User talk:DGG/Archive 37 Feb. 2010

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nov09, Dec09,

Jan10, Feb10, Mar10, Apr10 , May10 , Jun10 Jul10, Aug10, Sep10, Oct10, Nov10, Dec10

This article has been renominated for deletion by User:Libstar. Since you took the time to comment in the first discussion, you deserve to be notified of the situation. Regards.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 03:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note Tracker[edit]

Hello DGG, I would first like to thank you for your support in the discussion of a now-deleted page, of which I was the subject. The discussion has been about whether my inventions were notable. A device: the 'Note Tracker' was picked as an example, one which critics said they found little or no evidence for. Unfortunately, the considerable music press coverage and testimonials it received on launch date from around 1990 and as far as I know, only exist in hard-copy (which I have kept). Also, being long out of production for lack of funding, it has no web presence. I don't know if it was possible to cite hard-copy. However, the original creator of the article wisely concentrated on my currently available invention, the sonome, which does have web-presence, but has been called by toher names too. The article was in the process of improvement but ran out of time. I'm philosophical about the deletion - it's not for me to say whether my inventions are notable, or whether editors decide there's not enough evidence that they are. I have read your talk page and wish you success with your mission. Kind Regards, Peter Davies Pd1950 (talk) 01:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are occasional efforts by individual people here in various fields to try to clean up the articles in their areas by deleting a number of borderline or weakly supported articles. when this happens, it tends to overshoot the mark. Articles on computer software of this and several other types has been one of the ongoing efforts. It's not my specialty, and I cannot really marshall the sort of arguments I can do in areas I better understand. But even in them, what happens to an individual article has an inevitable degree of randomness--jury systems are not known for consistency. I hope you choose to stay involved here--your subject knowledge would be useful., as all subject knowledge is. DGG ( talk ) 02:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

JBsupreme's edit summaries and more[edit]

There's another rehash of that issue and more on ANI, and a RfC/U was started as well Wikipedia:Requests for comment/JBsupreme. I'm notifying you since you complained about his use of edit summaries before, although I'm not sure what can be said about these issues that hasn't been said already. Pcap ping 22:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

so I see . But this time he has admitted the need of them. I don;t want to pile on about that. DGG ( talk ) 23:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I accept[edit]

Thank you.--Father Goose (talk) 19:38, 2 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

G7 bot[edit]

I made a comment on the Bot approval page ... I originally only intended the bot to deal with article talkpages that had been created, then blanked and marked for G7 by Wildbot ... I have no issue if that was the only tasks for now. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:26, 2 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

nor I, but it's now expanded far beyond that point. I am very dubious about permitting bots to delete, for fear of just such expansions. (One thing though:, how many such that meet your original specifications are there, actually? ) DGG ( talk ) 21:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know that did a dozen a day for the first couple of days as an admin. I can't imagine how many more there were. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There's a lot: shows Deleted edits: 2,642 Live edits: 7,060 and the bot's been operating just over two weeks. The minimum number of edits would be two; one to create the message and one to ask for it to be deleted; if we call the average three then that's 800/16 days = 50/day.
DGG, could you please come back and comment again on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/7SeriesBOT#G7 "good faith" requirement; your experienced opinion was instrumental in shooting down a bad idea, I'd really like it applied again to the possible revisions of that idea. Josh Parris 10:07, 4 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was persuaded by your arguments on the AfD for this article, and I'm really bothered by the resulting deletion. Are you interested in pursuing a review of the decision to delete? --Orange Mike | Talk 20:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

wait a bit--I need to check something with someone. DGG ( talk ) 22:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This has been prodded. I have heard of his book, The great stink of Paris and the nineteenth-century struggle against filth q.v., but I'm not sure he passes WP:PROF. Bearian (talk) 23:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

my error here, I scanned this and sort of thought I remembered hearing about the books also--but I saw he was just an Assistant Professor and decided not to look further. As I myself keep saying, one should always look further if there is any chance at all, at least in the basic free obvious places. WorldCat now includes book reviews (and articles) from all the MUSE and JSTOR journals & an increasing number of others, so it's now my first place to go for authors . I found (and added) so many reviews of both books that serve as secondary sources for notability, to demonstrate he is clearly notable as an author, and so many library holding and references in G Scholar that make it evident he is seen as an authority, thus passing WP:PROF also. This is quite unusual, for someone at this rank to be already notable, but it happens. I should follow my own advice. DGG ( talk ) 00:49, 4 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Motion to dismiss or keep the Chabad editors case[edit]

Hi DGG: A discussion has started if the Chabad editors case should be dismissed or should remain open. As someone who has been involved in the serious COI discussions leading up to this ArbCom case you should be informed of this motion and have the right to explain if you agree or disagree with this proposed motion and why. Please see Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement/Evidence#Contemplated motion to dismiss. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 08:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Page Patrol Protocol[edit]

DGG - As you put me up to it, I have a NPP protocol question. As I began looking at new pages that had not been marked as patrolled, I keep coming across articles that have already been tagged by other editors with various clean-up templates but not marked as patrolled. I can assume this occurs because they find the article through means other than NPP. However, one could easily puruse new pages, add clean-up templates and NOT mark the page as patrolled. In your view, regardless of what templates are added to or the fate of the article, what criteria should reasonably apply to mark a page as patrolled? Is there a guideline or tutorial on this?, if there is, it has eluded me. Thanks, I'll monitor here.--Mike Cline (talk) 22:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: There was a discussion about a year ago regarding this issue. It appears that the consensus was never implemented.--otherlleft 23:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, DGG. You have new messages at's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Additional sources[edit]

Thank you for your interest in researching Scientology (James R. Lewis book). If you could suggest or provide any additional secondary sources, that would be most appreciated. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 14:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need your help[edit]

Hello sir, I'm in the process of re-doing the article Descendants of James I of England. Could you please tell me what tag i should place on the top of the page that conveys the fact that the article is being heavily edited, so that no other editor undoes my work, or gets into an edit war? Please reply on my talk page...

Thanks a ton!

- Nirvaan, 11:27 am, 8th February 2010 (UTC)

{{underconstruction}}. i just placed it for you. {{inuse}} is a similar tag, for a short period, but "underconstruction" is the one for an extended several-day project. Unfortunately, this does not actually prevent anyone from editing at cross purposes. DGG ( talk ) 06:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


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

-FASTILY (TALK) 01:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

re: susan campbell, etc[edit]

I'll get to work on some of the things you suggested. However, what is your source that International University of Professional Studies has become Akami University? I could not find anything relating these two things, or anything that gives me the idea that IUPS is not currently operating still. Can you please clarify?Wavecal22 (talk) 04:35, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure, but see [1] section on "Distance Learning Universities Bringing Access to Education To People Around the World

LaWanna L. Blount, Ph.D." paragraph 10, "Akamai University is an example of a young, effective and developing university, which offers Certificate, Bachelor's, Master's and Ph.D. programs fully at a distance without required residencies. Akamai is not regionally accredited at this date .......... Akamai University was founded in 1998, as the International University of Professional Studies on the island of Maui, Hawaii. During 2000, the planning and development activities began which evolved toward the development of Akamai University. The University has as its mission the advancement of the human condition and the sustainability of the planet through superior quality education and research programs and proliferation of demonstration projects worldwide." I cannot tell where it may have been published. You will find Blount's CV at [2]. It will be simpler to remove that from the article, & I just did. When we get to the articles on the universities, then we'll have to deal with it. Weird error, but the history of unaccredited universities tends to be weird. DGG ( talk ) 05:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Not a problem. Thanks, UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 21:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have nominated Saidu Medical College swat, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saidu Medical College swat. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you re

Requests for userfication[edit]

  • LSDJ. This got delete by a general failure to google form the AfD participants, in no small part because the common name under which it appears in sources is Little Sound DJ. It's one of the 2-3 tracker (software) that's actually noted in an outline of chiptune music, and similar books. See this discussion.
done, usual place [3] -- moved the talk p too as [4]
done, similarly nothing worth keeping on the talk p.

Thanks. Pcap ping 14:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC) OK DGG ( talk ) 01:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Albert Casuga[edit]

Speaking of BLPs at AFD, please weigh in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert Casuga. Abductive (reasoning) 04:05, 11 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your RfA Participation[edit]

DGG/Archive 37 Feb. 2010 - Thanks for your participation in my recent successful RfA. Even though your position was neutral, your comments were constructive and welcome. As the community has expressed its trust and confidence in me, and as you are an equal part of that community, deFacto your confidence and trust in me is much appreciated. As a new admin I will try hard to keep from wading in too deep over the tops of my waders, nor shall I let the Buffalo intimidate me.

