedia pages, but just not for this Soir subject. Free Cyborg (talk) 04:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I deleted it because it did not provide any context or any indication that it was notable, and it appeared to be promotional. "Promotional" can apply to a person, organization, product or company and has little to do with commerce. Please review your first article for guidelines. Acroterion _(talk) 04:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

BURN IN HELL !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Free Cyborg (talk • contribs) 05:04, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Ian Holt

Hi could you delete that page again? Someone recreated it by mistake. By the way, It was a G3 as it said he invented water and some other bizare claims, but guess its moot . Thanks DFS454 (talk) 17:20, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. The original entry met a variety of CSD criteria. Acroterion _(talk) 17:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

hello

I think you should write down your reasons for reverting an intro I just made. Just because you are an Admin does not gives you the power to violate the rules. thanks — Wiikkiiwriter (talk) 00:43, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

You removed sourced material and substituted a misspelled, ungrammatical, unsourced paragraph. Please do not do so again. Acroterion _(talk) 00:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

The intro is not understandable even it’s sourced. I made a better more reliable one . You should help correcting it rather than remove without saying so on the talk page. — Wiikkiiwriter (talk) 00:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Your intro was not understandable, and was not sourced. If you want a different intro, please discuss it on the talk page. Once again, do not remove sourced material to substitute your personal analysis. Acroterion _(talk) 00:54, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for U.S. Capitol Gatehouses and Gateposts

On January 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article U.S. Capitol Gatehouses and Gateposts, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 13:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

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

GCardinal

I responded. User talk:Gcardinal. ~~ Frvwfr2 (talk) 22:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Possible misleading

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

Might not have been G1 per-se, because I'm too lazy to find the right button. Would it fall under "an organization that shows no notability"? Elm-39 (talk) 19:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

G7, non-notable organization would have worked, with a side order of WP:MADEUP. Bored kids on a Friday waiting for the bell to ring. Acroterion _(talk) 20:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Wiikkiiwriter (talk) 02:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Why did you expose my personal info?

That is personal info I didn't want exposed. I wrote this to another admin. I shouldn't have to keep explainig my problem:

Why do my ips keep changing? I don't know. That's what I'm trying to find out. I only use two computers, yet this list shows far more than two. Anyhow, enough chasing me and spying on me, because... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.99.161.93 (talk) 15:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Anyone can find this via WHOIS. It's entirely public if you insist on editing from an IP. If you want privacy, please register an account. Your IP keeps changing because it's a dynamic IP and changes periodically when our address is reassigned.Y ou're not being spied upon, but you don't appear to understand that "anonymous IPs" are anthing but anonymous. Please register an account and you'll have more privacy. Acroterion _(talk) 15:04, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

With further investigation, you've been very busy disparaging the Bahá'í faith, and were recently blocked for disruption. Any further such activity will result in a block on sight. Acroterion _(talk) 15:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

A real Drink????

How on earth did you come to the conclusion that a Fuck you arnold palmer/FYAP is a real drink? There are no sources (Drinknation.com consists of user-submitted recipes) and there's nothing on google. Explain please! Exxolon (talk) 17:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Google returns multiple hits, including Drinknation. Whether it's notable (like things found on Urban Dictionary) is a separate discussion, where I'm ambivalent. But it wasn't vandalism, and there's no CSD for recipes. Acroterion _(talk) 17:29, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Maybe I should have been clearer - there are around 40 hits on google for "Fuck you Arnold Palmer" - 16 of which are unique (some have 2 hits) - let's see what we have....Drinknation.com (user submitted recipe site) - no good. Our own article. Neweasyrecipe.com - another user submitted recipe site - no good. A blog, a message board, a digg style site and a bartender aggregator site (that is taking the info from drinknation) - all rubbish. derais.pl - another user submitted recipe site - no good. 2 more blogs and 2 myspace hits - rubbish again. That's it. How can you extrapolate that into "it's a real drink"? Exxolon (talk) 17:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

It's entirely possible that I was wrong. I am from time to time. However, I took it as a good-faith, if somewhat misguided contribution that was not vandalism, which was, in fact, my chief objection. PROD it or AfD it. One could argue that it disparages Arnold Palmer, in which case maybe it could be speedied, although I think that's a stretch. Acroterion _(talk) 18:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Courtesy Notice

I've posted on WP:AN asking for feedback on your/Royalbroil's actions. Exxolon (talk) 18:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

69-in-my-wine

For what it's worth, I think that indef block[3] is well deserved.    SIS  00:44, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Any time the first edit is an attack on another editor, it's a returning sockpuppet of a blocked or banned user. It took me a few minutes to research exactly who it was. Acroterion _(talk) 00:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Hm, you might want to protect/salt that Talkpage...    SIS  00:50, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Just did: I changed the block settings to prevent talkpage edits. Acroterion _(talk) 00:50, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Kay Moor

Hi. I've nominated Kay Moor, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Thanks, Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Log canoe

I've created stubs for the Log canoes in Md for the NRHP project. Do you think that Category:Ships on the National Register of Historic Places should be added as a cat to each of them? I know this may sound odd, but is a log canoe a "ship"? TIA ... Ted--Pubdog (talk) 11:42, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

No, I think that's a stretch for something that's no more than five feet wide. How about Category:Sailboats ? Acroterion _(talk) 12:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Sailboats sounds reasonable. Should I go ahead and add that cat?--Pubdog (talk) 00:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Sure. Be WP:BOLD. Acroterion _(talk) 01:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Help with Edits

Sorry to bug you again, but an unregistered person just added some sentences to the article The Meadows (Owings Mills, Maryland) concering residents of that NRHP home that I question the validity of. They're not offensive, but what should I do?--Pubdog (talk) 00:59, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

None of those people were political refugees, and Anne Frank didn't leave the Netherlands until she was taken to Belsen. Vandalism. Acroterion _(talk) 01:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Thought so. Thanks for taking care of that issue. I guess I should be WP:BOLD when I see obvious errors like that. Best wishes--Pubdog (talk) 11:31, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Kay Moor

On January 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kay Moor, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 08:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Kay Moor

Congratulations on this new article, working in collaboration, and making the Main Page on DYK. It certainly seems both well-written and referenced. Vaoverland (talk) 12:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! I sort of picked it at random as part of my series of NRHP articles, and it turned into a nice little article about a ghost town I never knew existed. Learning about things like this are what I particularly enjoy about Wikipedia. Acroterion _(talk) 12:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

apple

Ok, if you really want to edit something, look at the apple page: big tummy eaters 10.39 g - Dietary fiber 2.4 g Fat 0.17 g Protein 0.26 g moo moocow 3 μg 0% Thiamin (Vit. B1) 0.017 mg 1% Riboflavin (Vit. B2) 0.026 mg 2% Niacin (Vit. B3) 0.091 mg 1% Pantothenic acid (B5) 0.061 mg 1% Vitamin B6 0.041 mg 3% hummer (Vit. B9) 3 μg 1% old guy 4.6 mg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.198.31.98 (talk) 17:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Looks like template vandalism that's already fixed (clear your cache to see the fixed version). Acroterion _(talk) 17:48, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Parsons (Tucker County) courthouse

I see you added the courthouse photo I took to a category. It sorta seems like you are asserting a fact about the designer of the building. I was wondering if you had a reference for that assertion. Perhaps that fact should be added, with reference, to the Tucker County article, or to the photo itself.WVhybrid (talk) 04:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Um, what fact would that be? The information about Milburn's in the NRHP nom that's referenced. I'm inclined to take out the references to McDowell and Berkeley, as they're not especially important: see the List of buildings by Frank Pierce Milburn that I've compiled (with 32 refs): it goes on and on.Acroterion _(talk) 04:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Okay, I didn't know there was an article about the courthouse. I just looked at the Tucker County article, which is where I first posted the photo. I guess this points to a weakness of categorization of photos, that can be difficult to tell that belongs to a category, while usually that linkage can be drawn from the context of an article. But then photographs taken and uploaded by editors are sorta OR to begin with, aren't they. I think I will build a couple links between the courthouse and the county articles. Oh, one question, I think I have a copy of that photo that has all the wires removed. Do you think that would make for a nicer photo? WVhybrid (talk) 04:36, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Aha. I was thinking about the article, but then I considered the sourcing of photographs in general and how you'd do that. I guess in the comment field, but I've never seen anybody actually do it. As you say, photos are basically OR. I've been on an image categorization binge, both here and on commons, and I'd say that categories are not stringently enforced, as they're a matter of opinion for the most part anyway.

