Jump to content

User talk:Salvio giuliano/Archive 20

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

Starmania (TV series)

[edit]

Thanks. I don't know why he's so dead set against this article. I've not got much to say in favour of it, but it can't be deleted as attack. I've told him to prod or afd it. Doesn't seem to have made an impression... Peridon (talk) 11:25, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure! My opinion is that they're just trolling — I have taken a look at their 'tribs and I've seen nothing useful —, but I'd like to see a little more evidence of it, before blocking. Well, I guess it's a WP:ROPE case... Salvio Let's talk about it! 11:41, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Removing a csd tag can be vandalism - can adding one be too? BTW Have you seen CSD recently? 1946 articles in for deletion. Peridon (talk) 12:18, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if done in bad faith, I'd say it could qualify as vandalism... Especially if the tag is evidently unwarranted (an A7 on Barack Osama's article, for instance). But this is only my opinion.

And I've just taken a look at cat:csd; I believe someone has tagged for speedy deletion a template, forgetting the noinclude... Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Athaenara has been taking care of much of the log-jam (by some private arrangement). I'm letting them get on with it. There's a few templates in. One is a recreation of a deleted by discussion. and two are author request. Peridon (talk) 13:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! It was Dr Blofeld who asked to speedy an awful lot of articles per G7 and Iridescent is nuking them... There has also been a discussion on ANI. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert of my MoMK edit.

[edit]

Explain yourself please. What do you mean by vaguely citing WP:NPOV? That explains nothing.

Read the talk page, please. Pablo X and SuperMarioMan have already explained why the quote should remain in the article. There is no policy-based reason to remove it. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:13, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The quote has substantially remained in the article. I don't accept the explanations I've received in the talk page from those 2 individuals. Can you please explain in simple terms why the references to 'Foxy Knoxy' and Knox being a 'celebrity' are essential for the article, thanks, as they seem to me to be in violation of WP:BLP CodyJoeBibby (talk) 12:18, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why exactly do you believe they violate WP:BLP? That's the opinion of the victim's father, it's reliably sourced and it's relevant. It's not like Wikipedia's saying that Amanda is a despicable individual. To remove it, while active campaigning to include all sorts of attacks on Mignini, seems a bit biased to me and smacks of trying to make a point... Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:24, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not campaigning to include any attacks on Mignini, merely the fact of his conviction. Anyway, this issue has now been resolved with a compromise on the article's talk page. Should you be making wholesale reversions of edits without engaging on the article's talk page? (Genuine question, not sarcasm). CodyJoeBibby (talk) 12:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Either of us could have started a thread on the talk page: he who undoes an edit is not technically required to do so — provided he does not keep on reverting, after such a thread has been started —. In this case, discussion was ongoing and I believed that I had very little to add to what Pablo X and SuperMarioMan had said. The important thing is to always be willing to discuss, no matter where.

However, I'm satisfied with the new wording, so I won't be reverting the edit. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Thanks for your input. It seems like people are really trying to compromise right now, which is good. CodyJoeBibby (talk) 13:11, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Templemore Sports Complex.

[edit]

Thanks for your note. However, I don't understand the rationale: "Does not redirect to a different...". It directs to the city of Derry - how can a sports complex be synonymous with an entire city? Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:11, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion criterion R2 only applies to redirects from the article mainspace to a different namespace; such as a redirect from mainspace to a page in userspace, the ones sometimes left behind after a userfication. In this case, the redirect is from mainspace to mainspace, so the page cannot be speedied per R2. You can send the redirect to WP:RFD, if you want it deleted, however. Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 16:25, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey!

