User talk:Ritchie333/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

my new article on Carol Sudhalter

... you declined my new article on Carol Sudhalter only minutes after I submitted it. That was two weeks ago although I applied the changes YOU suggested a only few minutes after. But it is still blocked. What ca I do to get the review process going? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josmarlangner (talkcontribs) 19:04, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

  • There is a massive backlog of over 1,500 articles to review, so it will take several weeks. I notice that you have not added any additional sources, per my original request, so unfortunately I will have to decline the article again. Have a look at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners which will guide you through what is required. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:22, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


We edit conflicted. I'm reading through the source you added prior to weaving it in. Sorry to have initially not included it, but I thought best to have the scholarly stuff there and get rid of the references needed template immediately. There will be a pause .... Yngvadottir (talk) 21:12, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

  • No problem. My source was only from a 2 minute Google search, and then mainly to give a cast iron reason to keep the article. Off-topic, I'd really like to drive the E6 from one end of Norway to the other one day. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:15, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
    • Have a look now :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 21:28, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Straight out of the Uncle G school of "expand and reference an article lots to make the AfD nominator really embarrassed". Nice one. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:37, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
        • Well Geschichte may have a sense of déjà-vu - he and I met early in 2010 when I found scholarly sources at the last minute to turn around this AfD, and we've worked together on a few things since :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 22:20, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Psst! I turned up the 1472 mention of "Tosowe" in Diplomatarium Norvegicum (volume II, p 659), but I was unable to translate it to see whether it was relevant.

    Given the above: You didn't see me, right. I was never here. And you didn't see User:Drmies/Asega, either.

    Uncle G (talk) 11:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

    • Got a Googlebooks URL? Though I suspect it adds nothing to the earliest book I used, which references the listing :-) re: Asega - I could rewrite that from knowledge (it's law-speaker, for example, not right-soothsayer), but I'll play safe and wait till I get home from work and can consult books. Unless of course Drmies does it himself first :-) --Yngvadottir (talk) 14:07, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
    • In the case of Faithful amplification, no I didn't :-/ --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:19, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Kevin Peek (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Lulu and Tom Jones
Bootie (bicycle) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Handlebar

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of various HP articles


You state that G11 "is only for articles that have fundamental problems and where none of the content is at all salvageable".

Not true at all. G11 applies for articles that need to be fundamentally rewritten! The last HP article I edited was reduced from 10k to about 600 charcters, due to all of the review/spam/market speak in it. That is a fundamental rewrite, to say the least. The articles I tagged are much the same.

You also wrote that "Since the articles have at least some content cited to reliable sources, I don't think in good conscience we can speedy delete them.".

I am quite able to write a Wikipedia article with tonnes of links to reliable sources, yet have it 100% nonsense or spam. Reliable sources have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not G11 applies.

I urge you to re-read the two articles I sited -- and then when doing so ponder something.

"Is this what I'd read on the company's homepage to sell their product? Is this what a salesman would send me as marketing material?"

These HP articles reference tonnes of reviews for the products. One of the pages is just market speak, one sentence after another.

Wikipedia is not a center for spam, no matter how well crafted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbarnett (talkcontribs) 13:17, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I think you're misunderstanding what "fundamentally rewritten" means. In my view, that's more along the lines of WP:TNT, where you discard the entirety of the article and all its sources, and write an article from scratch (or don't, if there are no reliable sources to do so). I don't need to read all of the article to know that a CSD is inappropriate - for instance, a cursory glance at HP IT Management Software reveals a sentence cited to The Register. Even if every other sentence of the rest of the article was promotional, you would be able to use that reliable source to write something about it. You might find that you're left with a stub, with a choice to redirect or go through the AfD procedure, but you can't satisfy the criteria for WP:CSD#G11. If you sincerely believe there is nothing encyclopedic in the article, I would repeat my advice for you to nominate the articles for deletion, state your case, and get a good consensus for it. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing me!