Although the above is a bit of boilerplate, I indeed want to thank you for the constructive advice and encouragement. I will be providing you some candid feedback about the experience off-wiki in a day or two. Thanks again.--Mike Cline (talk) 10:31, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Participation at my RfA[edit]

Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on my RfA. It was successful, in that the community's wish not to grant me the tools at this time was honored. I'm taking all the comments as constructive feedback and hope to become more valuable to the project as a result; I've also discovered several new areas in which to work. Because debating the merits of a candidate can be taxing on the heart and brain, I offer this kitten as a low-allergen, low-stress token of my appreciation.
Your particularly thoughtful comments and questions (and the fact that I have great respect for your work here) lead me to ask you for your help. My intention when I participate in deletion discussions is to neutrally interpret an article per existing policies, guidelines, and viewpoints; per your observations I have drifted a bit far into the deletionist camp since my remarks at the bow tie debate and subsequent deletion review. Would you be willing to coach or mentor me?--otherlleft 13:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What I shall do is keep track of what you do closely & let you know., on wiki or not as seems appropriate. . I may also suggest to you some articles to bring to AfD. a useful way to learn will be to look at PRODS about 2 or 3 days after they're placed, and either place a prod2 or source if that's what's needed or deprod if its an incorrect reason. But realize that although many prods could also be speedied, usually we do not bother unless it is vandalism or abusive, for they will go soon enough. I suggested 3 days because I take a quick look on day 1 or 2, and other people look at the end. So you will be a check on us. Another useful thing will be to look at what I delete, now that you can, and query me about any you do not understand or agree with, (or about anything I decline, from my contributions llist) .
Actually, I can't look at them - and I found your views to be representative of enough opposing (even even supporting) editors that I wouldn't wish to try again without your support. I know you will support a qualified candidate who doesn't always agree with you, and consider yours to be a good standard. I will watchs prods in particular as you suggest.--otherlleft 17:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ooops, I thought you had passed. DGG ( talk ) 17:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well to be honest I had made up my mind to ask your guidance either way, and the fact that you're ready to lend a hand shows that I judged your character correctly. I look forward to earning your respect!--otherlleft 04:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

you lazy editor...Martin Grace[edit]

I have been editing on WP since 2004, and guess what I have never had a username/page. Why? Because the point of this site is good faith.

As I note from all the usual WP accoutrements and other badges of office that you garishly drape all over your page, you think yourself something of a big cheese on WP.

George Orwell would have seen through Wikipedia's inherent failure when he noted "all animals are equal".

Which brings me on to the page Martin Grace. I put it up for speedy deletion because there are NO references, links or named experimental musician by that name.

Or do you think I just added the tag off the top of my head?! From the patronizing tone of your reason for removing the tag, it is quite clear that it was because an "ignorant" unregistered IP address did not follow procedures. I would like to assure you that I most certainly did! You certainly didn't bother to look for any references.

Instead you just removed my tag and left all the poor grammar, incomplete sentences, and even missing words, as is in the article!?

Martin Grace is an Academy Award-winning English experimental artist. His music has elements of rock and pop, and more. , at [[in England. Martin became best mates with a fellow student called Asheley Omid lalfam, he made a newly formed band.

Are you that limited in scope not to bother reading the article?? He claims to be an Academy Award winning artist. Did YOU bother to check?? I did and guess what?? There is no one by that name....

Or the page history either??? The page was started by a Grace12307 in 2007 and then edited by (Merton College, Oxford) a couple of days later. is the University of the West of England, Bristol. Even a user called Martin247 later vandalised the page! This article is a joke and is obviously a spoof.

Instead of being deleted forthwith it's kept (and encouraged) the real joke is on you. Bury your pride and obvious contempt for unregistered IP users and delete this rubbish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here's what you had the page say: This page may meet Wikipedia’s criteria for speedy deletion because this article has no references and has dubious WP:Notability. For valid criteria, see CSD.
If we turn to CSD we see various criteria for speedy deletion. Lack of references isn't among them. Lack of notability (for a person) is (it's A7). Here's part of what it says: The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. There's a clear claim of significance. You may find it incredible. Perhaps DGG does not. It's a slightly greyish area.
An experienced editor such as yourself will should have little trouble in making a more formal request for deletion. The exact method is explained here.
Your remark about "the patronizing tone of your reason for removing the tag" is very puzzling. Here is the relevant edit summary: "not a reason for speedy deletion First look for sources, & if not found, only then nominate for deletion. See WP:BEFORE." How is the tone "patronizing"? -- Hoary (talk) 14:20, 11 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What I do when i patrol speedy is delete articles that meet the criteria stated, and stop articles from being deleted if they do not met the criteria. (and rescue a few if it can be done quickly & they are deserving). I do not consider it a grey area that your deletion reason was wrong. We do not speedy delete for being unsourced, unless its a negative BLP: we do just what I said, we try to source them, and if we fail to find sources, nominate them from PROD or AFD. We do not delete speedy for having dubious notability. If its dubious, it needs a discussion. I made the edit summary I generally do in such cases, regardless of who placed the deletion tag. I always use it, because a delusion has been spreading that we do or should deleted for unsourced without trying to source. I will usually check for other reasons for speedy if I think the first one invalid. This time I did not check further, and you are right I was lazy in omitting that. You now say reasonably enough that it is a hoax. But you did not realize it either at the time you placed the speedy, or you would have said so. We neither of us realized it until it was further examined. Bongo did, and he tagged it now accordingly. Looking at the history, he is right, so I just deleted it. I recognize I make errors, and this was one of them. I think I might make in the range of 5% errors, and I doubt any really active admin makes much fewer than that. when people tell me, as you just did, I fix them. Thanks for notifying me. DGG ( talk ) 16:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Any respect I have here, is because other people respect me; that's their decision. All I say on my user page is whom I am, and what i intend to do here. Stars and the like I remove to a subpage once in a while, though I have not done it recently. I think it would be rude to the givers to remove them entirely, DGG ( talk ) 16:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adam Ferguson[edit]

Ha ha ha, I'm in a party mood, DGG. Have a glassful! -- Hoary (talk) 16:02, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Another inexplicable close as non-consensus rather than keep, , but it, and the many other such closes are not worth complaining about. I agree that I feel glad enough when something that ought to be kept gets even that. DGG ( talk ) 16:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removed prod from Zengzhi Li[edit]

I just wanted to let you know that I had to remove the proposed deletion tag from this article, because it was proposed for deletion not once, but twice in the past, and had the deletion request rejected both times (there's even a tag on the talk page asserting this). AfD would be a reasonable alternative, thanks. -- Atama 00:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AfD nomination of Zengzhi Li[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Zengzhi Li, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zengzhi Li. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:45, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've responded on the talk page.   Will Beback  talk  20:36, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

David, would you kindly explain to this guy why he has to provide references to prove what he says about The Sugarman 3? He's lowering this to the personal-attack level, and I've pretty much exhausted my patience with him. Thanks. (Gotta go to work.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 17:06, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seriously, take a look at Talk:The Sugarman 3 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Scone and tell me honestly if I'm wrong, or this guy's just being a total jerk. Thanks. He's driving me nuts. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 23:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
you must understand that I am not knowledgeable in this field. But the notability of the band would depend upon the notability of the records it makes. That it made the records can be shown adequately by allmusic, and the personnel involved can I think be adequately shown by them also--I consider them reliable for this. But of course that it lists a record does not show its notability, and so the notability of the two records that have articles is totally unproven. If notability cannot be shown for them, I'd think both they and this would need to be deleted. The speedy on the band was disputed rather strongly, and it might be best to decide on the three together, to avoid a circular argument. I've nominated them for AfD., where perhaps the community will be able to explain the problem to him, as with the article on Alan Scone. DGG ( talk ) 00:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, David. I just needed some input from a higher-up, and I think you did the right thing. Keep an eye on this, if you would, to make sure things don't get out of hand. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 00:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Update: User:Mecanismo is at it again, even after I requested the AfD be closed as keep after another editor found enough refs to establish notability. see my talk page (at the bottom). I slapped him with an immediate level-4 warning for personal attacks - immediate since he's been around WP long enough to know know better. I've done as much as I can, so it's up to admins now. Thanks. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 20:30, 14 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Blanked attack page[edit]

This article Eleanor Abbott was appropriately tagged for speedy deletion, and the page appropriately blanked. I just want to point out - the contents of the page, before it was blanked, was also written into the revision history. I was wondering if there should be a concern that this content is also in the revision history and perhaps as an admin you might be able to remove it. I am just jumping in and trying to help. Steve Quinn (formerly Ti-30X) (talk) 02:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ordinary admins like me don't have that power. You need WP:OVERSIGHT. Ask as instructed there. Problems, let me know. DGG ( talk ) 03:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request block for IP[edit]

Never had to request an IP block before so I don't know if I go straight to an admin or a workload page, but: see Special:Contributions/ Lots of vandalism today despite repeated warnings; a temporary block would seem in order. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

done DGG ( talk ) 01:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just so you know[edit]

I promised Bishonen that I'd stay away from the article, and that's what I'm going to do. I'm not saying I did anything wrong, but as Bish asked me to then it will happen. Frankly, I'm appalled that there was off-wiki collaboration to ban me, and there were accusations that I was in any way trolling anyone. It's a sad day when it comes to this. The whole thing was a farce, from start to finish. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 06:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

== Thank you ==

DGG, thank you for your kind words about my work, in your comment at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2010_February_15#Paul_Carrigan. It is most appreciated. :) Cirt (talk) 18:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This was a particularly fine example where you expressed doubts about the quality of sourcing of a BLP, and dealt with the problem by rewriting the article yourself so it was properly sourced. DGG ( talk ) 23:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well thank you very much! :) Cirt (talk) 01:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Looking at this talk page I get the impression you already spend 37 hours per day looking at issues and non-issues within this odd website. That being so, I hesitate to ask for comments on the merge proposal I've made in Talk:Christopher_Klim ... or rather, I hesitated. My hesitation period is now over; please comment! Thank you as always. -- Hoary (talk) 13:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you DGG. (Incidentally, nice phrasing of yours in response to the request immediately below this one.) -- Hoary (talk) 16:29, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've Klimmified both articles and tidied up the redirects and so on. I have to say that I view the Klim conglomerate with some suspicion, perhaps more than is healthy for an editor. However, I think I've erred on the side of caution (cliché du jour). -- Hoary (talk) 02:21, 18 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Screaming Eagle Bands[edit]

