User talk:DGG/Archive 87 Apr. 2014

                                       ARCHIVES

DO NOT ENTER NEW ITEMS HERE--use User talk:DGG

Barnstars, Awards, etc.

Reminders

Topical Archives:
Deletion & AfD,      Speedy & prod,        NPP & AfC,       COI & paid editors,      BLP,                              Bilateral relations
Notability,               Universities & academic people,       Schools,                       Academic journals,       Books & other publications
Sourcing,                Fiction,                                               In Popular Culture      Educational Program
Bias, intolerance, and prejudice

General Archives:
2006: Sept-Dec
2007: Jan-Feb , Mar-Apt , M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D 
2008: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2009: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2010: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2011: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2012: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2013: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2014: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2015: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2016: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2017: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2018: J, F, M , A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2019: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2020: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2021: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2022: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O, N, D
2023: J, F, M, A, M, J, J, A, S, O

 

            DO NOT ENTER NEW ITEMS HERE--use User talk:DGG

Bimal Kumar Bose

Dear DGG: You are being so helpful, but I;m afraid that I may have caused you extra work. I just discovered the link above. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

fortunately, not very much work--I did a very sketchy job with the AfC . DGG ( talk ) 05:01, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Charles L. Carson (Author)

Greetings DGG, You recently deleted an entire page for Charles L. Carson (Author) finding that he was not considered "Notable" I do wish to dispute as Mr. Carson is indeed noted both as a broadcaster and author. References supplied.

I did indeed as for guidance and now not only ask that the page be reinstated but references reviewed. As you are a ware there are hundreds of articles that post no credits and only "promotional" such as article for Doug Warhit.

I hope that with corrections and edits you would reconsider restoring the page. Knightflyte (talk) 21:26, 4 April 2014 (UTC)– — ° ′ ″ ≈ ≠ ≤ ≥ ± − × ÷ ← →

"several books on amazon" is not even a claim to importance. amazon will sell anything. None of his books are in any library in the United States--they are not even listed in WorldCat. I see nothing in the article submitted to show any importance as a broadcaster: no network presence, no notable shows, no awards. As for a lawyer, I see nothing either to indicate there might be the least potential for a WP article. No notable cases that had national coverage, and nothing else seems there from the article.

As for promotionalism , a long paragraph of his (uncited) views on miscellaneous matters in the world, a list of all the routine areas of law in which he practices, a list of all the companies and major clients he has worked for, and a very large number of adjectives of praise, are sufficient reasons to delete an article for promotionalism even were it the case that he would be considered notable.

If you think you can write a proper article, there is nothing to prevent your trying again.

(And as for the other article you mention, we have tens (or perhaps hundreds) of thousands of articles that ought to be deleted. The least we can do is not add to their number) DGG ( talk ) 22:22, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Comment request!

Hello, I'm User:Anupmehra. I'm seeking your opinion on a AfD closed by a involved non-admin editor as speedy-keep within 30 minutes of nomination. You may ignore, but it you could, then please comment at WT:Articles_for_deletion/John_M._Cooper_(philosopher). Thank you! Anupmehra -Let's talk! 16:08, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

To start with, he is an admin, and he does not seem to be involved; beyond that, I've commented on that talk page. DGG ( talk ) 23:33, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your helpful comment. Perhaps he *was* an administrator, now isn't anymore (Secret userrights) and has earlier !voted "keep" and within few mins deleted his comment and closed the AfD as "speedy keep" (diff). Again thanks very much. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 11:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Advice requested

Hi David, could you perhaps have a look here? Any advice is welcome. Thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 14:21, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David SG Goodman

A colleague of mine has created this article about an academic and asked me to review it. I find it well formatted, but I am not sure about the WP:PROF test. Since I am not fully COI free here, I'd appreciate your second opinion. Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:01, 8 April 2014 (UTC) '::'you aren't COI free? This is my third cousin! (joke, actually, of course--those notable cousins I do have come from the other side of the family). It'll pass AfD, which is enough reason to accept. It could do with some more book reviews, which will as a backup show notability under WP:AUTHOR. It needs a little reformatting--I'll touch it up and accept it. DGG ( talk ) 16:51, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Margie Orford