Hi Ritchie, Thanks for doing my editor review. I'll definitely take into account what you said. Just to let you know, I have created the Nanoc article and previously copyedited several pages. However, I would like to try to do more of this. Thanks for reviewing me, It's a Fox! (Talk to me?) 22:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Phil Lynott

Good work with expanding Phil's article. I had it on my list of stuff to do after writing Thin Lizzy, but it was going to be a long time until I got round to it. He deserves a decent article and now he's getting one. The new Alan Byrne book is also a very decent source if you have it. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:39, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Thanks. I was listening to Live and Dangerous this evening, found an old biography I brought years ago, and started to expand it, with the intent it will go to good article nominations in a day or two after I get another book source. His mother's autobiography is an obvious one to mine, but I might try the Alan Bryne book as well. O/T, I have a feeling this edit in November 2005 was the first one I ever did for Wikipedia, as I recognise my old IP address. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:42, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
That was a pretty good place to start! Yes, his mother's book is a decent source as well, for sure, especially on the personal/family side. The Byrne book has good info on odd bits like the War of the Worlds project, and lots of detail on the solo albums etc, as well as all the more commonly-known aspects of his life. Even if it's got more detail than this article needs, it's still a great read. Should easily make GA with another source or two, and it'd be great to have another Lizzy-related GA to go with the main article. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I think more stuff about his solo work needs to go in, and probably also a bit about his socialising with the punk crowd in the late 70s, which spilled over to The Greedies and friendships with Bob Geldof, Midge Urge and the like. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:36, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
I agree on both counts. The Greedies were a pretty unique mixture of the rock establishment and the punk movement and deserve a paragraph for sure. Ure is another interesting one, since he was both in Thin Lizzy briefly and contributed a lot of contemporary poppy stuff to Phil's solo work. Each solo album should get a good paragraph or two, and there should be a bit more on Grand Slam. The personal life section could be expanded too; there's no mention of the separation from his wife, for example. Bretonbanquet (talk) 00:53, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interchange (software)

You iVoted in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interchange (software). It's now at DRV. The DRV requester listed two references, which were not mentioned at the AfD. Please consider participating in the DRV request. Thanks. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Bryan Kanu

Thanks for removing the CSD template. I later saw that article was expanded but didn't have sources. I was also about to PROD the article later, anyway thanks for your help. Torreslfchero (talk) 13:47, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Contested CSD

Hi Ritchie, You recently contested a speedy-nomination by me. No worries, albeit I don't understand your rationale.

So what if I am a member of a notable band? That band might be notable but that doesn't automatically mean everybody associated with it must be equally remarkable, or does it? Going by your logic non-notable kins of very notable celebrities ought not to be deleted through A7 but that - in my humble opinion - is not what the A7 tells us in spirit. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 13:45, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

  • You might want to look at the criteria for CSD A7 again more carefully, specifically the line "This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability". All that is required is an assertion of significance that could imply notability. In this case, we can see that the article's subject is a member of a notable band, so the sources that establish the band's notability may well mention him in person. WP:INHERIT is a question to ask at WP:AfD. You can find more information at User:SoWhy/Common A7 mistakes. As things stand, there is a {{blp prod}} tag on the article so it will be deleted within ten days anyway unless somebody adds references. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:53, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
  • As a matter of fact, I have read that line multiple times please don't presume that I am inherently a careless person. Hence, no need for much pontification about it. The assertion has to be of notability nevertheless and A7 only allows it to be unsourced. What I am arguing is that the assertion of being a member of a band doesn't inherit the band's notability. Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 10:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry, but you're not reading what's there. Why are you arguing about notability, when the guideline explicitly states that a credible assertion of significance is a lower standard than notability. Or in the essay I linked to above, A7 is not about notability. The wording clearly states that the standard for A7 is lower than that, using "important or significant" instead. Do you absolutely know that the article's subject is not notable, having done due research yourself in looking for information in sources? --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:17, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Don't shout ritchie. The line you're shouting about only allows an assertion to be unsourced. Stop quibbling about the phraseology. I am saying the claim itself is not an assertion of significance (only using the overtone of notability not inherited). Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 10:20, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
  • When people I know say "hey, I was reading a wikipedia page, where's it gone?" and don't know why, I think I will question very strict policies and where they don't match what they say. My suggestion to you, as previously stated, is to nominate the article for deletion. Stating your case on here won't help your claim. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I don't have any personal grudge against that article and I told you I don't necessarily oppose the decline either, only the rationale. Let's not stretch it further, goodbye. Cheers, Mr T(Talk?) (New thread?) 10:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Aware Electronics Corp


