User talk:ReaderofthePack/Archive 11

Bad Suns page deletion

Why was the Bad Suns page deleted? I searched for them fully expecting to find a Wikipedia page and was surprised to see that they are not considered notable. They are notable enough to have a song charting on Alt Nation, which (in its own Wiki article) is recognized for introducing some major alt rock acts to the public.

Kikori Con (AFC)

You mention that I must find other news sources, other than AnimeCons, where would you suggest I look? There are no news outlets that EVER cover these events, and even though AnimeCons may cover all cons they are also one of the only sources. And I should point out that Wikipedia seems to be against conventions in general. The rules for notability are garbage as most conventions don't get any coverage by ANY media outlet except for the wiki pages they create for themselves. So, i ask again, what kind of sources do you legitimately expect us to use? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuraioni (talk • contribs) 15:06, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Why would you delete the band Bad Suns page? They have released and album are signed with a record company. Dunno why it would be deleted due to them not being famous enough for you, not A7 stuff.

Unambiguous Copyright - Hey Arnold!: The Jungle Movie

Hi Tokyogirl79! I noticed that you speedy-deleted Hey Arnold!: The Jungle Movie under G12 for "Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://heyarnold.wikia.com/wiki/Hey_Arnold!:_The_Jungle_Movie" I'm confused because I understood Wikia (for all its faults like garbage content and trivia and fancruft and crushcruft and speculation and other useless BS) to be free of copyright restrictions. I thought that the article would be buh-leted in fair time for its other faults. I'm not complaining about the deletion, just curious about the justification so I know whether or not to maybe use a different criteria when nominating similar articles for deletion. Was it just because the contributors had failed to credit Wikia per the [CC-BY-SA licensing]? Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:08, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

• Well... yes and no. It's one of those very thin lines when it comes to copyvio. It's not copyrighted but it's still considered to be copyvio because it's copied word for word. I have to admit that I'm not entirely sure of all of the ins and outs, but it's the same principle by which someone could have an entire section of a Wikipedia article deleted because it copied another WP article too closely or word for word. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Efficiencie

My article at wiki:Efficiencie was deleted too. please explain to me why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.221.91.182 (talk) 08:06, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• The tone of the article was a little promotional in tone and it didn't really assert why the company was notable. We need sourcing to show notability for the article. However that said, I see nothing wrong with the idea of transferring the article into your userspace so you can work on it and have it pass notability guidelines. I'll do that now and then drop you a note on your talk page (User:Jafarimunaba, right?) with where you can find the article and some tips on how to improve it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:12, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.221.91.182 (talk) 08:17, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tokyogirl, Please help me move my article back to wiki/Efficiencie. Thanks in advance. i will appreciate this41.221.91.182 (talk) 13:47, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Wizkid

Greetings Tokyogirl79, thanks for deleting the page. I mistakenly created the page and blanked it. I wasn't sure what to do. versace1608 (talk) 13:10, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

SPI tip

Hi Tokyogirl79, I just saw Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AlifLif. In the future, if you want a check for sleeper accounts to be done, make sure you change {{SPI case status|}} to {{SPI case status|CUrequest}}. That way it will go in a different section on the page and be clear that you want a check done and are not just looking for the known socks to be blocked. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 18:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks! I was wondering if there was a way to do something like that- I felt a little sheepish asking for an SPI when everyone was already blocked. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hungama Digital Media Entertainment

My attention was called to this, and I made some obvious improvements, but there's a lot more to go & it's not my best subject; perhaps you can help. DGG ( talk ) 00:53, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

• I've cleaned up the worst of it. It does seem to be notable enough, but that was a pretty awful article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:47, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I hereby award Tokyogirl79 the admin's barnstar, for her help with the speedy deletion backlog, and for her other awesome work with Wikipedia's deletion processes. Thank you for your help! — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 14:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your thoughtful comments on the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Adrienne_deWolfe discussion.Kschlot1 (talk) 14:20, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Cambrian

Could you please restore it? The deletion template was only transcluded onto it from some subpages that I needed rid of. Abyssal (talk) 17:36, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

• Sure thing- I was wondering about that. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks <3 Abyssal (talk) 19:24, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Recirect request

Hi Tokyogirl. Bozcaada (district) is about the district of Çanakkale Province in Turkey and it should be redirected to Bozcaada, Çanakkale, not island of Tenedos. Can you fix the redirect please? Have a nice day.--Rapsar (talk) 07:45, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

• Done- I think that's reasonable. The basic Bozcaada redirects to Çanakkale Province, but the district specific redirect shouldn't. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:51, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thanks for keeping my article PrajayXG (talk) 09:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

A few issues

You know which page I am talking about. If you look at the history, Davey removed primary sources, while Flat Out removes secondary sources. And then some tags are added. Also I added some negative points :v — Preceding unsigned comment added by PrajayXG (talk • contribs) 10:45, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

• Will reply on your talk page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:50, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

XOLO

Hi Tokyogirl79 I have withdrawn the AfD based on your addition of product reviews, you may want to close that. Re: the COI, that was based on this edit where he added <ref>According to XOLO employees' edit here.</ref> so I don't totally buy the 13 y.o thing. In any case, the article is neutral so the template is redundant. Best wishes Flat Out let's discuss it 11:28, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

• Maybe, but we still need to assume good faith. It's entirely possible that he'd heard something from someone on a forum that claimed to be an employee of the company, or something along those lines. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Question

I appreciate your review of the article "Disney Partners Statue" where I apparently had incorrect citations. I was wondering if I could get a little help. The biggest citation mistake was citing a primary source directly from Disney which I do understand.

I did notice that the only citation for this statue on the French version of Wikipedia cites a primary source which may need to be corrected. The citation is from a book "Disney A to Z" written by Dave Smith who was the founder of the Disney Archives and worked at the Walt Disney Company until recently retiring. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partners_(Walt_Disney_et_Mickey)

I updated this first Disney source to a USA Today article.

I'm not sure if the two other sources are merchant sources as you previously mentioned. The self-published blog posting from a staff writer was noncommercial from MousePlanet- a commonly cited and very familiar news source to those who keep up on Disney Park information. I'd love to get your input- I'm just hoping to get this page published because this statue is very famous and seen by hundreds of millions of people. Thanks in advance! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovepixar (talk • contribs) 11:45, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

List of japanese video games with a japanese audio track

Hi Tokyogirl79, the list would include only japanese games released outside Japan that have a japanese audio track, not all japanese games in general. The page would be less large than you might think considering the practice of including the original audio basically started this generation with the PS3 because the disk space was large enough to allow the inclusion of both audio tracks, therefore between the thousands of games previously released just an incredibly tiny number of them would be included. And, as you can see, the practice is not that widespread even nowadays on modern consoles. I think the page would be perfectly manageable and incredibly useful to a lot of users who base their purchases on the inclusion of the original audio and Wikipedia would be the best place to accommodate it. You also requested the addition of more citations so should I proceed with that? KerrBlackHole (talk) 13:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

• We would need sources that are about the dual audio track and this in general. Also, there are more games out there that have the original audio track than you think- I seem to remember there being some for some of the handheld games, plus we also have the computer games to think about. Even if the number now seems small, we've got to think about the future as well. If every game released from this point on has a dual track, then we have the potential to have hundreds of games qualify for this list each year. I just really think that this is too unmanageable as a list. I'd personally suggest listing this as a category rather than a page, as categories are better prepared to deal with a large amount of data such as this. Plus from there you can make sub-categories such as "Category:Video games with a Japanese-English language dual audio tracks" and "Category:Video games with a Japanese-Italian language dual audio tracks" (or something to that extent) and so on. Now as far as it being useful, we can't entirely keep things because they're useful- you have to show notability for it and prove that it's not just indiscriminate data. That's hard to do with lists, especially when the list looks like it'll grow to be exceptionally large within just a few years. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:19, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't know. If I started a category it'd be lost the ability to add important details, for example that the track is not on the disk and must be downloaded or that just a specific version of a game has dual audio and the regulard hasn't. There are far longer lists that are manually managed such as lists of games released for a specific console (PS3, Vita, etc) that are always going to be larger than "my" list. But anyway, I obviously understand that, in the future, it could become unmanageable so what if I create multiple lists for each console generation (japanese PC games are always console ports with the exception of some visual novels)? That would prevent the list to get too lengthy to manage, what do you think about it?
As for the sources for the games, every time dual audio is announced it will be reported by websites such as those that I already inserted in the citations so I guess the only thing I'd need to do is to add more sources and cite articles that talk about this practice in general? KerrBlackHole (talk) 16:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Player Attack

Hi Tokyogirl79!

re: Player Attack, you said "We need more independent coverage of the website" ...if I took the website element out and left it as a standalone television series page, is it sufficient?

(I'll keep an eye out for independent coverage, but it's difficult to come by. Most websites aren't really fond of saying how great their competition is!)

Thank you - Dotarray (talk) 06:53, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• We'd still need independent coverage. That's really the most important part when it comes down to it, as notability is established via independent and reliable sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:54, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! I'm not sure what sort of independent coverage you're after - pages on topics like Kotaku don't seem to have any. The Player Attack page lists awards it's been nominated for, which are by nature independent. (I totally understand that being first isn't enough, btw!) I'll keep looking for more, but like I said - it's difficult to find examples where an external source refers to an news outlet, rather than a news story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dotarray (talk • contribs) 07:16, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• Kotaku doesn't seem to have any coverage either. I'll try to find some, but offhand I'll just say that the existence of other articles on Wikipedia doesn't mean that a page passes notability guidelines. (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS) It just means that the other page either hasn't been improved with reliable sources or it hasn't been deleted yet. If I can't find anything to show that it passes WP:WEB, I'll have to nominate it for deletion from Wikipedia. (BTW, this is often one of the biggest drawbacks of drawing comparisons to other articles on Wikipedia- in most cases the other article doesn't pass GNG either and ends up getting nominated for deletion.) As far as awards go, nominations do not count towards notability, only wins. Award nominations only make it more likely that something will gain coverage, but it's not a guarantee. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:24, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
• I ended up having to nominate it for deletion. :( Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:47, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Thought you might, it didn't seem to have terribly much in the way of "information". Thanks for the clarification re: awards, too. I'll keep looking. Might find more stuff about the show and less about the website, which would still work, right? (The official tv station hasn't updated their page with show information yet, or I'd throw that in, too.) Dotarray (talk) 09:58, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• That would be good- since it's part of the website or at least associated with it, any coverage for the TV station does count. This is one of the most frustrating parts about sourcing websites, especially popular ones. They don't normally get a lot of coverage, as the people who cover websites are either in the same business (and therefore are less likely to want to give them any positive coverage) or they're inundated with so much to write about that they only cover the stuff that gets the big awards or whatnot, which usually translates into websites that are as well known as the Cheezburger network. (sighs) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:01, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Saltire

Hi there, I understand the submission refusal for Saltire Superhero. The book however is published and in the national library. It has an ISBN and several of the references are of national newspapers such as The Courier and the Evening Telegraph. Should I just delete the other references? How many references would be sufficient? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HughLarkin (talk • contribs) 13:39, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• I'm writing an article for The Novelist at the moment, but I'll take another look in just a minute. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:36, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
• Sorry, I thought that this was for the Player Attack website. In any case, when it comes to the book having an ISBN or being in any library, that in and of itself doesn't count towards notability. A wide circulation can help gain coverage, but it doesn't guarantee it. As far as the sources go, here's a rundown:

Sources

[1] This would be considered a blog source when you come down to it. It's written by the site's webmaster, but in the end it'd still be considered a blog, which we can only use if the blog and its editorial process is so well known that we can verify it. Most blogs don't pass this requirement. I think that Daily Dead is one of the very few exceptions to the blog rule. [2] This one is good, although the comic is mostly a brief mention. [3] This is just a reposting of the Courier article. Regardless of where it's re-posted, this only counts as one source. [4] Hmm... actually, I would consider this to be a RS upon further thought. What pushes this that I didn't initially notice is that this blog is up for one of the more notable web awards out there. [5] The college ran a competition that impacted the comic, so this would be seen as a WP:PRIMARY source. In other words, the artistic team went to the college, so the college would be considered a primary source. [6] When it comes to awards, the only awards that count are the ones that the book actually wins. If an artist wins an award for something that isn't the book in question, that won't count towards notability as notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Even then, we have to be careful about awards since only a small fraction give notability in any format and an even smaller percentage give enough notability to keep on that basis alone. [7] This is a primary source. The thing about primary sources is that no matter how many of them there are, a primary source cannot show notability. It can back up smaller data, but it cannot show notability. [8] Another blog source. [9] Same issue here- a blog source. [10] Same issue here- this would be considered to be a non-usable blog source. [11] Another blog source [12] This is a merchant source, which should be avoided at all costs when it comes to sourcing anything. Even if, and especially if, the link is only sourcing small amounts of information such as ISBN and page count, using a merchant link as a source is considered to be inappropriate.

In the end we're still left with only two sources. The problem is that we need about 4-5 really good solid sources to show notability. This is partway there, but it just isn't there yet. As for good sources, I'd probably recommend trying to get Publishers Weekly or Tor.com to review it. Not an easy task, but it's possible. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:22, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Articles for creation/Quiet Storm (Aly & Fila album)

Good day, You already said there are two good sources and Arab News seems to be independent of the subject too. So what seems to be the problem? I really don't like to wait for months so how about those then → [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] Thanks. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 14:32, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• The problem with the links you just gave is that they are on sites where we can't really judge how the articles are written. Part of what makes a reliable source a RS is that it is run through an editorial board that has a very rigorous editorial process. Most websites aren't as transparent about that and many take reviews and articles from submitters "as is", so we don't use them. Now when I said that the article had two usable sources, I meant that Arab News is one of the two sources. We'd need more than two sources to establish notability for the album. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:36, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• Well, the article isn't that big to need too many sources no? Sorry, i'm quite new here but have you checked the links well enough? Because i believe some were fine, but i'm still not very sure. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 14:52, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• Regardless of size, an article in general will need about 4-5 good solid sources in places that are considered to be uniformly reliable sources. I just don't see those sources as ones that Wikipedia would consider to be reliable. Trust me on this- they wouldn't be considered usable if this had been up for deletion in AfD. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 15:00, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• Alright, i'll keep looking. Thanks. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 15:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of WikiFM page

Dear Tokyogirl79,

I would like to know reasons behind deletion of the WikiFM page, especially under the A7 category. The article was fully sourced and contained notability claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruphy (talk • contribs) 16:17, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• The problem was that the sources were all primary sources. Other than that, the assertions to notability just weren't enough for it to pass a speedy. I can restore it and run it through a formal AfD, but I really don't think it'd pass WP:WEB if we went that route. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:33, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Please do :) I would like to improve the article providing information as needed. I'm also a WikiFM contributor (Conflict of interest alert), but I've waited to be asked by indipendent KDE people to create an article on the topic. Please note that I tried to adhere to the standard set by very similar arcticles such as this one Digikam, which don't seem to contain many more sources. P.S. are you sure it is WP:WEB? it's also a software project... and last complaint ;-) next time please notify me before deleting such a page, I discovered it in a very unpleasant way. --Ruphy (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
• The problem with looking at other articles for sourcing standards is that in some instances the other article may not pass notability guidelines and should be deleted as well. (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS) BTW, the person who nominated the page should have informed you. I'm sorry that they didn't post something on your page. It's not a requirement, but it's generally considered to be good etiquette and I'm sorry that this wasn't done. In any case, I did restore it and I've listed it for a formal AfD, but I've also asked that if it is deleted, that they allow you to userfy the data and continue to work on it until more sources become available. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 16:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Re:

Speaking frankly dealing with paid editing I'm not able to be nothing more than "civil" ;)

--Vituzzu (talk) 16:58, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

St. Patrick's Society of Montreal

Hello Tokyogirl79. This morning you rejected the proposed List of Presidents of St. Patrick's Society of Montreal page. When I proposed this page I did it following the lead of the St. Jean Baptiste Society page, which also has an equally long list of presidents in its history which is a separate page from the main St. Jean Baptiste Society page. I'm not sure I have done anything different than what that page presents - a list of their presidents dating to 1834. The St. Patrick's Society of Montreal is Canada's oldest "national" organization, predating the St. Jean Baptiste Society by 3 months. Any and all advice appreciated.

