User talk:Sparthorse/Archive 25

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

November 7 2011

I've attempted to add my first Article; a brief summary of a company named StrateSphere Enterprises. It was immediately flagged for speedy deletion. The reason the page exists at all is because there is a "dead link" from the KAEC page. Just trying to help out, but I really don't understand what I would have to change about this entry to make it more relevant. According to their website, they also own the rights to franchise COSI restaurants in the Middle East. Would more references to StrateSphere Enterprises increase it's "relevancy"? Koravecz (talk) 20:03, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Please cheek again Create page. Fan of Wikipedian's — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.48.196.197 (talk) 06:52, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

lol. I was talking about koravecz and fan of wikipedian's response, not you (didn't see the date btw, soz...) Mtgfanatic (talk) 09:35, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

October 29 2011

Hi, can you please give me a hint what I must change on the Sorting Thoughts page. It is enough to add a link to some review page like: [MacUpdate] or [Softpedia]? --HendrikEbel (talk) 16:38, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

+

Thanks for your quick response. I think I understand the rules now. Please delete my site Sorting Thoughts. --HendrikEbel (talk) 17:41, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

October 26 2011

Sorry about the improper outbound links. I saw that the page for Search Retargeting had no content, so I decided to submit information about the topic. I have only just learned how to create a cited section. I hope that it now follows the rules and regulations. Sorry again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zackmfc (talk • contribs) 17:29, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

October 22 2011

Thanks for your answer. I agree with parts of it. What you did not take into consideration is that I was in the start -up phase - especially for the article about Lancaster. While I were collecting information I was interrupted. kind regards

BirgerH (talk) 09:18, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

October 21 2011

There was a page about "Document classification". But this has two meanings: As automated document classification in computer science and as intellectual document classification i library and information science. The original page was ONLY anout automatic classification. I therefore made a new entry: "Automatic document classification" and changed the first to be about document classification in general. YOU changed it back and wrote that I used too much private research. This is simply nonsens. Please look at the text before you delete it. This kind of experience may make me less inspired to continue contributing to Wikipedia.

Kind regards Birger Hjørland BirgerH (talk) 21:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC) BirgerH

October 2011

Hello Sparthorse. You tagged "Adsasdsasada" for speedy deletion, but you did not notify the article's creator that it had been so tagged. There is strong consensus that the creators of articles tagged for speedy deletion should be warned and that the person placing the tag has that responsibility. All of the major speedy deletion templates contain a pre-formatted warning for this purpose—just copy and paste to the creator's talk page. Thank you. — Abhishek  ^Talk 08:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure sure if I am writing this in the right spot and I think you are the person who wants to delete the article James, son of alphaeus biblical criticism. I'm happy for it to be deleted. I'm a bit of a noob at wikipedia but I'm starting to get a few things. I have rewritten my article making sure that every statement has a biblical quote. Because the nature of the piece has changed I have placed the article back in James son of Alphaeus. If this still doesn't meet the requirments of wikipedia then I will require some extra specific assistence.

                                                                                 Bunofsteel.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunofsteel (talk • contribs) 06:40, 17 October 2011 (UTC) 

Ok I am confused. Your criticism is that I am making an argument rather than stating a series of facts and therefore constituting original research. I have trouble understanding why this isn't original research.

Possible brother of Matthew

Another Alphaeus is also the name of the father of the publican Levi mentioned in Mark 2:14 (fact from Matthew). The publican appears as Matthew in Matthew 9:9 (Interpretation as it is truer to say that Matthew tells the same story where the publican is Matthew son of Alphaeus), which has led some (who) to conclude that James and Matthew might have been brothers (sounds like original reserach). However, there is no Biblical account of the two being called brothers, even when they appear side by side in the synoptic list of the Twelve Apostles, next to the fraternal pairs of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee (true but the biblical references should be here).

If I am making an arguement I would like to know what exactly my argument is. I know what I would like to argue but I haven't done it. I have highlighted the facts that have led me to my conclusions however, given that I am referencing Mark at every step and not taking Mark out of context. I don't see how I am producing original research. Bunofsteel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunofsteel (talk • contribs) 10:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

So Sparthorse now I know that you are yanking my chain. I thought you were going to say that I using a synthetic argument. Do not combine material from "multiple sources" to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the "sources". A synthetic argument according to wikipedia requires more than one source. I have used the Gospel of Mark and which other source? I can't see how I can make a synthetic argument with only one source. The possible brother of Matthew is a synthetic argument because it uses both Matthew and Mark to make a conclusion that is not stated by both. This remains and yet mine is continually removed. Please explain this. Bunofsteel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunofsteel (talk • contribs) 19:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

So how the "possible brother of Matthew" not a synthetic argument? Possible brother of Matthew

Another Alphaeus is also the name of the father of the publican Levi mentioned in Mark 2:14. The publican appears as Matthew in Matthew 9:9, which has led some to conclude that James and Matthew might have been brothers. However, there is no Biblical account of the two being called brothers, even when they appear side by side in the synoptic list of the Twelve Apostles, next to the fraternal pairs of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee.