When a user searches WIKI for "Aware Electronics" he/she is shown which is a Taiwanese electronics manufacturer. All their ref. link to their website.

Aware Electronics Corp. was incorporated in 1989, 16 years before the above mentioned company.

Aware Electronics Corp. is a USA company.

When potential customers or interested parties search WIKI, they might get the impression we are a Taiwanese company.

Either remove the above page or allow us to include info. about Aware Electronics Corp. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quantum side (talkcontribs) 17:39, 17 December 2012 (UTC) Quantum side (talk) 18:56, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Articles for creation newsletter

Delivered 00:35, 18 December 2012 (UTC) by EdwardsBot. If you do not wish to receive this newsletter, please remove your name from the spamlist.

Disambiguation link notification for December 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

M11 link road protest (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to John Wheeler, M11 and Newmarket
You Turn My Life Around (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Charlie Wilson and Bridging The Gap
A12 road (England) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Brentwood
A14 road (England) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to A12
M23 motorway (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to William Shelton

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

  • What would I do without you, DPL bot? I never realised Brentwood was a disambiguation page and thought the one in Essex was far more popular than the others. (And given it's had two requests for move, it seems I'm not alone) --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:29, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

All the best for you this Christmas and may all you wish for happen in 2013

Yo Ho Ho

Merry Christmas!!

For all you do!! Have a wonderful HOLIDAY!!


I have mentioned your name in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Tomcat7. I have filed the RFC/U regarding Tomcat7's continuing issues on the Friedrich Eckenfelder page and others. As I have mentioned your name, I believe it is fair to note you as you did attempt to resolve the one-source tag issue on the Eckenfelder talk page. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:45, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Brands

Fredmeyer edit 1.jpg
Hello, Ritchie333.

You are invited to join WikiProject Brands, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of brands and brand-related topics.
To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:42, 22 December 2012 (UTC)


I like the article I really do. However, I should point to your attention that the citations in the article need some serious formatting work. Publishers are noticeably missing from a lot for example. I would make sure for consistency. The article's great, but the citations are an eyesore. Mitch32(Victim of public education, 17 years and counting) 04:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

  • A lot of citations were in the article before I looked at it, and I'm not sure what to do with them. Fix what you can, tag the rest, and it should be sorted quickly. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


Hi there - sad obsessive here - well done with your additions to A127 road; I hope you do not mind a reminder thus. :) cheers DBaK (talk) 14:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

EditorReviewArchiver: Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 3 January 2013 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7 days. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. Adding <!--noautoarchive--> to the review page will prevent further automated actions. AnomieBOT 16:54, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

The KInd

I wrote an article for this band, but it was declined. Here are some more sources:

There is another artist, Dugan McNeill, that is on Wikipedia with less information than what I wrote for The Kind.