--kwquinn (talk) 17:38, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Review of Article For Creation - the lion the bear the fox (band)

Hi Tokyogirl79!

I just got your message after reviewing my attempt at creating a page. Thank you for your notes and help!

This is my article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/the_lion_the_bear_the_fox_(band)

I can definitely add additional coverage, which you mention in your comment, but I was wondering if you could please give me a bit of guidance, if it isn't too much trouble, to make it read less like a "personal blog for the band."

Do you think you could please highlight a sentence or paragraph where it starts to sound too informal/bloggy so that I can know what to avoid? I thought I was keeping everything pretty neutral and just the facts, but maybe it would help if it was shorter, more to-the-point sentences?

Thanks so much for your help!!

ClaireLCooper (talk) 19:39, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

• I'll reply on your talk page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:24, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for contributing to The Eye of Minds!

• No problem! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

About Aharnishks matters

Hi Tokyogirl79.
I've WP:A11'd all the articles and closed all the WP:AfDs as speedy deletes. If anyone asks: yes, I'm a little bit qualified in Eng. Lit., a huge Cricket fan, and a WikiProject India participant. Sincerely hope that you don't think I was treading on your toes in any way here!
Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:49, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks! I really wanted to do them myself but didn't know if that'd be seen as a COI since I tagged them. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:19, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Wir halten das Tempo Tour

Hello Tokyogirl79. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Wir halten das Tempo Tour, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a blatant hoax. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 13:08, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of The Next Move page

Hello - my first time adding a page to Wikipedia and you speedy deleted it. Please let me know why so I can fix it. The page just tells the history of a band I played in that led to another band I was in that signed to a major label in 1996. I was asked by some old fans to write some content. Thanks.

Rreames (talk) 15:11, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

About Star Arcade page's notability issues

Hi and thanks for review! I'm bit curious did you have the chance to compare Star Arcade's page with other pages from Video game companies of Finland, as you would find out that there are other highly similar or much lesser referenced articles already submittes and approved.

Also the biggest issue for finding more references is the fact that most of them are in Finnish. I will try to improve the page the best I can though! Jlatto (talk) 07:50, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

• Well, the issue with comparing the page to other entries is that that the existence of other pages that may have less notability established doesn't mean anything. It might just mean that the page in question just hasn't been improved or nominated for deletion yet, or that the page might qualify for notability in a way that the other page does not. (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS for more detail) We're supposed to judge a page on the merits of that page alone and whether or not that page passes notability guidelines, not on whether or not articles of lesser quality exist on Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:52, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Innoz

I've tagged all the articles listed at that discussion under G5 (and one under G5/G6 just for fun). Next time, if you close an AfD discussion as speedy delete, could you actually delete the article(s)? Cheers, Ansh666 08:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

• Sorry about that. I don't know how I missed that. Guess I need a few more cups of coffee this morning. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Well, it's past midnight here, and I managed to get myself into this SPI-reporting mess...maybe it wouldn't have been so wise to delete them right away, there seem to be a lot more Wiki-PR accounts. Ansh666 08:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
• Ugh... is it wrong that I sometimes wish we could just firebomb their offices? Not while they're in there, of course. These guys are like cockroaches that you can't get rid of. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
• That reminds me- I should salt those entries, otherwise they'll just try to re-add them under new accounts. I did debate leaving them open as potential sockbait for any further Wiki-PR accounts, but then that'd just be more work for everyone involved. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
  • No, not wrong at all, I'd say! Thanks for clearing up the mess...though I've now gone and nominated another bunch for G5 after carefully examining the contributors. Ansh666 08:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
• I'll swing by the speedy page to take a look at them. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi,

On November 1st 2013 you speedily deleted an article entitled BrainStorm Cell. The contributor made every effort to make it non-promotional, nevertheless I would be happy to modify it immediately if you would kindly un-delete it and give me the chance. Await notification. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherylmindy (talk • contribs) 14:14, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

• Can you give me a link to the deleted entry? Typing in BrainStorm Cell doesn't bring up any deleted entries and it can take me hours to try to wade through the multiple, multiple thousands of deleted entries in the deletion log. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:18, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
• I'm not really sure what you mean by a link to the deleted entry (I'm new to this) - do you mean a link to the article itself? I didn't submit it but I can hopefully get it from the person who did. Can you please clarify? thank you. Here's the link from the deletion and move log:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brainstorm_cell&action=edit&redlink=1

Cherylmindy (talk) 15:10, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Cherylmindy

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Made in Me

Hello Tokyogirl79. I am just letting you know that I deleted Made in Me, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. GedUK  13:31, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles for creation - the lion the bear the fox (band)

Hi Tokyogirl79!

Thank you so much for your reply about my page about the lion the bear the fox (band) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/the_lion_the_bear_the_fox_(band))! That helps a lot, and everything makes a lot of sense! And I feel a bit better knowing you still have to watch that fine line around being too promotional... :) there's hope for me yet!

And it's funny about the peacock words like "prestigious Peak Performance Project"... I think I was so concerned about what I was saying about the band, I didn't really think about that!

Thank you so much for your offer to help me with some of the re-writing. I was thinking, if I take these two specific things you mention (the sentence about them crossing the western provinces by van, and then the section about the Bandwagon Project) and try re-writing them in a more formal tone, can I send those back to you to see if I am on the right track and see if you have any suggestions?

Thank you for taking the time to help me!

ClaireLCooper (talk) 16:32, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Auro-3D page adjustments

Hello Tokyogirl79, I would like to make the necessary adjustments to the proposed entry for "Auro-3D". I already have some ideas on what to delete/edit, but it would be a great help if you could point out the problematic passages so I can do this as thorough and efficient as possible. Thanks in advance, Dvossen (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello again, I made a number of edits to this page to the best of my knowledge, please provide me with some additional input if this page still isn't fit for publication. For your reference: there are already a number of pages on related topics approved and published: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auro_11.1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_Studios

Thanks, Dvossen (talk) 12:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Deeeleeete Award

Slakr's Deeeleeete Award For your tireless work in dealing with criteria for speedy deletion, I hereby award you your very own Cyberman to assist with whatever needs deleting should you ever need a break. It's perfectly safe(*), but if it ever starts giving you any lip, just pretend you're dealing with trolls by showing no emotion and give your local doctor a call. :P Keep up the great work. =) Cheers, --slakr\ talk / 05:46, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

• I would show all of my joy, but that would be a weakness that would require an upgrade. ;) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Rojerfeder

Greetings! You blocked Rojerfeder (talk · contribs) for using Wikipedia for advertising. Please consider removing talk page access as well, since more advertising has been posted there since the block. Thanks! -- John of Reading (talk) 08:03, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Remainants of WP:AfC articles in userspace.

I came across this article User:196.46.246.51/De Rogue which is in the userspace of an IP but created by an actual user. There's no actual content there. What can be done about it? My preferred options are

1. Delete
2. Move to AfC space without leaving redirect.

The first was turned down and the second I can't do.

Grateful for your perspective. Rankersbo (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

• I can move it. I'd personally prefer to delete it as a test edit, but I suppose we should give the user a small token amount of time to edit it. In about 2 months we can delete it as an abandoned AfC submission. My personal opinion is that it is/was a series of test edits by someone who didn't know how to use the AfC stuff, but I don't want to step on the toes of another admin by deleting it after they turned it down. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Peter Liddle (artist)

Hi, Thanks for reviewing the work. I have added a good deal of citations, hope it can get through to the next stage. Would it be much improved by some images? I may be able negotiate the use of a few, do they have to be given open licences?

Craig.chamberlain11 (talk) 12:29, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles for creation - the lion the bear the fox (band)

Hi Tokyogirl79!

Thank you for the help! I actually took out that whole section that used Canadian Beats as a source (partly because I thought it could be considered too "bloggy" and then also because of concern that the source wasn't reliable enough) so you mentioning that makes me feel like I was on the right track with that... :)

I have done some re-writes to make the post shorter by taking out some of the things that seem more promotional than informative and to tighten up the writing so that the sentences are shorter and more to-the-point, and I also added some more sources.

Do you mind checking and seeing if you have any more suggestions? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/the_lion_the_bear_the_fox_(band)

I haven't re-submitted it yet, just saved it, because I wanted to wait and see if you thought it sounded more formal.

Thank you so much for your help!

ClaireLCooper (talk) 15:23, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

AfD

Hi, you left a message on my talkpage, how do I do AfD? I tried to nominated some articles in the past with it, and it didn't appeared in the AfD log. Many thanks in advance.--Mishae (talk) 20:13, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles for creation - the lion the bear the fox (band)

Hi Tokyogirl79!

I just got your note and am really excited that you accepted my page - thank you! Thanks so much for all your help to improve my submission, and thank you for finding the photo and putting it into the infobox. I really appreciate it!

ClaireLCooper (talk) 06:45, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, ReaderofthePack. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 17:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 17:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you!

... for deletion of Template:R from printworthy plural – Joys! – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 01:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello. I see that you deleted a page that I was drafting (draft article on Nathan Bell). I don't understand the reference you used (R2 cross namespace redirect). I've read a few pages about that term, but don't understand it. Can you help me understand what I am doing wrong? This page is (was) only a draft, and I would prefer to be allowed to work on it, rather than have it deleted if it contains mistakes. Is that possible?

I am new to wiki, and would like to have your support in helping me learn to be a good editor.

Thank you,

Smitty Smitty48823 (talk) 14:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Death Walks

Hello! Your submission of Death Walks at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:17, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Please help me move article

Hi Tokyogirl, my article was improved as you advised. please help me move the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jafarimunaba/Efficiencie

back to the originally intended Link below; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficiencie

thanks in advance.41.221.91.182 (talk) 15:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

your rudeness or my luck!

Hello Tokyogirl179, Thanks for deleting my unnecessary Wikipedia Book. But, is not it a rude way to delete a page _within_a_minute_ of requesting! This time I have not suffered any problem, but it may have caused trouble, given I am a new user. I am saying about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=User:E99plant/Books/Copyright_etc_basic_concept_0129 --E99plant (talk) 10:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

• No, it's not rude at all. You requested that I delete the article and I did. That's not rudeness, that's efficiency and me doing my job as an administrator. Any time you post speedy deletion template you can expect the page to be deleted at any given point in time- either instantly or over a longer period of time. The wait time is entirely up to how long it takes an administrator to delete the page. Sometimes there is a backlog and pages can take hours or days to get deleted, other times the backlog isn't as long and articles can be deleted within seconds. This is why it's usually not a good idea to place the template on the page in question until you are sure that you want the page deleted at that very moment. If you are planning to extract more data from the page or work on it some more, do not place the template until you have reached the point that you want it deleted. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:35, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tokyogirl, my article was improved as you advised. please help me move the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jafarimunaba/Efficiencie back to the originally intended Link below; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficiencie thanks in advance.41.221.91.182 (talk) 15:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC)41.221.91.182 (talk) 18:34, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you so much for editing Family Perfume! I'm new to wiki so only getting the hang of it! Thank you! Dan Anj Dan anj (talk) 10:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

• No problem! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:57, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at HitroMilanese's talk page.
Message added 12:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hitro talk 12:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Tell Me Another Morning

Hi Tokyogirl79 - I posted some potential sources for Tell Me Another Morning at Talk:Tell Me Another Morning. -- Jreferee (talk) 14:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Please explain why you removed logobee page

Hello Tokyogirl, I cant believe someone can simply do this without a good reason. Logobee existed for many years and the page created was caring very useful information about the company history, business owners, and criticism. Logobee is doing a lot of charity work, which has been noted in the referral. Besides if this material was considered as "advertisement", I see not much difference from pages like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logoworks. If you let page like that exist but remove logobee page, you are acting extremely hypocritical. Logobee page , was a very useful source of information for Wikipedia users. I kindly ask that you restore the page. If you do feel that some of the material presented looks like "advertisement" I do not object to removing it from the page. Thank you Feb/5/2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dodikbobik (talk • contribs) 15:21, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Dodikbobik, you made the same argument on my talk page, and I answered it there. See User talk:Amatulic#Wonder about your criteria. Hope that helps. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:14, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Amatulic, I would love to hear Tokyogirl opinion about this issue, as it appears to me she is the one who actually deleted it. Thank you --Dodikbobik (talk) 18:01, 5 February 2014 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dodikbobik (talk • contribs) 17:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Tokyogirl - I am satisifed with Dodokbobik's explanation on my talk page, and I am willing to restore the article to his user space for improvement, if that's all right with you. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:59, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

• I'm cool with that. I'll transfer it over. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:23, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Tokyogirl! I appretiate your advise. About the report , was it suspicious the way it was written? For example can I still put a simple reference to it, without saying it the way it was?--Dodikbobik (talk) 14:46, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Chucky: Slash & Dash‎

I saw you were working on it. If you feel it now passes WP:N I will defer to your judgement. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:32, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks- I think it passes but then I also think it is borderline and I can see where someone could argue that it could be merged into the main article for the Chucky series. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:34, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Farbsteinism

Hello Tokyogirl79. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Farbsteinism, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I do not see the necessary indication that this was invented by the article's author or an acqauintance. Let the PROD take cae of it it. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 10:25, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of the band Saving Grace Music page

Hello I was just seeing why the Saving Grace music page was just deleted here recently. It was brought to my attention it was gone by one of the band members. I work with the band on a business level and would like to know what I can do to get the page back up please.