Hello, this is kind of my first time responding or anything, as the article here was my first article: 04:11, 17 February 2010 DGG (talk | contribs) deleted "Screaming Eagle Bands" ‎ (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of I was wondering how to go about recreating it because I am a current student of the said band, and my band director, whose website i got the information from had given me permission formally in an email that i sent (probably too late) to the wikipedia permissions email. and also, in general i am asking for help in how to properly cite my sources in the future, the wikipedia official page on it was kind of hard to understand. Xiisrylkiix (talk) 23:28, 17 February 2010 (UTC)xiisrylkiix (talk) 18:24, 17 February 2010Reply[reply]

the difficulty here is that the material in the first article added would not be well suited for an encyclopedia even if permission were given. There are two problems: The first is notability: you need to show it with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online (but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases). The best sort of sources for the purpose is reviews of performances, or of the program as a whole, published in newspapers of at least regional importance, or stories about the group published in professional magazines--the band director may know of some. Without them, there is no point really in writing a Wikipedia article. Second, you also need to write like an encyclopedia article, not a web site or press release--don't praise yourself, say what you do in neutral language, and support it by references to the published sources mentioned above. Don;t use the first person--this is an article about the band in an encyclopedia, not you telling people about what "we" do. Material of interest only to students at the school or people in the immediate community is not appropriate here. (if you did use material from your web site, you would need to send us permission as described according to WP:DCM, but there is not much there that would be usable without rewriting.) For further information see our guide to writing Wikipedia articles. You do not need anyone's permission to try the article again, if you have good references and the material is suitable . DGG ( talk ) 01:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jailhouse Rock[edit]

You de-proded that article. I just noticed that the two references (which aren't cited in the article) weren't about the topic. Not sure if that makes a difference to you. Niteshift36 (talk) 06:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

it makes a difference, I may have moved too fast. But since I;'ve done it, let's see if people can find anything. My guess, taking a guess in an unfamiliar field, is that the concept is notable, but I am not sure of the term. DGG ( talk ) 06:52, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I removed them. One was actually about an African art that wasn't notable enough for it's own article and got re-directed to an article about the tribe. This is going to end up in AfD. Niteshift36 (talk) 06:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No objection. this is sometimes the best way to find sources. I know that's not supposed to be the purpose, but , to be realistic, it can work that way. DGG ( talk ) 07:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That's a very realistic view. How many times have you seen a 3 year old article without a single source magically get 5 sources within 24 hours of being nominated. Niteshift36 (talk) 07:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
True, it usually take a little longer. that's why we have 7 days. Happens about 10% - 20% of the time, I;'d say. Deletion is the last resort. You know., it's not that I don t think there are things that need deletion--I've speedied over 9,000 since I;ve been an admin DGG ( talk ) 09:03, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you have a look at this article if you get a moment? It's one of a series that were likely created for promotional purposes but this one's got info that, even if poorly organized, seems to indicate notability.--otherlleft 03:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with you on all counts--probably notable. I'll do at least the minimal necessary rewriting, and check the other articles, and try to explain to the contributor what is and what is not appropriate for Wikipedia. DGG ( talk ) 05:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey DGG. I've been going through the unrefed Oregon BLPs, and I'm having a bit of trouble finding two significant refs about her. I know you know (that I know that you know..., just kidding) about academic subjects, and I'm wondering if you could give me two URLs to add as refs, or tell me if I should prod it. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 03:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

borderline. I am always a little puzzled by articles about people with a little less than full notability in several different fields. do the partial notabilities add up? If she is just under notable as an academic, and a good deal under notable as a poet, does this mean she is notable as a writer (unspecified), or not notable in anything? It's not a question of secondary sources in the usual sense for WP:PROF. The necessary sources for that can be the reviews of the books, and the references to the work, and the selection of her papers for collections. As an author, similarly: notability is shown by reviews, and inclusions in collections. But as an academic she has only one book, by a relatively minor university press, with reviews, & in about 200 libraries, which isn't that much for the subject, and 6 peer-reviewed journal articles-- 3 of them in major journals, & some of them are cited. There are also a number of essays in collections -- which don't count as much as journal articles. She is full professor at a Master's level university, not a doctoral research university. I rather doubt her record would not have gotten her that rank at a major research university. As a poet, though some of her poems have been published, but she has not won any awards or been included in any major collections. I removed her list of a few published photographs; I think her performance work is rather unimportant as well. Though it technically should not matter to notability , I am generally unfavorably impressed by padding of a resume, such as listing reviews of a book in which one of her essays appeared (I removed those also). That she wrote the article herself doesn't help either, though it's not cause by itself for rejection. Since you want urls, I supplied some from Worldcat & Google. I also added her faculty home page. If this were afd, I would say either weak delete or weak keep. ` DGG ( talk ) 06:48, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks a lot for looking into it. I think it would require an AfD and input from a number of users. You added some refs, so I'm going to remove it from Oregon's unrefed list, and let it sit until someone takes further interest into it either way. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 22:50, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


22nd febrary Hello DGG

I'm user : Acrystaluk On January 27th I wrote my first article on Wikipedia and the same day your deteted it because it was commercial and blocked me because I use an organization username.

Today I have some time to contest you.

I'm using this username because I'm the managing director of this organization.

I didn't want to write a commercial article, but just inform people of the existence of a totally new water based resin safe for health and environment. As there exists noting similar in the world I'm obliged to use the trade name of the prodcut ACRYSTAL.

You may not approve my style (but english is not my mother language)but you could ask questions or give advice to modify it without just deleting and blocking without any chance of explanation.

So I invite you to visit our website : and if you think that such an innovative product is on any inportance for the Wikipedia readers, please I'm opened to get all you advices to rewrite it in a Wikipedia style.

Should you like to continue this conversation in private, you find my email on the bottom of the first page of the website.

Sorry for my english.

Best regards

Serge ZEDER Managing director of ACRYSTAL Sarl (france) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:44, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps there could be an article there, based upon the projects it has been used on. You will however need for the product references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online (but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases). If you have them, write the article using them as the basis, not using you website as the basis. You also need to write like an encyclopedia article, not a press release--don't praise yourself, say what you do. Remember not to copy from your web site -- first it's a copyright violation, but, even if you give us permission according to WP:DCM, the tone will not be encyclopedic and the material will not be suitable. For further information see our FAQ about businesses, organizations, and articles like this. And about general matters, see our guide to writing Wikipedia articles.
But you must choose another user name; we have a very firm rule that only individuals can edit, and that the name cannot indicate the name of an organization, to avoid the appearance that they control the page. I am required to enforce it. On the new page, declare your affiliation. And be careful about WP:Conflict of Interest ! DGG ( talk ) 18:55, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kevin Shepherd link[edit]

Dear DGG, since you were involved in a former discussion on Kevin R. D. Shepherd [5] I was hoping you could provide me with direction whether my complaint about a Kevin R. D. Shepherd link could be considered inappropriate or whether there is justification for the link to remain. My explanations are provided on the Sai Baba of Shirdi talk page. I left a message with 'Kevin' [6] and it appears he does not wish to get involved due to the aggressively long-winded posts made by Simon Kidd. You may want to take a look at this diff [7] where Simon Kidd attacked 'Moreno'. After the Kevin R. D. Shepherd article was deleted, Simon Kidd added a link to the Sai Baba of Shirdi page that initially talks about Sai Baba of Shirdi but ends with an attack against 'Moreno' and Wikipedia. The inference seems to be clear. Thank your for any advice you can provide. I will abide by your opinion, whatever it may be. Sincerely, WikiUserTalk 14:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DGG, WikiUserTalk joined Wikipedia on 7 February and began editing the Sai Baba of Shirdi article immediately. On 8 February he created a new section on the article's Talk page, as well as posting an RfC. In spite of his newbie status, he demonstrated an uncanny familiarity with Wikipedia guidelines and processes, as well as with the recent events surrounding the deletion of the Shepherd article. I took exception to his claims, since they included significant errors (that Shepherd's online article 'quickly descends into personal attacks against Wikipedia and what appears to be a former Wikipedia editor'; that it claims to be solely about Sai Baba of Shirdi; that the section in which I posted it is for books only). The whole tone of his remarks struck me as rhetorical and misleading. In addition, he was impugning my motives in adding the link. The facts of this case are as follows:
1. Joe Moreno (alias SSS108) was banned from editing the Sathya Sai Baba article in 2006 due to his aggressive tactics.
2. Moreno is notorious among former devotees of Sathya Sai Baba (SBB) for his numerous websites and blogs, defending SSB and attacking the latter's opponents.
3. Moreno took exception to the appendices in Shepherd's 2005 book (Investigating the Sai Baba Movement: A Clarification of Misrepresented Saints and Opportunism), in which the author surveyed the controversial literature on SSB.
4. Having been banned from Wikipedia, Moreno began attacking Shepherd through his many blogs and websites.
5. Shepherd, who had never even heard of Moreno (and, indeed, had not even been a computer user), countered the latter's online attacks.
6. Shepherd's first book dealing with Sai Baba of Shirdi was published in 1985 and has been praised by the two most recognized scholars of Sai Baba.
7. Having created a web presence for himself (in the wake of Moreno's attacks), Shepherd started making some of his written materials available in online articles, often updated to take into account changing events.
8. The link I added to the 'further reading' section of the Sai Baba entry is to one of these updated articles. In it, Shepherd builds on a theme that is found in both his 1985 book and its 2005 sequel. This concerns the religious context for Sai Baba, in particular the 'hinduizing' trend that began before his death, and continued apace thereafter. This trend received a further boost when SSB claimed to be a reincarnation of Shirdi Sai around 1943. Shepherd does discuss the well-known controversies surrounding SSB (credible allegations of sexual abuse, fraud, and complicity in murder), and it is in this context that Moreno (SSB's most vocal defender on the Internet) is discussed. The entire article is in ten parts, and the discussion of SSB is the final part.
9. My addition of the link had nothing whatsoever to do with the deletion of the Wikipedia Shepherd entry. It is an informative article that should be of interest to future researchers on this subject. The fact that it is online makes it even more useful. Shepherd has carried out a good deal of research into Sai Baba and those directly or indirectly associated with him (including Upasni Maharaj, Meher Baba and Hazrat Babajan). From his early association with Meher Baba, he acquired materials (including some primary sources) that are not generally available.
Regarding WikiUserTalk's claims above, I think I have a right to defend myself. He did indeed leave a message on the Talk page of Kevin (the admin who deleted the Shepherd article in December), but Kevin has not replied there, or anywhere as far as I am aware. The implication is that either WikiUserTalk has had some offwiki contact with Kevin, or he is placing his own interpretation on the latter's silence. I do not agree that my posts are 'aggressively long-winded'. They may be longer than some, but I do not include anything that I think is irrelevant, and I try to avoid rhetoric. Some matters are just not amenable to soundbite simplicity. I also dispute that I am aggressive, although I will vigorously defend my beliefs (in the manner typical of debate). I did not attack Moreno, but expressed concern that the AfD process was being influenced by external matters. It was, in fact, Moreno who attacked me, making unwarranted claims about me on his blogs and websites at the time of the AfD. In this connection, I have to say that some of WikiUserTalk's remarks have sounded eerily similar to Moreno's (for instance that I am paranoid, or a promoter of Kevin Shepherd). I am the victim of the ad hominem attacks, not Moreno or WikiUserTalk!
Simon Kidd (talk) 17:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've commented at the article talk page about the article. I normally prefer not to evaluate behavior, just articles and article content. DGG ( talk ) 17:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Simon Kidd & Kevin Shepherd[edit]

