User talk:DESiegel/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This is an archive of User talk:DESiegel. Please do not change it in any way. DES (talk) 17:50, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


Just in case your idea of npov .......[edit]

Read this: Also take note that the "American Civil Liberties Union" is backing Churchill Albion moonlight 11:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


Mr. Siegel,

You deleted the Escoffee page. However, Escoffee is a legitimate coffee company from Ecuador. You do have pages on other (large) companies. So why not this one. The description was factual, stating when it was founded, what its activities are and so on. I don't understand why this company page was deleted.

Sincerely, Jeromekruft 16:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

That's good[edit]

Before I wrote my previous message I had just had a look at the Ward Churchill main article for the first time in a week or so. It too is very biased. I decided that since 5 days had gone by, Now might be a good time to get the ball rolling on the issues article. And by that I mean seeing to it that those who believe thy are capable of being neutral are informed of Churchills side of things. If every source that backs Churchills side of things is disallowed under one pretext or the other then I will have a better idea of how to proceed. Albion moonlight 23:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


If Ward Churchill's blog claims he said this or that it is fair to claim that he did in fact say it. Such evidence can and should be used. Not as facts but as a representations of what he had to say. By quoting or paraphrasing him directly from his website or other sources we can at least make the claim that we made an honest attempt at being neutral . Otherwise we can't. It is really quite that simple. There are editor who have denied him even that much. Albion moonlight 05:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


I'd love for you to take a look at it. I've been working on it for several hours, and while I'm not finished, I'm over halfway there, and would love input. Do you have email enabled? I'd rather not post the link here, if you understand, simply because it is not officially published, and I've seen the havoc caused by the TTR page. :) ArielGold 17:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh, yes I know about that feature, but not everyone does, just to let you know, it is the -2 version, not the original paste of convo from the talk page. I too prefer to do the conversing here when related to Wikipedia, but I just didn't want to get in "trouble" for this essay, ahead of approval/input, hope you understand! And I look forward anxiously to your thoughts and review. ArielGold 17:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Frequent refreshing advised Face-grin.svg

Moonpod DRV[edit]

I'm not trying to be obtuse, but is what you're saying in essence that if we cannot tell whether an award is utterly trivial then that uncertainty becomes sufficient assertion of notability to not apply A7? So if an assumption needs to be made, or discretion employed, A7 doesn't apply because the assertion of notability has been made? Carlossuarez46 18:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the response. I will say that there are a bunch of divergent points of view and thanks for the benefits of yours. For a sanity check, if the notability is "contentious" (as such word is used in WP:BLP) would that sway you? I came across one recently at Afd that I might have been tempted to speedy on notability because if the unsourced contentious stuff were removed there was little left asserting notability. But again, "contentious" (no pun intended) is not a settled concept (is being affiliated with a music group that puts out lyrics that would make a sailor blush contentious? If not for a rap singer would it be contentious as applied to an evangelical pastor?) Carlossuarez46 21:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Oops. I guess I misphrased it: Assume we have an article with no sources at all, where the sole assertion of notability: "Mr. X performed with band in making their second album." or "Mr. X was a member with group in their second job." Assuming both band and gang are notable, but that the band and album were ones that you wouldn't let grandma hear and the group and job was of the not-quite-legal sort. Reading BLP broadly, either of those unsupported statements is contentious and BLP would say remove them - let's even further assume that after a quick search still no sources can be found (so we've gone an extra step). If the removal of the claim removes the assertion of notability is the article in jeopardy of A7 or should the BLP issue be ignored/deferred and the article prod'ed or afd'ed and let consensus decide whether there is a BLP issue and if so, whether deletion is proper. Carlossuarez46 22:01, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • BLP is not so common, but no so rare to not consider it. Since many of the A7 bios are unsourced it does come up a little more often in their case than in editing articles on ancient cities, tribes, and personages (which I do more than occasionally). Carlossuarez46 22:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
  • That's an interesting take: granted members of a band known for raunchy lyrics cultivate that image and is not contentious, but until we have a source that says that Joe Blow is indeed a member of that band I don't think we should assume he cultivates that image and that such a claim is indeed contentious as to him until sourced. Carlossuarez46 17:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Tay Zonday[edit]

Hey, i was wondering if this page could be unlocked so that I can create an article. I have several sources, its not going to be biographical, but will make references to Tay Zonday as a internet meme and as a songwriter, including links to artciles written about him on the internet. The page will be based upon pages for other memes such as Star Wars Kid and Chuck Norris. --Robnubis 13:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Allegations of Chinese apartheid AfD[edit]

Following your recent participation in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 30#Allegations of American apartheid, you may be interested to know that a related article, Allegations of Chinese apartheid, is currently being discussed on AfD. Comments can be left at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of Chinese apartheid. -- ChrisO 15:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion note[edit]

Hello! Looking over the history of Wikipedia:Template the regulars, I see that all edits other than by its author were (1) typo fixes, (2) adding a merge template, or (3) quickly reverted. The first revision of the page was identical to the version the author requested deletion on (except for one typo fix and one merge template). Hence I've speedied it as author request. Yours, >Radiant< 13:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Whatever. Just put it back on MFD, then. The page is still a toxic endorsement of incivility and encouragement to escalating behavior, it shouldn't be there. >Radiant< 19:05, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Template the regulars[edit]

Your DRV comments say that the speedy deletion serves no point because you will simply create a new version of this essay. I agree with that assessment and I did not mean to extent my comments to any future incarnation of the essay. I don't, however, agree that the G7 deletion was unfounded. The vast majority of the essay was written by Giggy at the time of the initial request. I also don't think that the DTTR MfD concluded that there is a consensus to keep both articles, only an MfD on the merits of TTR itself would be helpful in defining consensus. I hope you don't mind this response here instead of the DRV. Cheers, ˉˉanetode╦╩ 16:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi DES...I'm not sure you userfying it was the best idea - since it hadn't really changed since I wrote it, it should probably be in my userspace. But that's your call. In any case, I'd really like to MfD the whole thing - it's doing more damage then good. If G7 doesn't apply, I'd still like to get it deleted some way, so if you don't mind, could I slap an MfD notice on the page? Giggy Talk | Review 22:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I would appreciate if it was sufficiently different to my version - especially since I now disagree with it. Giggy Talk | Review 23:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, I think the original user is mistaken to withdraw their support for this essay, though I don't know what position is being taken up instead, so I don't know that I disagree with them. But I do feel this essay should exist, if only because DTTR exists, and I do disagree with it, and therefore support a response. I don't know how the DRV will go, but if it closes as keep deleted, let me know where you're working on a new version of it. I'd like to contribute to it. FrozenPurpleCube 08:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Our project[edit]

Just thought I'd let you know that Carcharoth has taken a look, and offered impressions on the talk page. I'm still waiting to hear back from DGG if he has a better way to organize the TOC, but I did add the section about children we spoke about, and thought you could take a look at that. Also, since I'm not really up to speed on who would be good "polar opposites" to invite to comment, I thought maybe you could give some names of those who may be on the very ends of the issue, to take a look and voice their opinions. Hope you had a good weekend, DES! ArielGold 00:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Jody Weiner[edit]

Fair enough, but if the author doesn't come up with something more in the next day or two, I'll prod it. Realkyhick 21:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Shamrock (comics) copyvio[edit]

We got an OTRS complaint on this one; reviewing the article, and the source, though a lot of it has been moderately adjusted or rewritten, I think we're still clearly in violation. If the Marvel Appendix authors complained with a takedown...

