User talk:Peridon/Archives/2015/August

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

Francis Sultana

Hello I was told to let you know when I was ready to resubmit this, so here we are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:LittleGold/Francis_Sultana - thank you so much :) (LittleGold (talk) 21:39, 4 August 2015 (UTC))

I would think there's enough there to pass A7 with WTL and the Rob Report coupled with the assumption by Harper's and the Tatler that people know who he is. (Harper's and Tatler are a world I wouldn't want to be in even if I had the money, but everyone to their own taste...). You could ask User:MelanieN for another viewpoint. BTW when linking to a Wikipedia page, just put the title of the page in pairs of double square brackets, like this [[User:LittleGold/Francis_Sultana]] which will come up as User:LittleGold/Francis_Sultana on the page. Peridon (talk) 16:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 August 2015

Hi

sorry I assumed by the name it was vandalism and I didn't get the reference Saturn star (talk) 20:58, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Err... Can I have a clue? Peridon (talk) 21:38, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Got it. I thought it was too, but I either flicked through the article or Googled the term. As it is, I think it's OK. Had it been a redir to the country, it would have been vandalism - unless it was mentioned there (which I gravely doubt). I drop lots of odd things into Google, and it's amazing what floats up. Peridon (talk) 21:52, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for Jim Vejvoda

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jim Vejvoda. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. SuperCarnivore591 (talk) 22:47, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello

Can you please explain why you deleted the Jim Vejvoda page without any discussion on the talk page about our arguments of his notability? Thanks. SuperCarnivore591 (talk) 22:40, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Answer at DRV. Peridon (talk) 18:12, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Royal amps deletion

Hello. This is probably not the right place for this but being that I recently created an account at Wikipedia, I am not sure where else to go. I see that you deleted the page that was created from Royal amplifiers. I thought all guidelines were followed and we did note references regarding the history and creation of the company. Can you explain why it was deleted? Thank you. Boleskine1959 (talk) 17:49, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

A few points - the first not being to do with the deletion. When you put a space at the start of a line, it makes the text go funny, If you do need a space (as with this post, in order to separate mine from yours), put a : (or more depending on how far you need to go) at the start. OK. You build amps. I say 'you' because of an 'our' in the article - something that usually triggers a deletion for advertising or promotion. Your company may or may not pass our notability policy (speedy deletion talks about the lower level 'significance', but there's no point in aiming lower than notable) which is at WP:CORP. Claims to notability must be backed with reliable independent sources WP:RS, and I'm afraid that your own site is not independent. Forums, wikis, blogs, YouTube etc, Facebook etc, CrunchBase, AboutUs, last.fm etc, and blogspot or wordpress pages are not considered as reliable and independent. I'm not one of those that tries to stop people editing about things they are close to, but I do advise reading WP:COI about conflict of interest. That's the supposed conflict between your assumed desire to help build the encyclopaedia, and your suspected desire to promote your business (or religion, underwater crochet club, or whatever). I only noted one slip, though. Neutrality was good, but notability was not. Have a think and do some Googling. I can restore the article into your user space if you want to use it as a base for another attempt. Do remember that not every business (or rapper, or hamster, or politician etc) gets an article. This is unlike Facebook, where people can promote the beauty of their cat, or advertise their new line of farmyard perfumed candles. Do also remember that notability doesn't rub off from notable people onto others around them. It's a matter of coverage not contact. Feel free to ask questions. Peridon (talk) 18:12, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Re: PERJE

I swear, people edit war over the stupidest things... I left a note for the original tagger to cut it out. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 August 2015

Some baklava for you!

Brother,

Can you help me in creating page of a India based Leather brand "Mayborne Leather"

I am new here and does not know much about how to use, whatever I write gets deleted. while people from USA writes even a unknown article with no meaning and it stays.

Kind peridon, help me and guide me. Nawaab Sahaab (talk) 07:32, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid there's nothing much I can do here. I've just Googled "Mayborne Leather" and only got nine hits. Three are on Facebook, and not usable as references. Two are wiki logs, which also don't count for anything at all. One is the company site, which can't be used to show notability. The other three are merely company supplied profiles, and again no good. To be included in Wikipedia, a company must pass WP:CORP, and this must be proved with reliable independent sources WP:RS. Unless there are sources that pass WP:RS, there's no point in trying to get an article here. Wikipedia is not a directory, and we only have articles about subjects that are considered notable. Most companies in the world don't get articles, not because they aren't doing a good job, but because no-one has independently written anything about them in a reliable place. Where you come from makes no difference - we don't know where most of the editors are from anyway. If you can link to an article that is "unknown article with no meaning", I'll have a look at it and explain why it is here (or tag it for deletion if it really doesn't belong...). PS I do love baklava, and also (from further east) gulab jamun. There are no shops selling them near where I live, which is probably a good thing. Peridon (talk) 09:18, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your explanation. I shall read the guidelines. And you are right in the fact that the article about Edina Ronay is older and therefore is less well-sourced.--Sheroddy (talk) 16:56, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Harry Braun, Democratic Presidential Candidate, 2016

Hello Peridon

If there is any so-called "promotional" language in my presidential Wikipedia page, which G11 states must be blatant advertising or promotion of a company, product or group, could the you or the other editors please let me know what specific language or paragraph you are referring to, so I can remove it.