10:15, 1 February 2014 Tokyogirl79 (talk | contribs) deleted page Saving Grace Band (A7: Article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)Quintinalexander (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you.

The sock puppet

Here you go: User talk:Physics0x01 and User talk:Physics0x02

Wgolf (talk) 16:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks! Definitely looks to be a sock, so I'll add a tag to Physics0x01. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
• Looks like someone already beat me to it! Yay for GogoDodo! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:34, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Your deletion of "Kodak S-mount"

Hi Tokyogirl, I just saw that you deleted the Kodak S-mount article. I don't remember if this was a short article created by someone else or if I was the creator of the article (as a redirect to somewhere else) or moved it to this title, in either case, I had it on my watch-list since I created the S-mount disambiguation page some while ago. Since I think this is a valid subject, I would like to know in better details why you deleted it (G7 sounds strange to me) and I contest its deletion. Please consider undeletion. Thanks. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 21:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Is there perhaps any connection (collateral damage) with edits like this one: [[18]], user Frank Gosebruch on a deletion spree of some kind? --Matthiaspaul (talk) 22:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I can meanwhile answer that question myself: There is in fact a connection, as the page was originally created by that user (per his user page's history). He also recently requested speedy deletion of two other articles originally created by him (and now changed his name to user "K0 7zQY0oyqcz"): Color head and Paul Teufel & Cie Photogerätebau. I expand my request now to the undeletion of all three speedy deleted articles. Thanks. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 22:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

• I'll restore it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Great, thanks. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 13:51, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

On a different note, I now realized that these articles weren't nominated for deletion by "Frank Gosebruch"/"K0 7zQY0oyqcz", but by user "Kkj11210", who wasn't even entitled to use "G7", as he isn't the author. Given that "Kkj11210" has been warned not to use false speedy deletion criteria just recently ([[19]]) and the fact, that deleted articles no longer show up in the contribs, I have a gut feeling now that he might have falsely nominated many more articles for speedy deletion. Could you be so kind to investigate this and restore the other articles as well, if there are more? Greetings --Matthiaspaul (talk) 14:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Please Restore Efficiencie

Hi Tokyogirl, I know you are busy, i finished editing my article but unfortunately i dont have a move button. Please help me restore my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jafarimunaba/Efficiencie to the article space; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficiencie.

Thanks41.221.91.182 (talk) 09:13, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

• We need more sourcing to show notability via reliable sources. I don't see where you've addressed the issues of notability, as the CrunchBase link just goes to a database listing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:14, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

WP:PSTS

Hi TG, in response to your message on Cat Collier's page, primary sources are fine to use. They must be used with care, as the guideline says. They are not to be used "to analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate" but are absolutely fine to show the existence of a book. I understand that you were keen to delineate notability of the article, but I think that removing the publishers' refs is unneeded. The note also gives a mistaken impression to a new user. I appreciate all the work you do on new articles. Span (talk) 12:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Restored a page you deleted

Hi Tokyogirl79, I've restored Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GorillaWarfare/Route M4 (Manhattan) which you deleted as it was moved there as a record of something which was discussed during GorillaWarfare's RFA (hence G2 & G3 don't apply). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

• Ah- I meant to look at that more closely. I must have deleted it while I was doing that slew of old AfC articles. Thanks for doing that! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

No worries, I had my finger on the delete button before I had a 'hang on a sec' moment. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Dawn Olivieri may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• | ''[[Missionary (film)|Missionary]''

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:48, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Celebrate Your Life may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• //www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-2551754511.html|accessdate=20 February 2014|newspaper=Hindustan Times (subscription required|date=January 3, 2012}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:11, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Zombeavers may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• photography took place in [[Santa Clarita, California]] at the Golden Oak Ranch|Disney Ranch]] over a period of 21 days and with a small budget.<ref>{{cite web|last=Decker|first=Sean|title=

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:30, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Message replied

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at E Wing's talk page.
Message added 03:32, 14 February 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Need two BLP deletions

Could you please delete these two files: [20] and [21] immediately - they have sensitive, personal information about non-public children and relate to an interpersonal dispute that has spilled onto the encyclopedia. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 08:59, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

• Done- I'll leave the user a warning as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:01, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Aaaaaaand the page is back in mainspace at Steve Clark (Wall-Street) - le sigh. This user... WP:IDHT comes to mind. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 09:29, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

• I'll reply on your talk page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:30, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The BLP Barnstar
		For swiftly and surely addressing a sensitive BLP and privacy matter. Thank you! NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 09:25, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

W 2014 Film

Hi Tokyogirl. I am writing to you in capactiy of the producer of the film W (yes, the coi tag is still valid) hence has not been removed. The information which is presently appearing on the wiki page is very outdated. The production began in 2012, and the case of nirbhaya happened in dec 2012, after that a series of such hedious crimes took place in India changing the whole scenario of the way people reacted to it. hence in late 2013 after we applied for the censorship, we edited & reshot about 40% of the movie. Originally when we started the project the subject did revolve around sexual abuse (rape), but then due to too many such cases in India and censor issues, we had to dramatically change the movie. This did not reach the press (hence you will not find any script change related published articles).

We really did not want to publicise such a sensitive and heart wrenching issue. What women go through after an abuse is really traumatic and no one should ever take advantage of it as a subject for a film. Hence we changed. Request you to consider this.

If you notice all the articles are over a year old dating back to 2012 and early 2013. And the newer ones speak on a different subject. Which is primarly on women empowerment, the men of yesterday and the women of today. And that is W today and will release the same way. The previous edit done from the above IP did cite the present upto date references.

I am humbly requesting you to revert to the previous edit from the IP IP 60.190.181.238 i.e. you to undo your revert. As it is really outdated and not entirely true the present W. It is not about promoting the film. To us Wiki is to provide information on W. We are just a starup production company & all we are trying to do is make sure people receive the right information (hence all the changes were cited with current references). Your view of it being a promotion may be correct, but that is really not the intention because all the edits were supported by valid acceptable references.

I could have just submitted a new edit weeks ago, but that would be against policy, We patinently waited to support the edit with references. which you can see in the previous edit form the IP 60.190.181.238.

A small budget movie like W made with high dreams, sweat & toil of alot of people should be portrayed in the right manner. I am writing to you with hope instead of just Undoing your edit. I really hope that you would consider this request.

Regards, Shivang — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShivangSehgal (talk • contribs) 06:17, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

• The problem is that the new sources aren't really reliable sources per our guidelines. They show the movie exists, but don't really add anything that the previous sources didn't. Now as far as age goes, the age of a source doesn't mean that it can't back up data on the article. We actually like to keep all of the sourcing on the article regardless of how long ago the RS was first released. Other than that, the article was re-written to be extremely, EXTREMELY promotional. While I certainly like what this film addresses, we can't use Wikipedia as a WP:SOAPBOX or promotion for any viewpoint or film, regardless of how much we may personally agree with the point you're trying to get across. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:21, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for appreciating the issue which the film addresses. Lets take it step by step. 1) Eloboarte on your singular view point, of what made it seem promotional. If you pull up any bollywood movie article, both the references (bollywood hungama & nowplaying.com) are independant sources, Hence the updated synopsis should not be an issue. Not a word was changed from them in the previous edit. they were quoted directly and references given. I am not sure if you even bothered checking them before making a single "Revert / Undo" click 2) Your singular point of it being promotional, needs to be seconded by others aswell. So, I suggest instead of finding the easy way out for yourself by just undoing, you either do an edit or add suggestions along with making contributions. You must understand your view is very singular, requires further "talk" on the article itself (wiki policy). You could tag the article, But refrain from reverts. 3) Your previous action is being undone by me. the coi still applies, If you feel its promotional, Atleast a few other contribs should speak the same there. Your singular promotional view point is also against wiki policies (needs futher talk)

Discuss this further on the article - topic Tokyogirl79 Feels his article is promotional - Please talk here. Before Reverts/Undos[edit]

I am sure a further discussion by some other neutral wikipedians will help make this article better & also influence your decision further.

Rgeards, Shivang — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.190.181.238 (talk) 07:02, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

• What makes it promotional? The sentence "Not a battle of fists, W comes as a contemporary youthful musical thriller which explores the clash between the 'Women of Today' and 'Men of Yesterday' and how each side justifies their actions, words and mindset while setting an example for the rest of us without being preachy" is pretty self-explanatory. That's not only a promotional phrase, but it's filled with things that would be seen as an opinion by most editors. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:20, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
• I'm starting a discussion on the article page, but I'll be very honest when I say that no editor worth their salt on Wikipedia would say that the version the IP is reverting to is one that would stay on Wikipedia. It's not just me and one opinion- this is Wikipedia protocol. I would really like to ask that anyone involved with the film refrain from making edits to the article. If you have new sources, please post them on the article's talk page where experienced editors can decide whether or not to add them to the article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:25, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Your point 1 is again your singular view. Point 2 seems like the best idea, will post articles there, but will really hope someone who understand bollywood movies and movies in general to make the edits rather than people who are only following wiki rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShivangSehgal (talk • contribs) 07:31, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

• No, it's not my singular view. It's me applying Wikipedia policy. As far as Bollywood movies go, I'm not the expert of experts, but I am rather familiar with searching for sources when it comes to Bollywood and Indian cinema as a whole. I've saved quite a few articles from deletion so it's not like I'm completely unqualified on the subject. On a side note, I'd like to remind you of something: your movie's article was up for deletion very recently because you removed all of the "outdated" sources. My reverting the article to its prior status saved it from deletion, which does refinforce that the version I reverted to is a valid one that does pass Wikipedia guidelines for films. You're really being counter productive with the edits that your company is doing to the article. Seriously, please stop. You're not helping the film article out in the slightest and you're only making it more likely that someone else will nominate it for deletion in some form or fashion because of what your company is doing to it. To use an American idiom, you're shooting yourself in the foot with the edits that the IP is making. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:38, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nightmare Circus (film)

I found two decent sources and a slew of not-so-decent. My argument for keep is here. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 07:42, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Username

Just wanted to say I like your username, the song Tokyo Girl is one of my favs =). - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:59, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks! I kind of latched on to the song since I first heard it and it's been one of my "go to" usernames ever since then. It also doesn't hurt that I absolutely love anime, manga, and Japanese culture. :) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:01, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
  • YW =) Oh same here, I actually first heard the song by watching an AMV on youtube that featured Naru from Love Hina, it kind of fit together given the Tokyo U reference. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:03, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Talkback message from Tito Dutta

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at Titodutta's talk page.
Message added 16:29, 18 February 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tito☸Dutta 16:29, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Nice Little Penguins deletion

Hi there - Would it be possible to move the article back into public for editing? I have called for international "help" with the task of editing and adding sources etc. for it, and this morning ppl write to me saying the article is nowhere to be found. Just five mins ago a guy from Brazil wrote me, asking what's going on. Personally, though I understand the reasoning, I get a bit puzzled, as I threw in a { { hangon } } just yesterday, and Wikipedia immediately chooses to delete the article... I'm not sure I see the value of { { hangon } } then? Anyway I've deleted some passages and added some references (still looking for more). Please advise - what can I do more? :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmilling (talk • contribs) 12:00, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

• It would honestly be better for the page if you left it in your userspace for now. They can still edit from your page, but it won't be visible in the mainspace. The reason why this is better is because if you moved it back into the mainspace it would be subject to deletion again. This means that someone could list it for a speedy deletion or take it through WP:AfD. Keeping it in your userspace will allow you the time to look for sources at your leisure, rather than making a mad dash to try to find sources as quickly as possible. Now as far as the hangon tag goes, that just means that you're requesting that the page not get deleted. It doesn't mean that it will keep the page from being deleted, just that you'd like more time to work on it. A page can still get deleted in the meantime, either through a speedy deletion or a longer, more formal deletion process. Being userfied isn't the end of the world and in this situation it genuinely is the best solution for right now. It can always be moved back, but I'd recommend that you work on getting coverage in reliable sources for right now. That's the long and short of it. We can't have an article without reliable sourcing. I understand that you have people writing you to ask where the page is, but the problem is that the page still has to follow notability guidelines. Also... I have to ask: when you say that you have people asking you where the page is, do you mean that you were asked to create the page by the band or by a group representing the band as a specific favor or for pay? If so, it would be a good idea to look over our policy about editing with a conflict of interest. (WP:COI) I think that your intent here is good, but it's always a good idea to look over that policy so you can try to avoid any missteps. Now if you're just one of a group of fans (as in a fan group, either official or unofficial) that decided to make the page then that doesn't make you a paid editor, but it's still a good idea to look over COI since it does apply somewhat for those situations when you're editing as a die-hard fan. I know that personally there are a few pages I have to be very cautious when editing (or just avoid editing altogether) for just that reason. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Could I make you take another glance at the article? Don't move it back, as we are still looking for more references. Just let me know, if we are working in the right direction :-) Yes I am a fan - though not a member of any fan club. I noticed many of the online album-stores pulls the wiki-text from you onto their pages too. As for the 1994-1995 hit 'Flying' I can see a lot of links on YouTube - many of them homemade tutorials made by others as how to play the song on the Ukulele (key instrument in the original song by the band). But I guess that won't help us here either :-/ The latest notes I received was from a guy in Brazil and one in the US. None of them is related to the band (not that I know of anyway). Anyway I'll be continuing the search for viable references. As there was not much on the internet in the beginning/mid of the 1990's it's quite a task *phew* Yours Kmilling — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.104.185.118 (talk) 18:41, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

• Sure- I'll take a look at it a little later tonight. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

WikiFM userification

please userify it :)

thanks, --130.243.159.235 (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Can you help (2freehosting site deleted)?