I'm going to delete this under the listed copyvio criteria. If you want to do a complete rewrite of the copyvio sections and restore it with those changes, feel free to do so, but please be careful. Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert 08:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Tagging of Hell Date[edit]

Thanks for your comments. It would appear that significant content was added to the page after I had tagged it for Speedy Deletion. I certainly do not consider it a candidate for Speedy Deletion now. Karl2620 11:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Songs from Les Misérables[edit]

Hi, you're welcome for the draft I made of Songs from Les Misérables. It took longer than I first expected to prepare it, so I'm glad the work wasn't wasted. I did, of course, intend to influence the outcome of the AfD by preparing something that looked worth keeping.

I've only just realised that you actually moved it from my sandbox. It wasn't the first thing I had drafted in that sandbox, so the article now has a rather strange page history! I don't suppose it happens very often, but you might want to copy & paste if a user does something similar again! Best wishes, Fayenatic london (talk) 18:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I didn't know you you could do that! Very neat. No, I don't need my sandbox history back. It's interesting that my "See draft here" link at the AFD still works. Thanks, Fayenatic london (talk) 22:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Lilly Arbor Project[edit]

i think the article will stand, but it should be possible to find additional sources from area newspapers referring to the project DGG (talk) 17:10, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

SEE Earth[edit]


I created user pages for the 7 articles. can u please take a look at them and send me your feedback? Also, i tried to find some sources and links online that relate to the article, but coudnt find much. Is it possible to post the articles as they are now and modify them later on as we get more information?

Thank you ! SeeEarth 23:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The articles in question are:

I glanced at a couple and the thing that stands out to me is the lack of sources--which you mention. You'll need to have some reliable, independent sources to establish notability or the articles are likely to be deleted. You can try using Google News to find some sources, perhaps. Good luck. --Sopoforic 23:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


{{helpme}} How do i get the coordinates of a wikipedia page article? Thank you SeeEarth 15:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Your question may mean either "How do I read coordinates?" or "How do I write them?"
Most articles on major cities have the coordinates listed in small print in the upper right-hand corner and/or in the text of the article. See, for example, London, Ontario.
There are several ways to write coordinates into a Wikipedia article. The source code at London, Ontario is {{Coor title d|42.98714|N|81.246268|W}}. For more information, see {{Coor title d}} and other templates in its category. Shalom Hello 20:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you please check my articles? Thank you

SeeEarth 22:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Tagging of River City Jim[edit]

You do realize that following your criteria means that articles about half the videos on YouTube will have to be prodded (and a significant number taken to afd) instead of speedily deleted, right? To me, something that only appears on YouTube qualifies as web content. --NeilN 05:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

template question[edit]

I was looking to see if someone had created a "I am going to deny your request to speedy delete X" template because it comes up often enough. And I see that you have {{Template:Speedy-Warn}}. I was wondering if you'd mind if I add at the end: "You are, of course, free to add a {{prod}} notice or nominate the article for deletion at WP:AFD." Just let me know, since it's basically your template I won't be bold. :-) Carlossuarez46 21:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Inquiring about user's identities[edit]

(moving from my talk page to yours since you did not reply)

It is generally considered impolite to request users to expose their real-life identities, or to confirm or deny guesses at such identities. Edits such as this in which you imply that confirmation of identity is required for an edit to stand clearly violate policy. The test of an edit is the contents, not the editor. WP:COI (a guideline, not a policy) exists because many people can not edit on subjects in which they are involved with sufficient neutrality. But if a particular edit is in fact neutral, it stands no matter who made it, and if it in fact fails WP:NPOV it should be removed no matter who made it. Demanding to know an editor's identity as a condition of not reverting an edit is simply unacceptable. Please don't do this again. DES (talk) 14:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up... though Sethie is a little confused.
Dseer added a link to author Michel Langford's work. Sethie removed that particular link to author, because Sethie felt did not fit in so well with the article. Dseer put it back in responded and said "You may absolutely not remove that link."
The editor then proposed editing an another article in such a way that Michel Langford's worldview and views would be highly represented on a subject in which ML is not considered an expert or has any notability.
Sethie, based this and a number of clues suspected that Dseer was ML.... he read WP:COI which says you cannot insert a link to your own site without discussing it firt. Sethie at first ask, "Are you Michel Langford?" then changed the question to something only ML would know, to protect Dseer's anonimity....
How could Sethie have procceeded differently in accordance with wikipedia policy? Sethie 17:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

CSD AutoReason Updated[edit]

Attention spamlist! I've just updated CSD AutoReason to account for the new image deletion page. If you'd just hard refresh (Ctrl+F5 in most browsers), you'll get the new version and be on your way. ^demon[omg plz] 17:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dave, I was a member of the MSU mahjong group way back in 1983. I was wondering if you may have a copy of the old rules laying about in a digital form that I could have.

If so, please drop me an email (martincavell at yahoo dot com).

Thanks for your time! -Ted Greer —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:33, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Male Porno Articles. I need you help[edit]

I wanted to contact you because I remembered how you helped me with kindness against that former admin who was abusing the deletion formula. I think I need your help and support. I got an e mail from an editor asking me to look at the List_of_gay_porn_stars section. These articles are riddled with POV, advertisement and spam. I tried to do a simple prod tag but oh my did I get the thrashing of my life! One told me that I would never succeed in getting the aricles removed under WP:PORNBIO and they were right. All they have to do is supply an award! These subjects are the actual editors of their pages. So, when an editor goes in to try and edit the articles, they jump on them and remove any edits they do not like. The way the WP:PORNBIO is written, all these people have to do is to win an award or be able to write something about themselves in a web page and it can be entered into WP. When you click on the links for these pages, they take you to websites that you either have to agree to enter in on adult content or it takes you to their porno stores. This is a very effective way for them to advertise their webpages and escort services. The only way to get around these people is to put them up for AfD. I need some help here. Do you think you would like to join forces with me to rid WP os some of this crap? Let me know. I certainly could use the support and help. I think we are going to have to approach WP to see if we can rewrite the rules for these porno articles. Junebug52 18:10, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review discussion notification of Flyaow - you participated in the discussion regarding this deletion[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Flyaow. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 04:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Problem with my username[edit]

Hi, back on July 27, 2007, you helped me with my username, planetmikedotcom (which you flagged as a Bad username), so I asked to be moved into the unused PlanetMike username. You approved that, but now the system won't email me a link so I can reset my password. Thanks for any help you can offer. Mike

Do you get the error that you didn't supply an email? If so, there really isn't anything you can do other than make a new account. - Rjd0060 19:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I gave an email, but I think in the process of usurping the Planetmike user name, the old email wasn't removed and my address put into the PlanetMike username account? Or the email address is too long (it's 40 characters) for the Wikipedia system to handle? Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I would just like to know why you deleted the Kenopets article and if it is possible for me to re-write it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by N3me$i$ (talkcontribs) 20:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Nn-warn template[edit]

Hello again, DESiegel ... I ran across some of your comments while replying to another thread on Template talk:Nn-warn ... I've recently tweaked the template, and wondered if you had any comments on the latest versions of my deletion warning templates ... Happy Editing! — (talk · contribs) 16:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

db-bio template[edit]

Hello again, DESiegel ... the issue of using {{Db-bio}} as a "generic" CSD A7 template has surfaced again (on the Twinkle discussion page), and I have just read the history in the talk:Db-bio threads from 2005 ... now that I see how it is "ingrained in the culture", I think I'd better back off and re-think my position vis-a-vis rocking the boat. <Heavy Sigh!> Happy Editing! — (talk · contribs) 19:30, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Prod-2[edit]

Template:Prod-2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Terraxos (talk) 04:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


Hello again, DESiegel ... please see this talk page and tell me what you think of my newly created Template:Oldprodfull ... would you use it, or update it if you encountered it?

