- 1 Renata Ventura
- 2 Loren Coleman
- 3 AfD nomination of 2010 Papua New Guinea bus crash
- 4 January 2010
- 5 Wikipedia Contributions
- 6 Speedy declined
- 7 Canton articles
- 8 Naoman Alam
- 9 Altered speedy deletion rationale: Jake Pugliese
- 10 Jilda Shernoff
- 11 FirstGroup America
- 12 Re:Makudam
- 13 Eugene Paul Nassar
- 14 Polartec239
- 15 RE: Ultrapure Water Explained
- 16 RE: Ultrapure Water (3)
- 17 Talkback
- 18 ArbCom elections are now open!
Renata: Great! I'm happy you liked the article about Emmanuel (Spirit)! Yes, please, go ahead! Fix the red links if you want!
Hi Alex-- first, apologies for tagging my revert "rvv" -- your history shows you're no vandal. And you're right about the WP:Peacockery in that article -- it's much reduced from the incredible self-promotion it once was, and could use more trimming. He's among the most prominent members of a fringe discipline, so he's got some degree of notability, but the article shouldn't convey an academic respectability that isn't there. HNY 2kx! DavidOaks (talk) 17:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
AfD nomination of 2010 Papua New Guinea bus crash
An editor has nominated 2010 Papua New Guinea bus crash, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 Papua New Guinea bus crash and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. - Eastmain (talk) 00:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello AlexHOUSE. You tagged "Durgesh Sharma" for speedy deletion, but you did not notify the article's creator that it had been so tagged. There is strong consensus that the creators of articles tagged for speedy deletion should be warned and that the person placing the tag has that responsibility. All of the major speedy deletion templates contain a pre-formatted warning for this purpose—just copy and paste to the creator's talk page. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi Alex, If a person uses a writers psudonym or a stage name to cover the name of the real person for personal and privacy reasons, however the real person has relivant scholarship, articles and infomation content else where in his/her real name, How does this work with the wikipedia rules? —Preceding unsigned comment added by R13031979 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, you'll need to sign your posts by typing four tildes ("~")--little squiggly marks typed with the key that should be just below your "Esc" key-- at the end of your posts. So, with whom am I speaking, and what specific case are we talking about here?
- As a general rule, there really is no privacy in an encyclopedia entry. If a person is notable enough to be written about in one, there's really no point in concealing that person's identity, as that defeats the purpose of the entry. AlexHOUSE (talk) 00:42, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
- However, if this is about the Marc Blaze article, it doesn't matter very much either way. Unfortunately, Marc Blaze doesn't appear to be notable enough to merit an encyclopedia article, which was why his article was deleted. To be included in Wikipedia, a subject must have established notability through reliable, third-party sources. AlexHOUSE (talk) 00:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi! Just to let you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Claes Joachim Olsson because although there wasn't any notability shown in the article, there is a sizable Norwegian article that is fully referenced which can be found here. I've tidied up the English text for spelling and grammar, and invited the author to do some translations (if he can speak Norwegian). Stephen! Coming... 17:42, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I disagree. It is a speediable unreferenced non notable soldier biography if you ask me. We do not have articles on every soldier who died. in action. ΨMonastery 19:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey there. I was just over at the New Pages section and thought I'd let you know that your articles on the cantons of Ecuador are looking great. Keep up the good work man. AlexHOUSE (talk) 16:41, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Well thankyou. They are just a start but I think they should be able to be expanded a great deal. They are the equivalent to districts in provinces of most counties, second-level divisions so shouldn't really be missing.. ΨMonastery 16:43, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi. We seem to have simultaneously tagged this one, you for speedy and me for AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naoman Alam). :) Would you consider withdrawing your speedy? I do not disagree with it at all, but this article has now crossed to this name from Noman Alam (salted), and I would like to salt this page as well and to make subsequent versions subject to G4 (all previous versions have been PRODded or speedied). OTOH, I don't have strong feelings about it, so it won't hurt my feelings if you'd rather let your tag stand. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:44, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Altered speedy deletion rationale: Jake Pugliese
Hello AlexHOUSE. I am just letting you know that I deleted Jake Pugliese, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. (talk→←track) 19:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello Alex, I've declined the speedy deletion, as it does assert significance, a lower standard than notability. I find evidence that she does run a company, though her notability is not proven. Dlohcierekim 01:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Please see my complete reconfiguration of the article. There are now links to articles for four of the five divisions, and references for the remainder. Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:12, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Eugene Paul Nassar
Dear Alex House, I guess I could have had my dept secretary submit my resume to Wikipedia rather than my daughter. What matters is the quality of the resume, of course. That my books have been published by University Presses (Johns Hopkins, Indiana, Univ. of Pennsylvania, Minnesota,Fairleigh Dickinson,etc, and my articles in the best literary journals (Essays in Criticism, Sewanee Review, Dante Studies,Virginia Quarterly Review etc) ought to be enough proof of quality, along with the few reviews of my work that I cite (NYTBR, TLS, Poetry,etc.). I would very much like to be in Wikipedia, but there is something insulting in the caveats printed before my citation. Sincerely, Eugene paul Nassar184.108.40.206 (talk) 13:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Hello again! Forgive me if I'm misinterpreting the message you've left on my talk page, but it seems like you're under the impression that your article is being contested due to the "quality" of your work-- which is absolutely not true. The only "quality" being called into question was that of the article itself. The problem is that while you cite a few documents written BY you, there do not appear to be any documents written ABOUT you outside of a few websites for schools. Also, having your secretary do anything will not negate the fact that there is a clear conflict of interest, as your secretary still has a close connection with you. Instead of actively trying to "be on" Wikipedia, it really is best to wait until someone else writes an article about you (without being asked to do so, mind you).
There are three Wikipedia guidelines that I think will be particularly helpful to you. Please read them:
- WP:PROUD: An essay that sums up why an article about yourself is nothing to be proud of, and is not something you should try to instigate.
- WP:Autobiography: A guideline that explains our policy against creating/editing articles about yourself. While I understand that the article was written by your daughter (WP:COI), it still has information that will be valuable to you.
- WP:ACADEMIC: Guideline explaining the notability (or lack thereof) of individual professors, academics, authors, etc.
Please take a look at these and read them carefully. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page-- however, much of this is getting into certain gray areas that may require some attention from an administrator to make your article the best it can be. Thank you! (I've posted this on your IP talk page and on the talk page for the article). AlexHOUSE (talk) 02:08, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, i was planning to add more to the article Quantum Cipher but when i came back to edit it was removed. Can i get it back or have more time to edit it???
RE: Ultrapure Water Explained
Please clarify what else is needed. I have added 2 links at the end to other Wikipedia Entries, and have edited some of the text. I believe this is a unique contribution to Wikipedia, as it seeks to cover a niche area within the water treatment field. I am happy to make changes, but after having reviewed other Wikipedia content do not see how the verbage is any differant than what is found with other content. For these reasons, I respectfully ask that the this item not be deleted.
RE: Ultrapure Water (3)
Thanks for your willingness to allow for further upgrades. As time goes along, I will work to improve the content and to add other references, links within Wikipedia and outside sources as needed. Also, I am open to your thoughts/suggestings. As one who is new to Wikipedia, I'm presently learning about the different nuances, etc.
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)