Also, after my last posting to you, I was blocked for a few months. I have no idea why. What did I submit that made this happen? I was simply sending information about this band from Chicago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Those sources all look self-published or don't have any significant coverage of the band, and are hence unsuitable for establishing notability to pass an article. The state of McNeill's article is irrelevant - he is notable because he has been part of several albums released by a major label per the rules at WP:NMUSIC. Finally, if you are blocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks and request unblocking on your account's talk page - attempting to edit Wikipedia as an IP address (which includes editing anyone's talk page) may result in you being accused of sockpuppetry and blocked for even longer. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Were you aware?.....Ian Gillan

I just started reviewing Ian Gillan for GA (which you nominated and did much work on) and now someone has just started making major changes on it. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 01:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Quickfail the review on stability grounds. I fixed up the article for GA review about five months ago and since then it's had all sorts of changes, most of which are (IMHO) poor or content free, without citing sources, and I couldn't keep up.--Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:34, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Oxagile LLC

Hi Ritchie333. I think you removed the A7 CSD tag at Oxagile LLC based on a common misconception that A7 pertains to sourcing. In fact it pertains to claims of significance. From the guideline:

(snip A7 rules)

Please see WP:CSD A7 for additional information. It's best to leave these tags in place for an admin to handle, especially when two editors tag the same article. Cheers. - MrX 05:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Although I still think the company does not meet the threshold of significance, you make a good argument and clearly understand policy better than I initially assumed. I don't believe that that the A7 tag was applied too hastily and I think I have a different perspective than you articulated in the linked discussion. The CSD process serves an important function of removing vandalism, spam and non-notable subjects quickly and efficiently. Whether or not that applies in this case is ultimately a judgement call.- MrX 13:12, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
No problem, and yes CSD is very important for attack pages (particularly with living people) and with copyvios, which don't have any place on Wikipedia full stop. I think the root of my argument is that if you're going to delete something, try and make sure the person whose content you deleted understands why you're doing it, so they don't do it again! One thing I do notice about WP:CSD#A7 is it states "Often what seems non-notable to a new page patroller is shown to be notable in a deletion discussion." That's a key difference between spam, drivel and patent nonsense, which can never be shown to be notable.
As you can see, other developments have occurred on the article to the point it's almost having an unofficial AfD, and I've concluded I would currently vote "delete" should it go there. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
That makes sense. I was actually on the fence as to whether to go the CSD or AfD route. - MrX 13:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Gillan discography

Hello Ritchie, I have completed your AfD closer you forgot to remove the AfD template from the article itself & there was an error in deletion discussion {{subst:Afd top}} goes above the heading. Please remember for future reference, Regards ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 15:17, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

  • D'oh, forgot. Cheers. Have done the odd non admin close before, must have just missed it. If that's the bit that's got the comment saying REMOVE THIS, then feel free to apply a suitably large fish template. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:04, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Have only done the odd few before myself, nah you removed the template saying REMOVE THIS you just put something in the wrong place so it made the log look funny. No need to trout, Happy editing ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 16:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Chemical Records

I've dePRODed Chemical Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), because it's already been tried (as noted in my edit summary). Cheers. -- Trevj (talk) 13:48, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

  • No problem. I did have a good look for sources online, but really struggled to find anything suitable, aside from the odd mention in what might be online versions of local news in Bristol, or might be a self-published blog. If I can dig up anything, I'll add it to the article with the intention of saving it. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:05, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
    OK. I also searched and then tagged the article. Cheers. -- Trevj (talk) 16:12, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Kris kourtis

Please do not remove the CSD tags I put on the Kris kourtis article. The exact same article was up 7 days ago with all this same info, which was speedily deleted. The artist is non-notable (why there's no citations), and the author is simply creating the page for publicity. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 18:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

  • There are several fallacies here. Firstly, a lack of references does not necessarily imply an artist is non-notable, merely that the claims to notability are not verified. More importantly, the article gives a claim to reaching number 1 in 36 countries, which, if verifiable, means the subject would pass WP:NMUSIC. The fact that the article was re-created would suggest that your attempt at CSD tagging wasn't as successful as you hoped, whereas if you take the article through a full WP:AfD, it can be deleted per WP:CSD#G4 again and again until it's salted, which actually works out better in the long term for an article that truly does not belong on Wikipedia. Just have a bit of patience. Regarding publicity, there's no actual policy against paid editing, so provided the article is written in a WP:NPOV, it's not an issue. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:55, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Billy Ternent, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page West End (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