Also, what are your thoughts on my proposed WP:FLAG-BIO protocol?

Happy Editing! — (talk · contribs) 16:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Patrick Combs[edit]

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Patrick Combs, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 04:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Patrick Combs[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

An editor has nominated Patrick Combs, an article on which you have worked or that you created, 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/Patrick Combs and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it 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. BJBot (talk) 22:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Dawn Wells[edit]

I added a section to Dawn Wells that reads as follows:

In 1998, fellow Islander Bob Denver was arrested for having a parcel of marijuana delivered to his home. He originally said that the parcel had come from Dawn Wells, but later refused to name her in court, and testified that "some crazy fan must have sent it".[1]
Wells was arrested on October 18 2007, after a Teton County sheriff's deputy pulled her over after observing her swerve across the fog lines and center lines of State Highway 33 and repeatedly accelerating and slowing down. The officer noted the strong odor of "burning marijuana", and a search of her vehicle produced several partially consumed marijuana cigarettes and several containers of marijuana. Wells was taken into custody after failing a field sobriety test.[2] According to the Associated Press, she was sentenced on February 29 2008 to five days in jail, fined $410.50, and placed on six months' probation after pleading guilty to one count of reckless driving.[3]

The section is properly referenced and relevant. Several people including War, FCYTravis, and Cleo123, do not want this included because it is not seen as "positive". This is a POV view.

I request that you ask these people to cease reverting this section which is relevant and factual. It is based on news accounts and court records. Proxy User (talk) 02:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

It should be noted that I posted a notice on the Biography Project's Bulletin Board some time back regarding this user's edits to the Dawn Wells article. [1] Administrator, FCYTravis was kind enough to respond to my posting and has reverted Proxy User's version. Unfortunately, Proxy User just doesn't seem to understand why his revisions violate WP:BLP no matter how many people try to explain it to him. He continues to edit war on the article and has now posted a "warning" on administrstor, FCYTravis' page.[2] If you are familiar with this editor, perhaps you can explain things to him in a way that he'll understand. Cleo123 (talk) 03:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
I asked for Mediation, bud Admin FCYTravis, who is a party to the disagreement rejected it. This is improper. A party to the issue should not be able to reject the Mediation request. Proxy User (talk) 03:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Original Barnstar.png Thank you
Thank you for releasing the text of your standard GFDL non-compliance letter into the public domain. (talk) 04:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

updating a page on your userspace[edit]

I changed the TTR essay on your userspace to restore some info that you added, and that got reverted by an user, see the reversion of your addition, and my addition of the info.

I explain myself, I saw your complain on Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Giggy about being reverted, and then I noticed that you had been reverted by the sock of a banned user, and that the information was actually quite good and was according to my experience, so I re-added the information, after making a few changes and discarding a paragraph about strawman arguments. --Enric Naval (talk) 02:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, I looked again to the history to make sure that I hadn't overlooked something, and I saw that you had already introduced an improved version of the reverted information. I restored it back to the state I found it at. Cheers. --Enric Naval (talk) 02:37, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Flag templates[edit]

Hello again, DESiegel ...

Well, it looks like {{Flag-article}} and {{Flag-article}} are being embraced and used, as witness the populating of Category:Flagged articles and Category:Flagged editors by Some Other Editors. :-)

BTW, I just activated WP:FLAG-MOVIE, and added Movies as a (Guideline) for the flag templates ... it also made sense to have {{Selected filmography}} populate Category:Flagged articles as well ... do you agree?

Happy Editing! — (talk · contribs) 18:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

RTFM pointers for Flag templates[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, DESiegel. You have new messages at's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. (talk · contribs) 00:25, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:1906 (film)[edit]

Deletion review for Talk:1906 (film)[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Talk:1906 (film). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —scarecroe (talk) 15:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Please return to WikProject Media franchises[edit]

Dear DESiegel...You are invited to come back to discuss WikiProject Media franchises. Since you participated in one or more discussions of the project, possibly when it was known as WikiProject Fictional series, I hope to see you return to it. The project needs your participation. Currently there is no activity on the project's talk page about the reorganization which is discouraging. I had great expectations for this project as it touches so many topics but am becoming discouraged. I hope to see you return. LA (If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page.) @ 19:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Date Ranges[edit]

Since you have given thought to the issue of date ranges in the past, this may be of interest to you ... [3].--Ethelh (talk) 21:07, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Teratophilia[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Teratophilia. 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(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teratophilia. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Date of birth[edit]

Howdy- is it against Wikipedia policy to include the date of birth in a biographical article for a living person in the public arena?The Original Historygeek (talk) 08:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

It didn't used to be -- indeed it was encouraged provided that the DoB was verifiable. However, some people have noticed that a DoB can be useful in committing identity theft. Therefore, people tended to not list the exact DoB for living people at least in some cases. When the subject publicized his or her own DoB (as on a personal or official web page, for example) I would think it fine to include in a Wikipedia page. Similarly when the person's DoB is already widely available on the net, particularly in the case of a very well known person.
WP:BLP says "Do not use, for example, public records that include personal details—such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses—or trial transcripts and other court records or public documents, unless a reliable secondary source has already cited them." and "Caution should be exercised with less notable people. With identity theft on the rise, people increasingly regard their dates of birth as private. When in doubt about the notability of the subject, or if the subject complains, err on the side of caution and simply list the year." DES (talk) 17:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Is this account still active?[edit]

I notice DESiegel has not edited since August 2007.

Can anyone confirm whether DES is still active?

I have taken the liberty of archiving all posts prior to August 07 and have added a header box noting this:

I apologize to DES for taking this liberty on his talk page.