[edit]

Hi Salvio, can u take a look to this message on my talk? It puzzled me and leaved me a bit perplexed. Bye, in gamba! --Theirrulez (talk) 17:47, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about to go out for dinner, so I cannot really look into it at the moment. As soon as I'm back, however, I'll see what I can do. Sorry. Salvio Let's talk about it! 17:50, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
there's no hurry, thanks! --Theirrulez (talk) 22:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I read your talkpage and I'm not really sure what I can do; Attilios has just expressed an opinion regarding your editing. You're certainly entitled to ignore it, if you wish, but, in my opinion, it was not a violation of any policy; as long as he doesn't hound you to revert your edits or doesn't attack you, I'd say there's nothing I can do... You can ask him to keep away from your talkpage if you wish, however... Did you have anything in mind as to what I might do? Salvio Let's talk about it! 02:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CRD request

[edit]

Evening Salvio. I wonder if you'd be willing to delete this edit under CRD#2? Thanks. Best, Mephtalk 19:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Mephtalk 02:17, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure (sorry I didn't get back to you sooner). Salvio Let's talk about it! 02:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Salvio. Thanks for the indefinite block on User:Askedsnake and rendering invisible the edits created by that User. There is one edit by Askedsnake that has not been rendered invisible. See diff. Please render this one invisible too. Many thanks! Dolphin (t) 05:32, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did not revdel that edit, because that's only ordinary vandalism; the other edits, the ones I revdeleted, were egregious BLP-vios and, as such, qualified for redaction. I don't really think hiding that edit would be productive... I'm sorry. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:20, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Dolphin (t) 12:33, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion

[edit]

It certainly looked like a hoax to me. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 14:21, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then G3 would have been appropriate, not G1, which is for meaningless strings of words or letters. I don't think it was a blatant hoax, however. I believe one of those kids thought that their team deserved a bit of recognition and created a Wikipedia page. That's why I zapped it per A7, which is far less bitey than a G3 deletion. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:26, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I understand where you are coming from. Under G1 "fictional material" is included in the sentence and anyone outside their club would think its fictional. Intoronto1125TalkContributions 14:33, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I fear there's been a little misunderstanding here... G1 reads Pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history. This excludes poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism and hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material. This excludes the sandbox and pages in the user namespace.

Hoaxes and fictional material are expressly excluded...

If a hoax is blatant, then the page can speedied per G3. If an article only consists of fictional material, I prefer to use a PROD, providsed there's no intent to fool the reader into believing the page describes a real entity (however, there are admins who speedy those pages per G3 as well). Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:39, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The authors of these articles are recreating the article after it has been deleted. Maybe some intervention is needed? Intoronto1125TalkContributions 14:42, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ibrahim Zahaan Zahir speedied per A7 and salted; {{uw-autobiography}} dropped on User talk:Ibrahimzahaan. If they persevere, they can be warned and maybe even blocked... Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recreation?

[edit]

Could you check that Kickin' It isn't a recreation of the deleted page? ~~EBE123~~ talkContribs 17:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, it is not as the page is sufficiently different from the previous (deleted) article and because it has been improved (it's now sourced). Salvio Let's talk about it! 18:05, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

International Random Film Festival

[edit]

not a hoax, it has nothing in gnews. this text doesn't alert you to a hoax?:

Every year the festival takes place on a randomly selected time, in a random venue. The location is selected by opening wikipedia.org and clicking Random article repeatedly, until reaching a page representing a place with a local population. The date of the Festivals Opening Night is selected by using the True Random Number Generator at random.org.

LibStar (talk) 00:02, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It makes me suspicious, yes, but I'm not entirely sure the article's a blatant hoax — which, by the way, can be speedied per G3 and not per G1, which only applies to articles consisting of random strings of words or letters —; therefore, I'd rather not speedy delete it. I would not object to a PROD, however. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:49, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

[edit]

General question about ArbCom

[edit]

In your reply to Martin about the Tree shaping ArbCom case you linked to the new guidelines for ArbCom time-frames. According to that time-frame The Workshop phase of the Tree shaping case should have ended today. I note that there was very little activity from arbitrators on the page itself. Is this the usual situation? I can certainly see why it would be, with all the back-and-forth between editors in dispute (myself included of course), they may not want to get wrapped up in that. I was just curious as the case has 13 arbitrators on it and I think only one or two have posted to the workshop page. I note there is not much happening on the proposed decision page either. Do most deliberations/discussions happen on irc? Or has this just been put on the back-burner for now? Thanks, Colincbn (talk) 02:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That timetable is only a recommendation, it's not binding.