As for an image without wires, that'd be great. Bane of my existence, wires. Regards, and thanks for the pictures! Acroterion _(talk) 04:42, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

You deleted "Phenomblue", please provide feedback.

You recently deleted my page "Phenomblue" a factual entry about my company (after it had been patrolled..). The article simply stated our business, referenced a few projects we completed, and the owners/formation of the company. All of this was cited and there was no sensationalism or blatant advertising.

Please contact me and let me know what I can do to make the page appropriate in your eyes. I feel as though I am doing everything right and you still deleted my page.

Secondly, I have created my entry twice and re-creating is becoming time consuming. Is there someone I can contact within the Wikipedia organization to make sure that any problems with my entry are being reviewed by more than one person before being deleted? I would at least like the chance to update my article without having to do everything over again.

Thanks.

Joe Olsen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeolsen (talk • contribs) 04:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

All articles on corporations must assert notability: for pertinent guidelines, please refer to WP:CORP. Please understand that inclusion on Wikipedia is not a right; content must meet Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion, and your article gave no indication that the company met WP:CORP, such as multiple, non-trivial coverage in third-party media. Furthermore, as CEO of the company, you are strongly discouraged from writing about your own company, as this is a conflict of interest. The fact that it was patrolled does not mean that it is somehow approved: patrolling just means that someone has looked at it, and possibly tagged it for deletion: this is automatic with deletion tagging, and it was in fact tagged by another user. The article I deleted was not advertising, but it was also not notable, and thus a candidate for speedy deletion. You may wish to review advice on creating your first article. Regards, Acroterion _(talk) 12:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Crack a Bottle Deletion

Why did you delete Crack a Bottle? Tons of articles are blatant copyright infringement. I was going to look at it until I saw that you deleted it like an idiot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.8.196 (talk) 01:20, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I assume your very polite comment was a request to locate Crack a Bottle, in existence since January 9th? Acroterion _(talk) 01:46, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

HBW

--Hedgeskeith (talk) 01:58, 3 February 2009 (UTC) I was gitten to fixen it u didnt have to deleate it

Please review our requirements for notability. A backyard wrestling league is unlikely to be notable: can you provide several non-trivial references in independent media? Acroterion _(talk) 02:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

what is a subject of importance--Hedgeskeith (talk) 02:00, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Follow the blue link to WP:NOTE, which describes notability requirements. Do you really think a backyard wrestling league you've made up belongs in an encyclopedia? Acroterion _(talk) 02:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

HBW

it exist, but isn't well known go to [WWW.Myspace.com/hedgesbackyardwrestling] for proof--Hedgeskeith (talk) 02:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

cant yall cut a break

--Hedgeskeith (talk) 02:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Existence is not the question: significance is, and MySpace is not a useful source. Wikipedia is not for advertising your club, and it's not a free webhost. The article did not meet our requirements for inclusion because it's about a group or club, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject . Once again, please see WP:NOTE for notability requirements.ANd please learn to thread your comments: you don't need a new header each time. Acroterion _(talk) 02:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

mine as well deleate the sob then

--Hedgeskeith (talk) 02:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

PalmerSport

Hello,

At first I accept it was blatant advertising, but only because I had copied text directly from their own website, and was in the process of rewriting when you deleted the page. However, the third draft i find hard to accept was advertising - it was factual, and actually most of the text was written in a similar way to existing pages on Wikipedia! Because I have tried to create this page three times I think it's getting taken down without even reading it now - please be assured I've always intended it to be factual, not an advert, I just need info from their site to start with.

Being relatively new to wiki, I'm not sure how to start a page without creating it (I have a message to start as a personal page and then moved it I think!?) Any advice would be appreciated...Stremayne (talk) 10:24, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

PalmerSport

I would appreciate any effort to rewrite it as I'm obviously going a little wrong (without intending to). I have changed it since, so feel free to amend it as you see fit. ThanksStremayne (talk) 15:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

revert

thank you. Dlohcierekim 22:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Must have annoyed some very mature person out there. Acroterion _(talk) 23:02, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry - I boobed !!! Clicked on the wrong thing83.197.17.234 (talk) 11:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

PalmerSport

Thanks for your help, can I post the new effort as a Wiki page now? Stremayne (talk) 17:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Liege fortifications

Thank you so much for pointing out my error in placing the graphic of the Liege fortification in the Maginot line article. I have removed it from the latter and placed in in the article you suggested. My mistake. Thank you! pmcyclist (talk) 14:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for finding that image and all of the others you've contributed - they improve the articles tremendously. Acroterion _(talk) 14:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

helpme

I want to publish this, what exactly do you need form me? Mollylilly (talk) 03:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to Superphase? You'll want to review WP:BAND, Wikipedia's notability standards for bands, which establishes a threshold for inclusion. Has the band issued albums on a major label? Toured nationally? Gotten significant press in multiple publications of national standing? Those are the sort of things that will establish whether the band is notable by Wikipedia standards. Acroterion _(talk) 03:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

13

how was dat pure vandalism?? Fangfiftyfive (talk) 17:45, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

It could be vandalism, nonsense, non-notable. You are very close to a disruption block. Acroterion _(talk) 18:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

The Palace Hotel On 1st St and Cook Ave.

Hi,Im new to this so plese bear with me. I've seen your name on the discussion list and was wondering if you care to assist me in any way.Please understand that I take no offense if this is not possible.

I am looking for information on the Palace Hotel located in the Historical District in Raton. It is listed as number 23 and is located on the corner of 1st street and Cook ave. Between 1975-77. I was a teenager and live and worked there. I am now researching the building's history and appreciate anything you can provide.

Thank you in advance.

--Susanjxp (talk) 23:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I mispelled "please" and I should have clarified Raton is in New Mexico. Thanks.

--Susanjxp (talk) 23:19, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Susan. I've looked around for some sources of information. On a quick glance, information is a little thin. Unlike Virginia, South Carolina, West Virginia and a few other states, New Mexico doesn't publish detailed information on the web about National Register properties. In a few years, the National Park Service will, funding permitting, have all nominations online, but right now, only Kentucky and the District of Columbia are finished. Even then, properties that are part of historic districts may only be line items or very short notes in the historic district's nomination form. Your best bet might be to contact the person listed on the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office's website here [4]. They might be able to provide copies of documents or to point you in the right direction. Good luck, and please let me know how you do. Acroterion _(talk) 02:57, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

A free copy of the NRHP nomination form, which includes photos and additional materials, may be obtained by email request to nr_reference (at) nps.gov. It will come by postal mail to you in a week or two. doncram (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Deleting my page

How can you delete my page, Kathy Willets, I AM Kathy Willets, the information is a copy of what was on Wikipedia for many years, with MANY errors.

I finally decided to rectify long held misinformation regarding me and my case, and the administrators take it down.