I have been mostly inactive, and have done some editing as an IP. I ahve recently been quite active on the ISFDB (see DES (talk) 17:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

(removed talkback templates)

German art just before the Third Reich[edit]

re [4] - it is a straight copy of a section of yesterday's lead DYK article, which is not in line with summary style at all. WP:SPLIT has not been followed, and the article is completely pointless. The troll-like creator has a habit of creating articles that are unacknowledged copies or patchworks of other articles, or copyvios. See his talk page, contributions, & the current Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Variation on a theme. "Sincere" or not, this behaviour is not helpful to the encyclopedia, & I urge you to reconsider your edit. Johnbod (talk) 18:09, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

If you look at the history, you will see he removed a prod some hours ago. Johnbod (talk) 18:20, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Kurz and Allison[edit]

I don't think I'll be retagging it. There wasn't anything supporting the claim when I put up the tags (so the claims credibility was questionable), but the article's creator otherwise has a good history. Since another editor is supportive of it, I'll back out. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:47, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

UAS Lab[edit]

Mr. Siegel,

It looks to me that you have deleted UAS Lab. Your statement says, it is meant for promotional activities. I have several patients who browse for UAS Labs wiki page and don't find one. As this company's DDS probiotics are widely accepted by public, I got interested to create an article on them. It is informative for public to publish some relevant info related to their DDS strain. Although their literatures are little promotional those are the only available sources that I found so far. This company is notable with many newspapers, magazines, news mmedia, Books etc. Kindly understand my request. I have asked in public to incorporate their thoughts so some sections can be improved. Please don't delete this article.

Thank you (User : Gutflora)(Gutflora (talk) 06:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gutflora (talkcontribs) 05:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Jock Ruck-Crimes[edit]

Hi DE; I've nominated it for speedy deletion as a copyright violation. Cheers, (talk) 22:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Leandro Vieria[edit]

Hello DESiegel, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Leandro Vieria - a page you tagged - because: A7: article mentions several competitions in which Vieria won 1st place . Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 06:46, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with martial arts or Brazilian competitions, so you may be right about the (lack of) notability of the competitions. When in doubt, I generally try to keep articles rather than delete them. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 07:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


Hello. Thanks for your note. As you suggested, I restored Factoryase. Before I deleted the article, I searched for the word using Google and couldn't find any hits for it. I'll ask User:Betaclamp to try to clean it up and add some sources. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 06:52, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Yettaw AfD[edit]

Hi DESiegel, since you agree with Kingturtle's arguement in the Yettaw AfD, I just thought I'd show you some responses I've offered KT on his talkpage here: User talk:Kingturtle#Yettaw AfD. Peace! ↜ (‘Just M E here , now) 15:46, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

OK. & I see your point (/consistency of your viewpoint). Fair enough! :~) ↜ (‘Just M E here , now) 16:35, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
As M.J. Stephey (Dec. 8th Time magazine) said, Yettaw has become "a magnet for international scorn and speculation."↜ (‘Just M E here , now) 21:57, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
That merely proves his notability. DES (talk) 22:22, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
DESiegel, I made a comment on the "John Yettaw" article's talkpage that basically reponds to your point about notability; and this comment is here: Talk:John Yettaw#I have nominated this article for deletion.... :~) ↜ (‘Just M E here , now) 02:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
I read it. I don't think it is highly relevant. This page is clearly not constructed with the intent of attacking Yettaw, or anyone else. He was a participant -- a wholly voluntary participant -- in an event that was of literally international significance. Further more, the guideline you cite mentions the possibility of libel, but true statements are never libelous. Neither are inaccurate statements about public figures made without actual malice (an article I worked on, by the way). There may well, as I said above, be an argument for deleting some of the more speculative comments from the article, and doublechecking the sourcing of he rest -- possibly on insisting on multiple sources in many cases. I see no shadow of a reason to delete or merge the article. Frankly i think wikipedians sometimes go overboard in not including so called "negative information" about notable people that has been published by reliable sources. To me this introduces bias and flies in the face of WP:NPOV. DES (talk) 05:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
I note also that so far you seem to be the sole editor who favors deletion, while several have favored retention of the article, possibly with editing. Could it be that your view does not command consensus? DES (talk) 05:10, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

UAS Labs[edit]

Dear Des,

As per your suggestion, I prepared the UAS Laboratories drafts on my user pages. Please follow the link below to get it. Please let me know which one (out of the two) looks good to you. With your inputs I will continue further. Sorry for minor editorial mistakes such as adding a tag to a reference etc.

Thank you (Gutflora (talk) 23:09, 21 December 2009 (UTC))

  1. User:Gutflora/UAS_Lab-draft
  2. User:Gutflora/UAS_Laboratories

DES (talk), 16:36, 22 Dec, 2009

UAS Labs update[edit]

Dear Mr. Siegel,

Thanks for the help. I appreciate you for improving the section and fixing the references. Now it looks better. I need some additinal editorial helps. I made a box with the company logo and address on it. But the logo doesn't appear. I don't know why? Please advise? Thanks in advance.

Gutflora(Gutflora (talk) 22:41, 22 December 2009 (UTC))

UAS Labs-Todays update[edit]

Hi Des,

Thanks for the help. I moved the page to UAS Laboratories. I can later edit the sections/add pages to the article. The logo should be OK now without any deletion. Thanks again! (Gutflora (talk) 22:06, 28 December 2009 (UTC))


I am surprised to see that the article UAS Laboratories is getting a speedy deletion warning again. I followed the procedures and reviewed with you, with the hope that it won't be deleted. There are many reasons why I oppose the deletion. These are:

(1) The company is notable for its DDS-1 L. acidophilus probiotic strain. It holds a patent and trademark for being the first commercial manufacturer of DDS-1 L. acidophilus. Please see the United States Patent (UAS Lab) No. 3,689,640 and United States Trademark Office Reg. No. 1,685,959. I had a hard time in posting a pdf page of this trademark to the article. Much research has been done on L. acidophilus DDS-1 so far. It has been proved in last 30 years that this particular probiotic strain has many health benefits against IBS, chrohn's disease, candida, Indigestion, diarrhea and others. Therefore, public wants to know what this strain is?, how it was discovered?, why it was manufactured?, what is it's health benefits? and who is UAS Laboratories?

(2)The article is in initial stage. The next section would be how the idea to manufacture DDS-1 strain came to mind? - The history and development. Please note that I am not a technical expert in posting articles to wikipedia. Reviewing with the administrator and fixing things will take reasonable amount of time, not just one week. Therefore, please allow us fair amount of time to improve this article.

(3) I agree that it needs references from third party sources. I do have plenty of references from the primary sources for example published books, journals by S. K. Dash ( the founder of the company). Per your suggestion, that's marginal not notable. I might need little more time in collecting those. Finally, deletion of an article takes only a minute, but creation takes a lot of time. For people like me, who have less knowledge on wikipedia, it shocks when I struggle a lot to ceate an article and finally it is deleted.