The drafting arbitrator should start drafting the proposed decision shortly, I'd wager. But this activity may also be slightly delayed due to an unforeseeable hitch... As for the little activity, I'd say it's not that unusual: if there's no need for clarifications or for the intervention of an Arbitrator, Arbs tend not to intervene that much, leaving the clerks to keep the various discussions orderly. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:45, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. I expect just reading all that text would take a good long time. Thanks for the clarification. Colincbn (talk) 01:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The revert of Best bet diet

[edit]

I referted the edit on the redirection of the Best bet diet. Although the Swank diet and the Best Bet Diet are both Multiple sclerosis diets, they are not the same thing and there are significant differences between the diets.

Until/unless somebody puts up a decent article for the Best Bet diet, there really isn't much that can be done with the "Best Bet Diet" on wikipedia. It may be better to simply remove the link to the "Best Bet Diet" on here, and hopefully somebody can then put up an article on the subject. It is just causing confusion and is of no help to anybody with the way things are now.

You do a great job on here Salvio giuliano, but unless somebody writes a whole new article for the Best Bet diet, there really isn't much you can do with that entry. Unless you remove it that is

Mrx1

Thanks for your kind words. In that case, I did not delete the page because there was no applicable speedy deletion criterion that would have justified that. If you believe a redirect is useless or incorrect, you can be bold and change it or, if you want it deleted, you can send it to WP:RFD, where its deletion will be discussed. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:27, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Cirt#Early closure of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 May 16#techophilia

[edit]

Hi Salvio. I mentioned you at User talk:Cirt#Early closure of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 May 16#techophilia regarding your early closures of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Nandiyanto and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Sonoran Mamma/The Masque. If I have made an incorrect assumption, please correct me. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:01, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know!...

...And yes: you were right. (I'll take your indirect suggestion.) Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:32, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Thank you for taking the hint. :) Cunard (talk) 23:40, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

[edit]

YGM

[edit]
Hello, Salvio giuliano. Check your email – you've got mail! ~~EBE123~~ talkContribs 20:32, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You can remove this notice at any time by removing this.

Username SyrianETF

[edit]

Good afternoon,

You recently deleted my SyrianETF Wikipedia page, now I was told that I can still have my page if I changed my wikipedia username. I am not an employee of SyrianETF, I am a student familiar with the situation in Syria and American Syrian organizations who are fighting the oppression in the Syrian Regime. Today, I was going to do so, but the page was deleted. Could you give me back the page so I can change my username or give me the material I had so I can make a new wikipedia page that follows yalls guidelines.

Thank you

Hello, I'm sorry I'm making this difficult, but your username was a violation of our rules; so, before I can unblock you, I must be sure you'll request a username change: what will your new username be? Do you know how you can file such a request? Alternatively, you can just create a new account whose username only represents you, which is allowed.

When you have replied to my query or created a new account, I'll be happy to restore your page and move it to a subpage in your userspace. Alternatively, I can just mail it to you, if you so prefer.

However, I have to kindly ask you familiarise yourself with WP:NPOV and WP:N, two of Wikipedia's core policies — namely the ones about neutral point of view and notability —. Salvio Let's talk about it! 10:53, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way i could find my page back without the promotional links?

[edit]

Hello,

I just realized that my page was deleted but I did not keep a copy of the original text. Would you have it by any chance? I understand that some of the links provided were promotional and should be deleted. However, i would like to reuse the copy itself.

Many thanks to let me know if that is possible, Kind regards Aurelie Harp

I have restored it and moved it to User:AurelieHarp/Aurélie Harp. This is just a temporary measure, however. I intend to let you improve the article to make it ready for mainspace, if you wish to do that. Before moving it, you should make sure it meets our notability criteria, though.