Hi DGG. At your convenience could you take a look at Margie Orford. I am in need of a second opinion. The article popped up on my NPP queue and I had tagged it for notability, one source and affiliated references. However Coat of Many Colours took strenuous exception, removed the tags, and after adding another source and making some other minor changes, posted a testy comment on my talk page threatening to take me to ANI. I took another look at the article and concede the strong possibility that the subject may be notable, but sources seem to be hard to come by. A quick Google failed to yield anything that rings the notability bell and I do not believe either of the now two sources cited pass WP:RS for the purposes of establishing notability. I will look again a little later when I have some time, but I do sometimes miss things and as a courtesy to Coat of Many Colours I thought I'd ask for a second opinion. As always I appreciate your time... -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:28, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

My second testy comment (and I can get a lot testier)

You've been around long enough to know how Wikipeida judges WP:Notability. This secondary source alone is adequate [1] and then there's this [2], destined for the history books (already cited for example here) and concluding with "Margie Orford is an award-winning South African journalist and crime writer. Her new novel Water Music is out now, published by 'Head of Zeus'". Not notable? Hah.

As for "sources" you're confusing them with "citations". I'll remove that tag directly as well.

Please don't come back. Or at least read the sources first before you do. And if you do go for admin "eyes" perhaps you could do me the courtesy of telling me whose. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I have commented on the same talk page, where I explain why this should not havecaused as much trouble as it seems to have done DGG ( talk ) 17:58, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Could you clarify please

I was wondering if you could explain to me the rational for the speedy deletion of the article I created for Miniature World? I saw that several other articles already exist in the Category:Visitor_attractions_in_Victoria,_British_Columbia and so created this to fill the gap. Is there an article or notes that describe the threshold for tourist attractions I could use a a guide to improve the article before I resubmit? Thanks for you assistance. Nuncan (talk) 15:47, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I'll give you an explanation tonight or tomorrow. But FWIW, I consider a few of the other articles in that category rather dubious. DGG ( talk ) 18:05, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

ABCtales

Thanks for voting to keep the ABCtales wikipage active: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abctales.

I've just taken over the site as editor and we've had a serious revamp. I've tried to rework the wikipedia entry to be more neutral and reflect the content properly, respecting Wikipedia's principles. Do you know how I can go about getting the issue flags over the page reconsidered?

Thanks for all your help, DGG

Lneima (talk) 11:18, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

tomorrow. DGG ( talk ) 04:49, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Robert Stedall

I saw that you'd prodded it. I think it can be rescued, but am uncertain. Bearian (talk) 22:48, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

at AfD. Definitely not a criticism--going for definitive action one way or another is what I always recommend to people for an uncertain deletion. DGG ( talk ) 04:20, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

(it was deleted) DGG ( talk ) 04:55, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Redirect of Wing-assisted incline running

Hello,

I had just created an article on Wing-assisted incline running when it was almost immediately tagged for speedy deletion, on the grounds of the topic already being represented in the Origin of avian flight article. I defended my rationale for creating a separate article on the talk page, but received no response there, nor any indication that my comments had been read. As you are the editor who created the redirect, can you please take a look at my comments contesting the deletion? Talk:Wing-assisted_incline_running I still think it's worthwhile that this topic has its own article, as its notability in the paleontological literature exceeds a one-paragraph mention in a different article. I'd also like to bring this up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dinosaurs for more feedback from people who are familiar with the topic. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 18:52, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

It was in order to avoid the deletion and preserve the content that I created the redirect. I see someone else has already reverted it, which is fine with me. DGG ( talk ) 01:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Professor Michael Nimier

Dear DGG: When I found this page at first I assumed that this was a notable professor and started to look for sources. The first one I found was [THIS]. Does this make him more or less notable? —Anne Delong (talk) 03:17, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

More so, but it will be rather tricky to write a proper article. As you will see, I've started rewriting, but this is one of the situations where it will be necessary to verify the degrees claimed, as no trust may be placed in their web site. DGG ( talk ) 02:56, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Thomas Straub

Dear DGG: I came across this old Afc submission, but I'm not having any luck figuring out if he's notable. Want to try? —Anne Delong (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

nor am I sure. Some of the various Swiss business schools and their faculty are difficult to judge. I think this needs a more general discussion, and I am trying to decide whether to send to MfD, or accept and send to AfD. It will get more attention at AfD, but doing it that way is a rather unusual route. DGG ( talk ) 05:17, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Igor Birman (Politician) deletion

David,

Just following up with you with what you mentioned earlier on my user talk page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hubbardc) you said that you would get to discussing the Igor Birman (Politician) article that you nominated to be speedily deleted by User:RHaworth. I just wanted to mention (as I did to Mr. Haworth)that the article was indeed done in good faith and I really felt that it was important to get it up and running without any apparent bias or promotional activities. I am a "newbie" to Wikipedia, but I really think that the article is noteworthy enough to be accessible on Wikipedia. If you do the research about the current election in CA-07, I think you will find (as I did) that there is quite the national spotlight on this particular election, and it is indeed of high interest. I did notice that Elizabeth Emken, another candidate in this race, has a Wikipedia article that was similar to the one I drafted. Not that two wrongs make a right, but I think that this is somewhat of a double-standard, perhaps I could be mistaken though.