Again, I am THE Kathy Willets

Kathywillets (talk) 03:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)Kathy WilletsKathywillets (talk) 03:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

We have no way of knowing or substantiating that, and, as I said, Wikipedia will not accept unsourced biographical information, no matter who is posting it. Any unsourced biographical information of this nature will be deleted (and apparently was). The article contained information on other persons, equally unsourced, and equally unacceptable. Please read our policy on reliable sources and verifiability, along with conflict of interest and biographies of living persons. No exceptions are made. Acroterion _(talk) 03:50, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

why did you delete the page?

model american was a popular punk band with ties to several other big name bands..why delete? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.94.61 (talk) 16:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Those ties are not clearly indicated: it appears to be a band that never toured or produced an album, and fails WP:BAND. The article seems to be concerned with the band's existence in the same scene as much more successful bands: that's not enough. Lots of non-notable bands can make the same claim. Acroterion _(talk) 17:21, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

How do I make my contribution better?

My first addition to Wikipedia, Bridal Suite of Bay Shore, you termed blatant advertising.

I was hoping to work on it more but I posted it partially done. I believe the store has significance to the Long Island . How different is it from a supermarket like Trader Joe's?

Can I add history, key people, products?

Thanks for your help,

Gregory Eugene Gregoryeugene (talk) 23:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

In general, businesses of local significance are not considered notable: see Wikipedia's requirements for companies. Trader Joe's is a national firm: the bridal shop is not. Also, business owners are strongly discouraged from writing about their companies, as it is difficult to provide neutral, factual, encyclopedic information about something with which you are closely associated. All contributions must be sourced, backed up by multiple non-trivial references in independent media of more than local standing, which I doubt any local shop can provide. Please do not use Wikipedia for advertising. See also WP:SPAM. Acroterion _(talk) 03:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Unprotection

Thanks for all your help on PalmerSport, is it now possible to unportect the page so that I can use your sandbox text to create it? Thanks Stremayne (talk) 10:41, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. Acroterion _(talk) 12:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Page: Tim_durden

Hi there,

Please could you advise me as to how I can get some information added on the artist Rohan By Nightfall. I was planning to add information on the band members and build from there. I don't quite understand the complexity of the inclusion criteria, but am serious about adding information.

My first draft of the page entitled Tim_durden, was merely a test, but I have since tried to update with factual information.

Kind regards, tjd08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjd08 (talk • contribs) 12:34, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

You'll want to read WP:BAND, which covers inclusion criteria for musical artists. The article as written did not indicate any notability: generally a musical artist would have to have some influence beyond Essex, have released albums on a major label, toured, and so on. Also, unless the band members are individually notable for their participation in more than one significant band, individual members' bios are included in the parent article on the band, maybe with a redirect from the person's name. Acroterion _(talk) 12:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

APAMSA

Hi what is the best way to start the apamsa webpage. I am not affiliated with APAMSA but was asked by my APAMSA friends to create a wiki page. I know the APAMSA web page was recently deleted, but how do I create a new APAMSA web page without having it delete again. I wrote everything by scratch so no there should be no copyright infringment.

Thank you!

Sincerely,

Sheila —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jellybeaneater (talk • contribs) 03:46, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Replied on your talkpage. Acroterion _(talk) 04:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:Sub-surface mining

Hi, I started a discussion about changing Category:Sub-surface mining to Category:Underground mining, I wanted to see what the thoughts of other participents of WikiProject Mining were.--kelapstick (talk) 17:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Vermaletta

Please let me keep it. I am still working on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ComicHeavenComics (talk • contribs) 03:50, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Please review WP:BAND for inclusion criteria. It details requirements for notability, including the issuance of albums on a major label, touring, etc. Acroterion _(talk) 12:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK issue

Hello! Your submission of World War Memorial (Kimball, West Virginia) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! XLerate (talk) 06:23, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for World War Memorial (Kimball, West Virginia)

On February 13, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article World War Memorial (Kimball, West Virginia), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 21:06, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Is this Vandalism?

Can you take a look at Glenwood, Howard County, Maryland and see whether the unregistered user's gobbledegook is indeed vandalism? I'm not sure what to do about this? TIA --Ted--Pubdog (talk) 02:06, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

It is, now reverted. Good job on all the Balto. City articles: I'm not patient enough. Acroterion _(talk) 02:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Help on something

I just noticed that someone improperly redirected two pages without actually moving them. I was wondering if you could delete the Chatham Anglers and Orleans Firebirds pages so that I can properly move them. Unless you know of a fancy merger tool that only a few know about, I think that this is the best way to go about doing this. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. In essence, the user did a cut/paste move. I'll delete the newer pages and you can move the last good version there and update. Acroterion _(talk) 02:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I need you to retrieve the information on the Firebirds page as I was unable to paste it before you deleted it. I did leave a message to the editor who did those moves and I believe that since he was new, he was unable to move pages and thus not really at fault here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Where would you like it placed - in a sandbox in your userspace, or would you like it to be just restored? Acroterion _(talk) 02:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

You can place it on the Orleans Cardinals page and have the honors of performing the move if you want. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:13, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

In the interest of keeping it tidy, I put the deleted content in your sandbox: you can do the move and take what you need. I'm not feeling terribly competent at move/merges tonight. Acroterion _(talk) 02:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

See WP:SMERGE for policies: you just need to leave appropriate edit summaries to indicate what you've done. Acroterion _(talk) 02:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I moved it, go ahead and tidy as you wish per SMERGE. Acroterion _(talk) 02:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Help with Michal Levin

I have noticed that over the past two days, User:FranW has been removing content from Michal Levin. I have reverted such multiple times as I thought it was some crafty vandalism attempt. Then I noticed that yesterday, she made a claim on the talk page saying that the original content was not NPoV, and she was ammending as such. After looking through the original content twice and through, I am certain that this is otherwise. I'm not sure how to deal with this. Elm-39 - T/C 13:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

FranW's edits appear to have the effect of making the article read more like a resume than an encyclopedia article. I would suggest that you ask FranW how these particular edits make it more neutral - it seems to me to have the opposite effect. A discussion of the usefulness of edit summaries in understanding intention and purpose would be helpful too. Acroterion _(talk) 23:13, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Backtrack

System suitably tested, must sleep.

Nighty-night. Acroterion _(talk) 02:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion rationale wrong

Hi, I noticed your deletion of a page I PRODed. It was prodded because it was ineligible for A7 - and unlike in the rationale you have provided, it was in fact not an expired PROD. Just thought I should let you know so that this can be avoided in future. Thanks! :) — neuro^(talk) 12:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I deleted it as web content with no assertion of notability, which is a valid A7. However, I should have blanked the expiring PROD rationale upon doing so. Acroterion _(talk) 15:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

User:BackUp3

Hi. I noticed you put a sock tag on this user and i agree with you that it is a sockpuppet of Bun39. Are you planning to take it to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents? Eddie6705 (talk) 16:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

No, it's patently obvious, and if he continues to screw around with his user talk, he'll lose his ability to edit it. Nothing for AN/I to do. Acroterion _(talk) 16:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. Eddie6705 (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Lee Harding

Just thought id inform you that he has recreated another page of himself as a wrestler after your final warning. Thanks. Eddie6705 (talk) 19:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

An old friend of yours

An IP editor that you previously blocked for 72 hours is back. This time engaging in personal attacks in Talk: Fort Lewis. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:43, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

They've talked themselves into a three-month block. Acroterion _(talk) 19:09, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Campehr