Please see this edit [8] by Simon Kidd. He is using Shepherd as a reference on the Upasani Baba article as well. Something needs to be done about Kidd's constant need to cite Shepherd on as many articles as he can. It seems to me that Kidd is trying to use Wikipedia to propagandize the name of Kevin Shepherd although that author is not an academic and dropped out of school at 15 by Shepherd's own admissions. WikiUserTalk 14:08, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am not convinced that Shepherd is necessarily more unreliable than the general run of works on these subjects. DGG ( talk ) 16:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your even-handedness, DGG. I should point out that, before I saw your own edits, I reverted WikiUserTalk's removal of the link in the Shirdi Sai Baba article. As I understood it, the RfC process has 30 days, unless consensus is reached beforehand. You had commented, and I was about to respond. The process has only run for 8 days, with two comments.
Having seen WikiUserTalk's message to you above, I am more convinced than ever that we are here dealing either with Joe Moreno or someone acting in league with him. The reference to Shepherd leaving school at 15 appeared as the subject of a special page on one of Moreno's many websites shortly after the Shepherd article was deleted in December (Moreno makes much of this fact, although Shepherd hasn't kept it a secret, and it's not something he's ashamed of; speaking as someone with experience of gifted education, I wouldn't be surprised if Shepherd couldn't wait to get out of school!) Coupled with some of his other comments about my supposed paranoia and long-windedness (both lampooned by Moreno in his web attack on me), I'm afraid I cannot assume good faith in the case of WikiUserTalk.
There seems to be something of a campaign by a group of editors against Shepherd. For example, on 15 December Dazedbythebell (who edits almost exclusively in this area) removed Shepherd's biography of Hazrat Babajan from the article about her, without any discussion (see here). This is the only full biography of the subject. Unsurprisingly, Dazedbythebell was active in the Shepherd AfD process, and even linked to one of Moreno's websites in the discussion. Smartse, who had initiated the AfD, requested that he desist (see here), as a result of which Dazedbythebell removed the links containing Moreno's name (see here). After deletion, Smartse (using an IP address over the Christmas break) blanked the discussion, citing privacy, since 'some quite nasty things were discussed in this AfD'. Indeed!
I can well understand your not wanting to get involved in wikipolitics, but I do think you need to be aware that this whole matter is much broader than the Shirdi Sai Baba article. I'm sure you must have many demands on your time, but I would really appreciate it if you would have a look at Shepherd's analysis of this issue here. As an admin, I would hope that you would want to be as informed as possible before making decisions.
This brings me to my intended response to your comment on the Shepherd link in the Shirdi Sai Baba article, and unfortunately it is inseparable from the wikipolitics. What this whole episode highlights is a flaw at the very heart of Wikipedia. I have always admired the ideals of an encyclopedia that anyone can contribute to, and which is freely available online. It works well in many cases, being full of informative articles, and is usually a first stop for me. It works for non-controversial topics. But once there is any controversy, the combination of non-specialist editing and the pervasive anonymity of editors causes severe problems. The result has been the evolution of protocols, which serve to avoid some of the worst pitfalls of bias and libel. And it is up to the admins to apply the protocols.
A conventional encyclopedia, by contrast, is not only more transparent, where specialists use their own names and supply their credentials, but it also has a certain flexibility that is missing in Wikipedia. Wikipedia admins are not usually specialists in the subjects they have to make judgments about, which is why they fall back on protocols. Specialists, on the other hand, can make judgments based on their expertise in a given area.
To take the example we have before us, two of the leading scholars on Shirdi Sai Baba (Antonio Rigopoulos and Marianne Warren) praised Shepherd's first book on the subject. Shepherd acknowledges the work of those scholars, but also points out some shortcomings. For example, Rigopoulos and Warren both relied on Narasimha's biographies of Shirdi Sai Baba and his student, Upasni Maharaj. It was not an academic, but the self-published Shepherd who pointed out that neither of these writers showed any acquaintance with the Kishan Singh diary in their work. In 1954, Singh recorded Meher Baba's judgment of Narasimha's Upasni Maharaj biography: 'Half of it is good and half of it absolute nonsense'. This was published in the Meher Baba magazine, The Glow, in 1975.
So Shepherd points out something that the academics had missed. It's an important point, because Narasimha had his own biases, some of which contributed to the 'hinduization' of Shirdi Sai Baba. But because Shepherd is self-published, his credibility can be called into question in Wikipedia. In a conventional encyclopedia, the specialist editor of articles on Shirdi Sai Baba and Upasni Maharaj could follow up the reference, and make an informed judgment about Shepherd's reliability. In other words, it wouldn't be a case of rigidly applying protocols.
I have noticed that there is some scope for flexibility even in the Wikipedia protocols. For example, Ignore All Rules and Common Sense. The problem is that admins just don't have the time to familiarize themselves with the literature, and it is safer to apply protocols than to be flexible. Flexibility requires experience and judgment, and sensitivity to nuances. This is not a criticism of you, but of a weakness in the system.
I appreciate your acknowledgment that Shepherd is not 'necessarily more unreliable than the general run of works on these subjects'. WikiUserTalk was obviously emboldened by your initial comment, and he misinterpreted what you had said in order to remove more than the link in the Shirdi Sai Baba article. With incredible arrogance, he now thinks he knows better than Shepherd, Rigopoulos and Warren! It is very doubtful that he has even read Shepherd's book on the subject, but he undoes my valid and informative editing. Furthermore, his comments indicate that he thinks something 'needs to be done about' me, presumably meaning some sort of disciplinary measure. Give him an inch ...
I have read Shepherd's books, and my own credentials in judging him are available on my user page. Shepherd is an untypical writer, and this is why I think flexibility needs to be applied. It is simplistic to say that he is self-published. There are different kinds of self-publishing. It can be a noble pursuit and, as a librarian, I'm sure you would appreciate that. Shepherd employs the full scholarly apparatus, and it is easy for writers to check his references. The same considerations apply to his online article on 'Shirdi Sai Baba and the "Sai Baba Movement"'.
I'm sorry this is so long, but I hope you will appreciate that it is easy for people like WikiUserTalk to cast aspersions, and game the system while hiding behind their anonymity. I am passionate about this, and it takes great effort to elucidate all of the intricacies of the situation. I realise that time and attention are in short supply, but it still amazes me that my reasoned arguments have been ignored in the past (during the AfD). Imagine a similar situation in the real world, where a lawyer says of the testimony by an expert witness: 'Sorry, your honour, the witness was going on too long - I stopped listening after the first couple of minutes'!
In conclusion, I think Wikipedia needs to come to terms with some of the problems created by its modus operandi, especially the problem of anonymous sectarian editors gaming the system for their own purposes.
Simon Kidd (talk) 19:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The link to the web site is so utterly impossible that there is no point in letting the RfC run--I am prepared to remove it myself under the WP:EL policy. "Give an inch and he takes a mile " is applicable to you also; I say his books are possibly usable, and you use that statement to keep the website, which is just the same as using my comment that the website in unusable to remove the books. As for experts, there are advantages to WP policy in not relying on them here. What often happens when people try to judge the literature as specialists is a duel about who has the better credentials--generalists are commonly more objective. DGG ( talk ) 19:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK I have removed the link myself. I don't think it's fair to say that I was behaving like WikiUserTalk: his removal of the link was intended to be permanent, whereas mine was temporary, pending the outcome of the RfC process. I agree that there are advantages and disadvantages to both specialists and generalists, but I would add that the generalists need to be as well informed as possible about the work of specialists before they make editorial changes, or at least defer to those who are better informed. I am myself a generalist here, but I have copies of many books on the subjects I edit, including books by Shepherd, and I try to make my edits well written, NPOV, and properly sourced. Simon Kidd (talk) 20:09, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DGG, can you please clarify why self-published sources can be used as references on Wikipedia articles? For example, the reference that Simon Kidd added to the Upasani Baba page is taken from Kevin Shepherd's self-published book. Kevin Shepherd is not an academic by his own admission. Kevin Shepherd is a self-publisher by his own admission. Kevin Shepherd dropped out of school at 15 by his own admission. Kevin Shepherd's views are controversial and I fail to see how Shepherd can be allowed to be used a reference on the Upasani Baba article despite all these facts. Please clarify especially in light of Wikipedia's position on self-published works. WikiUserTalk 05:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Self-published sources can be used freely in general (a) to document the views of their author, and (b) as sources for non-controversial routine facts about the author. Whether they can be used otherwise depends upon special cases. The two possibilities of interest here are, first, if the author is very well known and widely accepted as an authority in the subject, his postings or informal are usable for many purposes -- Shepherd is not anything near sufficiently accepted as an authority for his postings to be usable; second, if the particular work involved has a reasonable degree of acceptance in the subject -- his books, not his postings, are in a number of academic libraries, and I think sufficient to indicate that they are regarded as worth considering. There's a general factor to consider: the overall nature of sources in the subject. As I indicated in an earlier response, most sources in this general subject, with the exception of a few widely regarded works, are less than satisfactory; very few of them are independent either of the desire to promote the subject, or the desire to denigrate the subject. Some otherwise unsuitable ones are however acceptable as showing what the legends about the subject say, or what he is reputed to have said (which is not quite the same thing as what he actually said). At some times, all we can do is achieve the balance of opposing unsatisfactory sources. Actually, quite a bit of the world is this way. Sources are not reliable vs. unreliable -- they are of varying degrees of reliability. We use the best of what we can get. The above is I think either generally accepted at Wikipedia, or in my opinion ought to be. DGG ( talk ) 16:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I removed the unpublished web source already removed as an EL, from within a reference in the Shirdi Sai Baba article. I see no point to continue this discussion here. I have given my opinion clearly enough, or at least as clearly as I am able to. DGG ( talk ) 16:27, 17 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
DGG, then please explain your edit here. The reference to Shepherd is not about himself. Shepherd is not a widely accepted authority on Upasani Baba. Shepherd's views about Upasani Baba are not widely accepted by religious or philosophical scholars. Shepherd is alone in his views about Narasimha. As pointed out before, Ph.D Marianne Warren said in her book "Unravelling The Enigma – Shirdi Sai Baba In The Light Of Sufism" that Kevin Shepherd's views about Narasimha were "highly opinionated", that Shepherd "summarily dismisses Narasimhaswami as an opportunist" and that Shepherd provided no bibliography in his book Gurus Rediscovered [9]. When a Ph.D and a scholar (with academic credentials, which Shepherd does not have) gave this critical and objective view about Kevin Shepherd, how can he be considered a reliable source for the Upasani Baba article? WikiUserTalk 05:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For I believe the third time: in my opinion, judging by the usual external criteria that I know how to apply as a generalist librarian, his published books are in an intermediate zone, considerably more acceptable than many of the other sources in the article. If nothing else, Marianne Warren demonstrates that herself, for she takes his views seriously enough to comment on them. It is very common in Wikipedia to try to dismiss a view one does not like by finding some reason to reject the sources supporting it. I have frequently seen sometimes successful attempts to call certain sources inadmissible, when they are in such an intermediate zone. I think this misunderstands the nature of evidence, for nothing is absolutely reliable or unreliable for all purposes. The insistence that his books cannot be used is just as lacking in balance as the attempt to use his website as if it were a published book. My opinion was asked and has been given: the initial positions of neither side were correct. The other party here has accepted this, but you have not. Anyone who looks at this further can use what I have said as a basis for understanding the issues to the extent that they choose. The article talk pages would be the place for further discussion for those who wish. DGG ( talk ) 06:23, 18 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay. Thank you DGG. I am new to Wikipedia so I had some difficulty understanding your comments. I must admit that I still do not understand them but will abide by your comments. Sincerely, WikiUserTalk 14:38, 18 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