How can I get access to the old article that was taken down? Also, do you have any specific tips on mending the article so that it is up to Wikipedia's standards? I think that it was taken down a bit prematurely, considering no tips were given before deleting it and no opportunity was granted to mend the article. I would certainly be more than open to take some advice and give the draft some more TLC (better/more sources, removal of any apparent biases pointed out by other Wikipedians, etc) before I re-submit it.

Again, I appreciate your understanding and help in advance. Hubbardc (talk) 02:24, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Hubbardc

I'll get there. things are a little busy. DGG ( talk ) 00:06, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Any news?Hubbardc (talk) 16:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)Hubbardc

Hubbardc: As for promotionalism, you have made in plain in your statement that the article is the very definition of promotionalism. You want the information in there to help support his campaign. That much was pretty clear even from the AfC draft itself, and I will not restore it.

I cannot advise you to try again at this time. We do not pass articles from AfC to mainspace unless there is a reasonable chance they will be sustainedat an AfD. There has been no support for the argument for including people merely running in a US party primary, as appears to be the case here, and it is overwhelming likely based on my many years of experience here that it would be immediately deleted at AfD. In fact, we normally do not regard nominees of major parties in the US as notable unless they have won office, but there are many exceptions (I, personally, think we ought to regard them as notable, but consensus has consistently not agreed with me). Given the information in the article, there is nothing to indicate enough notability to overcome the general view, and the article would probably be deleted unless he wins the elections. At that point, however, it would not be absurd to make another try. AfD can sometimes be unpredictable. DGG ( talk ) 00:18, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I can email you the text of the article, but you will first need to activate your email from your user preferences page. DGG ( talk ) 00:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I think that my argument was misunderstood about the intentions for submitting the article. I think there is an important distinction between promotionalism and submissions done entirely in good faith to increase the amount of information accessible through Wikipedia. Promotionalism, to me at least, implies advertisement, propaganda, etc. That wasn't the case for my submission and I just thought I should reiterate that in my intentions. Interesting that they do not consider political candidates to be notable enough to be on Wikipedia; I assumed otherwise (rookie mistake again, I guess) that since there was a template for political candidates and how much media coverage they tend to get. In terms of a general rule of thumb for notability, what is the main reason for this? If the problem was bad sources, I can assure you that they can be improved. As mentioned earlier, I am a little confused about the double-standard of allowing perennial candidates like Elizabeth Emken and Basil Marceaux to have articles. Again, I am new to this so I am far from perfect in this process. I also appreciate your clear explanation to why this wasn't allowed! Thank you for that. Perhaps we can discuss this if he wins through the primary..

Cheers, Hubbardc (talk) 00:09, 20 April 2014 (UTC)Hubbardc

Hubbardc: The nature of WP is such that it will not always achieve consistency. There are, hundreds of thousands of article that should be deleted; the least we can do is not to add to their number. Of the people you mentioned, Marceaux received national level publicity due to a very unfortunate television appearance-- an AfD on it was kept, but perhaps it should be looked at again; Emken was at leascandidate who had won a major party nomination--this individual has not even done that. DGG ( talk ) 02:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

True, and thanks for the advice. I will likely re-submit the article if he makes it through the primary. Also, I included my email in my preferences as your suggested earlier. If possible, could you send me the draft for me to keep in my records so that I can potentially re-submit it in the future? And one final question about notability: Birman is the first Soviet-born candidate for Congress in U.S. history, does that affect anything in terms of him being noteworthy enough to be on Wikipedia? Just curious, Cheers! →Hubbardc→Talk to me!→ 19:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Hubbardc

it is worth mentioning in the article, but just barely, and only if you can prove it. I rather doubt you could prove nobody else born in the Soviet Union ever ran for a party nomination for congress. I suppose if he does win the nomination, it might be possible to find the information for the finite number of people at that level, but still there are about 20,000 people to check, even if you exclude those who immigrated before it was the SU. You could perhaps say that "his election materials state he is ..." which is easy to prove. DGG ( talk ) 20:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Just did a quick search, and I did find an article on Fox News (I know, not the most reliable source out there, but they did do an exposition piece on the candidate, considering he is indeed a Republican), and it says in the article "Igor Birman, 32, is living his American dream and trying to become the first-ever member of Congress born in the Soviet Union." The article can be found here: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/10/soviet-born-congressional-candidate-looks-to-make-history/