Hello, I noticed you speedy deleted this article under G1. I do not believe that this fit the category, as the content was perfectly understandable, although it was definitely not encyclopedic. I believe I prodded it under WP:MADEUP and WP:NEO. Why did you speedy delete it instead of waiting for the prod to expire? Thanks, FingersOnRoids 21:22, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I find that "if you would like pork and baneeners you may have them so ya" is nonsense. Your mileage may vary. Acroterion _(talk) 21:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but it was clear that the article was not made up of an entirely random string of letters, or an entirely random string of words. If I remember correctly, the first part was a coherent sentence explaining that this was a word he made up. I'm just saying that waiting the 5 days for a prod to expire is a better solution than bending csd and maybe WP:BITEing a new user. I know that you didn't get promoted to administrator without contributing many good things to wikipedia , but I'm just saying, try to be more careful. Regards, FingersOnRoids 21:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I applaud your strict attention to G1 criteria, but on re-review I'm content that it's nonsense in the terms usually employed by CSD taggers and admins, even allowing for the general decline in use of the PROD tag. I tend to regard strings of random gibberish rather kindly, as it's usually nothing more than a test and should be deleted as such. G2 is an underused and kind way to deal with inappropriate test articles, and could have been used here as well. What irritate me are A7 taggings because the tagger's never heard of the person or company and just wants it to go away, when a little Googling would indicate the article's notability, asserted or not. Acroterion _(talk) 21:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I see you have done the same thing again that we were just discussing, except with Grohowich... It was basically the same scenario, it was a definition that was understandable, but silly, and I was about to remove the speedy and add a prod. Regards, FingersOnRoids 23:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and it could also be read as an attack. We must get 100 made-up nonsense words a day, and 90% are speedy deleted as nonsense, because it is nonsense. As I said, nonsense in the sense gibberish is frequently a test, and should be treated with a degree of kindness. This kind of silly stuff doesn't need the PROD process. Acroterion _(talk) 00:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

My page

Hello you deleted my page (shamrockbaby4494) I know it did not have alot of info on it but I kept on adding to it ... I made that page so people could know more about her if they wanted to! That was my first page and I am really upset .

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so the articles are about people who have already received notice elsewhere. There was no indication that this person met those requirements for coverage. You are welcome to contribute, but you will need to familiarize yourself with the rules. Some information can be found at your first article. Happy editing, Acroterion _(talk) 02:27, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

CSD

Ok, I will flag them as tests in future, although sometimes there is little between this and vandalismMacromonkey (talk) 13:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree, but it's more a matter of avoiding biting new contributors, who are frequently children who mean no real harm. I think that's more important than the precise category for deletion. You don't have to flag all of them as tests, I just suggest that the more benign ones be treated accordingly.Acroterion _(talk) 15:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey, this is Raninair10. I know what you said on top but really? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raninair10 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Answer about the 150 kt nuclear demolition charge.

Why do you think it does not satisfy the criteria?

You can see this confirmation on the following websites:

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

www.nuclear-demolition.com

In the first you will find a legal frames

In the other two you will find technical explanations on how it works.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DKhalezov (talk • contribs) 05:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You can't use Wikipedia as a source. The other website is not a reliable source. Acroterion _(talk) 11:47, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

P.S. to nuclear demolition

P.S. please, note, that I did not mention at all that my article had anything to do with the 9/11 particulars. My article was absolutely technical, no politics or conspiracies were involved at all. I didn't even hint it. Apparently, your drew your conclusions on your own, without my help whatsoever. Besides, I would like to inform you that what said in my article is 100% true, since I am a former official from the Soviet nuclear intelligence (Soviet Special Control Service) - responsible, besides of all, for conrolling the Peaceful Nuclear Explosions Treaty of 1976. That is why I know my subject very well, being an expert in the matter. If any questions arise - I am ready to testify to this effect even in a court of law either as an expert, or as an eye-witness. Thanks for your kind understanding. Dimitri. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DKhalezov (talk • contribs) 05:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, if you insist that it is controversial (though it is 100% true that CDI indeed patented the technique), I will remove the first link to the CDI. But why should you need to remove the entire article, which is just a purely technical matter - without any conspiracy or politics whatsoever involved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DKhalezov (talk • contribs) 05:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Because it is completely unverifiable and does not meet Wikipedia's requirements for inclusion. Acroterion _(talk) 11:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

About signature and deletion. Repeat.

I am sorry for the signature, I did not know how to use it.

OK, I repeat my last message signed this time:

OK, if you insist that it is controversial (though it is 100% true that CDI indeed patented the technique), I will remove the first link to the CDI. But why should you need to remove the entire article, which is just a purely technical matter - without any conspiracy or politics whatsoever involved?

Thanks, Dimitri.

--DKhalezov (talk) 06:01, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

As stated above, it is unsupported by verifiable, reliable sources. Replying more fully on your talk page. Acroterion _(talk) 12:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Nucler demolition acticle is improved

I would like to inform you that I improved the article Nuclear demolition. All mentionings of "Controlled Demolition, Inc." and all references to this company have been removed. Is it OK now to leave this article?

Thanks, Dimitri.

--DKhalezov (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nuclear demolition. That is the place where the decision to keep or delete is reached. Acroterion _(talk) 12:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Kurt cobain murder

Two days ago I tagged this article as an attack page and you deleted it. I thought the author Jrod716 (talk · contribs) was just a vandal, but he has come back saying that it was a school project and asking what was wrong with it. I explained on his talk page about negative unsourced BLP and NPOV, and he has asked to have the article undeleted so that he can fix it. I have told him I will ask you to userfy it, but warned him that it is unlikely to be acceptable in anything like its present form, and also that the existing article Death of Kurt Cobain covers the subject quite fully. Still, he should be learning quite a bit about WP from his class project, so could you please userfy it for him? I will keep an eye on him and it. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

No, I will not restore it. It accuses another person of murder and is not a candidate for userfication, and Wikipedia is not a suitable home for this, as well as not being a home for class assignments. I'm happy to encourage him to edit Wikipedia constructively, but he must understand that this sort of thing, presented in an encyclopedia, even on a user page, is not acceptable. Acroterion _(talk) 12:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Jrod716 (talk · contribs) has now enabled his email and would be grateful for a copy of his article. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for attempting to fix my redirect of French revolutionary sales to Biens nationaux. Yes, that what just what I intended. But it's not yet functioning as a redirect for me.--Wetman (talk) 17:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Hah! now it's caught up. Thanks again.--Wetman (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The servers have been slow and cranky for the past several days. It gave me occasion to read the Biens nationaux article, so that was a bonus, tagged though it was. Acroterion _(talk) 18:00, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Automatic translation programs seem to be stuck in their infant condition: I've seen no real progress in the last decade. The results, as in this article, can be quite zany enough. --Wetman (talk) 02:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Zany is a good description. I can't understand why anybody (or any program) thinks "actuellement" translates literally to "actually" every time. Acroterion _(talk) 02:40, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Repeated deletion of Jack Trib

hey, why are you deleting my page, Jack Trib. I was just starting to make it and check on how it looks. You then kept on deleting it! What is your problem? You loser. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerseyjack21 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The article gave no indication that the blog is notable. See also WP:WEB. Blogs may be suitable for inclusion if they've received non-trivial coverage from multiple independent media. If your blog meets such requirements, the article should indicate that. Acroterion _(talk) 20:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

hello there

hey acroterion. why did you delete that article on vahe manoukian? just kidding. I knew someone would delete it someday. by the way, I like your articles! awesome. please respond to me if possible.