I would appreciate if you would be kind enough and remove the deletion notice from the main page of the article. Thanks (Gutflora (talk) 20:25, 30 December 2009 (UTC))



I am extremely thankful for your action! I honor Wikipedia and it's editing policies. I am a neutral person creating this article for public. I have no relation with UAS Laboratories. (Gutflora (talk) 21:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC))

Tagging of Barracuda atomic[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, DESiegel. You have new messages at Donnie Park's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tagging of Natalie Bennett[edit]

Green tickYYou made a fair argument, and have changed my mind. Thanks for the note. -- Matthew Glennon (T/C\D) 01:14, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

FYI on A7 tag[edit]

As an FYI - I did not tag the Poland Central School as an A7 because I felt it was a non-notable school. If you go back and look, the A7 tag was for db-web -- the original article was called and I was judging that version since it focused (barely) on the school's web site and not the school. Thanks. Warrah (talk) 21:03, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User_talk:Deon[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, DESiegel. You have new messages at Deon's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
And again — Deontalk 14:25, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

WKPL (disambiguation)‎[edit]

User:Jim1401 added the information on the page, I had previously had it as a disambig. The information is as a hatnote on WPKL which WKPL redirects to. A disambig page is not necessary, hence my CSD for deletion. - NeutralHomerTalk • 04:23, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't have any problem with a move and then a prod. That would work for me. - NeutralHomerTalk • 04:33, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Not a problem :) I thought you were done, so I stepped in and did that real quick :) I wanted to trim those entries down a little too, also. Thanks for moving that for me. Merry Christmas...NeutralHomerTalk • 05:28, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:UAS_Laboratories_Logo.png)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:UAS_Laboratories_Logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 08:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, DESiegel. You have new messages at Wifione's talk page.
Message added 10:32, 26 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Taliban (screenplay)[edit]

More sources to verify what? It's a screen play they are pushing and lacks notability as well. Eeekster (talk) 04:49, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not pushing anything. Why is Eeekster determined to eliminate a verifiable document that indisputably accomplished what even a group of paid "think-tankers" failed to provide, and, quoting the FBI directly, due to a "Failure of imagination" Why am I being punished for allowing others to see what is possible with due diligence and hard work? I don't get it.RENGACORP (talk) 05:15, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Kim Bum[edit]

Thanks for looking at my CSD and fixing it all up. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 05:24, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

( List of ) Alumni, Principals and Teachers of The Rajkumar College,Rajkot- RKCians[edit]

Thank for intervention. I am a beginner and possibly the only active Wikipedian alumnus of the Public Boarding School, RKC referred to in link title above. Peding, creation of article about notable alumni, some deceased, attempts are being made through facility as the following link to educate and possibly entice some of the alumni to become Wikipedian in the process of listing and creating related articles and by extension possibly venture into unrelated territory; your continuing assistance may be required; most of upadtes to the school page was by me in last year. Related links are listed in context:

Can a link to ( List of ) Alumni, Principals and Teachers of The Rajkumar College,Rajkot- RKCians be accessed independently- currently it is in redirect to Main page Rajkumar College, Rajkot; Is it appropriate to put a link ( ( List of ) Alumni, Principals and Teachers of The Rajkumar College,Rajkot- RKCians ) for the list page on the school main page at Rajkumar College, Rajkot?

I know how to do above, but all the edits recently were done by an administrator(s) for some purpose and seeking your assistance would be more prudent. Once above can be established either by inserting list page link on main page or changing redirect to at least disambiguation with mention of both page links as above might help. Patelurology2 (talk) 21:09, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

      • Forbearance Needed; Alumni Listed are Notables; Besides some In Memoriam, others likely to be Wikipedians promoting Wikipedia culture in Schools
  • With support from thoughtsLogical, page development for individual notable alumni, many in notable positions in their fields, is on-going and how to start a page is also demonstrated in a link previously on this page ( since de-linked ) to " my space page ". After judging appropriateness to further the cause for progressive creation of pages of notables, if a link ( in history of this page ) can be re-established to my user space, progress for this School page will be significant. This I write, whereas a full page previously written somwhere and transported is welcome, but page written partially is promptly deleted, unless it is done under shield of user space feature and then transported. This feature likely to be used most by our Alumni. Some parts of above were already mentioned, to further this worthy cause, under show and hide feature ( green bar ) to decrease clutter on page.

At the same time, Alumni are to use only Other Alumni category, where notability will be judged and recategorized to appropriate category after a page full of data are available to compile a page possibly under the user space feature which will be detailed in Alumni E -mail circuit; boldness in Wikipedia is espoused and direct entry and edits encouraged, but Alumni E-mail circuit is available where details of notable nominations and information is welcome and encouraged. Become a Wikipedian and promote Wikipdeia in schools starting with your Alma mater.

        • The following are two blockQuotes from me on the discussion for deletion page re above subject; hoping it is appropriate.
  • Comment Note many of the "notable alumni" are simply bluelinks because they are piped to a city or name. For instance, Tedder of Portland. tedder (talk) 21:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment: Hoping this comment is appropriate and allowed Place name used for temporary link for the place which each of those are/were rulers/Kings of the place pending creation of specific page. Patelurology2 (talk) 01:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

  • Possible Solution from a Beginner Wikipedian Alumnus in Observation: Hoping this comment is appropriate and allowed The page was created to avoid clutter on Main page and further development of individual pages and an instruction page for creation of pages was started under my space feature with intent to speed up and maintain order; listing on main page would be acceptable, if that is the best logical option; if so, a revert to version of prior acceptable date( ? Revision as of 17:54, 13 December 2009 ) could be considered, so that merger is seamless; list was a copy of list on prior version page. See also discussion/talk page of this list page.

Patelurology2 (talk) 01:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Patelurology2 (talk) 02:01, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Lisa Pegher[edit]

I'm having trouble understanding why this article was undeleted beyond your comment of "a claim of significance". While it may have been edited to no longer be a direct copy of the artist's official bio, it's barely rephrased and still uncomfortably close to copy written by her agent. At best it's autobiographical spam, at worst it's still a copyvio. While I dont doubt that this person may meet WP:BIO, it seems the best course of action is to delete this article as it stands today and write a new one that meets wikipedia guidelines.--RadioFan (talk) 02:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, DESiegel. You have new messages at OverlordQ's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.


So what happens if someone creates an account named Bdfjhkgi? Eagles 24/7 (C) 19:44, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

User:Bdfjhkgi Deletion[edit]

User:Eagles 247 referred me to you when I wanted the page to be deleted. I accidentally created the page when I mistyped my username. When it said that there was no page under that name, I mad the biggest mistake I have ever made on Wikipedia. I made User:Bdfjhkgi redirect to my user page. Can I delete it if I'm not an administrator. If I can, could you explain how on my talk page? Thank you. Bdfjhkgj (talk) 21:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC):-)

Deleted as per request. DES (talk) 16:38, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

From Patelurology2 - see Prior section (list of) Alumni of Rajkumar College, Rajkot.... two additions[edit]

From Patelurology2 - see Prior section (list of) Alumni of Rajkumar College, Rajkot.... two additions Happy New Year

    • Also see Userpage for creation of Alumni pages at
    • Had started sometime ago, but just completed frame work where more info and ultimately someday full page at least some of the Alumni may be a reality;co-operative efforts by other other Alumni may be forth-coming; hoping this might make things easier for input from others who would be beginners.

The list page was started to avoid chaos; either way should be able to work through the above Userpage feature.

Patelurology2 (talk) 06:30, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


I am interested in becoming an administrator. What do I to to get nominated? Gigogag (talk) 15:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)


I see you must be on vacation! Oh, well. I remember when I used to never check my talk page. I was worse at it than DESiegel. MUCH WORSE!!! Gigogag (talk) 17:36, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletion Proceedings for Rajkumar College List page- also see other two sections above[edit]

Your consel needed; the following summation created. Should I send a copy to all on the deltion proceedings?

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/( List of ) Alumni, Principals and Teachers of The Rajkumar College,Rajkot- RKCians

  • Admin Comment Note many of the "notable alumni" are simply bluelinks because they are piped to a city or name. For instance, Tedder of Portland. tedder (talk) 21:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
    • My Comment: Hoping this comment is appropriate and allowed Place name used for temporary link for the place which each of those are/were rulers/Kings of the place pending creation of specific page.