Hello, would it be possible for you to help me create my page so it meet all the requirements? You have deleted one of my pages already but I would like to do the best I can to make it good and acceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henkas17 (talk • contribs) 09:37, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

• Well... the problem is that the site didn't pass notability guidelines and there was a big lack of reliable sourcing when I did a search. If you can show me where the website has received coverage in reliable sourcing that would pass WP:RS, then I don't mind transferring a copy to your userspace. The problem is that like I said, I couldn't find anything out there. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:42, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Barnstar

	The Original Barnstar
	For your cleanup efforts at Birbal Jha‎, in the face of considerable adversity! Justice007 (talk) 10:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Trouble at House Hunting

There's an editor at House Hunting, an article which you previous edited, who has been repeatedly removing negative reviews and adding unsourced information and promotional details on the director. I suspect that it's the director himself, as the IP address that he edits under resolves to the same location as the director. Also, the logged-in account he uses, User:Cvilleslacker, seems to be from the same city. He previously blanked the reception that you added, replacing it with a line about how the film received "universal acclaim". I removed that and added a new reception, not yet aware that he had removed the one that you added. That's when he started edit warring to remove negative reviews. He was briefly blocked over that, and he back now, trying to force in external links to his production company. Normally, it wouldn't bother me if someone did that, but I strongly suspect a conflict of interest here. I realize that there isn't yet enough disruption to protect the article, but it's getting rather frustrating trying to fight this determined editor. Maybe you could explain to him the rules on COI and edit warring? I've already tried to reason with him, and he ignored my talk page messages; instead, he decided to go on a vandalism spree on several articles that I created. Honestly, I think this guy needs to be indefinitely blocked based on his history of vandalism, COI infractions, edit warring, and incivility, but I'd settle for a stern warning if it got him to behave. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

• I've left him a message. I'll look at his editing history to see if his behavior warrants further blocking. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
• Which articles has he vandalized? I only see edits to teh House Hunting movie. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:10, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Check out 23.31.101.217 (talk · contribs · block log), an IP address from Charlottesville who targeted only articles that I created (listed as such on my user page). This happened directly after I left a message talking about COI/vandalism issues on Cvilleslacker's user talk. Mark Arsten blocked the IP vandal after I explained the situation. The conversation is still on Mark's talk page. Normally, I'm pretty laid-back and try to avoid getting involved in this kind of drama, but it's getting a bit frustrating – and it's actually pretty rare that I encounter people who don't respond to a friendly message on their talk page. Sorry about not linking that earlier; I forgot that he used a different IP address. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
• That is pretty damning in my opinion. He hasn't edited under that account yet since he's been IP editing mostly, but I've asked for page protection due to the previous edit warring and the edit war that's currently gearing up. I'm a little hesitant about blocking him myself if he logs back in under his own account at that point (assuming the IP is him, which I'm fairly sure it is), as I'm slightly involved at this point and I want this all to be kosher so it can't be overturned for some technicality. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 22:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Gypsy

Hi. Could you try to straighten this out please? The article on the stage musical was at Gypsy: A Musical Fable. Citing WP:COMMONNAME I asked for it to be moved to Gypsy (musical). Another editor, trying to be helpful, moved it to Gypsy (the musical), which is not a proper disambiguation term. (We only use "the musical" when it's actually part of a title). Could you move the article to where it should be, which is Gypsy (musical)? Thanks. BMK (talk) 10:41, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Oops, I see that you have already done that -- thanks so much. BMK (talk) 10:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

• Yeah... I cringed the cringe to end all cringes when I saw what had been accidentally done. (sighs) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

AfD vs speedy

I haven't removed the speedy deletion template from A Walk With Our Ancestors because there is a valid BLP argument, but I've just left a note at the AfD suggesting that if you think the stuff in the history is that bad, why not revdelete those versions? Yngvadottir (talk) 13:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

• It was done partially because the previous versions were bad, but also because it would've given the article a speedier demise than if it went through AfD. It really doesn't have a snowball's chance of survival in the end. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:38, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

• Ah, I see. I agree - as I said at the AfD - I haven't added any references because I can't find any. But I think the community should have a right to decide. Who knows, someone may find newspaper coverage; for one thing a forum post tells me that like many such books, it's been contentiously refused to prisoners. Anyway, hinking you'd stopped editing for the moment and in the spirit of WP:SOFIXIT I went ahead, reverted your addition of the speedy template, and rev-deleted the insulting versions. I'm going to drop a few notes on talk pages arising from what I found before returning to the AfD - if I don't run out of break at work! Yngvadottir (talk) 13:56, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
• I have no true problem with it running through a full AfD, I just felt that it'd be extremely unlikely for it to meet notability guidelines at any point in time so I thought it'd save time if it was speedied. As for it getting refused at prisons, that's not surprising. Prisons are pretty notorious for refusing a very wide variety of books, some of which are pretty surprising. I used to work for a bookstore and we'd have people come in all the time looking for books. Some of them were actually given a list of specific books and authors that were allowed, as opposed to some of the less strict guidelines. It all depends on the prison, really. I would imagine that the reason that this specific book was denied was probably because they saw the word "shaman" and assumed that it discussed religious drug usage (peyote and such). I did see the [http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t853151/ refusal notice] and in this case I think that it was probably for the potential drug references. It's not surprising- I had an instance where someone tried to send their relative a new-ish paperback bestseller (I think it was either Dan Brown, James Patterson, or one of those types of authors) and the book was refused because the jail thought it could promote bad behaviors. We've also had prisons refuse educational books as well. It's been years so I can't remember specific texts, but the works were fairly innocuous and it kind of surprised us that they wouldn't let them into prisons. I remember we had a church group run a fundraiser for books for prison and they talked about how frustrated they were that they could send stuff into prison such as motorcycle magazines that were thinly veiled pornography, yet they were restricted from sending in a lot of stuff that could help educate the prisoners and make them able to have a life that didn't involve crime. At first they'd thought it was just because it was a hardback, but the paperback versions of various different types of books were turned away as well. Anywho, that's just me ranting about how prisons will refuse just about anything if they think that there's even a slight substantiation. I think they'd refuse the back of a candy wrapper depending on what day it was, so the book being refused to a prisoner isn't exactly a huge show of notability akin to if it was a library refusing to carry a book. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

zombeavers director

Hey there

Thanks for putting up the Zombeavers page. I directed the film. I just fixed a few errors - the interviews you were pulling from had a few factual errors. Let me know if you have any questions!

Jordan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinephile24fps (talk • contribs) 20:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

• No problem! I appreciate you coming on here and saying all this! I do have a question... will this hit theaters? I've had several people around me ask if this will be in theaters, preferably ones where we can drink! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)

RE: SPI?

Hello, it's not something I'd considered, really. I guess it's probably best just to leave the AFD to conclude as it might be that the editor/s stop then. Perhaps. Bob talk 18:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help with the article about Anomaly (novel)! I hope it all right to leave this message here - I'm really new at this. Transcendentalist01 (talk) 23:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Rejection of my Article Submission

Hi, you rejected my article for submission at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Caslin_Rose I'm not mad or anything, I'm just confused about why you rejected it. You told me that I put "peacock terms" in it and that it was not written through a neutral point of view. It was written through a neutral point of view!!! I never said "oh she's so great" or "oh no one compares to her talent" or anything like that. I just stated the facts. Please re-examine your evaluation and hopefully we can clear this up. Thanks, -Mallen22 (talk) 01:45, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Tokyogirl79 I just found this on your user page, and moved it here

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation

Hi,

I'm confused about deleted page "Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/FriendFin.com (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.amazon.co.jp/100-Free-Dating-Site-App/dp/B00EI1LOQG)". Actually I copied content from http://www.friendfin.com/ContentPage_id_19.aspx not from http://www.amazon.co.jp/100-Free-Dating-Site-App/dp/B00EI1LOQG but where else would I copy from if I need some information for specific website, I guess "About Us" for that website would be the best place. right?

Regardless, I can change the text. Is it possible if I make changes and then the page can be approved? Let me know.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jen.Hudson (talk • contribs) 02:01, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Rakeshkala

As an administrator, you have tools that I don't have that might show that an SPI for this user is warranted. If you think he's a sock, please ask for a checkuser.

On a related note, you can legitimately db-g6 John Louis Muratori because the page would never have existed in main-space in its current form if I hadn't asked for a history split of Amazon Mist. You can also grab your mop and compare the edits of Feb. 13 by Rakeshkala with whatever edits were made to the now-deleted versions of John Louis Muratori and John Muratori. This may help with the SPI as well. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 06:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Researcher's Barnstar

		Researcher's Barnstar
		I am both pleased and honored to present you with the Researcher's Barnstar in appreciation for your superb work in finding sources for Walter's Christmas. The number of French language sources show the film as meeting WP:NF. Good job and excellent work! After a "keep" I think setting up a redirect from the searchable "Le Noël De Walter Et Tandoori" would make sense. Schmidt, Michael Q. 13:49, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artificial (film)

More sources have been brought forward. Care to revist the AFD? Thanks, Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 01:19, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, ReaderofthePack. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 15:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Tito☸Dutta 15:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 6 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Tempest page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:40, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

David Berry (educator)

Creating a redirect target from scratch is certainly a unique way to save an article... keep up the good work!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

And now perhaps you've created something beyond anyone's ability to control. Poor Dr. Frankenstein comes to mind.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 02:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

For doing a great job with Belle Knox! Bjelleklang - talk 20:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Honeymoon (disambiguation) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * ''[[Honeymoon (2014 film]]'', a 2014 American horror film

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:32, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

2014 Arab U-20 Championship

Hi,thanks for moving my page, but can I ask. What's the point in a discussion if things are just moved without a discussion taking place? Druryfire (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thank you for closing a very snowy article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brett Smith (energy executive). Bearian (talk) 20:49, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you for the revision and for saving The Average Homeboy page from deletion! Thesideliner2014 (talk) 08:46, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

• Well... don't thank me just yet. I saved it from speedy deletion. It is still debatable whether or not it could be deleted again through an AfD. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:53, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of Center of Government

Hi, could you indicate which other page is it duplicating? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrinkTheKoolAid (talk • contribs) 15:34, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

• The other editor said that it duplicated Government without really giving enough to show that it could stand alone. Offhand it does have a few more issues with it than just a bit of re-stating parts of the overall government articles. It had some issues with sourcing and the tone of the article could use a little work because at times it reads a bit more like an essay than an encyclopedia entry. It's good, but it could use a bit more work. I'd talk to User:JamKaftan more about this for a more specific reason. If you really feel that it can stand on its own, you're free to move it back to the mainspace, but it might be better to work on it in your userspace first. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)

M. L. Forman

Hi, do you think this author passes the notability bar? His books seem to be getting reviews and attention, but he himself doesn't seem quite there yet. It does seem, though, that given the books appear to have a small fanbase, (but not an article of their own yet, I notice), he ought to be. Anyway, I thought I'd ask a second opinion as I don't think it's really delete-worthy, but can't really see any good sources on a quick scan. Thanks so much! Mabalu (talk) 13:25, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

• Hmm... we have two options here: one would be to create a page for the book series and redirect his article there. The other would be to just place the links to the reviews/coverage on his article. Offhand it looks like he's only published the one series, so it would probably be more helpful to have the article for the book series and redirect his article there since that's what he's known for. I'd figure that anyone looking would probably be more looking for information about the books than about him. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 23:01, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello Tokyogirl79!

I have researched the The Upper Footage film quite extensively and while there are negative reviews, the vast majority are positive. To say its mixed is not accurate, that implies a 50-50 ratio, from what I have seen in around 75-80 percent positive. I can easily supply sources if you would like.

Furthermore you say that people liked the marketing yet in your article you say reaction to the marketing was mixed which is 100 percent untrue. The statements that you use to back that up are misused, and don't mean that the reception was mixed. How can you say it was a mixed response when you only use one source? I am unsure if it is a language barrier but you use misuse the word mixed quite a bit.

You also say that a lot of people were skeptical but you don’t base that on any source, just a opinion, which is not how this should work.

--Flaviohmg (talk) 01:22, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

塞ぐ

なぜ私のページのアクセスをブロックしている？ 私の禁止は終わった。あなたはこの問題を解決してくださいすることはできますか？ ありがとうございます！ AlliGloss (talk) 20:03, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Adminship anniversary

Wishing ReaderofthePack/Archive 11 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Ϫ 08:03, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Request for not deleting page The Book on Networks

This book is an independent and in depth look at a key sector of information technology. A number of other lesser books also have articles, even those that have not won any awards. A notable book and an article with no issues suggests keeping the article.user talk:Shahzad91 — Preceding undated comment added 17:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

thank you for deleting my page Stephen (talk) 11:32, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• No problem! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:30, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Derogatory Comment

Tokyogirl79 I would appreciate if you do not add my name and make derogatory comments about me. I am open to discuss any issues with you directly. We can exchange direct numbers if you like so it would not sound you are just sitting behind a commuter and attacking some's reputation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Groupclr (talk • contribs) 02:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Well, you were correct. The "Average Homeboy" page has been deleted through an AfD.. Myself and others have written articles about "Average Homeboy." Even though, many credible references have been sited in these articles, the pages have been deleted. I would greatly appreciate any kind of suggestions or assistance that you could lend on how to prevent a legitimate article from deletion. Sincerely, Rayhazen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rayhazen (talk • contribs) 00:17, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• You can always argue the point for Average Homeboy at deletion review, as the page did have more sourcing than some of the prior pages did and the text was not substantially the same. I don't necessarily know that it would have passed notability guidelines if it'd run through an additional AfD, but I do think that it was different enough to warrant another discussion. I'll broach the subject with the other editor that deleted the page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:30, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
• It looks like it was speedy deleted, not run through another AfD, so you could always argue against that at deletion review since the article's content and sourcing was fairly different from the version deleted at AfD. In any case, it all really boils down to coverage over a long period of time. I can actually see where you could argue for inclusion since the coverage has been over a relatively wide span of time, but I can see where others might argue otherwise as well. Deletion review is probably the best place for this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:40, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Regarding your Yellow Wallpaper Deletion

There are published sources referenced at the bottom of the page. Newspapers and magazine (Pennyblood Magazine and Tolucan Times Newspaper to name a few), which are verifiable. The film meets all the guidelines from Wikipedia's film guidelines. If you want to remove blog resources, that is fine, but published, verifiable sources, such as the national publication which has gone to every college in America as (the Harbrace Guide to Writing) for study in college classes, is a verifiable source as well. Thanks. Also, there are enough extremely notable names to waive the verifiable resource condition per Wikipedia guidelines as stated. It passes notability guidelines by the famous people involved, if the verifiable sources are not enough (which they should be per wikipedia guidelines themselves.) Also Wikipedia clearly states that films are a case by case basis and the rules should be weighted on various aspects of notability, not just on published, Wikipedia deemed verifiable sources. But nonetheless, there is enough published sources to verify (hard copy published sources, and not just 'blog' sources). Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atafirst (talk • contribs) 05:38, 20 March 2014

Wassy24

FWIW, also a probable sock of User:Arindamb6 Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:05, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• Ooh- good catch! I'll tag it accordingly. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:07, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Antonio Pio Saracino may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *2007: ''New Generation of European Art'' ([useum of Contemporary Art, La Centrale Electrique in [[Brussels]], [[Belgium]])

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

ァぜの声

分かりました。私は、「web host」としてウィキペディアの使用を停止します。とても素敵であること、ありがとうございます。また、私は英語を話さないように私を理解していただきありがとうございます。^o^ AlliGloss (talk) 15:07, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Fatz

I don't actually know if Fatz is notable or not; I was just fixing the capitalization. Feel free to PROD or nominate it for deletion. :) Trivialist (talk) 15:44, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar

In recognition for your hard work over the years :) We certainly haven't crossed our paths before, but I've always seen you do wonderful work on Wikipedia! You seem to be very kind and helpful to everyone here, specially to the new users which is a great quality every editor should have. I look forward to learn many useful things from you in the future :) Best wishes. -TheGeneralUser (talk) 20:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Deleted WWE PPV template

06:52, 22 March 2014 Tokyogirl79 (talk | contribs) deleted page Template:Wrestling Pay-per-views (I don't see the point of this template. It's broken, and there are already similar templates like Template:Infobox Wrestling event, Template:WWEPPV and Template:TNAPPV. There's no other purpose this template could fulfill)

Hi. Can you undelete my template please? It serves a completely different purpose than Template:Infobox Wrestling event and Template:WWEPPV, I don't see how it was "broken". It needed some major improvement, but it wasn't broken.