Would that affect the notability requirements for publication? I know that it does not mention if he is the first to run, but I think it is certainly possible that he is, and there is no apparent evidence to counter this claim. I also looked at the List of foreign-born United States politicians, and found nothing. →Hubbardc→Talk to me!→ 07:18, 23 April 2014 (UTC)Hubbardc

• • Don't rely on WP lists to be complete. As for Fox, you can certainly say that "according to Fox news, he is the first..." and people will give it the credit they think it deserves.But in any case, he must first win the nomination. (Note that the fox article does explain the rather peculiar primary process in that state
  • And remember I am only giving you my personal advice about will make a strong article, that might have a chance; the current view here is rather skeptical about articles for candidates who have not won the election. In practice, most such articles have been deleted. It's not me who decides--if it were, those articles might be decided differently, DGG ( talk ) 07:30, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Andres Gifford

I have reverted your removal of the BLPprod because the only source does not support "at least one statement made about the person in the article." It is a listing for the law firm he is said to have worked for, but it does not mention him at all.

The law firm has its own website at http://www.gpzlegal.com/nosotros-es/, but he is not mentioned there, either; in fact, I have not found any source for him, nor has Drmies who had a look, see User talk:Randykitty#Andres Gifford. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

My carelessness, I should have checked it. Thanks for the catch. DGG ( talk ) 22:44, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Burke Ramsey

Hi there. So you deleted Burke Ramsey, and I am wondering why? He has been covered in dozens of books, every major news source in the world, and has been a suspect of a high profile murder for over two decades. His parents have pages, and info on him is not covered in The Murder of Jonbenet Ramsey article. Why was this page removed?

Also, this deletion happened literally within a few minutes of being nominated without me having a chance to contest the deletion. --Kbabej (talk) 04:47, 14 April 2014 (UTC)04:29, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Let's see what others think. I'll restore it, and send it to AfD. DGG ( talk ) 05:13, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

(at AfD, the article was redirected to the main article on the murder) DGG ( talk ) 04:55, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Northwest Pipe Company

Another PROD restoration requested at WP:REFUND#Northwest Pipe Company. This one is from a student project; I have offered to userfy it if they ask. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I've comment on their talk p. Unless there is documentation of the one claim to notability, it doesnt have much of a chance. . DGG ( talk ) 20:04, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

sent to afd. DGG ( talk ) 06:59, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

DGG or stalkers

Maybe I'm cynical, but Structured cognitive behavioral training (one edit, SPA) looks a bit of synth and coatrackish to me, but would prefer smarter and more educated eyes on it. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

1. My impressions is that it is basically promotionalism & I would even consider G11
2. It gives indications of copypaste, is particular the large unsourced paragraphs.
3. the term is devised by Ryan, & my feeling is that it is probably a trivial variant, but this is a field laden by such & things I think ridiculously trivial variants have sometimes been taken seriously.
4. It would need a check of textbooks etc to see is his approach is generally recognized as distinctive.
5. It would need check of all the refs to see whether they are actually about his variant or whether the term is used generically--in a sense, most therapies have or think they have a structure.
6. key quote from the article: "however as of yet academic studies in this promising area are still relatively sparse" implies the 3 & 4 cannot be met.
7. Doesn't the APA have a WP working group of some sort? DGG ( talk ) 23:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

• This is exactly why I wanted to bring it to your attention. I could smell a potential problem, but honestly, this topic is simply too far over my head. I checked a couple of sources but I get lost and some are behind pay walls. I'm better at dispute resolution than at this type of material, and not afraid to admit it. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Ada Hitchins, AKA Ada Florence Remfry Hitchins

You created an article named Ada Hittchins when it should be Ada Hitchins. I tried to move Ada Hittchins to Ada Hitchins, but I was blocked. Can you help, or should I go to the help page?--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to message you, but my latest attempt worked fine.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:36, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Assault Weapons Ban of 2013‎

That was no split, that was the renaming of an existing article because of a POV fork (1 editor vs 3 others). There was/is plenty of room for it in the "parent" article, but some people like writing misleading tripe about pieces of legislation that failed to give a false impression that there was some sort of federal ban on standard capacity magazines and scary looking semiautomatic rifles.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 07:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

you may or may not be right, but it still is a split, and splits are not a speedy. DGG ( talk ) 07:15, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

I know, just saying...:) --Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 07:19, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey - just want to clear this up.