  • ....while numerous people in it are apparently notable enough to be included on Wikipedia, this is a rather trivial article and it would be more logical to create a Rajkumar College Alumni category instead, into which the relevant people can be added. KaySL (talk) 20:01, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
    • My comment: Agree with title Rajkumar College Alumni ( category ).
  • Merge any missing notable alumni and list of principals back to Rajkumar College, Rajkot. The red linked people should not be merged. TerriersFan (talk) 22:21, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
    • My comment: Agree, red linked notables not be merged. This page was created to avoid the clutter on the main page of The Rajkumar College, Rajkot; page created after at least four pages were started under my Usepage feature. On starting of deletion proceedings other pages were started at same location; community effort will be largely by the Alumni; discussion mode on talk page will need to be used and the alumni will be informed about other instructional matters through talk page as well as Alumni E-mailgroup circuit.
  • ...if the college is notable enough for an article here -- and I think it is -- then a list of notable and somewhat notable alumni is a reasonable extension of that article. The page could be improved but I see no need to delete it. DES (talk) 20:30, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
    • My comment: Improvements are being attempted to this page around general aspects of Alumni; intent for creation of this page was to separate the list from page save the most notable category which righly has been left by the first Admin on main page, so that clutter can be avoided and also link to page preparation page under my userspace can be established; I infer that the latter cannot be linked as per guidelines?;it was de-linked by the first Admin. Anyway, Alumni capable of completion of these page will now have a started page ready to input; my first attempt months ago to start first page was met with Auto-deletion, then the Userspace feature came to attention; upto that time all the material gathered was somewhere else; casting a page gives avenue to completion someday; not all likely to be completed soon; inertia ruleth supreme and current limited manpower in background further help from all the Alumni will be needed considering Alumni In Memoriam; institution is 130 years old.
  • See also talk pages of college and the list page for recent postings regarding above.

Patelurology2 (talk) 11:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, DESiegel. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/( List of ) Alumni, Principals and Teachers of The Rajkumar College,Rajkot- RKCians.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Patelurology2 (talk) 21:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you...[edit]

that the John Yettaw material needs to be more carefully presented. (See my reply to a comment of yours about this subject, here....)↜ (‘Just M E here , now) 13:43, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Royall Advertising[edit]

What do you think is the best course of action for the article? -Reconsider! 10:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I originally considered adding a PROD notice to the article, but with the recent addition of third party references, I think that it may meet the bare minimum of notability. Attempted to clean it up, but maybe PROD is still the best option. -Reconsider! 11:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

In view of your expertise[edit]

on reconciling claims of defamation with allegedly problematic sourcing with concern a subject of a BLP, I thought I'd throw you a link to the discussion I have started on the BLP noticeboard: JohnYettaw on "John Yettaw".↜ (‘Just M E here , now) 19:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


Hi and Happy New year !! This is my first time on Wikipedia and I am very disappointed to see the results ... in It Girls Documentary there were many many many writeups !! I don't really understand why you have chosen the two most negative things ever written and selected them to be indicative of the film . It Girls is a very positive documentary and the two items you selected out of hundreds were written in a very meanspirited way , Shouldn't Wikipedia be balanced and thoughtful. It Girls has been around since 2002 and never been posted on Wikipedia ... I don't understand the complete negativity of your additions or why you would insist on portraying a documentary that you have likely not seen with such an instantly negative choice ?? Not a great first experience here ... If you want to post writeups and interviews you might want to take the time and read all the writeups and either post them all or none or a few that are truly and generally representative of a film that took many years to create ... Thanks for your time ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkyellow (talkcontribs) 03:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your offer!! Actually It Girls was shown on television seven years ago and there were not really reviews as it was a tv event on cable and not a film for the movie theatres ... there were mostly interviews, gossip, and thoughts. The chosen writeups you have are not by reviewers but by gossip columnists ( Roger Friedman was an entertaiment Gossip columnist at Fox online ) and the NY Times writer is also a style/fashion writer not a film reviewer and this is a onetime article that appeared in the fashion section because her sister was considered an "it girl" ... there were many thoughts in all directions at that time because although the film was shot before Sept 11 it was released just after and the people's consciousness at that time was heightened ... most articles were light and funny and gossipy about It Girls ... those two chosen just happen to be quite meanspirited and not indicative of that moment or spirit of the film and therefore show a light that didn't exist then ...The CNN transcript is the complete interview ... Also I believe that there were also many articles in print and not on the internet ... Thanks so much!! Also thanks again but the new selections are not reviews but also articles that appeared in the gossip column of WWD ... Is gossip really a critical review of the film ?? It Girls was a sweet light movie for television and was never seriously reviewed so I have a problem with the heading Critical Response ... Maybe if you want to call it gossip response ?? Also there were several thoughtful interviews done ... why not post those ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkyellow (talkcontribs) 16:54, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Also this was sent to the other reviewer but I never really got a satisfactory response !! Hi and Happy New Year !! This is my first time on Wikipedia and I'm just wondering why ?? and for what reason ?? your comment " 03:39, 9 January 2010 ArglebargleIV (talk | contribs) (1,747 bytes) (removing peacock terms) " was tweeted onto the internet to appear immediately after a search ?? Is this normal and common for each wikipedia correction or opinions to be tweeted and to stay on the internet forever ?? If that is true than it seems like a very invasive process ... If this is not true than I'm hoping that you can remove this tweet as it is an unfair item to come up at the top of any internet search !!! Thanks !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkyellow (talk • contribs) Can that tweet be removed ... Seems like an invasion of privacy !!! Thanks so much !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkyellow (talkcontribs) 17:27, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

The Tides Of Time[edit]

Regarding your deletion of The Tides Of Time. I have enough proof for you with regards to reviews, etc. Can you help me please? I have released an album. The article (posted by me under 'Magiko'). You seem to question my "notability": I have published articles, given concerts, been on radio and television worldwide and have now released a CD with my own music as well. You will also find my name in the 'International Who's Who of Music' (Classical). If that is not "notable" enough I don't understand Wikipedia rules anymore. In any case, I am not on any type of "ego" or "vanity"trip here. But many people always ask me why I am not on Wikipedia. I usually respond because I am not "notable" enough - something that usually causes some amusement. I truly hope someone would like to take on my case and help me solve this predicament. I have seen people included in Wikipedia that are truly irrelevant. Hence, it is really difficult to understand why you are banning my biography and work from it. In any case, I would really appreciate someone independent and impartial to help me. I am here attaching some files as proof. I hope this will help to reinstall my original entry.