thank you[edit]

Thank you I just wanted to say thank you comments in various places. I love some of your quotes by the way. Okip BLP Contest 11:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May I help?[edit]

I tried looking at your talk page before your recent archival from an iPhone and it can't couldn't be done without using the mobile site. Can I help archive threads from 2008 to 2009? I'll do it however you want, but I suggest that I'd put them all in a new page called TempArchive or something and file them by month of last post. Bongomatic 08:32, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll get at it. I am still trying to archive selectively, dividing the key items by subject. . I know people tend to use my page for a reference. The ones I don;t think are of permanent importance only get filed by month of last post. Perhaps if I were doing it over, I would do it all automatically by month, and let the subject specific archives duplicate. Perhaps it's a hopeless enterprise, but I have not yet gotten myself to admit it. Perhaps the best immediate course is to split off the large amount of recent BLP material, but I intend to do it myself. Incidentally, what is the largest size page the iphone web software can handle? It will help me plan. I know needs are different--my own working style is to use the largest screen I can afford and keep as many windows open as Safari will tolerate. DGG ( talk ) 08:38, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I stand corrected—I can now see the whole thing. Anyway, I was still suggesting putting them in a holding pen for you to review one-by-one, not merging them with your existing archives. Bongomatic 08:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Isaac and Jacob le Maire[edit]

Hi, Isaac le Maire was the father of Jacob le Maire. (Jacob's name is sometimes written Jacques.) So, there is no reason to combine the articles. I hope this answers your question. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 08:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, thanks--now I see what needs doing--perhaps you can help: the article on Isaac needs considerable translation from google-English into English.It has confused not just me, but some other people also. DGG ( talk ) 08:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
When I have the time I will look at it. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 08:54, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have translated it, but I suppose there is still some "Dutch"-English in there. Could you check it and if necessary change it to "English"-English? Thanks. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 14:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

sandbox and blp[edit]

see my recent edits for updated lists. (not sure where they where placed in the WP space) βcommand 14:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merging Dunsmore, Buckinhamshire - a history to Dunsmore, Buckinghamshire[edit]

As you recommended that Dunsmore, Buckinhamshire - a history be merged to Dunsmore, Buckinghamshire, perhaps you could comment at Talk:Dunsmore, Buckinghamshire? I have recommended that the merger be done quickly lest someone nominate the page for AfD. Cnilep (talk) 17:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

only problem is that the contents will need to be rewritten, for as is, it seems that it;'s likely to have been a copypaste from somewhere. DGG ( talk ) 20:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Quite right, I knew that and simply missed it. Thanks for the reminder. - Philippe 00:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello, DGG. You have new messages at Wifione's talk page.
Message added 14:47, 20 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.Reply[reply]

▒ Wirεłεşş ▒ Fidεłitұ ▒ Ćłâşş ▒ Θnε ▒ ―Œ ♣Łεâvε Ξ мεşşâgε♣ 14:47, 20 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RE: deletion procedure[edit]

Thanks for the advice
Mod mmg (talk) 07:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply on my talkpage (if neccessary).Reply[reply]

very long comment

please ref: this page

  • Now this article is ready for review so please take a necessary action.

Here is translation of some news related to article Ambarish Srivastava. Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • 1. This News Title : Ambarish Indira Gamdhi Priyadarshini Award se Sammanit [Ambarish honored to Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award]: p. 04. 2007-12-07.

Name of Newspaper :“Dainik Jagran” , Lucknow , 07 December 2007 | Page 4| Sitapur

Ambarish honored to Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award (Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award to Amberish)

Sitapur, 6 December Here's Architectural engineer Ambarish Srivastava have been awarded the Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award. The honor of Award on behalf of National Unity Conference has been posted to him. Mr. Srivastava was not found to receive honor at Delhi due to became Injured. He was invited by the National Unity Conference to receive this award at constitutional club Rafi Marg, New Delhi, he was to be provided this award the same day in the award ceremony but he was injured in a road accident on 11 October 2007 . He received the award recently by mail. Resistant to Sitapur ,Architectural engineer Ambarish Srivastava, particularly work in the field of earthquake resistant construction and design than work for the welfare of workers. For these actions he received this honor. Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • 2 This News by Hindustan, Reporter (4 December 2007). News title: "Shramikon ke kalyan ka kaayta karna hee uddeshya [He intent to labour welfare only]"

Name of Newspaper Hindustan Lucknow , Tuesday 04 Dec, 2007 page 13 Sitapur

He intent to labour welfare only. (His Aim: work to welfare of workers:)

Having Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award, Ambarish have to proud himself.