This has made the WCW PPV list revert back to just listing the branding of their events, rather than having the complete list, which most people found more useful.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paradox295 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the info

I wanted to thank you for the information and help with the article I posted. I will work on everything recommended and hope to have much more feedback. Thank you, BrendonPorter (talk) 15:01, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Alpha and Omega 3: The Great Wolf Games

Hi. Thanks for deleting Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Alpha and Omega 3: The Great Wolf Games. Could you also delete Template:Editnotices/Page/Alpha and Omega 3: The Great Wolf Games for the same reason (WP:CSD#G6)? Edit notices are automatically fully protected by the wiki software, so I tagged the editnotice for speedy deletion on the talk page instead. Thanks! Mz7 (talk) 16:41, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, ReaderofthePack. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

The Special Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		File:HappLand!.jpg Each time I poke my head into a conversation nowadays all I see are Gnomes and Tag Monsters, it seems like a scary, unhelpful place sometimes. But you make me realize there are still unicorns! Thank you for both noticing me and helping me, the page will be much better now because of your experience. Zanglazor (talk) 16:59, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Arathorn,son of Arador‎

Hi Tokyogirl, it has been a while, maybe this?, I hope you're well. I redirected the above to Rangers of the North#Arathorn II per WP:2R, have a look and see if it's good. Had I had the tools, I would have moved it to Arathorn, son of Arador‎ without leaving a redirect. Best, Sam Sailor ^Sing 09:51, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Copyeditor's Barnstar
		Great work in improving and sourcing the Malenka article! NorthAmerica1000 15:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Cellphone spying

I completely understand why this had to be deleted. Requesting userfication to User:Northamerica1000/Cellphone spying, whereupon I would work on the article and then republish it. It's a notable topic to be sure, and I performed some work on the deleted version. It would be nice to have this as a blue-linked article, rather than red-linked. Please respond at your convenience, and thank you for your consideration. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• Done! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:14, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt reply and action. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Now created as a new article: see Cellphone surveillance. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:02, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

I really appreciate the keep for The Company Man wiki page. Total novice wiki editor here. Also, I live in Japan - Love the user name.Pizzamancer (talk) 13:11, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks Tokyogirl79: I wrote to that student right away that he is not supposed to create the article without making sure all is fixed (syntaxwise) etc. I guess someone deleted his article this morning. My guideline says they are supposed to work on it in the sandbox until they are ready to post. I am not sure I understand the route you suggest. If you could elaborate, I'd appreciate it. BerikG (talk) 19:39, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Category move request

Hi - I'm asking you as a friendly admin as I think this may be something only an admin can do. I created the category Category:Dominican fashion designers, then realised after I'd added it to the Dominica category, that all other categories say "Dominica #occupation" - Would it be possible to move the category to the uniform spelling please? Thank you so much. Mabalu (talk) 18:21, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at Northamerica1000's talk page.
Message added 22:14, 26 March 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:14, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Den (film).
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at Hieutrung.trinh's talk page.
Message added 07:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Antonio Pio Saracino

Hello, I am an admin on Commons from Italy and for this reason I chose for the business to be handled by some native speaker. I see you did a good job on the mentioned article, though I'm afraid that the subject lacks of notability but it might just be my impression... We never heard of this architect, which sounds weird to me as Italian architects who are successful abroad like i.e. Renzo Piano, Gae Aulenti, and others, are vastily publicized in our country :-) -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 23:39, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

• I'll send you an e-mail. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Belle Knox AfD talk page

Was blanking and protection the right move, especially given that you contributed to the original discussion? I don't see why anything on the talk page was inappropriate. Lagrange613 16:15, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I honestly think that blanking and protecting the page was in fact the wrong move. It sends the message that Wikipedia is not a place for open discussion. Web Warlock (talk) 22:19, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• I was involved, but the thing is that the end result would have been the same regardless of which admin was brought in to blank and protect the page. You could always contest the page being protected, but other than my getting a possible warning the end result will be the same. The difference between an AfD page and the talk page of an article in the mainspace is that the AfD's talk page is meant to remain blank. It isn't supposed to be used as a talk page to discuss an article's deletion, the article itself (or the lack thereof), or to protest the deletion. The proper place to discuss any potential re-creation of the article is here at deletion review. However I do want to say that it was discussed and the decision was to keep the page deleted, so it's unlikely that the article's history will be reverted. We do want open discussion, but we're not a forum. Open discussion should be limited to articles that are currently on Wikipedia and for articles that have a chance of passing our notability guidelines. The article on Belle Knox failed at AfD and failed deletion review. You could probably discuss the page further on someone's talk page but not at the AfD talk page. To be honest, the discussion on there wasn't particularly helpful and was mostly people complaining about how they couldn't use her real name or celebrating that the page was deleted. I didn't see that discussion as being particularly helpful in general (and again, AfD talk pages are supposed to remain blank) and it was mostly being used as a general forum, which is against Wikipedia's guidelines per WP:NOT#FORUM. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't think this rises to the level that I want to contest it and create drama; I'm just registering my disagreement. I share your assessment of the quality of the conversation that was occurring, but I don't see that by itself as justification for ending it unilaterally. I'm not aware of any policy or guideline that says AfD talk pages should remain blank, and the spirit of WP:TPO seems to be against it. WP:NOT#FORUM exists to keep talk pages focused on the encyclopedia. This is the first time I've seen it interpreted to prevent discussion of Wikipedia procedure. Lagrange613 07:56, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

• The basic consensus has always been that talk pages of AfD were to remain blank. The problem is basically that while the AfD is running, it shouldn't be used because it would create a fork of content and could be confusing while it's open. After the discussion has been closed, the only other appropriate place to discuss the article is at deletion review or on someone's talk page. Basically there's no reason for a discussion to be on an AfD's talk page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

• I am actively trying to get this codified because it's one of those rules that has always existed but never been expressly written down in detail, partially because nobody really expects there to be discussion on the page after the AfD ends and all talk is moved to the main page if the AfD is open. Protecting the page would have been inevitable, so I figured why draw it out and have a ton of drama when it could be ended right then and there - especially since it'd likely end up becoming identical to the discussion we had on the article's talk page (which necessitated it being protected as well)? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
• I've re-added it per someone else's recommendation, but I'm leaving it protected. We could argue that it could remain open as a discussion for the page, but the page has been deleted and by all accounts the conversation was mostly people using it as a way to make swipes against Knox or against the general deletion consensus. I mean, I understand the frustration on both sides but the conversation was going downhill at a fairly rapid rate and would have required a page protection eventually. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

As long as the page is restored (and it is) then I am happy with it being protected. Web Warlock (talk) 16:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Tokyogirl79

User:Tokyogirl79, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Tokyogirl79 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Tokyogirl79 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mkdw^talk 16:19, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

AFD talk pages

AFD talk pages are rarely useful, but they are useful.

I've used them for "live" AFDs when there is a "meta" issue that isn't part of the AFD and isn't relevant to the outcome of the AFD, but which needs to be recorded and closely associated with the AFD for some reason.

I've also used them to copy information that would normally be put on the article's talk page such as possibly-useful references, in case the result will be "delete, without prejudice for a new version being created."

I've used them for closed AFDs when there is important information which needs to be kept with the AFD for historical reasons. One example would be if an article about the same topic but under a different name had its own AFD - it's important to put cross-links in BOTH AFDs so if it comes up a 3rd time both will be easy to find.

I've created at least 7 such pages since December 2013 and more before then. Of the 7 (1, 2, 3 (a joke edit), 4 (a post-close edit), 5, 6, and 7) you could argue that in some cases I should have put the content on the AFD itself. However, I can't think of any plausible alternative for edits like #4. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:19, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Re: List of candidates in the Indian general election, 2014

Hi. What was the rationale for the deletion of List of candidates in the Indian general election, 2014? I was off Wikipedia for a few days, perhaps I missed something, but I didn't see any deletion discussion anywhere. Thanks, --Soman (talk) 16:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• The user who created the page (User:Logical1004) requested a deletion, mostly based on a conversation that had been over the potential merging of information. I have no issue with transferring a copy to your userspace (or Logical1004's userspace, since I tagged him in this message), if you want. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:04, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
  • If you could, please recreate the content at User:Soman/temp, I think there are some salvagable material in the article. Thanks, --Soman (talk) 21:05, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	for your good understanding of humor when closing the april fool's AFDs -- Aunva6talk - contribs 20:45, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

T-Shirt

Hi Tokyogirl79, I finally heard from the WMF about the t-shirt and they decided to give me one based on your recommendation. Woohoo! I didn't want to give out my real name and address so there is no practical way. So I asked if I could recommend another person and pay it forward, or regift, and they said sure. So I recommended.. Northamerica1000... But I don't think Northamerica1000 knows about it yet. I'll email them again to make sure it doesn't get lost. Anyway thanks for the gift that was pretty cool. To be continued. -- GreenC 05:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, it looks like Northamerica1000 also declined for the same reason.[22] Do you want to nominate someone else? -- GreenC 16:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

• Hmm... I'm not sure. How about User:Gareth Griffith-Jones? He's done some good work on Wikipedia and deserves one. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:28, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Good morning Tokyo Girl,
As you can see here a t-shirt is promised—and thank you for your original recommendation over a year ago—but I do have some reservations regarding security as outlined in Lugnuts's three posts on User talk:JMatthews under 'claim'. His suggestion to J Matthews was somewhat rejected.
Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 08:31, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• I thought that I'd recommended you for a shirt! Do you have anyone you might want to recommend in your stead? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:46, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Ha, ha! Glad to know that I would still receive your endorsement today!
Yes, this new editor, Onel5969 (talk) whom I have taken under my Welsh wing deserves my recommendation. He is based in the U.S. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 09:05, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• Sounds good! GreenC, sounds like we've got our lucky recipient! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:19, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok, great. Does User:JMatthews (WMF) know about it? The T-shirt is by way of Tokyogirl79 -> Green Cardamom -> User:Northamerica1000 -> User:Gareth Griffith-Jones -> User:Onel5969. -- GreenC 14:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Guys, what about me? I need it too.. hehe Ashish Lohorung (talk) 11:33, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tokyogirl79, it appears that you would like to regift your free shirt to User:Onel5969. I can add this user to the nominations page. To do so, I need a brief description as to why you're nominating them for a free shirt. Every nomination needs an answer to the question, "Why is this user awesome?". Thanks!! --JMatthews (WMF) (talk) 05:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

• Hey! Not my shirt per se, but User:Green Cardamon's shirt that she received per User:Gareth Griffith-Jones's recommendation. (I nominated them both for a shirt.) I've tagged them both in this so they can post something on the page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

That is correct. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 08:00, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Kim Young-chul

Thank you for working the admin processes. Please check the page Kim Young-chul. You deleted twice. Sawol (talk) 06:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for letting me know! I was doing a lot of them and I think I had it open in two windows, which is why it turned into a circular redirect. I've restored the history and fixed the error. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:49, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes Sir Boss

I was basing the article on meeting these criteria:

• Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

FMV Magazine and Female First. I have also found this citation The Fleece.

• Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.
• Has received non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country

I barely had any time to work on this article and just created it yesterday. Since, I've been targeted by some personal attacks here and here. I do believe that the article should be allowed more discussion. What do you think? :)

Also on a side note, can you restore the full history for The Devil's Tree, its talk page, and remove any protections on the page? The article has passed AfD and I intended to move the information back to The Devil's Tree as it appears that is the more standard name. Thanks! Valoem ^{talk contrib} 14:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• The page for The Devil's Tree seems to already exist at Devil's Tree, but I can make a copy of the other edits in your userspace. Offhand it looks like anything of value has already been merged. The redirect to Devil's Tree seems most appropriate since the basic name is just "Devil's Tree" from what I can see.