Being mentioned in a source does not show notability, why is A7 not appropriate? Darkness Shines (talk) 12:09, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Indeed not, you need multiple sources to establish your own article. But A7 isn't about notability - per WP:CSD#A7 : "This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability." and "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines." In the case of, Abdur Razzaq (barrister), it might be appropriate to reduce it to a redirect to Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami instead of deleting. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:12, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
I see, thank you. I had not thought to redirect and have nominated it for deletion as he is only ever mentioned in passing in sources. There is not enough coverage to warrant an article really. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:15, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
No problems with AfD - unlike CSDs you can nominate pretty much any article you like for AfD, even GA candidates. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:17, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Joyce and Jane

Hi. You removed the A7 tag from this article because "A7 does not apply to television shows". I'm aware that A7 doesn't apply to television shows. This article is incorrectly categorized as a TV show in an effort to make it look legit. I actually looked up what this "show" supposedly is (I tend to do that before I slap on deletion tags). It's some kind of animated web series made at - a site where anyone can make videos for free. It's not a real television series nor is it a notable web series. This can also be gleaned from the fact that there is no such thing as a Samuel Brice Channel. That's some kid's YouTube channel, presumably the user who created this article. If this isn't web content, what is it? Pinkadelica 15:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Pinkadelica 17:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

An invitation for you!

Featured article collaboration.svg
Hello, Ritchie333. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's article for improvement. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the list of members. Happy editing! Northamerica1000(talk) 01:56, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Ritchie 333 can you help me get my article submitted. Would appreciate it — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

  • The content already exists at Frank T. Caruso, though the paragraph that your article duplicates is not explicitly sourced there either. See other comments on your talk page. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

JetNEXUS Solutions

You've reverted the speedy at JetNEXUS Solutions, with the edit summary "Company is mentioned in two reliable sources. Try WP:AfD". The two sources on the page are a company press release and a product review in a non-notable blog: not WP:RS. It's been speedied three times (and salted) at JetNEXUS, and speedied once at JetNEXUS Ltd, after creation less than an hour ago by Special:Contributions/Jetnexus1. Is it really essential to AFD this? It makes no assertion of notability, and hasn't got a prayer of making it through AFD. Thanks, Altered Walter (talk) 16:41, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Afd-teahouse

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Afd-teahouse has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.  Sandstein  10:18, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

  • After the B and the R comes the D. I want to get a few more people in on this discussion as TfDs tend to get buried and sat on. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)


Some questions have been raised at User talk:Drmies#Question. Uncle G (talk) 10:32, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Frankly, DrMies needs to find a country with decent beers like Westmalle! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:31, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

A7 and reliable sources

I'll just give my 2 cents here, on your 3 examples. Nr. 1 is at AfD , and rightly so. If Nr. 2 had been tagged with db-corp, I for one would have denied the speedy (and recommended AfD). And Nr.3....I think with us old coots, this is as much an affair of the heart (THE BEATLES!) as anything else, so nobody cares if it is reliably sourced ;). Just my take on this. Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar (talk) 14:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

  • So for now we'll have to be happy with the redirect; our time will come ;) Lectonar (talk) 15:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Erdbeerteller01.jpg For being nice to newbies and oldbies. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


The version of the article I tagged looked little more than a spam article for a non-notable company. Users should either make use of the article incubator, or their own user spaces before creating something in article space that is unsuitable for prime time. -- Scjessey (talk) 18:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Indeed, that's why we have WP:AfC. But expecting newbies to add an article with just one reliable source is like Canute asking the tide to stop coming in. We might as well just accept it happens! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
    If we make exceptions, anarchy ensues. -- Scjessey (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
    That put to one side, you cannot have tagged the article more than 59 seconds after the user hit "Save page". I can't honestly believe you did everything WP:BEFORE suggests, such as looking for sources and concluding none could possibly be found within that time frame. Anyway, my advice is, have a cup of coffee before hitting "csd" on the Twinkle Toolbar, look again, and if it changes, great. If it doesn't, then hit the button. --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:01, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
    WP:BEFORE relates to AfD, not CSD. I honestly thought it was a spam article, because at the time it just talked about how wonderful the company was with an external link to it. -- Scjessey (talk) 17:16, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Civility Barnstar Hires.png The Civility Barnstar
Thank you for your thoughtful explanation of how I could have better tagged Purple Saturn Day. Though you were constructively criticizing my work, I learned from what you had to say and will implement your advice in the future. Thanks again for your work! Jackson Peebles (talk) 20:21, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Sinclair