Sitapur (Hindustan Reporter): Architectural engineer Ambarish Srivastava has been awarded Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award. Award is honored to have it himself. This information was given in the press conference at Sitapur, Mr Srivastava said that the conference held in New Delhi 'India off Indiraj Dream' Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award was announced. He said that he was injured in a road accident, had both hands tied in the plaster was why he could not take the award there. He received this award through mail due to not reaching in this function. He said he is particularly work for earthquake resistant building construction and design. He said that his aim is to work for the welfare of workers. He said that Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award are honored because it found itself in various areas important services award, for outstanding services ,achievements and contributions and is given on the birthday of the former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by National Unity Conference in Delhi. "This honor is special for him because even as Mother Teresa, Birju Mhraj, Pandit Hariprasad Chaurasia, Russee Modi, M. P. Navjot Singh Siddhhu and Deepak Nayar like figure has been honored with this award. Being honored engineer Ambarish Srivastava his associates are very happy. Colleagues say that the Ambarish has increased distinction of Sitapur . In press conference Hari Narain Srivastava, Raj Kumar Srivastava, Sanjeev Saxena, Anil Kumar Dwivedi and others were present there. Photo Award winner Ambarish Srivastava. Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • 3.This News title "Ambarish Srivastava Indira Gamdhi Priyadarshini Award se Sammanit kiye gaye [Ambarish Srivastava honored with Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award]”

Name of Newspaper : Rashtriya Sahara, Lucknow. Monday, December 3rd, 2007 Page -2 Sitapur.

Ambarish Srivastava honored with Indira Gandhi Priyadarshini Award.

Sitapur, December 2: Earthquake resistant building construction experts Ambarish Srivastava of the district is extremely happy being honored with India Gandhi Priyadarshini Award in conference named India of Indira’s dream held in Delhi at last month. In a press conference held at city hotel Melroj He said receiving the award fully marks to their parents, teachers as well as colleagues too. Expert Srivastava is resident of Kaysthan Srayan near Guria Jhal at Laharpur route. He told journalists in 1993 he had started his career he had designed the first earthquake resistant Regency Public Degree College , then he constructed a guest house as well as other buildings. He said he obtained the seismic design education in 2004-2005 from IIT Kanpur, Mr Srivastava joined Indian Institute of off-Building Association as a Member now he became president of the association have reached today. Mainly in the press conference Former Minister Buniyad Hussain Ansari, Anil Dwivedi, Pappu Bhatnagar, Ranjit Saxena, Hrinarayn, Kuldeep, Sudhir and Sharad Srivastava were present. Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • 4. This News By Mohan Verma (4 January 2009). "Samman pakar phoole nahee samaye Chhavinath [Being honored Chhavinath was to much happy]" (in Hindi). Danik Jagran (Lucknow): p. Front page of Jagran City.

Name of Newspaper :Danik Jagran Lucknow (Jagran City)Jan 04, 2009, page 1st

(Special report at Sunday)

Being honored Chhavinath was to much happy (Extremely happy to have respect Chavinath)

Sitapur, 3 January: Poor Chavinath of Aga Colony is very much pleased being honored by the people through neighborhood. he say, the last stage of life such a joy in having received honors from others, as life has become meaningful. Live by a cottage near river Srayan Chavinath, who do not get to eat everyday properly. His son arranges his bread by pulling Thelia (Rickshaw or goods) any way (cereal Jugadh). Spent in these circumstances - to live in any old gift, then, of course if he 'beg' the will, one way to meet someone on honor got him a valuable commodity. Similar in concept to have respect not only Chavinath minds of colony, but keep the assumption is even older neighborhood close to 35. Yes, people who own and others' mothers - fathers do not have respect, they should learn from Agha Colony, these enthusiastic young people.

Even without any discrimination by some young men of great honor elders have put a new tradition. Architectural engineer Ambarish Srivastava and Kuldeep Saxena, of the neighborhood by adding its foundation. Points out that, families are spread Ambarish reportedly that the aim of the felicitation ceremony held to remove segregation in families. The more than sixty years of age by honoring their elders wished to have better health and viva. He now says that it has been awarded to only the neighborhood elder elders, then to district-level program is planned. To support that the Ambarish, Kuldeep says at the felicitation ceremony was awarded to the first Cvinath's poorest neighborhood ignoring the poverty and wealth. All homes for one – contribution was one rupee only and lamps (maid of soil) for lightning were sent to their homes. Then they were told that they have some stored in their home and rest brought to the venue.

This type of sacrifice was held in the form of ‘Deep Yagya’ (pray to god by lightning lamps) and this tradition has begun. This (event of this work )was staged in the rupee 3089 which was collected from people in the neighborhood. He says that the committee need not. Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • 5. This News by Jagran Karyalaya (19 January 2009). "Shikshak evam Kaviyon ka Hua Samman [Poets and teachers were honored]" (in Hindi). Danik Jagran (Lucknow): p. Front page of Jagran City.

Name of Newspaper : Danik Jagran (Lucknow):dated 19 January 2009, p. Front page of Jagran City.

Poets and teachers were honored.

Sitapur, 18 January: Youths of the Aga Colony Civil Line awarded to poet and litterateurs Swami Vivekananda Jayanti to mark Swami Vivekananda Jayanti at Saturday. This mark Hindi Ratna (Gems of Hindi which is name of a honor) Ganitagya (mathematician) and Kawysri (Rich in poetry) honor were awarded those persons. Mr. Ambarish Srivastava, Kuldeep Saxena, Mukesh Gupta, Ashish Srivastava, Ajay Dixit, Avdesh Pal, Santosh Bajpai, Shiv Kumar Pal etc were organized this event with the help of ‘Vivekanand Seva Sansthan’ (name of a society), ‘Sahitya Utthan Parishad’ (society of litterateurs) and ‘Akhil Bharteey Chitransh Mahasabha’(society). Program was conference at Vivekananda Public School at in late night in a kavi sammelan (Conference of Poets). Dr. Gneshdutt Saraswat and Niranjan Lal Agnihotri have bee awarded Hindi Ratna (Gems of Hindi which is name of a honor) and Pankaj Srivastava, a teacher of sacred heart Inter College was awarded with mathematician and Som Dikshit, Mukteshwar Baksh Srivastava, Dinesh Mishra Rahi, Gopal Sagar, Ram Sagar Shukla, Mehfooj Rahmani, Mujeeb Sitapuri, Raj Kumar Srivastava, Shacheerani Saxena, Vinodni Rastogi, Gyanvati Dixit, Balendu Dutt Tripathi, Maya Prakash Awasthi, Pratap Narain Mishra, Shanti Sharan Mishra, Akhilesh, Rajneesh Mishra, Pankaj Pandey, Rajan Pandey, Ambarish Srivastava, Shyam Bihari Lal Srivastava, Chandra Gupta Srivastava Diwakar Pratap, Brijkant Vajpayee, Kuldeep Saxena, Neal Srivastava, Bhupendra Dixit, and three dozen poets, including Rajesh Akela the 'Kawysri’ (name of honor) awarded by the manager of school Jai Prakash Verma. Program was presided by Maya Prakash Awasthi Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • This News by Hindustan Reporter (29 April 2004). "Building Designers Association gathit [Building Designers Association constituted]" (in Hindi). 'Aaj' (Lucknow): p. 6.

Name of Newspaper : 'Hindustan" (Lucknow): dated 29 April 2004 p. 6.

Hindustan, Lucknow dated 29 April 2004, page 6 Building Designers Association constituted " Sitapur (Hindustan Reporter). Indian Institute of off-Building Designers Association Meeting held in local hotel Melroj where officials were selected by consensus of the committee, the president Er. Ambarish Srivastava has been elected as president while the General Secretary Syed Murtaza Hussain Rizvi has been elected . Newly appointed president Er. Ambarish Srivastava said the Er. Ajay Srivastava & Er. Anupam Srivastava have been elected as vice-president, Umesh Prakash Srivastava & Desh Deepak Srivastava as Joint Secretary and as a treasurer Er. Akhilesh Srivastava (nominated). Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • This News by Aaj Reporter (05 April 2005). "Building Designers Association ne kee baithak [Annual Meeting of the Building Designers Association]" (in Hindi). 'Aaj' (Lucknow): p. 10.

Name of Newspaper : 'Aaj" (Lucknow):dated 05 April 2005, p. 10.

Sitapur (Aaj Reporter). Annual meeting of all members and officials of the Indian Institute of Building Designers Association held at in local hotels Melroj under the chairmanship of Er. Ambarish Srivastava. In this meeting all one decided to constitute a Professional Building Designers Registration board at the national level and execute a committee of three members was set up for it. As well as providing this information the general secretary of the ‘Indian Institute of Building designers Association’ announced that this registration board of IIBD will hold an examination for the registration of professional building designers (PBD) on June 30 on the basis of which a register will be formed and a certificate of registration of Professional Building Designers will be provided to successfully passed candidates that will display his technical competence, quality and excellence. Mr Hussain also declared that it have been decided by all members that they have to set up IIBD welfare fund to assist the building designers as well as construction workers in their causalities. Beside, It has also appealed that all building designers must have inspire to others building designers and construction workers for taking their accidental insurance policies and to open Public provident fund account. along with them. Mainly Er. Anupam Srivastava, Er. Vivek Kapoor, Er. Akhilesh Srivastava, Er. Anil Verma, Umesh Prakash Prakash Srivastava, and Mohammed Rehan Khan etc. have participated in this annual meeting. Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Translation of

"Saraswati-Ratn" Honor (Translation: Gem of Goddess Saraswatee) in 2009 by Hindi Sahitya Parishad (Translation: Hindi Literature Council) in the field of Hindi poetry. Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Translation of

"Abhiyantran-Shree" honor (Translation: Rich in engineering)in 2007 by Bhartiya Manvadhikar Association (Translation: Indian Human-right Association) in the field of architectural EngineeringSpjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • English Translation: of This poem "Ek Mazdoor ka dansh"

-A labor's bite-

Something we all suffer silently

We never afraid of hard work

Our labor is precious, brother

Why work for free made

Why do say ugly abuse

Why do we say slacker

Half the bread in our home

All the meat in your part

Destined to poverty but enjoying fast

Our death is cheapest

Until our exploitation will

Until then you must nurture

Your right to education

No one supported us

Whenever we must educate

All your organs must cry.Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • following more citations were also added.