I'll restore the article into your userspace, but the problem is that you'd still have to show coverage to back up the claims of notability for Yes Sir Boss. Just saying that someone is popular within a specific area isn't enough. You have to have the coverage to prove it, regardless of how big the band is. The FMV Magazine link should be good, although the one from Female First kind of gives off the bloggy vibes, so expect people to argue that link if it goes to AfD- and it'll likely go to AfD if you re-add it to the mainspace. Now the problem with The Fleece is that it's a venue. That means that it's in their best interest to write about the band and promote them in the best light possible, which means that it'd be considered a WP:PRIMARY source. Anything written by someone who stands to gain something (financial or otherwise) by writing about the band and is directly related to them is seen as a primary source. I'd really recommend that you keep this in your userspace for the time being and not re-add it to the mainspace. It'd probably be good to ask for some people from the music wikiproject to come and help you with sources. I'd also recommend using our Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to help vet sources since (don't take this the wrong way) you seem to be a little new to discerning sources. Don't take that badly- it took me a while to learn the difference as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the input! I do however, feel that this band is notable and intend on restoring it, but first I will add a few citations. When its comes to finding reliable sources my goal was to get a third party opinion. With newer bands and less mainstream articles in general, the quest for finding reliable sources can be at times, hazy. I will make a post on the Music project page, but what I am seeing is at least two reliable sources, BBC and FMV Magazine. I believe third party RS sources are for meeting WP:GNG. Primary and other sources can be allowed to expand the article, but not establish its notability. With a second album being release this August, I feel waiting for that release is a bit superfluous and per WP:IAR this article should have some ground to be retained. Let me know! Valoem ^{talk contrib} 00:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

The Kingdom Keepers

Hi Tokyogirl9! That was awesome work on The Kingdom Keepers. Yesterday, I spent a couple hours looking for relevant references for that article and apparently missed a lot of them. Would you mind sharing your search techniques? Any tips for being a little quicker and more thorough on the research would be a great help. Thanks EBstrunk18 (talk) 16:25, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

• I'll usually use Highbeam, Bing News Search (since Google doesn't have archived news hits anymore like they used to), my college's database search, and just good old fashioned "search until your eyeballs bleed" searching. It took me better part of a night to search for a lot of those. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:09, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

New book article could use some sprucing

Hi TG. I've just thrown up a very cursory article about a recent book - The Copper Promise. I don't have time at the moment to put together more than the bare bones; if you get a chance to take a look and work your magic on it at some point, I'd be jolly grateful.
Also, thanks for using my userpage as an example of good design; I'm very flattered and I'm glad you like it! Yunshui ^雲_水 12:52, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

• You've got a beautiful userpage! It deserves to get used as a great example! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:15, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

AfC - Quiet Storm

Greetings,
We had a recent encounter over Wikipedia_talk:Articles for creation/Quiet Storm (Aly & Fila album). I found a few more stuff to add, including info about the remixed version of the album that will be released soon and a mention in Libertatea, but i'm thinking about creating the article without using AfC because other editors might have better sources than mine. Can i do this for now while you add the notability tag till someone finds more sources? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 10:56, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

• I had to think about it for a while. You could create it if you wish- I won't tag it with a deletion rationale and give you (and others) some time to find sources, although I can't guarantee that others would. As far as the two sources go... they're not exceedingly useful except as trivial sources at best. Hopefully though we'll find some other sources when the remix album comes out. All we really need is that one review for the remix album to help push it into more comfortable notability standards. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:09, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• Hello and thank you for replying. I will create it in the next few days by adding new stuff about the remixed album. I agree however that other editors might not even touch the article because very few care about trance-related articles. Another part of the problem is that this music genre isn't covered much by reliable sources and those that do are mostly trivial ones like you said, even though this album for example, among many others, is highly notable in the trance scene. If no one pays attention to the article in the next few months, i will consider merging it to Aly & Fila instead of deleting. Sounds good for now? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 08:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Groupclr

Hello Tokyogirl79 I would kindly appreciate if you would not slender my name. If you have issues - i would more then be happy to talk you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Groupclr (talk • contribs) 02:31, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• The problem is that there is reasonable suspicion to think that you may be a sockpuppet. If you're not, then I'm sorry for the confusion but I'd still like a check to know for certain. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:00, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

User talk:Jimmypader

Hm. I've been working the unblock request queue for a long time, and this is perhaps the first time I've seen an unblock request declined by the blocking admin. I don't know if there's a policy against it, but the social norm does seem to be that admins only decline one admin request per block, and that the blocker doesn't decline at all. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 05:00, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

• K- I'll revert it to be fair. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
• Basically, we can decline but it's a reasonable request to want a third admin to come in with a fresh mind. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:10, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thank you for all your support you have given to fine tuning my articles. Cheers! Ashish Lohorung (talk) 11:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

My page deleted- pls talk back

Dear,

My page "KOOVS" has been deleted by you citing the reason G11 and G12. I regret to have anything like that in my article but we had no intention of either advertise or copyright infringement. As we are new to WikiPedia so i would like to request you to help improve our article.

Looking forward to get suggestion to improve our deleted Article "Koovs"

Thanks. Pawan

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pawan1984 (talk • contribs) 12:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC) 

Orphaned non-free image File:What We Talk About When We're Talking About Anne Frank Cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:What We Talk About When We're Talking About Anne Frank Cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:27, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:48, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Re: Lesser extinctions

Hello, ReaderofthePack. You have new messages at 50.181.30.121's talk page.
Message added 01:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Repost of Draft:Yes Sir Boss

A tag has been placed on Draft:Yes Sir Boss requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's discussion directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of recreating the page. Thank you. Barney the barney barney (talk) 12:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Barney the barney barney did you read the comment under the review template? Flat Out let's discuss it 12:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

@Flat Out (talk · contribs) - quite clearly, the reviewer doesn't actually have a clue, which I'm afraid in my experience isn't uncommon. Barney the barney barney (talk) 12:49, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I have declined speedy deletion. The article submitted is substantially different from the one previously deleted. Favonian (talk) 12:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Barney's misconduct cause me to has start an ANI incident input is appreciated. His nomination of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yes Sir Boss may be in bad faith. In the first line he falsely stated that my article which pass through all proper avenues was created in violation of COI. Any research on my account history shows that this is nearly impossible. I find this highly inappropriate and believe a block my be necessary. I took the high road the first time when he made flagrant attacks, but this has crossed the line. Valoem ^{talk contrib} 15:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Valoem (talk · contribs) has started an ANI incident, not me, and I can hear the WP:BOOMERANG already. He is whining "ooh, personal attacks" when unable to present required evidence to satisfy notability guidelines. Barney the barney barney (talk) 16:39, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid that Valoem (talk · contribs)'s "high road" is somewhat below the epic alpine heights of mine, and I shall be staying out of this and I am confident that I will be vindicated by the deletion of this pathetic article. Barney the barney barney (talk) 17:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hagabaga

Thanks for closing that. The pink speedy tag overshadows the small white AfD. The white AfD tag blended in in with the snow we have here. My mind was overwhelmed by the nonsense of the article I missed the AfD. Actually I'm probably just a idiot. Thanks again. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 15:42, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Choorian (1963 film)

This has been listed for a looooong time. Care to do a close? Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 23:04, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

• I've closed it as "no consensus without prejudice for a renomination". I can see where both sides are coming from, so I figured that this was the best way to solve that issue. I'm going to ask for help from one of the various applicable WP as far as sourcing goes, hopefully they can find something? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:24, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

• Plus it looks like it was released on to DVD in 2000, which says something about it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:25, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Pocket guide to divorce

I have closed WP:Articles for deletion/The pocket guide to divorce as speedy delete G11 - the text made clear that these articles are part of the class's "social media campaign" marketing exercise. I have also explained the facts of life at User talk:Denisegee69.

I see that Jimfbleak has deleted the author's article. I don't have a strong view about that, I am not sure whether he met WP:AUTHOR; but even if that article is resuscitated, I don't think this book should be a redirect to it. As part of their learning experience, the class need to get the message that WP is not for "social media campaigning". In fact, I have salted both versions of the title for three months, in case other members of the class have a go. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:29, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

• I have to admit... I'm really uncomfortable with the idea of deleting the author's article as a form of promotion on the basis that the reviews were for "non-notable" books. If the author/professor and his students wanted to complain, they'd have a good case for the author's page since the reviews weren't exactly from small trade sources. We had one from the Bulletin of the Center for Children's Books and another from The News-Star. Plus I also saw reviews from the Horn Book Guide, Booklist, and Kliatt - all reviews that do count towards notability under WP:AUTHOR. There's also the trade reviews from Publishers Weekly, Booklist, and Kirkus. Those I don't really count anymore, even though they do still sort of unofficially "count" in an AfD. I understand the idea of wanting to discourage the professor and his students from trying to manipulate Wikipedia for personal gain, as I think it's incredibly unethical because Connelly is essentially telling them to help him sell his manuscript in return for a passing grade. Maybe that's not how he told it to the class or put it in the class syllabus, but that's pretty much what this boils down to. It's an incredibly slimy, disgusting move on his part as far as I'm concerned and it goes against the whole idea of what educators are supposed to do with asking their students to edit Wikipedia - even the ones who tried to use this site to propagate hoaxes. But... the guy did still pass notability guidelines. Other than the history having some copyvio in it, there really wasn't a truly good rationale for speedy deletion (as reviews do count towards notability for authors as long as they're in RS) and I'd have been more comfortable with it running through AfD as opposed to a speedy. User:Jimfbleak, I'm tagging you in this discussion because I do think that this needs to be discussed a little further. I understand why you did it and part of me really doesn't want a recreation of the article for the whole mini "slimy professor" rant above, but I'm just worried about this coming back to haunt us later. So what I'm proposing is that I'll take a copy of my latest version into my userspace. I'll non-index it so it doesn't appear on a Google search, and after a short period of time (1-3 months) I'll transfer my copy into the mainspace. I do think that the author's a jerk (see rant above) but I'm just uncomfortable with penalizing him for being unethical when he does technically pass notability guidelines. I'm not going to make a thing about it, but I do think that there would probably have been better ways to go about all of this and I'm just a little afraid of this coming back to haunt us in the end. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:57, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

No, it's not as bad as that, Connelly is not the professor in charge of the exercise, that's someone called Carswell. Carswell's class picked Connelly's manuscript as the subject of their exercise - see http://www.gorskypress.com/. Carswell's conduct seems to me dodgy - using his class to do promotion for a book his publishing house will put out - but I don't see any evidence that Connelly is involved.

Author notability is an unsatisfactory area - WP:AUTHOR is very demanding, but people will say "never mind that, here are two reviews, he meets GNG", and reviews of a sort are so easy to come by that we probably end up being more inclusive than is really desirable. JohnCD (talk) 10:23, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

• At least it's not the author, but that the guy doing it is the publisher is still just as bad. I usually don't use just a handful of reviews and if not for the other stuff that came up in a search, I wouldn't be as leery over the whole deletion. I guess I'm just overly paranoid when it comes to stuff like this, as the media seems to love when they can kick the site around and honestly... I don't really trust people who use Wikipedia for promotional purposes on that sort of level. Odds are he'd do nothing, but there's always the slim chance he'd try to raise a stink in the hopes that the media sympathy would sell books. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:27, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

• Basically my unease is more of a CYA thing since I don't want anyone to get in trouble in the long run. I'm not really going to fight it or anything, I'm just uneasy when it comes to stuff like this because I don't want it to turn into WikiGate 2014 or anything like that, not that I think it would. I just mostly don't want anyone to have to deal with any fallout if it happens, and I think it's mostly a tentative "if" at best. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:31, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

To be clear about Neil Connelly: he isn't, as far as I can see, behind the promotional activities of Carswell's class, he just happened to the one whose unpublished manuscript they chose. His article is not part of their campaign, it has been here since 2007. It may do the class no harm to learn that using WP for marketing is not only ineffective but can actually backfire, but that's not a reason to delete. On (narrow) balance, I think it should be restored, and then maybe sent to AfD, but I don't feel strongly about it. JohnCD (talk) 11:14, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

• Eh, I'm not going to push too hard for it. I'll probably do the "no index" userspace at some point and just slowly gain references. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)

Thanks

Thanks for your work at RadiumOne. Chisme (talk) 20:13, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedies

Thanks for helping clear out my userspace. VanIsaac_WS^cont 08:03, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Arabicadoo on Commons

I've nominated those two files for deletion, one as a copyvio and the other as normal deletion request.Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 27 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Chinese food therapy page, your edit caused a DOI error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Editor's Barnstar
		Much thanks for your significant improvements in cleaning-up, copy editing and adding reliable sources to the The Farnsworth House Inn article. Thanks! NorthAmerica1000 05:41, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

A clap on the shoulder for you, my friend

Hello there Tokyogirl79. Thank you so much for your edits on the How Hitler Lost the War article. I appreciate your help. Best regards. Jonas Vinther (talk) 11:56, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

• 
  Caption1
• 
  Caption2

Dragons: Real Myths and Unreal Creatures

Hi,

You have denied my documentary "Dragons: Real Myths and Unreal Creatures" its own page on Wikipedia. I believe this is unfair and that the information given about the movie was valid and objective.

I don't know how to file an official complaint about this, and I apologize for this direct intervention.

I honestly believe that your opposition constitutes an abuse of power.

Marc Fafard — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mf wik (talk • contribs) 20:00, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

• I'm sorry you feel that way, but the article had some serious issues with it when it comes to notability. The thing to remember about articles is that while they should be factual, an article must show notability first. First off, one of the sources (Dragons and Dragon Lore) is not actually about the movie at all and as such, cannot show notability at all. This link is a WP:PRIMARY source, which can never show notability. You have two readily identifiable sources that can help show notability, but they are not of themselves enough to assert notability per WP:NFILM. The L'Ecran Fantastique source isn't readily available so I can't tell how in-depth it is, something that is very, very important to ascertain. The article also had some issues with tone, as it also comes across as fairly promotional. The phrase "This 3D film for giant screen theaters delves into the rich history and folklore of dragons." comes across as very incredibly promotional, which is something we cannot have on Wikipedia. However the biggest issue is about establishing notability. As far as the existence of other articles, please be aware that another IMAX film having an article means nothing. (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS) It just means that either the film meets guidelines in other ways or the film fails NFILM and just hasn't been deleted yet.

I'm sorry that you feel like this is us being unfair, but I can assure you that myself, User:Darylgolden, User:Anupmehra, and User:Davidwr are not doing this to be mean. There are very firm rules on Wikipedia about notability for films and about promotional language. Accusing everyone that has ever denied the page of abusing power is not a good way to go about trying to fix the issues. We're willing to work with you, but only if you are willing to meet us halfway and try to help look for sources and clean the article up. I'll be honest, not every film passes notability guidelines and if at the end of all of this (assuming you're willing to continue working and not just give up) the article doesn't pass NFILM, that doesn't mean that there is any agenda or ill will towards the film. It's just that the film didn't pass notability guidelines. If you really feel that there is a genuine wrongdoing here, you can always go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk and pose a question, although I will say right now that I doubt that you'll get much of a different answer from anyone who is fully aware of Wikipedia's policies. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:44, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

---

Thanks for your message, Tokyogirl79.

I get your point and I also understand that I'm trying to make mine with different criteria. I'm also doing all this wrong, which doesn't help. I apologize for insinuating that you or other reviewers (Davidwr, anupmehra) are not acting in a fair manner. It's also the whole process and criteria that I'm interpreting wrongly. You shouldn't pay with your time and patience for my chaotic learning phase and awkward interpretation of what Wikipedia should take or not. Again, I'm sorry.

I'll be at peace with whatever decision will be made. Let me just try to contribute a little more here in the spirit of the current rules which I'm not sure this movie can meet.

Notability being the main issue, I'm trying to see what I have that could help the cause.

One peculiar point about Large Format movies (aka Imax) is that they have long carreers made of international bookings that can be quite dispersed in time. It also happens that a movie of that type will be shown on TV or be released on DVD and still get bookings in the institutional market. Adrenaline Rush, a movie I made, released in 2002 was still showing at the Smithsonian, even after the DVD was released and having been programmed on TV in a few places around the world. The same happened to Dinosaurs: Giants of Patagonia. I will be showing again in a few days at the British Film Institute long after its DVD/Blu-Ray release and a few TV presentations. Vikings: Journeys to New Worlds also had a similar carreer (it doesn't have a Wikipedia page, but it has been reviewed by the international press).