                                                    Sincerely,
                                                               zas10818  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zas10818 (talk • contribs) 00:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC) 

Fire lookout

Okay. It's not that big of a deal, I didn't realize that it was such a problem, usually, if I am reading something on the site and notice an error or a problem I just fix it. With citations I generally have added them myself but I wasn't sure where that statement came from and I didn't know that national register listings were inherently notable. Thanks for letting me know. I suppose the "significant" term is something used by the bureaucracy? Again, I apologize for the phrase I used in my edit summary. You are actually far nicer than many of the regular editors I have encountered, they usually don't seem to like the anons.--208.82.225.245 (talk) 06:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

It's easy tor experienced users to take things for granted, and we need reminding of that from time to time. It's also easy for them to succumb to peevishness and to condescend to anon users. Significance is a matter of continual debate between inclusionism and deletionism. I could go on about this at some length (for some insights by others, see WP:WIKISPEAK and User:Antandrus/observations on Wikipedia behavior. I encourage you to sign up for an account, and I appreciate your comments. Acroterion _(talk) 11:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I suppose I can understand why some editors have a bias against anons, I assume that is where most of the vandalism comes from. Maybe I will sign up for an account, I think I used to have one but have long since forgotten about it.--208.82.225.245 (talk) 07:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and on "significance" I guess I meant that the national register probably uses it as a way to describe their listings. I was looking over some of their website, and found my way to a database of historic landmark forms, they all seemed to include a section that was essentially about the "significance" of the landmark. I suppose Wikipedia has their own uses for the term though.--208.82.225.245 (talk) 07:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia uses it similarly, but I find that the nomination forms use too much jargon ("fulfills Criterion C for ..."). In the specific case of the fire towers in Glacier, they are part of an MPS (multiple property submission) that takes a thematic approach for an entire category of structures. Individually, they don't amount to much, so it needs an umbrella article that references the individual sites. I've started writing an article that ties it all together, which would state the significance in a larger context that is consistent with the manner in which they were nominated. Many of the nom forms are little more than survey records. Glacier must have had a policy to nominate every hut, cabin and shed that would stand still long enough to be written up. Acroterion _(talk) 04:00, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Kurt cobain murder

Jrod716 (talk · contribs) has enabled his email and would be grateful for a copy of his article. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:45, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Emailed yesterday: forgot to tell you. Acroterion _(talk) 12:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. JohnCD (talk) 14:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Ashley Tisdale

Hi! i need that help me with Ashley Tisdale's article, a user called Olivewildes began to editing the article, the bad thing is that this user in several opportunities edtited the article with accounts before blockeds (FortyFootEcho, RaiseYourVice) you can to verify checking the hitory of editions. I know he is hater of Ashley, always he copies things for Brenda Song's article and delete for Ashley, the bad thing of everything is that the user Gimmetrow support him. Sorry for my horrible english, i hope you can help me. Thanks Juanacho (talk) 11:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Administrators don't resolve content disputes. Exxolon and Kww appear to be doing a good job of encouraging discussion. Your concerns about Olivewildes are not supported per this [5]; . I am not sufficiently familiar with the subject to offer an opinion on the validity of the changes to the article, but you have three established editors (including Gimmetrow) trying to help out, and I suggest you consider their points of view carefully. You are edit-warring, and I would heed Kww's warning. Acroterion _(talk) 18:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Read this carefully: Major Edit Discussion Section --Olivewildes (talk) 11:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The notice concerning edit-warring applies to you as well. One approach may be to protect the article until the discussion plays out: I would prefer not to block anyone. Acroterion _(talk) 18:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)

The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Xtromadon

You really shouldn't have deleted Xtromadon: The Orange Overlord. There is really a fish named that and I felt like the world should know his back story. Please do whatever you need to do to get my page back up. Please. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Robot Master (talk • contribs) 22:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Quite a fish. Has he published his biography, or did you receive this knowledge directly from the fish's mouth? Acroterion _(talk) 22:49, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

International College of Dentists

was marked for deletion this morning due to notability and lack of references. I've added a bunch in. It's a large multinational volunteer organization and does a ton of humanitarian work. I'll keep adding references for the work that is done to prove its' notability. Is that what is required? I"ve only done one other page so I'm new to this. Ian Furst (talk) 15:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Coordinator Elections

Nominations for Coordinator positions in the Military History WikiProject have commenced, and voting will begin on March 14, 2009. Make sure to get involved and ask questions to the candidates. Nominations for Coordinators goes until March 13. Then come out for the voting which begins on March 14. Thanks and Have a Great Day! Lord R. T. Oliver ^{The Olive Branch} 23:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Serial Deleter

It seems that you delete pages at random that do not fit in with your warped sense of what a source is. I don't personally think that you actually follow any source and if you believe it to be invalid, without even checking it, you delete it. You even try to defend why you did it with the original author of the article even tough the author themselves are an expert in the particular field.

Such as somebody's teacher, their myspace band, or whatever random gibberish is posted? Articles aren't deleted for being unsourced, they're deleted because they make no credible assertion of notability in accordance with Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines, because they're copyright violations, advertising, defamation or plain vandalism. Acroterion _(talk) 22:40, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Ed Chambrone

Hi. If I remove the speculation about Ed Chambrone's connections to the Mob, will the aricle be acceptable? I'm working on gathering my sources and putting them on the article's page right now. Thanks!

I'm still not sure he's notable, so you should be prepared to deal with it if it goes to Articles for Deletion (I won't nominate it if it's cleaned up and referenced). I'd adopt a somewhat more encyclopedic tone, though. It's unprotected. Acroterion _(talk) 23:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

NRHP reviews

I noticed you have been reviewing loads of NRHP unrated articles, which is a task that is sorely needed. However, I also noticed you've been doing it today at a rate of 1 and sometimes 2 articles per minute. While that type of speed may be feasible for stub articles, that kind of speed doesn't allow for an accurate evaluation of longer articles. The thing that brought it to my attention was ego-driven -- your "C" rating for two of my articles (Bryson Apartment Hotel and Camarillo Ranch House), both of which I was considering promoting as good articles. I hesitated to comment, since my own ego is involved, but I decided to post this note in a constructive spirit. Before rating an article with 10,000+ bytes and 10+ sources, I do think a more careful deliberation is needed -- more than can be accomplished in 30-60 seconds. If you have any thoughts on how I might improve the two articles, please let me know. Cbl62 (talk) 06:28, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

• Also, if you have comments on why you rated Banning House as a "start," or how to improve it, that would be appreciated as well. Cbl62 (talk) 06:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

It's been my observation that ratings for NRHP articles have been neglected, and that we have far too many articles listed as stubs that are starts, or starts that are Bs. Most of the articles I looked at last night were stubs and starts, which are relatively easy and can quickly be assessed, and many of which had already been assessed by other projects. I vacillated on the more advanced articles, as I haven't done much rating, and I agree that more time is warranted. It was my intention to go back and look at them again: your LA articles are of a high quality, and I was intentionally being conservative, which may have done you and your articles a disservice. Really, a C-class article should be an almost-B-class article that falls short in one or two criteria. It's hard to assess articles for completeness of subject presentation without being familiar with the subject matter, but the writing, referencing and organization are readily apparent. I suspect on review that I rated the Banning House a start based on length rather than quality.

In any case, I was chiefly interested in getting my feet wet on ratings, and was attempting to set my personal calibration while cutting some of the backlog: feedback is welcome, and I will go back and review. You don 't need to apologize for having a keen interest in your articles: we all have egos, and your work is consistently excellent. I agree that I was going too fast on the more advanced articles. I'll have another look, and please feel free to discuss or dispute. I appreciate your comments. Acroterion _(talk) 12:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

On looking at the Banning House, I cannot find fault in the six B criteria; if that is the case, then the default should be to B regardless (within reason) of length. If one is deficient, it would be a C. In the case of NRHP properties, this would usually be sourcing, as the chief issue I've encountered in my own writing would be narrowness of sources.