This Scanned Image: of Indira Gandhi Priydarshine Award This Scanned image: Certificate of Indira Gandhi Priydarshini Award This Scanned image: Letter of approval for the Indira Gandhi Priydarshini Award This Scanned image: Letter to delivery of that award This Scanned image: of the registration of the Indian Institute of Building Designers Association.Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:16, 16 February 2010 (UTC) This scanned image 1 of a designed project name: Regency Degree college Reseora This scanned image 2 of a designed project name: Regency Degree college Reseora This scanned image 3 of a designed project name: Regency Degree college Reseora (during construction) This scanned image 4 of a designed project name: Regency Degree college Reseora (during construction) This scanned image 5 of a designed project name: Regency Degree college Reseora (during construction) This scanned image 6 of a designed project name: Regency Degree college Reseora (landscape work) This scanned image 7 of a designed project name: Regency Degree college Reseora (landscape work) This scanned image 8 of a designed project name: Regency Degree college Reseora (landscape work) This scanned image of residence of Mr. Anis Mirza at Tareen pur This scanned image of residence of Mr. Anis Mirza at Tareen pur (during construction) This scanned image of redidence of Mr. Avadhesh Verma at Civil Lines This scanned image of redidence of Mr. Anoop Agrawal at agrawal colony near 2 Bn. PAC This scanned image of redidence of Mr. Suraj Verma at Naimish Puram (during construction) This scanned image 1 of redidence of Mr. Suraj Verma at Naimish Puram (during construction) This scanned image of building of Jaswir Singh at civil lines This Scanned Image News: A Seminar on concrete roads projests This Professional website of Ambarish Srivastava This Blog of Ambarish srivastava This specialization page at website of Ambarish Srivastava This popularity of web site oa Ambarish Srivastava This Scanned Image of 'Abhiyantran Shree' Honor This Scanned image of the certificate of 'Abhiyantran Sree' Honor This Scanned image of 'Saraswatee Ratn' Honor This Scanned image of certificate of Saraswatee Ratn Honor This Ambarish Srivastava on in the list of notable poets on sl. no.-41 This Scanned image of American Society of Civil Engineers 'ASCE' membership certificate This Scanned image of Architectural Engineering Institute 'AEI' membership certificate This Scanned image of Indian Roads Congress membership letter This Scanned image of Indian Buildings Congress membership letter This Scanned image of the Indian Society for Technical Education Membership certificate This Scanned image of the Indian Institution of Bridge Engineers Certificate of Fellowship This Scanned news 'Building Designers Association constituted' This Scanned news 'Annual Meeting of the Building Designers Association' This Scanned news 'meeting of IIBD members' This Scanned image of the certificate of course on the seismic design of steel structures from IIT Kanpur This Scanned image of the certificate of course on the seismic design of bridges from IIT Kanpur This Scanned image of the certificate of course on the seismic evaluation and strengthening of buildings from IIT Kanpur This Scanned image of the certificate of course on the seismic design of masonry buildings from IIT Kanpur This Published poems of Ambarish Srivastava at Anubhuti of (UAE) This Published poems of Ambarish Srivastava at Swargvibha (Mumbai) This Introduction of Ambarish Srivastava at Sahitya Shilpee Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I did some editing. You need to use only 3rd party sources, not pictures of the awards and of the buildings, or texts of the poems. I have therefore removed a good deal of such links and irrelevant material. For the architecture, you need to link to some published information about the building, not just a picture of it. If the building is not sufficiently important for there to be anything published in an architectural or general journal about it, it doesn't really count for notability . The main notability is as an architect, not a poet--that's what the national award is about. What you need for the poems is references to where they were published in printed sources or their web equivalents, not videos of poetry readings. You still need to clarify for many references to awards just what organization is making an award and for what--explain the hindi name, say whether it's a national organization . For the social work, I did not understand the entire section. Are you making awards of behalf of some organization because of your leadership in it? What organization? What does it represent? Is it about your local community, ?
I will make a comment at the Deletion Review, but it need further clarification. DGG ( talk ) 19:34, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks for editing the article and removing the irrelevant material and I am so grateful for your nice support to improve this article. Unfortunately no any published information is available in architectural or general journal about for these buildings. "Abhiyantran Sri" (translation: Rich in Engineering) honor was given for the dedicated outstanding services to human rights protection and continuous struggle against Human harassment and by "Bharteey Manvadhikar Association" (Translation: Indian Human-right Association)which is a nation level association of India. "Saraswatee Ratn" (translation: Gem of Goddess Saraswatee who is a goddess of knowledge) honor was given for the Constant discipline in the field of Hindi-poetry by "Hindi Sahitya Parishad" (Translation: Hindi Literature Council which is a regional level body). Clarification about the social work is that Ambarish Srivastava had honored to some genuine persons for their outstanding work and services related to their respective field of work with the help of local registered societies named Vivekanand Public School and Vivekanand Sewa Sansthan on the basis of his goodwill & reputation in these societies. Best Regards, (talk) 20:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Sorry! i have commented when i was not loged in. Thanks again. Spjayswal67 (talk) 21:17, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks for editing the article and removing the irrelevant material and I am so grateful for your nice support to improve this article. Unfortunately no any published information is available in architectural or general journal about for these buildings. "Abhiyantran Sri" (translation: Rich in Engineering) honor was given for the dedicated outstanding services to human rights protection and continuous struggle against Human harassment and by "Bharteey Manvadhikar Association" (Translation: Indian Human-right Association)which is a nation level association of India. "Saraswatee Ratn" (translation: Gem of Goddess Saraswatee who is a goddess of knowledge) honor was given for the Constant discipline in the field of Hindi-poetry by "Hindi Sahitya Parishad" (Translation: Hindi Literature Council which is a regional level body). Clarification about the social work is that Ambarish Srivastava had honored to some genuine persons for their outstanding work and services related to their respective field of work with the help of local registered societies named Vivekanand Public School and Vivekanand Sewa Sansthan on the basis of his goodwill & reputation in these societies. Best Regards,Spjayswal67 (talk) 21:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks again! Most humbly for your kind notice please: that there is a some small mismatching mistake appears at that places where citation no 41 and 42 are being used. 41 no cite (Residence of Avadhesh verma) is being used at the place of Residence of Anis Mirza and cite no 42 (Residence of Suraj Verma) is being used with the residence of Avadhesh Verma. Best Regards.Spjayswal67 (talk) 22:56, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I have made a correction as i mentioned above and as per suggestion of Mr. Cunard, I have also removed two primary sources this & thisfrom the professional membership section. Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:21, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks a lot! Best regards.Spjayswal67 (talk) 08:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks a lot again. I am encouraged now for which i am grateful to you and i appreciate your work which is without prejudice. Really you are a great person.Spjayswal67 (talk) 05:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article name changes in The Economist[edit]

DGG, are you able to shed any light at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Article name changes post-publication? Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

left a comment there. DGG ( talk ) 23:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks so much: that covers it nicely. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Web page titles[edit]

Do you know what the relevant style guideline is for mentioning a website's name in the text of an article? Not as an inline external link, mind you; I'm talking about the domain name acting essentially as the name of a publication, like the Huffington Post - a better example would be, since the ".com" is definitely part of the name. Do you italicize it like you would a newspaper, only if it is a newspaper, or something else maybe? I asked a journalism teacher who guessed it's just in plain text, but have you any idea?--~TPW (trade passing words?) TPW is the editor formerly known as otherlleft 21:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

my general approach to such things here is to let other people do what they please. But looking around, it seems most people here do not italicize. DGG ( talk ) 03:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fair enough - I figured if there was a standard out there that I hadn't found that you might have gotten wind of it. Thank you kindly!--~TPW (trade passing words?) TPW is the editor formerly known as otherlleft 04:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Home Owner Soon[edit]

Hi DGG, you said I should contact you if I wanted the block removed from my attempted "Home Owner Soon" page. I have reviewed your notes and have created a new version I am hoping to post. I have provided the content below and am hoping you could review and give me some feed back to whether my revised version meets the restrictions? Any insight you can provide is greatly appreciated. I didn't want to spend a bunch more time formatting only to have my page deleted so please excuse the references not being formatted entirely correct.Thank you for taking the time to read this, and hopefully we can come to a quick resolution.

Home Owner Soon is a Canadian rent to own company, based in Toronto Ontario, and operating in all provinces across Canada. Home Owner Soon' rent to own program provides an alternative solution for renters wishing to become homeowners, and helps those who cannot obtain traditional forms of financing.


In 2006 realtor Alex Kluge MBA and broker Guy Lew AMP teamed up and identified a hole in the industry. Due to the global credit crisis, the industry has seen the departure of B-lenders, leaving a void in the market to service families and individuals that have bruised credit and can no longer find lenders that will approve their applications.