The only editor who did make a comment was (shoy), who said my document should be deleted because "the vast majority of the sources have nothing to do with Braun." Yet isn't using independent scientific references and citations to document my statements and issues far more important than me just using citations from me? How is this fair and objective?

Please correct me if I am wrong, but the word “promotional” is a highly-subjective term, especially when it involves censorship of the issues of a presidential candidate, when candidates are criticized for making simplistic slogans like “I want to make America great again,” without mentioning any references as to how they are going to accomplish their objective. All of the presidential candidates I have looked at on Wikipedia have a long list of their accomplishments, policy objectives and principal issues they are advocating. And have you seen the Wikipedia page for Donald Trump!!! Talk about promotion . . . his extensive Wikipedia page is nothing but promotion of his real estate deals. And Trump is a presidential candidate who stated on the national news that he wants to take Iraq’s oil by force and then give it to Exxon, which is a direct violation of international law.

In my case, the person you are censoring is the only presidential candidate with a career in scientific research that has allowed me to develop a 5-year peer-reviewed plan to replace all oil and other highly toxic fossil and nuclear fuels, which my independent scientific references and citations documented are making the Earth uninhabitable, by shifting to a solar sourced “hydrogen economy” that has been advocated by thousands of PhD-level scientists and engineers worldwide for many decades, who are members of the International Association for Hydrogen Energy (iahe.org), a peer-review society that I have been an Advisory Board Member of since 1981. But is it "promotional" or "educational" for me to inform you or the readers of Wikipedia of such information?

While (shoy) is not apparently unconcerned about the oil company-induced global chemical contamination or trying to save civilization from the oil-induced sixth mass-extinction event that is almost over, the document he wants to delete explains that only because I have been working on these issue since my undergraduate work at Arizona State University in the 1970's, am I now able to be only presidential candidate who is knowledgeable enough to even be discussing such issues. And yet (shoy) wants me censored for being "promotional," as though I was selling real estate projects like Donald Trump, and is unconcerned that virtually all of the other presidential candidates, including Hillary Clinton, are either already being financed by oil billionaires -- or they want to be. Talking about taking sides. . .

And what about the informing the American public that the USA has never been a Democracy because as any dictionary can verify, the USA is and always has been a bribery-based Republic, which is rule by the tiny few in secret with lobbyists. And the 28-word Democracy Amendment I have proposed will fundamentally change that by empowering the majority of citizens to approve all laws and judicial decisions that impact the majority, which will make government secrecy and bribery (i.e., lobbying) illegal Should that information also be censored as being “promotional?”

With all due respects, given the Wikipedia pages from Donald Trump that have not been deleted, you should not be censoring the critically important life and mass-death scientific and political issues that I have documented in my personal and presidential Wikipedia pages.Harry W Braun III (talk) 16:22, 18 August 2015 (UTC) Harry W Braun III (talk) 16:02, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Clearfield, Inc.

Hey there, Peridon The Template:Clearfield, Inc. was deleted due to copy right issues. I have since fixed the problem and done a better job overall with the sources, but now I'm pretty confused because I can't seem to repost or get it to the approval stages again. I moved it to a talk page, but that didn't do much, then I moved it to a help page, and still no results.

Here is the message I received when I checked up on it last week. 12:42, 12 August 2015 Peridon (talk | contribs) deleted page Template:Clearfield, Inc. (G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page)

How can we un-delete this template and get it checked off to be posted? Any help you can offer is much appreciate! Ewert333 (talk) 15:11, 19 August 2015 (UTC)ewert333

Right. For a start, if you hadn't blanked it, that template would have been deleted anyway. What it contained was not what a template is for. They are for things that need to be copied onto various different pages, like blocking notices, speedy deletion tags and so on, and also for those collections of links that are the same on several different pages on similar subjects. Template is not for what is in effect an article about a company. As there is no need for the info to be copied onto other pages, that template should stay deleted. You should create a new Draft in Draft space, or in your user space at User:Ewert333/DRAFT. At WP:AFC you can create a new version of the article (follow the instructions - I can't help you any more than that as I've never used AfC myself). If there's a problem over the name, just stick space2 after the title. By space I mean put a space in. Then you can submit it for review when ready. If you do it in user space, you can ask almost any admin or regular editor for an opinion. Do be prepared to be told that the company is not notable by our standards - the vast majority of companies world-wide do not pass WP:CORP. Also, please do stay away from templates. They are a a specialised thing that needs to be properly understood. Peridon (talk) 17:14, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 August 2015