Alexander II Colonel Hat.jpg Right! Stop that!
It's far too silly!
Don't take this too seriously. Another user just wants you to know something you said crosses their boundaries of sensibility.

-- Trevj (talk) 12:25, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Kensington Swan

Hi Richie, you recently declined my submission of the Kensington Swan article due to the firm not being notable. I was just basing this page on the fact that other New Zealand firms of similar notably to Kensington Swan are already on Wikipedis, for example:

I was wondering if you could explain why they have been accepted but mine has not? Or point out what information they have which makes them notable enough? Thanks Hmn22 (talk) 20:04, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

  • All those articles have problems, and they're all tagged as needing quite urgent attention. I don't think any of them are particularly good. In Articles for Creation, we strive to get articles in good shape once they pass, so they don't get tagged or deleted. Each of Russell McVeagh, Bell Gully and Chapman Tripp asserts that they are the "big three" in New Zealand, but I can't see a reliable source that backs them up, and indeed Chapman Tripp is tagged as being "not notable", which means somebody may propose it gets deleted at any time. In fact, the problematic tags on each article would make sending them to WP:AfD legitimate, even if it turns out other sources exist. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:10, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

The Invention of Magic, and the Light Bulb

Hello, thank you for looking over my article. As i am the creator of this film everything is as reliable as it most possibly can be. This is a film that i am creating for my Alevel Media studies class and i need this as part of the evidence. I personal believe that i meet the minimum requirements for an article like this. Could you please reconsider accepting my article.,_and_the_Light_Bulb

Thank you,

(SeanCoyne1 (talk) 21:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC))

  • I see your article has been declined several times now. I think there's some misunderstanding about what we mean by a "reliable source" on Wikipedia. "Reliable" in our context means that somebody has a professional reputation to state things correctly and trustworthy. For instance, a newspaper cannot print whatever it likes - it needs to have tight editorial control (as Rebekah Brooks found out the hard way, for example). So you can rely on what it says to be held to a known standard.
You and your own websites, on the other hand, can say pretty much anything you like, and that's why they're unreliable, because there's no code of practice or conduct stopping you writing "Sean Coyne is the greatest filmmaker in all of history, bar none" and using it as a source for a Wikipedia article. I think Steven Spielberg (to pick a name completely at random) might disagree with you on that!
So that's why we don't allow stuff you've written yourself, or appears on sites pretty much anyone can contribute to like Facebook. I'm afraid to say your article probably doesn't belong on Wikipedia - maybe in 20 years you might be as famous as Steven Spielberg and this film will gather historical interest, but until then I'm afraid it's just not notable. Sorry. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you very much for replying, now I understand why it has been declined so many times haha. If I got my movie on a movie website (e.g. IMDB) would it then maybe be accepted? Haha I would still like to have a film of mine on Wikipedia :-P
Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by SeanCoyne1 (talkcontribs) 21:47, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • There are problems with using IMDB as a source. Really, you want to be aiming for your film having its premiere at Leicester Square with the Duchess of Cambridge in attendance, with a writeup in all the major newspapers the next day. That's a pretty good way to be sure of getting a Wikipedia article. And then, you want to be careful, as Wikipedia will print the positive and the negative about the film without taking sides. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:53, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Right back at you

The Citation Barnstar The Citation Barnstar
For lots of digging through Hansard - a hefty task - to find citations for M11 link road protest, consequently helping it get to good article status. — Hex (❝?!❞) 08:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

M11 map

Hello again. As the base image is now public domain, do you think we could get a larger (preferably much larger!) version of File:M11 link road protest map.png? Cheers, — Hex (❝?!❞) 10:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC).