As a matter of feedback, I'd be interested in your opinion of stubs vs. starts. We appear to have far too many starts listed as stubs (although there are an awful lot of the barest sort of stubs in places like MA and FL). In my opinion, most competently-written articles with in-line refs and a couple of paragraphs should probably be listed as starts. Acroterion _(talk)

I'd offer Bruton Parish Church as a good example of a C-class article. The article is comprehensive, but minimizes the prominence of the church in Colonial Williamsburg and its role in the town's restoration: I'd like to see more, but that's because I already know a good bit on the subject and feel that there's something lacking in the article's treatment.Acroterion _(talk) 12:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The Eugene W. Britt House seems to me like it could be expanded a bit more, but is stymied, perhaps, by a need for more sources that might not exist. Given that C seems to be perceived as more like less-than-B, it seems like undervaluing a pretty good article, though. Acroterion _(talk) 14:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I very much agree with you about the big picture need to get ratings issued for the NRHP articles, and appreciate your willingness to take on this task. I also appreciate your willingness to take a second look at some of the longer articles. Cbl62 (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate the feedback. This should be a consensus-driven activity, but given its subjectivity it will always be open to discussion. At some point, somebody needs to be bold (I'll spare you the all-caps bluelink) and just do some of this stuff. The bold/revert/discuss process applies to this activity as much as it does to articlespace. Acroterion _(talk) 15:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Humbug

apparently you deleted a poem by Walter Raleigh that I hoped to read. What a humbug. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.19.16 (talk) 23:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Acroterion _(talk) 23:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Leesport Lock House

Thanks for your help on the article :^) Fightin' Phillie (talk) 04:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Glad to help. Acroterion _(talk) 15:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Sweeney-Conner Cabin

Added picture of the cabin I obtained from the NPS. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 19:08, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

They sure didn't spare the pixels, did they? An image was pretty much all I saw between C and B class, but it would still be nice to have an image at a reasonable resolution. By the way, I like your Appomattox article series, as must be apparent. I haven't done much in the way of article ratings, so please feel free to let me know if you have comments or objections. The backlog's gotten too big, and there are a lot of articles that deserve recognition hidden there. Acroterion _(talk) 19:29, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

It looks like this [6] image at HABS is the same cabin. Acroterion _(talk) 19:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out for a higher resolution photo. So far, this is the only photo I have come across of the cabin. The Appomattox article series when first came out was a 16 article hook DYK. There is also the Charles Sweeney Cabin, which might be the one you pointed out as the HABS image instead.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

That's probably it. Appomattox would be a nice day trip for me this spring, once there's some color in the trees. Maybe I can get some shots. I'll let you know if we go: I'll shoot whatever you need. Acroterion _(talk) 20:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Great! We have been there a few times and I did take several pictures, some of which are here. The only item I don't have color pictures on is the Sweeney Prizery. I am not even sure where it is on the grounds, so apparently it is is an obscure corner of the woods. Not that important if you don't come across it. The Park is a place you definitely want to see. Lots of Civil War history there. My great uncle was there on April 9, 1865, at the surrender of General Lee. Should get a picture of him to them, as they display pictures of soldiers that were there then.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Hall House

Does this answer your inquiry on hall house? Added link to Charles Sweeney Cabin#Historical significance. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 22:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I think the NRHP nom means that it's one big room, which more or less agrees with Hall (concept). I've been looking around for something more distinct. Acroterion _(talk) 23:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

That was the most I have come across, even before when I looked into it - that it's one big room! If I find anything additional, I'll let you know.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Did come across this of an English Hall House that apparently has a timeline of 1200-1800. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 23:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I saw that too. You might want to do a little copyedit on the Historical significance section: it's a little repetitive and doesn't flow well. My object here is to declare it a B-class article, and that paragraph and the hall house issue are all I see to prevent it. The article is unlikely to get much longer, and I'm opposed to rating articles based on word count, beyond a certain minimum. Acroterion _(talk) 01:14, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll work on the Historical significance section today. I have a librarian at the Library of Congress. I'll ask her if she can get me an good definition for what a "hall house" is.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 11:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done Reworked the Historical and Description sections of Charles Sweeney Cabin. You have Wiki-mail.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 16:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I think we've gone as far as we can with what there is to work with. Perhaps one day we can find some more sources (probably in a book, rather than on line) about the term "hall house." In the m eantime, it's sourced to the NRHP nom, which ought to be good enough. We'll call it a B. Acroterion _(talk) 16:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Great! Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 17:14, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

less offensive rant

Blindly reverting pages, using automated tools, damages wikipedia. It's not vandalism because it's done in good faith. But it is harmful. It's against wiki policies. It's against usage guidelines for all of those automatic scripts. Don't you think it's weird that admins ignore abusive use of scripts (to revert unwanted text) by people who are making edits at bot-like speeds without looking at what they're editing? 82.33.48.96 (talk) 20:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks for toning it down. I agree in principle: you're responsible for your work, whether it's script-assisted or not. Having used those tools, I'm aware of how easy it is to make a mistake, but I'm equally aware of how effectively those tools, appropriately used, have controlled vandalism, compared to the situation just two years ago, and allowed us to spend more time improving the encyclopedia and less reverting the word "poop". The user you're unhappy with has not been, in my experience, one to abuse the tools.
• You're also responsible for the things you say on the wiki, and I don't think your talk-page messages (the ones that were reverted) were appropriate or particularly conducive to building an encyclopedia. I might have taken the same action, manually or script-assisted, as it looked like plain vandalism. I don't think you're owed an apology for what, frankly, was calculated to be fairly obnoxious comment [7] on a shared IP talk page, on which you have no right to make such demands, and I don't see a pattern that would cause me to scold the user.
• You seem to understand the project well, assuming the comments your IP made in recent months are yours, and if you removed the chip from your shoulder/userpage, you seem like you could help out. I hate spam too. I'd even welcome you, but you don't seem to take that kindly. Acroterion _(talk) 21:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Appomattox articles

If you have a chance, someday could you look over Jones Law Office and Woodson Law Office for a quality rating. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell ^talk 20:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm giving article reviews a rest for a bit, as there really ought to be a diversity of reviewers. How about I just look them over and offer my comments? As a result of looking at the good work of others, it's motivated me to improve my stubby articles. Acroterion _(talk) 21:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Sounds great. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell ^talk 21:57, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

oops

I'm assuming that this wasn't really the desired result? Hopefully your account hasn't been compromised ;) — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 21:33, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

No, not the desired outcome. Nothing like tag-team alternating-IP vandalism to improve the wiki. Acroterion _(talk) 21:44, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

LOL .. yep, and I'm seeing more of it too - weird. I see you were born next door too - (I'm in Pgh. PA). Well, happy editing ;) — Ched ~ ^(yes?) 21:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I was in fact born in M'burg, though I don't actually live there, hence its presence on the watchlist. Acroterion _(talk) 21:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

about the article you just deleted!!!!!

hello :D i was just testing how to use wiki. when first computer told me that the page don't exist (probably because you deleted it very swiftly), i thought it was due to some error i made. so i recreated it. any how, thnx for your assistance. it was indeed very helpful. and thnx for the sandbox.arsalan... (talk) 13:53, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your message

Thank you for your message, Acroterion ; I now finished my stub about the samll region Le Ban de la Roche; now what I can do is finished, because it is really difficult for me to write in English ; hava a good day --Nicolas Baeteman (talk) 17:27, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Your English is far better than my French; thank you for the article, you did very well. Acroterion _(talk) 21:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Why did you delete tripmaster monkey?