Thank you. Magiko (talk) 19:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your understanding and help. The Observer article is indeed from the Hastings Observer from 11.12.09 and the review was written by critic Rob Alderson on 18.12.2009 (same Observer) as you mentioned. I have added also some reviews (below) from German newspapers and magazines reviewing my music on my composition and performances with Frieder Noegge on our program entitled: Der 'Satierkreis'. Please let me know if you need more materials (although you can find more on my official website as well). Thanks a lot again for all your help. It is much appreciated. Magiko (talk) 20:22, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot: my official website is —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magiko (talkcontribs) 20:29, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Three more links for you here. Sorry for "bombarding" you with so much info but I am determined to prove that I am not a liar. Many thanks again for all your help DESiegel. It is indeed very much appreciated. Magiko (talk) 20:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

1. Some of my works at the German National Library in Berlin: German National Library

2. My recent album registered and archived at the British Library Sound Archive: [Search the British Library Sound Archive]

3. Entry at Hastings Borough Council Official Website (with photo) Hastings Council Official Releases -

HI DESiegel, I wrote to you but don't know if you've received my message. In short, Airplaneman has decided to become my Mentor (I want to avoid any more mistakes). Is it alright with you if I continue sending my materials to him now or to you directly? Many thanks. Magiko (talk) 14:51, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

A quick question, please: how do I send you (and where to?) the files you need to approve specific quotes in my article? (such as publications ISBN numbers, photocopies of articles, links to relevant websites, etc.)? Do I include them in the article itself for everyone to see or shall I send them to you for approval first? Magiko (talk) 09:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


why is this descriptive and not spam? can you please look at blogtronix and tell me what the differences are that make blogtronix inappropriate and socialtext appropriate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elimccargar (talkcontribs) 06:52, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

blogtronix was tagged not as spam but as a recreation of an article deleted by consensus in an AfD, largely for lack of notability, which is not primarily a speedy delete issue. And it is significantly changed since the fD in 2006, so i just removed the speedy delete tag from it also. That said, the argument WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS that "X should be deleted because Y was, or X should not be deleted because Y hasn't been" rarely works on Wikipedia, It seems logical, but Wikipedia's deletion systems are not systematic enough for it to apply -- the reason often is simply "No one nominated that yet", and issues like "promotional" are judgment calls. DES (talk) 07:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

SEEBURGER revision[edit]

I plan to rewrite my SEEBURGER article submission later today. Thank you for clarifying why it was removed. I will put it in my own words. I hope that once the article is accepted, it will be built upon by users of their solutions.Shockleyj (talk) 14:36, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Good idea, but do remember our conflict of interest guideline. You may want to consider a Userspace draft. DES (talk) 03:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

A thanks[edit]

Hello. Thanks for deleting/moving the last couple pages of Portia, Portia (disambiguation), etc. to finish up the project I started. Now, on to revise all pages that link to the disambig page! –ArmadniGeneral (talkcontribs) 02:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

you are welcome. DES (talk) 02:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Biscuit and Biscuit (bread)[edit]

Can you please read this discussion on the talkpage of the WP:Food & Drink project, re language confusion. I am just putting in place the discussion there held, creating a series of suitable sub articles to stop the grand language confusion. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 08:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I have read the discussion you liked to on my talk page. Indeed you will Find that I posted to it. Clearing up the category confusiuon seems good to me, although I am not sure that I agree with the solution suggested. Some of the stubs you are creating seem like good ideas to me, and the text you have added to Biscuit and the text that was in Biscuit (bread) when i last looked at that article (some hours ago) generally seem to me to be good text that should stay in Wikipedia. But I am not convinced that having Biscuit and Biscuit (bread) as separate articles is a good idea. Of course I am only one editor, and the matter should be settled by consensus, on talk:Biscuit, in accord with the advice of WP:MERGE that merge discussions should usually be on the talk page of the proposed target page. I remain open to arguments for separate articles, and i hope everyone in the discussion will be open to considering the reasons put foreward by other editors. DES (talk) 22:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
There are two problems: the old page mashed a number of edible things called biscuit into one page, resulting in reader confusion; secondly, as I have undertaken the exercise, it is fairly obvious that the individual items mashed into the old page were under developed - the article on Biscuits and gravy which I have added to currently lacks references. At some point the page would have got to big and broken out into sub-articles. There was a discussion which you could have taken part in. Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 22:36, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

United States Antarctic Territory[edit]

Hi. You removed the speedy tag from this article, but I have nonetheless speedied it WP:CSD#G3 as a blatant hoax. I wouldn't do that unless the evidence was very solid, but to explain why I think it is, here is the evidence I started to gather for an AfD:

  • The document you referenced says only that "Seven nations (Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway and the U.K.) assert claims to territorial sovereignty over parts of Antarctica... The United States, along with Russia and others active in Antarctica, reject claims and assert the right of access to all areas of Antarctica for peaceful purposes." It explicitly does not make a claim on behalf of the US. It only says that "the United States has a solid basis of claim" - in other words, reserves the right to make one.
  • This document says that the policy of making no territorial claim goes back to 1924. So though Byrd and Ellsworth made such claims, they were not supported by the US government.
  • Google Books doesn't know about his reference: "History of the United States Trust Territory of Marie Byrd Land and Ellsworth Land Antarctica. Lulu Press (2009)". Lulu Press is a self-publisher.
  • Up to this point, there might be a case that enough research was needed that the hoax was not blatant; but this document cited as a reference from the article, purporting to be a 2008 resolution "Agreed to by the Congress of Marie Byrd Land and Ellsworth Land Antarctica" and with a picture of "Governor Daniel Izzo", puts the lid on it. There might have been a tenuous basis for an article about the Byrd/Ellsworth claims, if there wasn't evidence that the U.S. had already established a policy of no claim; but a current territory with a Congress and this guy as Governor is fantasy, and we shouldn't support it.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

P.S. - it's worth skimming on down through the Articles of Confederation document: you'll find that THE DIRECTOR OF MARIE BYRD LAND AND ELLSWORTH LAND ANTARCTICA PATENT OFFICE (Dr Dan Izzo) has granted a patent to the Reverend Daniel Robert Izzo for a "Resurrection Burial Tomb and Resurrection Ship" which "provides people with power and security from death". JohnCD (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:John Yettaw[edit]

Hi, there is a discussion about converting the subject article into a redirect to the incident page. You have been a prominent editor on the article and I would like to solicit your input.--Jarhed (talk) 01:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Sarah Ryan of Good Counsel[edit]