Recognized content bot

It runs approximately every week. The last time it ran on the UKRD page was January 6, and it's supposed to run approximately every week. It used to run on Sundays. Also, it puts articles in alphabetical order (except those that have appeared on the Main Page as a TFA or DYK; those are set to chronological order) so I'm not sure if it it will catch the fact that you put M11 link road protest in the wrong location when it does run again. Imzadi 1979  11:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Microsphere (software company), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Assembler (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

AfC help desk

Could you please take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#Wikipedia talk: Articles for creation/Vic329? I was one of the people Vic329 spoke with in the IRC help channel, and since he ended that conversation by calling the helpers a "Kafkaesque elite" bent on rejecting his submission, I doubt he'd be all that happy if I were the one to reply to his Help Desk question. Huon (talk) 20:29, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I left that one alone as I didn't feel like picking through 20+ sources to see if there's was enough coverage to establish notability. My gut feeling is that it's got the air of self-promotion, just unusually one where the promotion is in reliable sources. Still, if he wants to court the tabloids, he should really know they'll turn on him in a split second if it sold more copies. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:44, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! "Rent-a-quote" seems an appropriate description; on the IRC help chat the prevailing opinion was that that didn't suffice when no sources actually covered him in detail. Huon (talk) 21:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
It's one of those articles that I could see going to WP:AfD and having a massive five page argument about whether or not the sources were "significant coverage", with battle trenches drawn by the Article Rescue Squadron and an exhausted admin declaring "no consensus" at the end of it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

A pie for you!

A very beautiful Nectarine Pie.jpg This time I really owe you for wading through that bunch of references. Huon (talk) 01:48, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Ritchie333. You have new messages at Curtaintoad's talk page.
Message added 08:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Reply. CURTAINTOAD! TALK! 08:57, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Why, why

can't you be neutral? Look at the edits and the discussions. There was consensus for quite a time. He is ignoring this consensus and just pushing his point of viwe... It is just frustrating me and he DOES personally attack me.--2001:4CA0:2201:1:4DBC:A6EA:1B56:E268 (talk) 14:37, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

  • I have no knowledge or interest in your discussions - merely giving you a friendly head's up that if you revert a single page more than three times, you can be blocked. Since WP:ANI generates so much heat, you're better off finding an unloved article elsewhere and improving that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:38, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

But it is not only me. He is editwarring against several other persons... Just have a look.--2001:4CA0:2201:1:4DBC:A6EA:1B56:E268 (talk) 14:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

OK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4CA0:2201:1:4DBC:A6EA:1B56:E268 (talk) 14:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


Hi, thanks for your review. I have now taken the time to address all of the issues you have raised. Farrtj (talk) 08:46, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again for a great review. Sorry, I was totally unclear when I asked before about the maps. The visual map ([1]) is out of date, whilst the page List of countries with KFC franchises is as up to date as I can make it. Could you update the visual map with the data from the list page, or elsewise show me how to do it? Thanks. Farrtj (talk) 10:22, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Chinneeb (talk · contribs) added Mongolia using an out-of date version of the map. I'll have to merge the two together. You need an account on Wikimedia Commons to edit it, I can do it now if you want. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes please. Countries that need adding include Ukraine, Cambodia, Laos, Swaziland, Kazakhstan, Zambia, Nigeria, Malawi, Mozambique, Kenya, Ghana, Morocco, Libya, Nepal.Farrtj (talk) 12:54, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
All claims are cited at List of countries with KFC franchises.Farrtj (talk) 12:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Eek, that's a lot. I'm not sure where else you can ask about these things, but anyone with the technical chops can edit it. At the moment I'm tinkering with Twyford Down so I can take it to a GA review soon. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:57, 22 January 2013 (UTC)