Imax documentaries most of the time don't get as much attention form the media as mainstream film does, even minor ones. For instantce, Dragons, the movie that's discussed here, has had nearly 75,000 entries in Paris. That's about equivalent to a (beautiful) movie titled Gabrielle that has had much more press coverage. Attention by the critics most probably helped and that's great and deserved. On the other hand, Imax movie tend to be overlooked because they are distributed mostly in an niche (institutional) market. The commercial market has been mostly taken over by blockbusters. The logic is indisputable. Please, don't cry.

L'Écran Fantastique is mainly a print magazine that doesn't keep articles online. I do have a link to a pdf copy on La Géode's website. I'm putting links here. This is awkward. Sorry. http://www.lageode.fr/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/efx.pdf I've asked for a link withe the publication name in the url.

Le Figaro has also covered the movie through an interview with Max von Sydow. http://evene.lefigaro.fr/cinema/actualite/max-von-sydow-les-films-francais-representent-l-art-du-cinem-2353652.php Max gets a lot of attention and it is great for the movie. This also means that journalists focus a lot on him, his long and wonderful carreer, and don't cover the movie as much. This said, his fans are delighted to read all about him. I can guess that this this fire will be burn even brighter with his recent cast in next Star Wars. You had the same dynamic goin on with CultureBox: http://culturebox.francetvinfo.fr/cinema/stars/max-von-sydow-parle-de-dragons-3d-et-de-lexorciste-interview-exclusive-143901

La Presse/Le Soleil (Canada) http://www.lapresse.ca/le-soleil/arts-et-spectacles/cinema/201306/13/01-4661126-dragons-3d-mythes-reels-et-creatures-irreelles-dans-le-ventre-de-la-bete.php This is a full review of the movie. It would qualify as "in depth", I believe, movie reviewing being generally a short form.

La Presse/Le Soleil (Canada) http://www.lapresse.ca/le-soleil/arts-et-spectacles/cinema/201306/13/01-4661122-laurence-leboeuf-dompteuse-de-dragons.php This is also substantial, with actress Laurence Leboeuf talking about the movie. La Presse and Le Soleil are major newspapers in French Canada.

C pour les enfants, Paris http://www.cpourlesenfants.com/cinema-documentaire/dragons-3d-–-mythes-ou-realite.html Short positive review

The Davis Clipper (Salt Lake City, Utah) http://www.davisclipper.com/view/full_story/23419065/article-Movie-Beat---Dragons--not-sure-what-it-wants-to-be Not positive, but an opinion that I respect and expected. Docufiction was almot mandatory (that another point in itself) and the Dragons wasn't t the hard science movie the reviewer expected at a planetarium. It could be the same in Hunan, China, where the movie is projected in a science center, in a special version created by Evans & Sutherland for a planetarium dome. I haven't seen reviewing from there yet. I'm putting a link to show you it's there but I dread trying to find reviewing because the search has to be done with chinese characters. http://www.hnstm.org.cn/newsview.asp?bid=7&sid=17&id=362

Metro News Paris http://www.metronews.fr/culture/video-on-a-vu-des-dragons-a-la-geode/mmjp!MXNt0MsWgMu2/ It freguently happens that no reviewing space is given to a movie albeit a specific media will want to attest of its presence somewhere. To me this add to the awareness of the movie, but I understand that this doesn't equate to notability. This type of small mention is nonetheless somewhat of a nod. They will not necessarily mention everything that's happening, although they will not send someone to cover the movie. Their demographics, the interest of their reviewers (Imax documentaries are considered in a class by themselves and they do not please everyone, even as a genre) will determine what attention is given to the production. This is also the case with this mention in Le Parisien: http://www.leparisien.fr/espace-premium/culture-loisirs/dragons-a-la-geode-19-10-2013-3239805.php Or, in Dernière Nouvelles d'Alsace. http://www.dna.fr/culture/2013/10/28/les-expos-a-voir-a-paris

Tycho Brahe Planetarium in Copenhagen -- Mostly short mentions but the movie has been programmed there for several months now. Kino (Denmark) http://www.kino.dk/film/d/dr/drager-virkelige-myter-og-uvirkelige-skabninger Minimal mention.

Bionyheder (Denmark) http://bionyheder.dk/film-trailer/13528/drager-virkelige-myter-og-uvirkelige-skabninger Minimal mention.

Politiken (Denmark) http://politiken.dk/ibyen/vis/17433/drager-virkelige-myter-og-uvirkelige-skabninger It only says that the movie "could have done without the story". Not "in depth", obviously.

Kulturguiderne http://www.kulturguiderne.dk/opture/2013/11/drager-virkelige-myter-og-uvirkelige-skabninger/ Short report of a school visit to the planetarium and screening of Dragons

Festivals that welcome Imax films are not many. Usually, because of the film format, festivals are held by Imax venues. La Géode in Paris used to have one. Sudbury in Canada has one. Mexico has one

Stockholm Film Festival http://www.stockholmfilmfestival.se/sv/junior/2014/film/dragons_3d

Sudbury Film Festival (Science North) http://www.sciencenorth.ca/promos/imaxfestival/images/festival-program-2014-en.pdf There was also radio coverage by the CBC/Radio-Canada but I can't find it.

Festival du cinéma interantional du cinéma en Abitibi-Témiscamingue (32nd edition) http://www.festivalcinema.ca/index.asp?varLangue=FR&varPage=accueil This is a mainstream festival -- it was presented in a section for kids.

Abitibi-Express (Canada) http://www.abitibiexpress.ca/Culture/2013-10-25/article-3448859/Des-decouvertes-a-faire-au-Festival-du-cinema/1

Rencontres cinématographiques de Québec. Professional convention where I presented Dragons and another 3D documentary (The Wings of Johnny May). http://www.lapresse.ca/le-soleil/arts-et-spectacles/cinema/201303/13/01-4630463-rencontres-cinematographiques-de-quebec-sicotte-et-pilote-en-ville.php

There was at least one or two festivals in China, (Beijing and Hangzu -- maybe one was a film market). I can't find exact references but I can if that's missing. Our distributor would know. This could be added later is the submission is accepted before. Sorry for this lack of precission. I'm trying to give you as many references as possible at once.

Dinosaurs: Giants of Patagonia (which has a page here, not a point in itself, I understand), was covered by only one newspaper in Paris, L'Humanité. The movie has had 440,000 spectators in a few years presence on one screen in Paris. This in a significant success in France, though. So, I don't know how Dragons can really satisfy the notability criterion as it is enforced by Wikipedia.

This is pretty much all I have for now.

Again, my apologies for this maybe unorthodox way of communicating info in this process, and once more, for my unjustified harsh and imperative tone.

I don't know if this will be seen by your colleagues who may have to sound in the decision to publish this page or not. I will send copies if you feel it is relevant.

Marc Fafard Mf wik (talk) 18:24, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Non-wide-release movies which do meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines may have received the necessary significant coverage by winning a major award, being widely used as a teaching tool at the college level or higher, being selected for preservation in a country's official film archive, or other reasons outlined in Wikipedia:Notability (films)#Other evidence of notability. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:38, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

---

Hi Dadidwr,

Thanks for giving some more time to read my last arguments.

Some links here are valid reviews.

As noted briefly, Imax movies do not have many festivals, especially because of their characteristics, film format, duration and other characteristics. They often don't have prizes either. I am at a loss for words. I tried.

This film features Max von Sydow, an iconic actor, twice nominated of an Academy Award and widely recognized as one of the most notable actor of the XXth century.

I'm at a loss for words, Davidwr, but I said that I would accept your decision, which I believe is shared by Tokyogirl79 and anupmehra. I think the other members of this production will want to move on as well.

This non-notable film will play later this year in Montreal, Seoul and Japan, after having being shown elsewhare in Canada, US, Mexico, France, UK, China and Denmark.

We'll analyze the following as an example of something that makes it through the approval process : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_Universe_3D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mf wik (talk • contribs) 16:57, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Regards,

Marc Fafard Mf wik (talk) 19:40, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

• Coming in a little late to the current conversation here: I wish that you'd have shown these sources in the article to begin with and/or had posted these on the talk page rather than saying that various people were abusing their power. The thing about claiming sources exist is that at some point you do need to produce them. Don't take that the wrong way, it's just that in the past we've had a lot of people and I stress A LOT of people say that sources exist and that we should keep it on their word alone. In most of those cases the sources didn't seem to actually exist and the editors never actually produced any sourcing themselves, so we had to assume that the sourcing didn't actually exist. We can't really go on someone's say-so that a film is notable and should be included and we can't add or keep articles just because other things exist or because it's difficult for a film to gain coverage for whatever reason. Basically, this all would have been a lot easier if you'd approached us with "hey, I have that extra sourcing you were asking for" rather than berating us. I'll add the sourcing to the article and see if it is enough to pass film, although offhand I do think that it will be. It's just that I still have to stress that when someone declines an article, it's better to try to work with us rather than argue that we should approve it on your claims alone. We just can't do that anymore when it comes to Wikipedia- we need the actual, hard proof. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:02, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
• I've added the new sourcing and it now passes notability guidelines. Again, I just wish that we'd had this to begin with. I really don't mean this to come across as harsh, but again- it all boils down to coverage that either we can find or that is provided by the person who created the AfC submission. Google search isn't perfect and our time is limited in what we can search for because honestly, there's a huge, huge backlog at AfC in general and that's not even including the research needed for the hundreds of articles that are up for deletion each week in various formats. We can't search indefinitely for each film, so the expectation is that the submitter will find and submit the sources in general. It's a lot of work on you, I know, but in the end we still have to have the proof of coverage. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:36, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Category:Dutch children's novels

Hi, you or the good @Drmies: might add some further entries to this category and add the nl interlink if it exists!♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:08, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

• It doesn't, and I tell you what--it's the "novel" part. The Dutch categories and articles for children's books don't use novel as a genre. What articles I've written here (like Pluk van de Petteflet) I've put in Category:Dutch children's books. Drmies (talk) 13:44, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Amir (singer)

It would be a great pleasure actually Tokyogirl79. I truly like to work on articles of artists with ethnic origins in Wikipedia. Although the references are much harder to find, and sometimes they are in foreign languages not accessible to most of our editors, yet these artists are truly international artists in the diasporas stretching from North America to Europe to Africa to Asia and Australia. They are active in and do get some coverage in various media away from their countries when they engage in international tours. Of course the hardest part is proving chart positions as most countries do not have official singles and albums charts...

By the way since we are at it, for a very long time, I've been truly interested in working on articles of artists already deleted or in the very risk of getting deleted. Is there a convenient area in which I would know about deleted articles of such artists that could be revived with some efforts. I am willing to exert enough effort to reestablish artist articles deleted because of lack of references and finding notable articles about them. werldwayd (talk) 08:49, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

• There's not really one good place to look, but you could probably find quite a few in the category pages for the speedy candidates and proposed deletion candidates. There are almost always more than a few performers listed on there, so it's usually a good place to start looking. Many of them get placed on the Speedy Deletion Wikia, but they don't always make it that far. I know that if you see any on the speedy deletion category that you want to have userfied, I'm more than happy to do it. I feel sort of guilty sometimes when I see performers who may be notable, but like you said, may have a language barrier standing in the way of finding sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:55, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

I dedicate to you a very famous song by Amir called "Sahneh". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvVB1y0SqH8 Amir is an American Persian singer. The songwriter Shahyar Ghanbari who wrote it is a huge songwriter with songs to the greatest names of Persian music and he found appropriate to give a song to Amir. This is an achievement as is. The short Amir article of a few lines did have three separate references attached as you see in English and Persian and a review of his album. I could not understand why a long-standing article needs to be "speedily deleted' rather than being given a fair chance of being discussed at least. werldwayd (talk) 09:14, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

• That song is so beautiful and forlorn! I have to admit that it was the sourcing that gave me pause. I can see where they could be potentially picked apart at AfD as being unusable, but I kept sort of feeling that there might be more out there and the speedy didn't really sit well with me, so I definitely was glad you were willing to userfy it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:23, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

The music of the song was composed by a renowned Armenian musician called Andranik Asatoorian now living in the States. werldwayd (talk) 10:56, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

• I'll have to look into getting this song- it really stuck with me! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:42, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Important topic

Thank you very much, for your contribution in an article Corbin Bleu. It is well known, in September 4, 2013, he was revealed to be a contestant on the 17th season of Dancing with the Stars. He partnered with professional dancer Karina Smirnoff.