DESiegel, I do not agree that the statements you quoted are assertions of significance. First, the article text does not indicate the sport this person plays. Second, after looking at the infobox and seeing that this person is a camogie player, a sport played almost exclusively in Ireland, I feel it is absurd to consider any current individual player to be significant from a worldwide standpoint. Third, the article was one of several created in a short period of time by the same author User:Gearoid69, about various current camogie players, many of which were tagged for speedy deletion, and not just by me. While I AGF, it struck me a spam campaign. For the record, I left a message at gearoid69's talk page suggesting that they focus their efforts differently, such as consolidating information from the articles they had added into articles about camogie teams, tournaments, etc, and to expand the camogie article itself. Regards, RadManCF (talk) 14:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I read the definition of spamming, and I agree that I had misunderstood it, but I would also point to WP:NOT, as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminant collection of information. However, I am not saying these individuals should not be covered on wikipedia, just that the level of coverage being given is excessive based on the limited popularity of their sport. I never said that I doubted good faith in this case. As to my CSD tagging, I am unaware of consensus against a "when in doubt, use the CSD tag and let the Admins sort it out" approach, although if there is, please let me know. With regards to the question of whether we should include articles on current camogie players, my feeling is that they should be consolidated into one article. Perhaps we should start an rfc on this. I apologize if my actions have been offensive in any way. Regards, RadManCF (talk) 16:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification on CSD. With regards to WP:ATHLETE, the relevant section reads "People who have competed at the highest amateur level of a sport, usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships." I would emphasize "usually considered to mean the Olympic Games or World Championships". You mentioned that the highest level of competition for camogie is the All-Ireland competions. I would like to point out that the NCAA Division III National Football Championship is the highest level of competition for NCAA division III football players. As of yet, I have not found any articles on div III football players, even though they participate at the highest level of their sport. Given the status of div III within the NCAA, I see no problem with this. I see camogie players as having the same status. Giving teams their own articles makes perfect sense. So would giving notable players their own sections in the appropriate articles. Regards, RadManCF (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by RadManCF (talkcontribs)
The take I had on WP:ATHLETE was that if it was not represented at the Olympics (or at an international level), then it generally is not worthy of inclusion. Also, I brought up NCAA div III football because it struck me as being similar in stature. Also, since the participants of div III football operate under diferent rules than participants of div I, div II, and the NFL, I would argue that the analogy is valid, as differing rules can greatly affect gameplay (most notably the designated hitter rule in the AL). Regards, RadManCF (talk) 18:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Okay, but regardless, this seems like an excessive level of coverage for us to give a subject that is not likely IMO to interest many people outside of Ireland. On the Gaelic Wikipedia, I would not object to these articles. To clarify my position, my objection in this case is that we have so many of these articles, and would be open to keeping articles on players who are extremely notable, such as record holders, historical players, etc. With regards to the GNG, recall that the guideline tag reads "though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply." I feel that this case is one of those exceptions. Regards, RadManCF (talk) 02:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


Thanks for helping out here, it will really help speed things up! – ukexpat (talk) 17:51, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, hey...[edit]

Just noticed you'd returned. You probably don't remember me, but you're the first admin I really dealt with here, in a contretemps over some articles about municipal elections (my username at the time was Sarcasticidealist); you made a good impression, though we were on opposite sides. Anyway, I'm an arbitrator now, and I just wanted to thank you for not chasing me away. Steve Smith (talk) 23:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


Hi, just saying thanks for the feedback on my draft, Im tryin to figer out how to use this, its like learning html again! It might take me some time, but with your help i'l hopefully figer it out. cheers.

Mike n jack (talk) 11:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Mass deletions and restorations[edit]

Please note that, although Rdm2376 may have been unseemingly precipitous in deleting all those BLP articles on the grounds that they were unsourced, that is not the only reason that such articles are deleted.

I restored a bunch of them and set out to provide proper sources myself.

For one of them, I realized it was unverifiable. I could find no evidence that it was real. There was nothing to support any of the assertions made therein. Google has many hits for the name of the author provided, but it seems to be a common phrase: there's a lot of social networking stuff, and some wikimirrors... but nothing else that I could find. That's why I deleted it. Unverifiable. DS (talk) 16:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Ooh, I've managed to find some stuff. "(X), a medical doctor and newspaper columnist, is also a poet and playwright. He was recently Lagos State Chairman of the Association of Nigerian Authors (ANA)" - so I guess he does exist. Is that notability, though? DS (talk) 16:51, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
It probably isn't notability, and a specific WP:PROD on the grounds of non-notability would not be unreasonable in my view, or an AfD if you'd like more eyes to check. It might be argued that the chairmanship was enough for notability, but I think i would disagree unless there was some coverage. OTOH, content from Lagos might be less likely to be online so i would give this more leeway than if it were "California State chairman of the Association of American Authors". (debating that kind of issue is one reason for AfD.) But in any case it isn't a speedy delete. My objections are that in mass-deleting anything tagged as an unsourced BLP, Rdm2376 was deleting perfectly valid and sourceable articles with no obvious problems, no attempt to find sources, and no one else's eyes on his deletions. i never objected to individual prods or AfDs of articles for which sources can't be found after reasonable searches, and I don't object now. I won't even object to a policy change that requires sources within a reasonable time (say 2 months) for new BLPs, and incubates them if such sources are not provided. DES (talk) 17:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I wasn't clear. He deleted it, I restored it, I searched for info, I couldn't find info, I re-deleted it as unverifiable, then you restored it as an out-of-process deletion (which I think was in reaction to the first deletion). (Oh, and while I have your attention - if you come on IRC, I have an APL joke for you.) DS (talk) 17:18, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Oh I see, i missed that, sorry. Yes i was reacting to the initial deletion. I would still say that prod, not a speedy deletion, should be used: "Unverifiable" is not one of the WP:CSD, nor should it be, IMO. i will look at it again.
I don't do IRC. But feel free to post such a joke here, or email it -- my Wikipedia email feature is active. I wan you I've heard, and told, a lot of APL jokes over the years. DES (talk) 17:35, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
You are apparently referring to Tolu Ajayi. Nine of his books are listed in worldcat, a very useful place to search for basic info on an author. The two that I have checked so far are both held by the NY Public library and several other major libraries, so anyone who visits one of those libraries or uses inter-library loan can at least source to an "about the author" section. In short this was not unverifiable, merely unverified. I have restored sicn your stated reason for deletion does not apply, and am adding source notes. DES (talk) 17:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Rescuebarnstar.png The Article Rescue Barnstar
Thanks for your good work on Tolu Ajayi Colonel Warden (talk) 20:45, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Your block of Kevin[edit]

Is officially wheel-warring. Undo it now. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:48, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

No it isn't, I warned him, on his talk page, that if he continued to make disruptive deletions against consensus after he was unblocked, i would block again. There is no consensus for these deletions -- some editors approve, but the discussion at WT:CSD shows that editors disapprove, by roughly 3 to 1 (and the more recent comments by much more than that) of such shoot-on-sight deletions. I am not undoing the previous unblock -- I am blocking for continuing disruption that occurred after the unblock, and after specific warnings. This is well within WP:BLOCK, and furthermore the lack of consensus to support these deletions, indeed I think i can say the consensus to oppose them, justifies a block. DES (talk) 02:01, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I think you're missing the point. WP:ADMIN says Wheel warring is when an administrator's action is reversed by another admin, but rather than discussing the disagreement, administrator tools are then used in a combative fashion to undo or redo the action.Juliancolton | Talk 02:12, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I agree, it is wheel warring. Ask ArbCom for an injunction to support the block, if you're sure you are right. ++Lar: t/c 02:51, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I disagree, but I see how it could be taken that way. I have therefore unblocked, after having requested such an injunction from the ArbCom in my statement. DES (talk) 03:08, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. ++Lar: t/c 03:22, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


Please see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#BLP_deletions. Thank you. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:03, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Your statement says that I was involved in unblocking Rdm2736. This is false; please revise. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
My error, now revised. DES (talk) 03:15, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


Not to be a pedantic son-of-a-bitch, but block logs are pretty much forever, and it appears you're nearly deliberately trying to riddle the logs with misspellings. Please be more careful. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:11, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I assure you it was not intentional. The firefox spellchecker doesn't seem to work within the block reason windows, i should have double checked. I am a poor typist I fear. DES (talk) 03:15, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Ah, a Firefox user. Nice. :-) This explains how to enable spell checking in other text inputs, if you're interested. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:19, 21 January 2010 (UTC)