On the Eden Wood AFD, you seemed to suggest that I claimed something I personally find distasteful in the extreme and would never have knowingly said. Can I just request confirmation that this was a misunderstanding as I think you might have missed my objection on the AFD itself? Thanks so much, with respect, Mabalu (talk) 10:30, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Mabalu, is my present statement clear enough to be satisfactory to you? I apologize for any implication otherwise DGG ( talk ) 21:30, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hey, thanks - that's much clearer. I thought it was a misunderstanding, but wasn't absolutely certain, so just wanted to be sure. Mabalu (talk) 22:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

NPOV?

Hi DGG. I have some fairly serious reservations about Jarir ibn Abdullah Al Bajali and was wondering if you could take a look at it. NPOV tops my list but I am also concerned about sourcing and the recent addition of a great deal of Arabic. I am not sure if Wikipedia has policies concerning the use of non-English in articles. Obviously there are circumstances where it's appropriate, but I am not seeing the justification here. Any attention you might give would be appreciated. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

The material is presumably the traditional islamic view, written in the traditional style, with emphasis of the hadith which relate to him; the chain of transmission of hadith is of course the long-traditional islamic manner of scholarship. This is reasonably what the reader who knows something about the tradition would expect to find, and such readers are a valid part of our audience. it is also interesting to others to see how this intellectual system works--tho I must admit that most of what I know about it I have learned from WP. Similarly for Christian figures we give the tradition, and not in such a way as to imply that the tradition were something exotic and superseded. We normally do indicate something like "in the traditional view", or "in the Orthodox view" or whatever applies, but it is not really necessary for writing such as this as it would seem quite obvious.

However, when there is modern scholarship, religious or secular, we include it also. We do not make or imply a judgement about which gives the better picture. The reader will judge on the basis of their own conceptions. This material needs to be looked for and added--there are abundant sources, none of which I have available at the moment.

As for sourcing, we accept sources in any language whatsoever. When the material is non-English,we include enough of a translation of the title, etc. to indicate the nature of the source. Many thousands of readers of WP know Arabic, and can correct inaccuracies. We also try to use English sources when available. the way I personally word it is that we use both the best sources regardless of language and the best english-language sources. I see however there is already one helpful english language source, ref. 3.

As for the Arabic content, as long as it is also translated that is satisfactory. Names in particular should always be given in the original as well as transcription, in order to facilitate people who want to use sources in the original. I find it infuriating, for example, when a Russian language source is given only in what might be an idiosyncratic transcription, and I have to reconstruct the actual Cyrillic spelling in order to find it. It's almost as bad as when a title is given only in English translation, and it really needs guesswork. Unfortunately, some of the Arabic here does not seem to be names but standard religious phrases, and those need to be translated. People familiar with a non-English tradition often use such phrases only in the original even in English writing (o even use only their standard non-english abbreviations) This is not helpful to those outside the tradition. . This I cannot fix; it is up to the contributor to do this or someone else who knows the language. DGG ( talk ) 03:35, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Based on your assessment I will assume that for the most part the article meets essential WP standards. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Question

Hi DGG, could you take another look here. I created that article at the same time the AfC was going on, and now that AfC might be superfluous? -- Mdd (talk) 15:06, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

yes, the afc should & will be deleted. When there's a better existing article we delete; when the AfC was moved to mainspace or is relevant to the article history, we redirect it to the article talk space. DGG ( talk ) 16:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Apology

Hello. Regarding this message you sent me two years ago, when I was known as User:Celeste6566: "I see you also placed a speedy deletion tag on Pooper-scooper, without even attempting to give a reason, not that is any possible reason for deletion, let alone speedy deletion. As reviewing administrator, I removed it, and I warn you that deletion tagging like this and the previous one is unconstructive.I think it may be a response to the deletion of some of your own articles,and it is not an appropriate way to deal with it. Any continuation of the like will probably result in a block--consider this a formal warning. DGG ( talk ) 03:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)"...