Sandeep Maheswari

I usually give then four goes, or five sometimes. Let me know if he goes beyond the current three. Peridon (talk) 18:30, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for requesting other views on this deletion

You are welcome to !vote in the discussion, but I advise brevity if possible. I am not trying to censor anything. However, we do have a policy which concerns politicians. As yet unelected candidates cannot draw notability from their candidature or the publicity surrounding it. To have an article, they must show notability separate from the election. Donald Trump definitely has notability, and is not the author of that page. Articles about people who are candidates should not be used as web space for putting their manifesto before the public. That is what I count as promotional, and including the wording in places. I would advise you to read WP:AUTOBIO about (surprisingly) autobiography, and WP:COI about conflict of interest, which is about editing on subjects you are very close to. Both are strongly not recommended, although not forbidden. Our policy on candidates is to prevent Wikipedia being used as a platform for electioneering. As I said, you are welcome to !vote and comment, and that is where you should be making your points. I am neutral, and took the article to AfD in order to get a consensus. You are free to change the article in order to show that you pass WP:BIO without the election, and to reference that with reliable independent sources WP:RS. (I am saying !vote as it isn't a vote but a discussion. Each participant is allowed one Keep or Delete, and as many Comments as it takes. Wikipedia is not a democracy, but apart from in certain legal matters, we are governed by consensus. As I said, brevity is advised - we even have a policy WP:TLDR about lack of it... Peridon (talk) 16:28, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Dear Peridon, thank you for your speedy response. Please note that I have absolutely no business or financial relationships with any of the references I cited. I have been retired since the year 2005 and am solely focused on my scientific research and my presidential campaign, that will go nowhere if I cannot get a page on Wikipedia, which is necessary for being listed as a presidential candidate on Facebook. As such, I will remove whatever is necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harry W Braun III (talk • contribs) 17:03, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

What you have to do primarily is to prove notability by our standard in WP:BIO. If you look at WP:GNG and its subdivisions as well, it may help. This has to be based on you as a person, not you as a candidate. The references showing notability must be more than mentions, and not publications by the subject. In academia, number of papers counts for a lot more than it does here. I have never before heard of Facebook putting restrictions on people that insisted on them having Wikipedia pages, but I'm afraid it won't help here. Usually every man and his hamster can get a page there, which is why we do not count Facebook pages as any indication of notability. (Same goes for YouTube, Twitter and all the rest of the social media.) The discussion may decide that being a presidential candidate IS notable - things like that can happen. In most cases, it's candidates for Representative, or for city councils (which is a specifically non-notable position by itself, that I deal with. Here, I removed a tag for 'something made up' (which may have been a click in the wrong box), and decided against replacing it with a 'lack of significance shown' tag because I felt consensus was needed. Note that that tag doesn't say that someone is not notable - it says the article failed to show significance. Articles for Deletion is the only way for a discussion to be noticed by a wider audience in the community here. It often leads to an improvement in the article. Feel free to ask questions in the discussion. Wikipedia is free to edit, but no-one says it's easy. I'm an admin, and still finding new things. Peridon (talk) 18:17, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Mr. Braun, if I may comment here: I understand why you are frustrated by all this. Here's the problem: Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia anyone can edit," but it doesn't accept every article about any subject that anyone wants to add. This is an international encyclopedia, and it has definite standards for what kind of articles can be included here. The standards are not arbitrary or based on people's opinions; they are very specific, namely that there must have been significant coverage of the subject by independent reliable sources. That criterion cannot be met by things you say about yourself, or links you provide to show that you were right or there is evidence to support your ideas. The links must be specifically ABOUT you, by independent reliable sources such as major newspapers. So when we talk about whether to accept your article or not, there is no "censorship" involved. It's not about whether people agree with you or not. It's not about judging your worth as a candidate. Probably some of us agree with your ideas, or might even vote for you if the opportunity arose. Some others have no opinion at all about the U.S. presidential race, being citizens of other countries. It's all about whether there is enough third-party coverage to show that the subject (in this case, you) qualifies for inclusion in this encyclopedia. That is why Donald Trump has an article and you will probably not. A search of Google News turns up 29 million hits for Trump. A search of Google News turns up exactly one hit about you: a passing mention in the Piqua Daily Call.[1] See what I mean? --MelanieN (talk) 01:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