As I said, it's only a temporary measure, because, per WP:FAKEARTICLE, Userspace is not a free web host and should not be used to indefinitely host pages that look like articles. Private copies of pages that are being used solely for long-term archival purposes may be subject to deletion.

Also, please familiarise yourself with WP:NOTRESUME. Salvio Let's talk about it! 13:39, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bramer Banking Corporation

[edit]

Hello Salvio

I have noticed that the page of the Bramer Banking Corporation Ltd has been deleted.

As you might have read in my comment, i would be grateful if you could please tell me why the BBC corporate page in the Wikipeida, The Free Encyclopedia, was deleted. This page was created today, and it was filled with very basic information to see how it will look and further information about its history is to be compiled.

I have also pointed out that several other banking institutions have their pages on Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, which give full description of their banks, their banking segments, their history, milestones, photos, with links to all their branches amongst others.

Please note that this is not flaming or attack in any way, just for information.

Also, i would please ask you for advice as for how to implement the corporate page on Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, without being deleted on the same day. Should it be done from a corporate email account with a corporate login ? Is there a different way that a Corporate page is set up?

Thanks Best regards MA

I speedily deleted the article per criterion G11, because I deemed it to be unambiguously promotional. It had nothing to do with the Bank's importance.

Wikipedia is not supposed to be used as a means of promotion and, so, all articles should be written using a neutral point of view. My suggestion would be to create a userspace draft, here, for instance. Before recreating this article, however, please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's policy regarding conflicts of interest.

Also, please read WP:ORGNAME: if you create an account that gives the impression of editing on behalf of a group, it will be blocked; your account should only represent you as an individual. Salvio Let's talk about it! 18:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Veschuere

[edit]

Hi. Happy to talk about it. Thanks.

You declined a speedy on Michael Veschuere. I'm not sure what the basis is, specifically. I don't see that any of the following (assuming, as we do, that they are true--and assuming that they are credible claims, as we may) indicate why he is important or significant:

  • He sang Panis Angelicus with Helmut Lotti at the Casino of Oostende in Belgium.
  • He toured with Lotti.
  • He performed in over 200 live concerts.
  • He recorded three albums. (this would make him important or significant, if they were major label or the top indie labels, but that is not averred).

You can respond here. Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:04, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I considered the tour with Lotti and the 200 live concerts a (weak, I grant you that) indication of importance; I was about to PROD the article, actually... This page was different from the other ones you tagged that I stumbled upon tonight, in my opinion. After all, the article has been around for a bit: it's nothings that needs to go asap... Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see you prodded it. I don't think that touring with Lotti is enough. Or that any number of concerts, if they are non-notable. But reasonable people can differ. And a PROD certainly works just as well -- thanks for addressing that. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:24, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

nabacar.com

[edit]

I disagree that you should have deleted Nabacar.com. Autotrader.com edmunds.com and cars.com all have pages and it was not wrong for me to create one for http://nabacar.com. But... you deleted an honest attempt to do a page on it. Why? Will you please delete the autotrader.com and the cars.com and the edmunds.com also? it is only fair.

It's not been deleted. It's here: User:Tomloftis/Nabacar.com. You can work on it, to create an article that meets our notability criteria and is not written as an advert, but using a neutral tone. Please, do not recreate the article, but try to improve it in your userspace, and, when you're through, try to ask for feedback.

Also, please note that WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a suitable argument to justify keeping an article around. Salvio Let's talk about it! 21:33, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ok, I will try harder....

Muhammed Memić

[edit]

Thanks for your notice about the CSD decline for this page, however I was simply reinstating the CSD tag that was created here and was subsequently removed several times without reason by an IP editor which was picked up during normal counter vandalism work. Tiggerjay (talk) 22:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks for your note! I stumbled upon the article as I was doing a bit of WP:NPP and was rather surprised to see an article about an Olympic medalist tagged per A7 and used WP:CSDH to decline the speedy and you received the message... Salvio Let's talk about it! 22:31, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Salvio_giuliano/Archive_20&oldid=1143284273"