Yes, it was a response to my articles being nominated for speedy deletion. But, I can say that it was very immature of me and I apologize for that. I also apologize for any other articles I nominated for speedy deletion without valid reason. I was blocked for something else, but now I am unblocked, and have matured. Now I'm learning how to edit constructively. Is there anything else I can do for you? EmilyREditor (talk) 19:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Striking out edits by a banned user

Hi DGG. Quick question, is it WP policy that we go back and strike out the comments of users on closed AfD discussions if they are later banned? The most recent edits here seem inappropriate. But maybe I missed something when going through the ban policy. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:55, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about the huge font. No idea why it is showing up like this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The large font was caused by a problem with the Books and Bytes notice just above, a missing "/div". I've fixed it (and told its originator so he can fix all the other copies). My opinion on your question to DGG: no, WP:CSD#G5 provides only for deletion of edits made after the user is banned. JohnCD (talk) 22:10, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Certainly not; and even G5 applies only to page creations, not contributions to discussions. DGG ( talk ) 00:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Just took a look at the users history and he has been quite busy making edits to closed AfDs of the same nature. I think this is going to take a few minutes to fix. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

It appears that Unscintillating believes that edits by banned users and socks should be reverted or struck. See his post here. I am not seeing that anywhere in policy though I am not a Wiki lawyer I did look. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Roger Cram

Do you want to withdraw Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Cram, per WP:HEY?

Bearian (talk) 17:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

see my comment there. If you ewant to apply HEY, rewrite it , not just fill in the refs DGG ( talk ) 20:21, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Various deletion tags

Wow, for the state park, when I first came across it, it was very small and it was unclear to tell what it actually was, but since then it seems to be have significantly expanded. For the Iphone OS 3, it was unclear to tell if it was an operating system or something else (this technology stuff is not too obvious for some). Staglit (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Staglit, when I review articles, if they are in a field I do not understand, I let someone else review it. I have learned by experience I am both likely on one hand, to not recognize notability , and on the other hand, to not recognize major problems. Not one person here is able to deal with the whole range of human knowledge, but we have a very wide range of knowledge among all of us collectively. DGG ( talk ) 22:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your understanding and response, but isn't not understanding something a logical reason to flag an article based on patent nonsense? Isn't the point of wikipedia to bring new information? Thanks again for your timeStaglit (talk) 22:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I'd say there's quite a wide gap between "stuff I personally don't understand" and "patent nonsense"! It includes plenty of articles which need to be flagged up as needing context, or as too technical, or are full of jargon or material from particular cultures with which I'm not familiar (such as American Football, Indian caste systems, current rock music), or are so badly written as to be incomprehensible but with a visible thread of facts buried somewhere in there. PamD 23:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Al Hilal

Hello DGC i invite you to see this →https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Al-Hilal_(Juba)_FC

They want deletion these pages i can understand the deletion of David Mena Rojas it is a small stub about a young not famous player but i don 't understand the deletion of the south sudanese teams who currently play in the South Sudan Football Championship because they are insignificant teams. Regards--Lglukgl (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

I have no confidence that the person nominating the articles on the clubs has been doing so with sufficient care. You will need to make the argument that the league is sufficiently major despite being a small country. DGG ( talk ) 22:44, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, DGG. You have new messages at Dewritech's talk page.
Message added 18:38, 23 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dewritech (talk) 18:38, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Again.-- Dewritech (talk) 17:29, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Jude Njoku

Is this guy notable per WP:PROF? Bearian (talk) 21:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

He has a few papers cited in WorldCat, but while it may make him an authority in his field in his own country, we normally use international standards--which does create a certain degree of bias. Administrative posts are on the other hand judged within people's own systems, and vice-chanellor is notable within universities organized after the UK pattern, as is the case for Nigeria.. Additionally, he has apparently been a government official in his state, and a/c WP:COMMON we "often" accept that for cabinet officials--I do not know if commissioner is at that rank in Ibo. (If this provision were consistently applied at the state level it would be a very inclusive criterion.)

Unfortunately, the article was entirely copied word for word from his web site. (not the p. listed, but an interior page. I've therefore deleted it; it would take an unrealistic amount of rewriting. I will advise the contributor. DGG ( talk ) 00:37, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Possible new article by banned member