Tripmaster Monkey was an important and influential band that easily meets the WP notoriety standards as defined by Wikipedia. I feel they deserve their own Wikipedia page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trivialgenius (talk • contribs) 23:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

If the band meets WP:BAND, please indicate so in the article, along with references. Acroterion _(talk) 23:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Vandal

I've just deleted Acroterion Sucks as a courtesy, but you may wish to take further action; I left the individual a note on his/her talk page. Accounting4Taste:talk 00:12, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I think your response was just fine. Acroterion _(talk) 00:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Thx

Apols for any misunderstanding etc, trying to hit it quick --  Chzz  ►  00:15, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I assumed it was so, but was having trouble finding the re-created article. All done now, thanks. Acroterion _(talk) 00:46, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

invitation

You're invited to sign up as a founding member, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#WikiProject Historic Sites ! :) doncram (talk) 05:10, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Historic Sites is opened up. I took the liberty of assuming your support for the wikiproject meant you wanted to join as a member, and I copied your signature to the Members list on the main page. Please visit and add to, or remove, your listing there. It would be great to hear about what you're interested in the Wikiproject becoming, in your member comment and/or at the Talk page, shortcut wt:HSITES. Thanks for your support! doncram (talk) 17:41, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

You have new messages at User talk:Tmwps

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

The Dare

This was tagged as nonsense which it definitely wasn't and I know you deleted it as an A1, no wonder, it was in sad shape. I was in the middle of supplying a source and adding cleanup when it was deleted. If I can find further relevant sources would you object if I recreate it later?—Sandahl (talk) 23:34, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. I'm amazed at how many people have reverted my userpage. I must be an interesting person to watch (wink)! Royalbroil 00:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Stalking talkpages is the only way to know what's really going on around here! Acroterion _(talk) 01:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm giggling! Funny answer (wink)! I enjoy avoiding drama, but to each his own. Royalbroil 01:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

That's why I avoid AN/I: (Ban him! Desysop her! Burn the witch!) Acroterion _(talk) 01:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

MD Archeological sites

Thanks for removing the erroneous cats for National Historic Landmarks from various MD archeological sites. I'm afraid that was an oversight of mine and I am very glad you corrected it. I had been using Accokeek Creek Site as a template and neglected to remove that cat tag Best wishes--Pubdog (talk) 21:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

That's what I assumed: I've made similar mistakes in the past, so no worries. You've done a tremendous amount of work, and I appreciate it. Acroterion _(talk) 21:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Conra

how can i post a page about the site, without having the advertising effect, if thats even possible? I just want people to know a bit about it, without causing any problems. Im sorry if it was blatant advertising, i really am. But could you offer me suggestions where i may post something like this, or how i can post it on wiki?

You can stop using copyrighted text from another website, which is unacceptable. You can rewrite the text from scratch so it isn't promotional - as practically every sentence was. "If you are looking for a top notch web browser based game, check us out. Or if you are just seeking a change, and something to pass the time, this is the game for you" is blatant promotion. Finally, you must assert and back up that the site is notable according to WP:WEB for Internet content. Non-trivial coverage in multiple independent media of national standing will help with that. Please do not use Wikipedia for promotion. Acroterion _(talk) 12:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

J.Nothing here...

Can you please remove that deletion somehow? I am a real person and am new here... I was about to paste the {{hangon}} tag but you two literally nabbed my page two seconds after I posted it. I am an artist in California and need to put a page up for media purposes on request of a few press outlets. If you can help me out here , I would really appreciate it.

Thanks,

J. Nothing (Jeff)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

deleted by mistake

this not advertising. i am just explaining what people in New York refer to as a "summer share"

Please tell me where in the article that I am advertising? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Njf78 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Replied on your talkpage. Acroterion _(talk) 18:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

i am new to Wikipedia. I am not sure why you are accusing me of advertising. I am not advertising anything. I am defining a term using in New York. There are no websites or products being sold on this site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Njf78 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

www.summershare.com is a spam link. Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia: you are writing narrowly targeted advertising and using Wikipedia for promotion. Summer shares exist all over the world, not just the Hamptons. There may be room for such an article, but it should be written from a broad, preferably global perspective. See Vacation rental for an article that does exist, but has significant problems. Acroterion _(talk) 18:33, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Tim De Groot page deleted

I believe the deletion of this page is in error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KingSethos1 (talk • contribs) 18:49, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Can you provide several references in independent media to verify the information in accordance with wikipedia's verification policies? Notability of individuals should be more than purely local, as should the references. Acroterion _(talk) 19:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

KnowThyNeighbor.org page deleted

I am a founding member of KnowThyNeighbor.org and would like to put up an article wikipedia users can read since we are referrenced in the VoteOnMarriage.org article. Please allow me to post my article as I am not in violation of copyright when citing our own mission statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Salemmaman (talk • contribs) 19:36, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

No, you can't post articles of non-notability websites. Read Wikipedia:Your first article. ZooFari 19:38, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, you are in violation of Wikipedia copyright policy, since we cannot tell who is posting the information and must assume that it was not originally released under the GFDL copyright, which is far more liberal than normal copyrights. Please see WP:COPYRIGHT for ways to deal with this. In general, such material should be re-written to deal with the subject in a manner consistent with an encyclopedia entry. Also, it is best to substantiate the organization's notability in the article through multiple, independent references in third-party media. Also, please see WP:COI for information on Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines. Acroterion _(talk) 19:41, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Recent discussions at WikiProject Mining

Hi, there are some discussions you may want to weigh in on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mining about:

• Naming conventions for multiple mines with the same name
• Using "Categorty:Metal mine in Country" in community/company articles
• Capitalizing the word "mine" in article titles

Cheers --kelapstick (talk) 16:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Aezagorski12

Hi. :) User:Aezagorski12 sent a letter to permissions-en. I believe permission for this text will be shortly forthcoming. (For the record, his e-mail was very polite, but shows complete lack of familiarity with the whole Wikipedia environment.) I wonder if you would consider lifting his block early under the circumstances. I have explained to him how talk pages work and how to communicate when he's running into problems and suggested that instead of creating many small stubs related to this museum, it would be better to add information to the primary article. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:55, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd be happy to lift the block under those circumstances, and to assist the user. I'd expect a letter to come from one of the staff people named as museum management, and I agree with your suggestion concerning the stubs: if you approach Wikipedia from a web-designer mindset, it's easy to fall into a heirarchical tree of links to stubs rather than the broad, lateral connections we'd like to see here. I'll unblock and leave him a note. Acroterion _(talk) 16:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I'll try to help keep an eye on things in case he persists before he has clearance. He hasn't responded to my e-mail yet, but if he clears everything properly I'll make a note of it. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

I'm sure you'd do the same for me.:-) Maen. K. A. (talk) 22:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I do not understand

Is it not possible to just make up a word and put it on Wiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabedookie (talk • contribs) 23:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

No. See our policies onverifiability and reliable sources. Acroterion _(talk) 23:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Avoiding Edit Wars

Acroterion, I have been trying to avoid edit wars since I was unblocked last October 2008. I try to make articles more accurate, but sometimes it results in stepping on the toes of persons who have a particular point of view. I have learned the lesson from the past, not to push an issue. I have had a few prolonged discussions, but I have avoided edit wars on the main articles.

However, I would like to have your advice on a particular issue. It relates to a comment which I have just left on the talk page of 'Kepler's laws of planetary motion'. I do not intend to press the issue and I do not intend to make any more reverts. But I do feel that there is a matter here which needs to be observed.

I appreciate that physics is not your topic, although I do know that you are scientific enough to grasp the concepts involved. I'll give you a quick summary. There are two equations involved in the Kepler problem, each with two terms on the active side. A couple of months ago, I was going to try and make major edits to this page, but I got stuck on the issue of agreeing names for the terms in the equations. You can see that discussion further up. There was general agreement about the actual equations, but no agreement on the names of the terms. So I lost interest and went elsewhere.