And what I *actually* came over here to say, before noticing the Countly-vs-Count.ly mystery and talkpage-stalking, was that being a presidential candidate doesn't require you to be wealthy. What is does require is for you to have at least one (1) megadonor, somebody with upwards of ten million bucks to spend, on your presidential campaign alone, who will fund your super-PAC. See the explanatory paragraphs, with links, at Fundraising_for_the_2016_United_States_presidential_election. Some of the new campaign finance laws are VERY new indeed, and 2016 is the first presidential election where they will be seriously tested... which is to say, bent, broken, bypassed, et cetera. Braun had a PAC of some sort, circa 2003, but I'm not sure what his fundraising is like for the 2016 campaign. Theoretically at least, it only takes one Tom_Steyer#Political_activism backing Braun's campaign on environmental grounds, to pick a hypothetical example, in order to make Braun'16 a powerful force in the 2016 primaries & caucuses, however. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 17:04, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 August 2015

NTA, Wscribner

In regards to the questions about the NTA (Company) page, I am the Marketing Communications Specialist for NTA, Inc. I was asked by the President of the company, Dtompos, to add the proper citations/references to our wikipedia page to avoid being in danger of the page being merged, deleted, or any other negative actions. I had added some "references" earlier this year, but did not realize that I had added them with the incorrect formatting. When I went in and added them correctly (I think), the warning at the top of the page did not go away. I contacted a help person, who removed the warning about our page lacking notations, references, citations, etc.

We try to keep our wikipedia page as correct as possible, for anyone seeking to find information on us. In that vein, there is information regarding the founding family of the company that will show the expertise of the individuals involved. We are not attempting to "self advertise", but to inform anyone looking for information on NTA, of our qualifications as a testing, inspection and certification company. That is why the links to government sites (a thoroughly legitimate reference, as the certifications we have earned, and our ability to perform certain services that require government approval must be able to verified, and they are verified as shown on the government websites).

No one contacted us outside of wikipedia to ask us to do edits. We simply check on our page on occasion to ensure everything is accurate and up to date. Wscribner (talk) 12:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Wscribner

    I had posted this a short while ago lower down on your thread, but I am copying it to here, to make sure you were able to see who I am:

In regards to the questions about the NTA (Company) page, I am the Marketing Communications Specialist for NTA, Inc. I was asked by the President of the company, Dtompos, to add the proper citations/references to our wikipedia page to avoid being in danger of the page being merged, deleted, or any other negative actions. I had added some "references" earlier this year, but did not realize that I had added them with the incorrect formatting. When I went in and added them correctly (I think), the warning at the top of the page did not go away. I contacted a help person, who removed the warning about our page lacking notations, references, citations, etc. We try to keep our wikipedia page as correct as possible, for anyone seeking to find information on us. In that vein, there is information regarding the founding family of the company that will show the expertise of the individuals involved. We are not attempting to "self advertise", but to inform anyone looking for information on NTA, of our qualifications as a testing, inspection and certification company. That is why the links to government sites (a thoroughly legitimate reference, as the certifications we have earned, and our ability to perform certain services that require government approval must be able to verified, and they are verified as shown on the government websites). No one contacted us outside of wikipedia to ask us to do edits. We simply check on our page on occasion to ensure everything is accurate and up to date. Wscribner (talk) 12:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Regards;

Wscribner (talk) 12:57, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Howdy User:Wscribner, thanks for your response. Probably the article about NTA (company) needs some pruning, but I'll be happy to help with that. Factual info is not enough; it needs to be WP:NOTEWORTHY info, which was mentioned in some kind of independent WP:SOURCE like a book/teevee/magazine/radio/etc. Now, this *specific* conversation here above, on User:Peridon's talkpage, is mostly about improper cross-namespace-redirects, which were NOT used at NTA (company), so I suggest we move further discussion of the wiki-notability and prose-content of the NTA article over to Talk:NTA_(company). I'll open up a new section there, and if you like, give you my crash-course on the recent changes to the WP:COI and the wikipedia terms of use, that you may not have been heard about yet. As with samtar, my appreciation for your calm response, thanks.  :-)     Should get this sorted shortly. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 13:05, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. As we are a B2B, we are not really mentioned in general TV, although the DIY Network had a show, Deconstruction which our test lab as part of an episode on SIPs. That video is on our website. Other than that, we are referenced mainly is studies or engineering articles that our engineers participated in, or our company aided with. An example would be a study on the Seismic properties of SIP Panels (as seen here: http://www.ntainc.com/pdf/sips-white-paper.pdf). This is the struggle that precipitated me to contact a help person in regards to removing the banner regarding a lack of references, as we do have references, they are just not what would pass for the "norm". We can take the this conversation to the Talk:NTA_(company) so that it is easily accessible for others questioning the changes made to NTA (Company). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wscribner (talk • contribs) 13:14, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

I have copied this over to Talk:NTA_(company), User:75.108.94.227 for future use. Wscribner (talk) 13:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Peridon/Archives/2015/August&oldid=681250430"