Hi DGG. I just noticed Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Minister of Revenue & Estate was recreated after being deleted in the past. And I know that at least one similar article was deleted by an editor for being the creation of a banned editor. Unfortunately I can't recall any details or I'd tag it. But I thought I'd pass it along in case this is the same entity. Best regards -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:49, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

there seem to be quite a number of new contributions under his name, not just this article; this needs to be handled as a more general sockpuppet problem---see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Haseeb_Ahmed_Malik_786/Archive I see that the block of the original account was for repeatedly adding copyvio images, which is not relevant here. . I don't attempt to do every procedure here, and I don't do these. One reason I don't work on them is that I somewhat disagree with our policy, and it is difficult to correctly interpret policy one does not agree with in line with the interpretations of those who do agree. I see this as a possibly good faith editor trying to find a way to contribute, though, like many people working on articles from this region, he does not understand copyright. I recognize that we might reasonably be concerned that the text contributions also are copyvio. DGG ( talk ) 16:49, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I took another look at it and am inclined to leave it tagged as it is. If there is any obvious copyright violation I'm not seeing it and I tend to operate on the belief that governmental agencies at the state/provincial level and up are notable. If someone wants to take it further they are free to do so. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:18, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Westway Electric Supply

Hi DGG. Added additional sources and looking forward to an update. Buffalo747 (talk) 15:24, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Notice of RfC and request for participation

There is an RfC in which your participation would be greatly appreciated:

• Talk:Gun_control#RfC:_Remove_Nazi_gun_control_argument.3F

Thank you. --Lightbreather (talk) 15:38, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

so I have. I doubt that what I said will be popular. I will however never actually work on this or any related article or get further involved in the debate. , this is an issue I feel too strongly about to work on, especially because I think the people on my side of it are trying to suppress other views. I expect my opponents to be foolish. When I first expressed this way of looking at it soon after I came here on a very different issue, I was accused of being a bad faith editor falsely pretending to personally support the SPOV while actually trying to undermine it. DGG ( talk ) 17:36, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

SSSSH!

Hi, DGG. Got your note. But SSSSH! merely auto-forwards to Mr. Cram's article. Is it possible to locate and preserve the original SSSSH! (or more accurately now I know SSSSH) article contents under my account? I keep hearing about something called a sandbox. Perhaps I have one of these and can store it there? What do you think? Thanks. JimScott (talk) 20:57, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Have you looked at the article history? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SSSSH!&action=history.--v/r - TP 22:14, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

current statuds: redirected to founder, and now being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Cram I apologize for not getting to this yesterday. DGG ( talk ) 21:57, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

The Councilor: A Journal of the Social Studies

Hi David, could you have a look at this journal? It's not in any Thomson Reuters database, nor PsycINFO or Scopus. I cannot find any sources either and citations on GS are negligible. Still, it has been in existence for 75 years so I find it a bit difficult to believe that there is nothing to be found. Can you find something? --Randykitty (talk) 11:27, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Borderline. I looked for a criterion I use for whether to even consider locally published journals, whether the authors are associated with the same institution only, or are more widely in significant universities. For this one, there is quite a range of instiutional affiliations. I'd let it stay, but I would have a rather hard time defending it. DGG ( talk ) 00:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Socialist Party (Italy, 2007–08)

Hi, I don't understand your motivation: there aren't sources because this party doesn't exist. The page talks about internal facts of New Italian Socialist Party, when De Michelis definitively abandoned the New PSI he directly joined to Socialist Party. The existence of this party cannot be demonstrated in no way, also the author of the page admitted that there aren't sources. I think that it is necessary a speedy deletion for a page on a non-existent party--Maremmano (talk) 01:20, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Maremmano, you may well be right. But the place to discuss this is AfD. Wider input is needed than just me taking your word for it , or doing my own research.. DGG ( talk ) 02:12, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not practical, what should I do? --Maremmano (talk) 10:44, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Please answer my question--Maremmano (talk) 19:17, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

@Maremmano: (talk page stalker) This is how you accomplish your goal. You're welcome. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:48, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: Thank you!--Maremmano (talk) 12:43, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Talk page length

Hallo David, I recognise that you have the right to do what you want with your talk page, but as someone who regularly checks her watchlist on a small not-very-smartphone (no selfrespecting teen would have one) with poor rural data connection, could I ask you to rethink? It takes an age to load before the TOC appears, and then a lot of scrolling to get to the recent messages. How about having some sort of automatic "holding pen" for non-current discussions, from which you could manually archive at leisure?