A few days ago, I returned to add what I considered to be very helpful information on elliptical orbits in relation to Kepler's second law. It was reverted. But it was reverted by a user who has only ever come to physics pages in my time, to revert my edits.

I will now walk away from that page because I don't want a repeat of what happened last July. Interestingly it was during an argument with this same user last July that indirectly led tome getting blocked, albeit that the final straw actually came on the Mozart page.

I intend to tidy up some more of the physics pages over the coming months. I am not asking you to do anything right now. But I would be grateful if you could monitor the situation and provide any advice because I do not believe that this guy is doing these reverts in the genuine spirit of promoting knowledge in physics. David Tombe 86.141.249.136 (talk) 18:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

David: Thanks for the note. At this time, I'm not necessarily the best candidate for looking at subtleties - I've been dealing with a veterinary emergency at home the past few days and have had very little sleep this week. A cursory look indicates that it might be important to look at referenced facts, rather than engaging in theoretical discussion on the talk pages of the article. I would think that there's a pretty significant body of work on Kepler's Second Law. As I think I've said before, dynamics, kinematics and the differences between the two are not necessarily my area, as structures in my line shouldn't be moving. I'll keep an eye on things, and maybe you and the other editor can find a way to agree on sources, rather than letting it drift into debates about theories. I appreciate you willingness to tread carefully here, and that you've taken Antandrus' trust seriously. We've seen so many editors who aren't willing to try other approaches and get into a ban/unban proposal cycle. Acroterion _(talk) 17:09, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Acroterion, Thanks for your response. What I'll do is, I'll try one more time to tidy the article up. I'll begin with a few proposals on the talk page and see what responses come forth. If there are no responses, I'll go ahead and make a few more edits. If that editor in question comes in and removes them, then I'll walk away from the article. But I would like to think that at least some administrators can see what has been happening. David Tombe 86.141.249.136 (talk) 00:25, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Sex and aging

I saw you deleted Sex and aging several times. It has been recreated (again), so could you consider deleting and salting? KuroiShiroi (talk) 03:11, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and while you're at it, Sex and music and Alcohol and sex should go too. They're not technically CSD'able, but the same concept applies. I also might file a WP:SPI for these users. KuroiShiroi (talk) 03:12, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing it's a class project. One user's KaitSpfldCol (talk · contribs), and I bet it's a condensation of Kait at Springfield College. I'll leave a note. Acroterion _(talk) 03:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I saw you found a couple more. I doubt they will respond to talkpage comments; any suggestions for what should be done? Sex Censorship should be merged into Censorship if possible; Female contraception should be merged with Birth control; and Maternal Obesity, I have no clue. I wouldn't say this material is damaging the encyclopedia, in fact, some of it is quite good. However, the manner in which Wikipedia is being used really just irks me. Can anything be done? KuroiShiroi (contribs) 04:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd go ahead and tag the merge candidates. I left a note for the person I take to be the instructor. I'm fine with Wikipedia's inclusion in class projects, provided the instructor is an experienced Wikipedian, but thios person seems to be inexperienced to the point of not signing posts, encouraging OR and synthesis, and not realizing that new articles are not the best way to start: article improvement is what we need, which is not so amenable to class projects. Acroterion _(talk) 17:38, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Yellowstone list

The List of Yellowstone National Park related articles is impressive - you might want to consider submitting it as a featured list. I was trying to figure out how to include Yellowstone National Forest, which was the predecessor to Shoshone National Forest, and which Sheridan proposed as an expansion of the park. It also occurs to me that some of the adjoining wilderness areas might be added, but I wouldn't want to dilute the list through geographic scope creep to areas that aren't really in the park. Acroterion _(talk) 03:07, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmph, I may not have done you a favor. While I agree with many of the individual points raised concerning the list, I see considerable value in having an all-in-one-place listing of topics on the subject that can't be dealt with appropriately in a category. I think breaking portions out makes it hard to use, and forces users to follow links rather than viewing the topic as a whole. Lists are problematic - the whole idea of a "featured list" rubs people the wrong way sometimes, but I think this is an example of a subject that benefits from this particular format. Acroterion _(talk) 17:36, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I am pretty confident that the list will survive any deconstruction attempts because there is great support for Yellowstone topics. The MOS inputs are valid and I've made a few adjustments. As for the sourcing comments, I always find those a bit confusing as they relate to list of already notable articles in WP. The category approach works well for less complex topics, but is a poor choice for such a complex topic as Yellowstone.--Mike Cline (talk) 18:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Catoctin Rural Historic District

Acroterion, thank you for your message and thank you for all of your contributions! I concur with your idea to draft an article for the Catoctin Rural Historic District, especially since the district contains so many extraordinary historic farm properties, most of which were owned by the Mason family. I'm currently writing an article for Chestnut Hill and Selma, which are also contributing properties within the Catoctin Rural Historic District. I'm not quite sure where Locust Hill is located either, but I'll inquire with some of my compadres who reside north of Leesburg. Chestnut Hill and Selma could also benefit from having some of your beautiful photographs. Other than those properties, I can't think of any others in the Leesburg vicinity. I'll keep on the lookout for Locust Hill's location. Thanks again for sharing your images, writing articles, and all of your hard work! --Caponer (talk) 02:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind comments - the area around Leesburg has an extraordinary number of notable buildings, and the landscape's relatively unspoiled too. Somehow it always seems to be hazy and gray when I have the time to shoot pictures, and brilliant blue skies when I have to hurry on to a meeting. I have a suspicion about Locust Hill - I think it's on the road from Leesburg to Waterford, Virginia. Acroterion _(talk) 02:54, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion

Why did you delete the page entitled "The Zeugin"? There was no reason to delete said page, so go undelete right now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.129.160.37 (talk) 03:52, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Because it was vandalism. It will not be undeleted. Acroterion _(talk) 03:54, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Open Mesh - deletion

Give me a few more minutes before deleting all of my work. I am actively building this article. Okay, thanks for your guidance. Editing in the SANDBOX Jmacofearth (talk) 18:34, 29 March 2009 (UTC)jmacofearth

Thanks, that will let you have some peace. Please make sure you've done a full rewrite, and please include some context for general readers. Also, it's a good idea to avoid prices, as it looks like advertising. Acroterion _(talk) 18:55, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Article

I had an article proposed for deletion and would like you to userfy it, as I only wanted to take a print screen and then delete it. If you could help me out with this, I would greatly appreciate it --GreatWallofMatt (talk) 19:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by GreatWallofMatt (talk • contribs) 19:45, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Misogynist

All I ask is that I recieve a copy of the site. A childhood friend is currently deployed with the military and I thought this might cheer him up, as it was a childhood joke. Hence, I was going to delete it after printscreening. --GreatWallofMatt (talk) 01:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by GreatWallofMatt (talk • contribs) 00:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheesy Productions Studio

Hello

I noticed you had deleted the Cheesy Productions Studio article. I was creating it today and hadnt finished it. If you could allow it to be returned to the site that would be great. I want to share the article with the many people who will read it.

Thanks,

Cam Steckler —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheesyprostudios (talk • contribs) 21:35, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

The article provided no indication of notability; can you provide some references indicating non-trivial notice in independent media of more than purely local standing? Otherwise, it was deletable as non-notable web content. Acroterion _(talk) 21:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

LiveJasmin

Why did you delete this article? It IS notable.--Opal Opal 123 Come With Me (talk) 18:11, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Then can you provide multiple non-trivial references in independent media? That's what notability requires on Wikipedia. Acroterion _(talk) 18:13, 31 March 2009 (UTC)