===Access Denied=== Presently Ottawa is considering new rules that would force banks to use even tougher criteria's to evaluate mortgage borrowers.[1] The key proposal under discussion would see the creation of new conditions the banks would have to follow when determining whether a customer can afford a mortgage.[1]

Lending standards have increased since the sweep of sub prime mortgages took over the market. Even if you got a mortgage 25 years ago and have kept on top of those payments, it doesn't mean you can get another mortgage whether you can afford it or not. CREATE FORMATTED LINKS AND REFERENNCE the above section is general background and not directly relevant to an article about the company

===The Cause=== The sub prime mortgage crisis is an ongoing real estate crisis and financial crisis triggered by a dramatic rise in mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures in the United States, with major adverse consequences for banks and financial markets around the globe. The crisis, which has its roots in the closing years of the 20th century, became apparent in 2007 and has exposed pervasive weakness in financial industry regulation and the global financial system.[2] The immediate cause or trigger of the crisis was the bursting of the United States housing bubble which peaked in approximately 2005-2006[3]

Three important catalysts of the subprime crisis were the influx of moneys from the private sector, the banks entering into the mortgage bond market and the predatory lending practices of mortgage brokers, specifically the adjustable-rate mortgage, 2-28 loan CREATE FORMATTED LINKS AND REFERENNCE

It has become and remains to be increasingly more difficult to get approved for a mortgage. These days, those with high income, those new to Canada, and even entrepreneurs and individuals looking to refinance their existing mortgages are feeling the wrath of stringent financing qualifications.

Some potential homeowners are shaking their fists in the air as they look at houses that are finally in their price range but the mortgage is now out of reach. CREATE FORMATTED LINKS AND REFERENNCE

This means many people are faced with circumstances that make it impossible to receive conventional bank financing.

the above section is general background and not directly relevant to an article about the company

HOME OWNER SOON Can i post my page if I remove all content you have striked through and made revision to? There is not really any third party sources that speak "specifically" about Home Owner Soon as a company.I can attempt to add more references to the content you have left, but I just wanted to confirm I can post this page, before i spend anymore time working on it. Thank you for getting back to me so quickly, have a good day —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jharris08 (talkcontribs) 15:51, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Program[edit]

The concept of rent to own is not new, but with credit markets and the housing crash, these contracts are becoming much more popular.[4] The rent to own program is composed of a rental lease and a purchase agreement, between the investor and the tenant. The tenant has the ability to purchase the property at a set price and time in the future, as well as select any property they wish through the buyer selection program.

An individual can rent to own any home that is currently listed on the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) across Canada. An investor will then purchase the property selected, and rent the property to the tenant for a duration of two to five years, based on the tenant's financial circumstances.

During the rental period, 20% of each months rent is saved as an option credit to be used as part of the down payment on the home at the end of the rental period. This in addition to the original deposit and all other savings accumulated by the tenant over the rental period creates valuable buying power at the end of the rental term.

The rent to own program gives tenants the time needed to correct any issues that may be keeping them from getting financing from traditional lenders. Over the rental term, the tenant is managed and educated in how to re-build their credit, ensuring the tenant is eligible to purchase the home from the investor, at the end of the rent to own lease.

this also is not about the company, though some of it might be usable as background

What you need is references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources about the company itself. DGG ( talk ) 20:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

further discussion[edit]

Can i post my page if I remove all content you have striked through and made revision to? There is not really any third party sources that speak "specifically" about Home Owner Soon as a company.I can attempt to add more references to the content you have left, but I just wanted to confirm I can post this page, before i spend anymore time working on it. Thank you for getting back to me so quickly, have a good day —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jharris08 (talkcontribs) 15:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If there is no third party source, the company is not yet notable. You may hope it will be in the future, and think that it ought to be, but until that happens there cannot be an article. See WP:ORG. Even when it is, it will not be your page. Please also read WP:COI. It will be a page about the firm, and anyone can write it when there are sources. Look, there's a difference between an encyclopedia and a business directory--an encyclopedia covers the things that are already important. DGG ( talk ) 17:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! I've just add some citations and sources, and change the text, so, please, change the templates. Thanks! Sverige2009 (talk) 09:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've placed them where they go, & fixed up the English a little. The next step is finding some third party reference to the competition he has won. wiki.bin by itself is not sufficient for that. DGG ( talk ) 17:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! I added some new sources and references, not all, but now is better than before--Sverige2009 (talk) 22:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I noticed you helping with some cleanup on the article. I had tagged it for G12 because it was from "Wikibin" which is new to me but, as you said, they use the GFDL so that handles any problem there. I think what's happening though is that they take deleted articles and post them there. The old deletion debate on this one is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rostislaw Wygranienko. Is that you're understanding of that site?

My other question is if you know of any WP:Plagiarism templates that could be used much like the {{copy paste}} templates. Even if the source is public domain, or appropriately licensed, a lot of these copy paste articles (like this one) need to indicate some sourcing. I spent a while yesterday trying to sort through an editor's contributions of public domain material, and got what looks like all of it sourced, but I've seen this problem more and more. I wondered how you tend to handle these, especially when there are too many to just quickly take care of yourself. Thanks. Shadowjams (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

wikibin takes material from here, but they take material from elsewhere also. That they have deleted articles is sometimes helpful, but otherwise they're a prime example of what Wikipedia might be like if we had no rules about promotionalism., NPOV or Verifiability.
you are right that in any case it seems to be based on the deleted article, which I have examined. this can fall under speedy criterion G6, repost after AfD without dealing with the problems --but the discussion there was so inadequate that, by current standards, I think it would need a new discussion. If anyone wants to renominate, they can do so. there is somewhat questionable notability , and I tagged for that. The question will be whether the awards are significant. I checked the articles in ru, po and uk, and see some more detail, but no additional sources.
As for plagiarism, copying a list of positions or recordings is probably not even copyvio, because there is no US copyright on facts, just on the expression of them, and there is sometimes no other possible way to express the facts. However, it is highly desirable to rewrite even such lists a little , at least in format, so as not to be an exact copy. Certainly it's not plagiarism, if it's attributed to the source, and we do that. There are two types of plagiarism that are not acceptable at all here: one is not attributing, and the other is following a source too closely. How exactly a copy needs to be attributed is an open question. Normally,it is considered plagiarism in the academic world to not indicate exactly with quotation marks just what part is copied, but that rule has not been strictly followed here, though I think it ought to be. I am particularly concerned about the material copied from the old EB and Catholic encyclopedia, with a general notice that its been followed, bt not indication of whether it's the whole article--the reason I am particularly concerned here is that such material is always outdated, is often now known to be inaccurate in major ways and is often POV by our current standards; I consider the main use of it is to show what people thought 100 years ago.
There are some useful related templates : {{citations missing}} -- "this article is missing citations or needs footnotes. Please help add inline citations to guard against copyright violations and factual inaccuracies."; {{no footnotes}} "This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate " (note that contrary to what some people say, there is no rule that inline citations are actually always required, though they are for Featured Article status), and the very helpful {{original research}} We probably do need a specific template. Anyone can make one. I'll give it a try if I get a chance from emergency rescues. DGG ( talk ) 22:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sounds good. The plagiarism standard doesn't yet have the accoutrements of the more established guidelines, including templates. I also don't think too many know about the attribution templates. Thanks for the help. I've never made a template but I might take a look at some point too. Shadowjams (talk) 00:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello, DGG. You have new messages at C628's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

AfD nomination of Daniel E. Witte[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Daniel E. Witte. 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 Wikipedia:Notability and "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/Daniel E. Witte. 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) 01:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Missing signature[edit]

How does John Pack Lambert not have the usual signature on replies at AfD and the Sinebot doesn't add it?

Sorry about forgetting to add my signature. I will try to do better. Why it is not added, I have no clue.John Pack Lambert 03:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

  • I haven't seen it added anywhere. On talk pages, in articles, in AfD. It appears to me that it isn't being added by design. I'm just not sure why. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I went through and figured out that I had clicked the "show as shown" and the effect was to not add things. I did not realize this when I clicked it and had to go through several levels of explanation of signatures to figure out that was the result of clicking the key.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shepherd and Sathya Sai Baba Issue[edit]

DGG, I'm sorry to trouble you again. But Simon Kidd is now posting links to Kevin Shepherd's websites on the talk pages. See this edit [10]. Also, on the Sathya Sai Baba talk page [11] there is a statement by ArbCom saying that "Negative information in an article or on a talk page regarding Sathya Sai Baba or organizations affiliated with him which is poorly sourced may be removed without discussion." The links that Simon Kidd added to the Upasni Maharaj talk page contain content that is very negative, poorly sourced and original research against Sathya Sai Baba and the Sathya Sai Organisation. As such, can those links be removed? Thank you for your help in this ongoing matter. WikiUserTalk 05:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The place for discussion of arbitration enforcement is WP:AE; I ordinarily leave such matters to others. But you seem to have also initiated Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Simon Kidd, where in response some reasonable doubt was raised by another editor about the nature of your own account. Since the clerk there has now referred the matter to arb com, they will be the ones to deal with the matter--and they customarily examine all aspects of it. DGG ( talk ) 05:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, DGG. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 January 14, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 February 28#Simple Instant Messenger. Cunard (talk) 08:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  1. ^ a b [12], CTV news.
  2. ^ [13], Bernanke-four questions-april 2009.
  3. ^ [14], PBS news.
  4. ^ [15], Post and Courier.