Your talk page has many watchers, as a place where interesting and wise comments are made, but it's very hard work reading it on a small screen. (Have you tried?) Best wishes, PamD 07:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

(Stalking) sometimes they are hard work viewed on a 17" screen ;) Cheers all! Irondome (talk) 22:25, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

getting there now, I hope DGG ( talk ) 01:38, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks: down from 667k and 346 threads when I commented, to 597k and 288 threads today! I'm sure your 739 page watchers will be grateful. PamD 09:24, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

New Comment

Hi DGG. Coat of Many Colours left a comment for you on my talk page. I am guessing you are not following the thread anymore as it is rather old. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:29, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Erm ... I only noticed it because I was checking whether any of my uploads had been linked since I last looked, and was flattered (I think) to find all my user page images uploaded by you onto Ad Orientem's Talk page. Continue to feel very free not to bother explaining yourself. You are obviously very content with you and your mentor's behaviour towards me. Your lack of any sort of an apology deplored by me. Your continued attention unwelcome and (frankly) inappropriate. Go away and leave me alone. It's unlikely I will be editing much more at Wikipedia. A couple of legal things more I'm committed to and then I'm done. Thank you. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 19:11, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

I was going to do what I advise in cases of interpersonal conflict, which is to make one comment and then ignore it. But since it was carried here I should perhaps say that the reason I give that advice is that it is a disadvantage to be oversensitive about such things. The only way of working here with any degree of equanimity is to focus on the articles--and not to get too attached to any one particular article or issue.

I see no point in continuing this, and certainly not in continuing it here. DGG ( talk ) 20:14, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Me too. Can you tell your cat as well? Thanks. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 22:31, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Urgent Advice required

Hi,DGG I really need your help with reference to Felix Tataru page. I need to recreate it and I need to know what was wrong. Felix Tataru is Senior Vice President of International Advertising Association IAA Board of Directors, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Advertising_Association. I was carefull to have notable sources for the uploaded content. Could it be a problem the fact that sources were in Romanian? would it be a solution to edit first other pages on Wikipedia whith activities related to Felix Tataru? Cristina Butunoi (talk) 17:06, 28 April 2014 (UTC) Cristina Butunoi

There are two questions: can an article be written on him, and is the present article acceptable.

A Wikipedia article needs to show notability 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. If you have such sources, it may be possible to rewrite the article; otherwise, it will not be possible to write an acceptable article. There are two problems with your sources; I notice almost all your sources come from industry blog, and some from the online versions of industries newsletters. This are not in general reliable sources, because they publish every press release that gets sent to them, without serious editorial control. An examination of some of them indicates that what they are publishing is indeed press releases. The second problem is that most of them are about his company, not him. This can be hard to distinguish for advertising agencies, but you would probably have more success writing an article about the agency. And I point out that being vice-president of an organization is never notable. And in a biography everything must be referenced--his political work was not.

A Wikipedia article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release--don't praise the organization or person, say what they do. Don't include material that would better belong in a web page, such as minor information about his ctivities that would interest nobody but his family.

Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective clients/purchasers/students/supporters/donors--that sort of content is considered promotional.

As a general rule, a suitable page will be best written by someone without Conflict of Interest; it's not impossible to do it properly with a conflict of interest or as a paid press agent, but it's relatively more difficult: you are automatically thinking in terms of what the subject wishes to communicate to the public, but an uninvolved person will think in terms of what the public might wish to know. And keep in mind that the goal of an encyclopedia is to say things in a concise manner, which is not the style of press releases or web sites, which are usually more expansive. I cannot insist on your telling me whether you are a paid editor, but I wonder why you "need" to recreate it.

If you think you can do it right according to our guidelines, do so, but expect the article to be carefully checked for objectivity, and for the presence of sources that show notability. The best way of rewriting is to use the WP:Article Wizard, which will guide you towards an acceptable article if one is possible.

For further information see our general guides to writing articles, WP:PLAIN and WP:FIRST; see also our list of the things we don't do here, WP:NOT, and our practical guide to conflict of interest, WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide

And one warning: Do not add material about him to other web pages. That is considered spamming, and people who do that are generally blocked.

Again, my best advice is to write an article on the company. DGG ( talk ) 18:29, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. It is very much appreciate it. I understand what you say about the style, but I do not understand about the sources. There aren't any blogs or online newsletters. Most of them are online versions of business newspapers and magazines in Romania. I may have been wrong about it as I did not include the author and the complete name of the article when I cited. I also understand that being a vice-de of an organization is not notable, but being a president of a global organization is considerend a notable information? As he will become president in 2016 because elected Senior vice president automatically becomes its president of the future mandate. Would not this be a reason enough to have this profile now? As regards the conflict of interest, I transparently showed my identity. I work for the companby and I thought it would be usefull to have this profile before an important international congress taking place next week. Cristina Butunoi (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:26, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Based on what you say, the article is fixable. I will take another look tomorrow in more detail. DGG ( talk ) 03:57, 30 April 2014 (UTC)