I have an important topic of this article, you can add this section in the article Corbin Bleu. This is important topic in this article, please. good luck in your life. --NooryLyn (talk) 11:21, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Researcher's Barnstar

		Researcher's Barnstar
		I am both pleased and honored to present you with the Researcher's Barnstar in appreciation for your superb work in finding sources showing Kule Kidz Gråter Ikke as notable. Excellent work! Schmidt, Michael Q. 17:09, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

The Guide Dog Foundation Speedy

Indeed, you are correct. :) I overheard someone ask the foundation itself to create their own Wikipedia article. I told this individual NO - the foundation could not create this page as it was COI, but that the individual requesting it can! So I created the article as a stub/example for some them to work on. Being an experienced wikipedia editor with little experience on the subject, I shouldn't have done that. I have instructed those individuals (and thereby the members a guide dog users mailing list/community) to read up on Wikipedia:Credible_claim_of_significance and a the getting started pages and assemble something proper. Still, Thanks for your efforts. - Trysha ^(talk) 15:58, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Quick question for you re: creating a page that is considered notable - 5/15/2014

Hi user:tokyogirl79, you deleted the page Doug Given due to lack of notability. I'd like to resubmit the entry with improved information to show why he's notable (he founded a biotech company that developed an improved live attenuated influenza vaccine against seasonal and pandemic flu, among other things). Any help is much appreciated. Thanks! -user:kawika — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kawika (talk • contribs) 19:13, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Pages: Brandon_Cyrus

Hello, why would you delete our page? There was a delete article posted on it by someone who was harassing my client, posting hateful things such as that deletion page and I'm pretty sure the person was massing peoples pages telling them to mark it for deletion. I was on my way to put in more sources and articles. We spent over 6 hours creating that page and would appreciate it if you would reinstate it and give us another try. Please and thank you. Those newer sources and references will be up ASAP! The page was receiving several hundreds of views while it was up. Kind of disappointing to add. --BrandonCyrus (talk) 09:13, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, but the problem was that the roles he played were minor and Cyrus has not received any in-depth coverage. You can try running this via deletion review, but you would have to show that he's received coverage in reliable sources such as news articles specifically about him. I don't see where User:Dudel250's nomination was made out of bad faith, and I'm familiar with User:Bgwhite. Bgwhite is an excellent editor and I have no reason to believe that their edits to Cyrus's page was made in an attempt to attack Cyrus. I honestly don't think that either editor did this in an attempt to make a personal attack against Cyrus, rather they did this because they did not see how Brandon Cyrus is independently notable outside of being a relative of Miley Cyrus, who gave him small, trivial roles on her television show. You can always run this through Wikipedia:Deletion review, but I will warn you that if you go in there stating that any of the various editors pushed for the page's deletion out of a personal vendetta against Cyrus, you will not be taken very seriously. Please understand that making accusations without some form of hard evidence to back up your claims is extremely inadvisable, as not every deletion nomination is done as part of a personal attack and this can actually make many editors less likely to want to help you. Sometimes people simply don't pass notability guidelines. I understand that this is frustrating, especially if you are someone who is a big fan of Cyrus or someone who knows him personally, but I just don't see where he passes our notability guidelines for actors or for people in general. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:24, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• Also, I would like to point you to WP:COI, if someone hasn't already asked you to read over that page. Since you have stated that you are part of a social media management site, I am going to assume that you were paid to create this page for Cyrus. It isn't against the rules for someone to edit with a conflict of interest, but it is highly discouraged because not only does a COI make it more likely that a page will come across as promotiona, but in many cases where people are paid to create Wikipedia articles, the company feels that the deletion of a page reflects poorly on what their company is able to accomplish. It does have the risk of negatively impacting your company, but the problem is that if the person does not pass notability guidelines, re-adding the page does not do anything to help the person you're trying to promote. If anything, many companies and individuals who have paid for companies to create Wikipedia pages have been the focus of negative scrutiny and several companies have tried to greatly distance themselves because of article deletions on Wikipedia. Basically what I'm saying is that it's recommended that you proceed with extreme caution when creating articles with a COI and in how you go about responding to article deletions, as this has backfired for people in the past. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Tokyogirl79, I understand where you're coming from, however, that dude person on my talk page was posting all types of harassment, calling me a liar and names, stating I did this and what not. When I explained to him why the page for deletion should be deleted, he agreed but another user made him change his mind. The page was deleted over too little of sources, however, I explained multiple times that I was re-updating the page, it DOES take time, a lot of time. Especially all that time that was wasted, of 6 hours, because you decided to delete a page over harassment and didn't even give me time to update it, which I was going to do so this morning! Cyrus doesn't only have "little roles", he had several roles on Hannah Montana, he was a recurring guest for over 10 episodes, he also starred as a popular character on Zoey 101, he has credits for Ted 2, Magic Mike 2, and he played in major movies such as Divergent, High School Musical 2, and several MTV shows that I had not listed yet, all of these can be found on his IMDb page. If these credits, or shows, aren't notable, or fit, then we really don't know what is because playing a main character in The Hunger Games (a civilian) is a huge huge step for someones acting to be called 'small' or 'minor'. Under Wikipedia's guidelines, Cyrus does fit as he is a "famous persons" and the page should remain while it is edited. Please help and understand.

As for the COI, we work directly under Cyrus' management. In nowhere, we never said we were paid for the Wikipedia page, we were indeed thanked and had several gratitude. Most edits were revised by Cyrus and agreed upon before processing. We have no bias reviews or anything, we just know the person from inside and outside as we are his team. Please give us another chance. And by the way, our username was changed to avoid confusion, however, Wikipedia hasn't updated t yet. --BrandonCyrus (talk) 09:50, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Also wanted to note, another user discussed with "BigWhite" why the page should remain, he agreed with the author, touched it again, and just said it needed to be updated and recited. He did, however, mark it for deletion once, but the user talked it over and I assume he agreed that it should remain under a fix. --BrandonCyrus (talk) 09:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

The article will be fixed and updated. I promise. It just takes time and research, the page was a "stub" for a reason. Because it starts off as really small and develops itself. --BrandonCyrus (talk) 10:00, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• I do see where he was being uncivil and should have asked someone else to step in, but you were also being uncivil at the same time and being uncivil on a Wikipedia page does not automatically mean that they have a personal grudge against whatever subject they are putting up for deletion. As far as paid editing goes, COI can encompass anything from having a personal involvement to being paid in money or in exchange for references and so on. As far as major roles go, the thing about that is that this is meant to signify large roles such as Hannah Montana, Katniss Everdeen, or Molly Weasley. The writing is vague, but the inference is that the role (regardless of how major the film or show is) should be major enough to where multiple independent and reliable sources would have reported on the performance by either covering the actor themselves or the role. It usually translates into coverage like this academic text that mentions Molly Weasely. Simply having a guest role does not automatically qualify someone as having a major role that would extend notability. I don't see where he's done anything major enough to qualify as a notable actor. As far as BGwhite goes, I do not see where he specifically said that Cyrus passed notability guidelines. I see where he tried to give you more time to work on the article, but that does not mean that he endorses the person passing NACTOR. I'm sorry, but I will not reinstate the page. Unless you can show me evidence of him passing notability guidelines by giving me reliable sources that discuss Cyrus in-depth, I will not restore the page. Deletion review seems to be your only option at this point. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:02, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Those are major actors you are listing. To even be in the acting roles, to be on set, to get into the roles I mention is incredible. It isn't easy. You start from the bottom and you make your way up. There is WAY SMALLER (not yelling) pages than his was! You are throwing away over 6 hours of editing because of another administrator's thoughts? That administrator didn't even put the deletion article up! This is unbelievable, totally bias, and unacceptable. You aren't even giving me a chance to fix the page, deleting it after one day does nothing. People should have time to fix their articles and many pages are reinstated. Please tell me how exactly I can file this for undulation, since you are a admin and you are supposed to be helping users... cough cough... Thanks. --BrandonCyrus (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) Brandon_Cyrus/Reigningbc, your user name has been changed - you need to log out and then log in using the new name, because all your old edits have been moved to that name, and your talk page redirects to that name, too (that is why I am posting this here since you might not see it otherwise). I'm not an administrator and don't know how this works, really, but please note that you should be able to log in to your new name - if you can't, you might want to contact Xeno, who was the one who changed your name. Since your old name seems to have been recreated, you might want to contact Xeno in either case. Do that before you go to Deletion Review (which Tokyogirl very helpfully linked to above, but you may have missed that), please. --bonadea contributions talk 10:12, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• I am trying to help you, but the issue here is that Cyrus does not pass notability guidelines. While I do fully understand your frustration as it's hard for smaller, unknown actors to get attention, we can't keep an article because of the time invested in the article or because it's so difficult for actors to gain coverage in reliable sources until they have hit the big time. The reason our notability guidelines are so strict is because we cannot be an all-inclusive website where everyone gets a page, otherwise we'd have a million articles on actors who have never moved beyond playing Prison Guard #3. At some point we have to be more specific in what is needed to prove notability. In any case, you can go to Wikipedia:Deletion review and ask for another consensus. Again, I would very much recommend that if you seek further recreation that you please not say that the article's deletion was the result of someone with a personal agenda against Brandon Cyrus and that everyone that disagrees with you is being unhelpful. That will not help you in the long run. Your best bet is to go in there with reliable sources to show that Cyrus passes NACTOR, sources other than IMDb and WP:PRIMARY websites. If you can show me these sources I'm willing to look through them, but I couldn't find anything to show that he really passes notability guidelines in the slightest. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much bonadea! It worked! I may be a little slow on this Wikipedia thing... :) At least someone knows how to help other users! Thanks again for the tip. --Reigningbc (talk) 10:18, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• A small note, when you are responding on talk pages please be careful that you not remove other people's comments. You can edit your own comments, but removing another editor's comment (as you seem to have accidentally done here) is considered to be an extremely big faux pas, whether it is done intentionally or accidentally. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:22, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for that. IT must have done that while we were both updating the talk page and pressing the save button at the same time. I get where you're coming from. I'll follow your instructions, however, I wish to continue with another admin on the page you provided. As you listed before, you did this involving BGWhite views, which is unfair, if he had a problem with the page he would've deleted it himself. If you noticed, he was the one who gave me 7 days, unlike you who gave me 12 hours. --Reigningbc (talk) 10:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• The problem is, another user stating that they will not immediately seek deletion does not prevent another editor from seeking deletion. Nor does it prohibit me from closing an AfD early per WP:SNOW if the outcome is very clear that someone does not pass notability guidelines. Odds are high that if by some chance another editor had not nominated the page for deletion so quickly, BGW would have nominated it for deletion eventually. Him giving you a short period to improve the page does not mean that it is still safe from deletion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:34, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Important topic

Thank you very much, for your contribution in an article Corbin Bleu. It is well known, in September 4, 2013, he was revealed to be a contestant on the 17th season of Dancing with the Stars. He partnered with professional dancer Karina Smirnoff.

I have an important topic of this article, you can add this section in the article Corbin Bleu. This is important topic in this article, please. good luck in your life. --NooryLyn (talk) 21:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• It'd probably be better to suggest this on the talk page, as I didn't really do a whole lot of major editing to the page. Offhand I don't necessarily think that it's really needed to have an entire section just for his DWTS appearance as it's already covered on another page and so far it looks like this is his only appearance. Unless the appearance got an extraordinarily large amount of coverage, we don't really need to cover it in extreme depth, ie- reporting his scoring on the show. The reason it's in the article for the dancer is because that's primarily what she's known for and would make sense to include to some degree. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:47, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for your reply. please, because I see articles about actors and others, there is used by this section: Dancing with the Stars performances.
  • please look in this articles: Amber Riley, and Snooki and Bill Nye. Can you do it in this page Corbin Bleu. Because I do not have permission to edit this page Corbin Bleu. It's only a process of copying and pasting in this article. Thanks for your contribution excellent. good luck in your life. Sorry for the inconvenience. --NooryLyn (talk) 11:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
• I'd prefer that you bring this up in the talk page for the Corbin Bleu article, as I'd prefer to have a community consensus on this. I'll post there and link to this discussion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:25, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

A special delivery from Sodor

		The Troublesome Tank Engine Barnstar
		Thank you so much for your hard work at Hero of the Rails - you've transformed the article, it looks tons better now and is saved from deletion. You're a really useful editor whose work is very much appreciated! :) Acather96 (click here to contact me) 11:56, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• Love it!! I didn't know there was a Thomas barnstar! This has to be the best one I ever got! Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 12:23, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

No problem, my pleasure! It's on the WikiProject Thomas page, but we don't have many participants at the moment so that's why it's rarely given out. Wear it with pride! :D Acather96 (click here to contact me) 17:33, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Miniscule of Sound may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Sound''' is a small mobile nightclub that originally opened in [London Borough of Hackney|Hackney]], [[London]] in 1998.<ref>{{cite web|last=Rouse|first=Alisha|title=World’s ‘smallest disco’ set to

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:01, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Please delete the old revisions again

As it turns out, the only other actual version of File:Windows 2000.png is even worse for use in the article, but for reasons I could not have known had you not restored the revisions. Thank you! Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 07:30, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

It seems you deleted the wrong type of content - please restore the page revisions (which shouldn't have been deleted) and delete the actual images instead (which are still visible right now). Thank you. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 09:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• Let me ask another admin to look at this- I'm not sure how to undo what I did. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Requesting A comment On my talk page

Hello. Seeing that You deleted the page www.bitcoingg.com I was wondering if you could comment on my talk page Here Because it seems the creator of the page Thinks it was made Without his constent Claiming to be the owner of the company. Even though he made the page himself...Could you help me explain to him about how Pages are created on wikipedia and (maybe) Any Guidelines about lying about another editor. (if any) Thanks! Dudel250 (talk) 08:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• Just did! I think I actually hit it at the same time you did, since my comment originally showed up above your latest comment. I moved it down accordingly. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:31, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Kinda was having that stereotypical moment in movies just then when you have to smile even when you don't want to...yeah assuming good faiths hard sometimes :\ Dudel250 (talk) 08:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• It's soooo hard! I've had moments where I had to step away from the keyboard and walk away for a minute. On that note, I will warn you that you might want to be a little careful about how you phrase things, as it can seem a little confrontational at times. I know that with the whole Cyrus thing, that this was one of the editor's complaints. I don't think that you mean to come across badly, just that it's the whole "on the Internet nobody can hear your tone" thing. I've had it happen on multiple occasions where people assumed that I was being overly sarcastic, snide, etc, (oh the stories I could tell) but I didn't mean it to come across that way. It's sort of a CYA thing to be overly careful about everything you write, as it can really help in the long run if someone tries to stretch a complaint out by throwing "but they were mean to me" in the mix. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:37, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
• I'll email you about all this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:39, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeahhhhhh..I can relate....one time i found a really AWESOME! page....i gave wikilove to the creator Here But he took it as Scarcasm and Removed it..then i posted This Saying sorry when i realized what i said but it was too late..didn't respond to my Apoligy....oops...Dudel250 (talk) 08:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• I think that's one of the most frustrating aspects of the Internet in general, but especially here. I remember having instances where people thought I was bagging on a film because of the way I phrased the review section when really, I was just trying to encompass the varied opinions. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

 Agreed Dudel250 (talk) 08:56, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

On a Side Shameless Advertising Note Do you have permissions To Make Decisions On Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback? Dudel250 (talk) 09:00, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• I've never actually given anyone permissions, so I'd probably let someone else handle that because I don't know what they look for with that sort of stuff so I don't want to jeopardize your chances of approval by mucking about with it. I mostly do janitorial type stuff such as deleting pages and closing AfDs. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:06, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough...but i Haven't gotten any sort of response for quite a few hours since i posted the request for rollback rights...guess i'm stuck with using Twinkle :\ Dudel250 (talk) 09:17, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, ReaderofthePack. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 08:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Dudel250 (talk) 08:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Gender studies

Hey Tokyogirl79, so here I am writing you for help, and as I start, I realize I'm wearing my 'I edit Wikipedia' t-shirt that you nominated me for almost a year ago. So crazy! I was actually browsing the WikiProject Gender studies and noticed you had recently written on the talk page. I've created an article about the Chinese term sheng nu and I'd love to get it to featured status. Now I know you're thinking, Mkdw probably wants me to do all the hard work. That's only partly true. It's currently at GA nomination and I think it's probably going to pass. The leap shouldn't be too difficult to FA since I cited the bananas out of it from some really great sources, but I worry that the turn of phrase and prose might be lacking. Would love to get you to go over it at least once and get your thoughts especially since it's something that might interest you. As always, my fondest regards, Mkdw^talk 19:00, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

• I'll see if there's anything I can do. I'm not normally a big editor of GS pages but I'll see what I can add. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 01:57, 14 May 2014 (UTC)