It suggests that the publican is the same even because it quotes two different source to imply have Matthew and Levi are the same person when neither source says they are the same person. There is also no source symphasising that argument. Bunofsteel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunofsteel (talk • contribs) 21:23, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sparthorse. You have new messages at Abhishek191288's talk page.
Message added 08:32, 16 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Abhishek  ^Talk 08:32, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Kofi Annan, I do not see any personal analysis. It is a series of facts, so please let me know what are you talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.172.47.121 (talk) 19:24, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Sparthorse. You have new messages at Titanic1986's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Titanic1986  ^Talk

Hello. I was not aware of an edit summary to provide reasoning for my edits. Sorry about that. However, I can elucidate: There is a lot of misconception surrounding Charles Pellegrino's Wiki entries: a lot of them have been mysteriously deleted (I just re-added Ghosts of the Titanic, his book). Also, the entry seems largely dedicated to tarnishing his image rather than being objective about his successful work with archaeology, paleontology and microbiology, or about his slew of books and involvement in documentaries. How many Wiki articles about people are dedicated to slander like that, as opposed to a broad overview of an individual's career? And the blogger who supposedly "unmasked" him, if you read on his website which the Wiki article links to, you'll find it to be one that spreads hoaxes, about more than just him, but about 9/11 too. It is even more absurd that he named it Jamescameron.blogpost.com because Jim Cameron is close friends with Pellegrino, and that is not Jim's official wesbite at all. Additionally, David Brennan is a longtime enemy of Pellegrino, so why would his statements carry enough merit to persist on that page? Titanic1986 (talk) 20:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)}}

Hello, Sparthorse. You have new messages at Titanic1986's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Titanic1986  ^Talk

Well in that case, if you find the cited sources sufficient to prove Charles Pellegrino lacks a PhD (which I know is not the case), is it not enough that the article is called "Charles Pellegrino" instead of "Dr. Charles Pellegrino"? Why is it necessary to report such controversial material on the article that can potentially harm the author? How does dedicating such a remarkable amount of the article to this issue make the article objective? Is Pellegrino's career truly defined by this one incident alone?

Hello, Sparthorse. You have new messages at Titanic1986's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Titanic1986  ^Talk

I have several reasons to believe otherwise (Pellegrino himself wrote about the ad hoc tribunal in Her Name, Titanic in the 1980s) and I know David Brennan is Pellegrino's enemy, because he was posting 9/11 hoaxes on Pellegrino's discussion forum (and his own blog) years before going to the media about this (heck, he got the idea of going after Pellegrino's PhD from Pellegrino's own books detailing his experiences with Vicotria University). Either way, I feel like my discomfort with the article is being misinterpreted - I have no problem with it being called "Charles Pellegrino" instead of "Dr." and am not concerned whether or not anyone believes he has a PhD. My issue is indeed the matter of undue weight and anyone reading it has only learned about controversial matters related to Pellegrino's career as opposed to things like his contributions to Jim Cameron's AVATAR, his dives to the RMS Titanic in 2001 with JC, more about his books or what not. It makes no sense why so much attention is placed on the PhD controversy in the article, if Wikipedia believes he lacks it, simply drop the "Dr." part. It is not as if I am debating the Last Train controversy outlined in the article, because that is relevant to his work as an author, and people may need to know that the book was revised. But all this information about the PhD controversy doesn't seem very objective, especially when the articles about his books have vanished, and there is mention of little else beyond controversies. I'm new to Wiki so thank you for the links, will certainly discuss this in CP's Talk page.

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you very much for being so vigilant in reverting vandalism on my pages!! Thanks!! CTJF83 18:13, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Betterment.com

Re your edit summary: "Once a speedy deletion request has been declined another should not be made. Maybe a prod?" It's also customary to mark the page as patrolled if you've tagged it with a speedy to avoid wasting the time of other patrollers. Using Twinkle would do this automatically for you. Regards, Bazj (talk) 09:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Nice job! LAAFan 19:24, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Robotech: Love Live Alive

Hello Sparthorse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Robotech: Love Live Alive, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not a blatant hoax. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 05:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: ELID

Hello Sparthorse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of ELID, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 06:12, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Garrett dubose

Hi. You tagged it as nonsense. That's a tag with a Wikipedia meaning. It doesn't mean the everyday nonsense as opposed to something real. It's for things like 'treryttciuy uiyu6xrtrtrr'. You should do a Google search without quotes if it's not got numbers in the words or is all consonants, as it might be some variety of Foreign (y and w count as vowels in this test). If the words come up, put quotes round the sample and look for a copyvio. Nonsense can also be in English, but it looks like 'Anterior blue the forward fish into noon haphazardly'. (Something like those old spam email subject lines...) All the words mean something, but not together in that order. Something like 'shawn is the most awesomest and he luvs kylee minog and she luvs him' is obviously utter bilge, but not Wikipedia nonsense. The sentence makes sense even though at least part of it is fairly obviously less than true. That's an A7. I deleted this one as A7, anyway. Cheers. Peridon (talk) 19:16, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Awliaya Motobi Md. Abdul Mukit Siddique Al-Quadri Al-Chisti

Hello Sparthorse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Awliaya Motobi Md. Abdul Mukit Siddique Al-Quadri Al-Chisti, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: enough content has been added since you tagged it to escape A3, and enough assertion of importance for A7.

You tagged it as A3 only a minute after creation - that's much too soon, for A1 or A3 you should wait at least 10 minutes. New users often put in a few words and then click "Save" to see if it works - it is very discouraging and WP:BITEy if a speedy notice pops up immediately. See {{uw-hasty}}. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'd missed the note about waiting ten minutes on CSD:A3. Thanks for pointing that out. Sparthorse (talk) 09:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I have removed your "wikify" tag - the article already had eleven wikilinks in two lines, one could hardly ask for more than that! See my addition to User talk:Saifiadarbar for useful advice to give this sort of newbie. JohnCD (talk) 09:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your help with the vital work of patrolling new pages. I noticed that you are not marking some of the pages you've reviewed as patrolled. Please do remember to click the 'mark this page as patrolled' link at the bottom of the new page if you have performed the standard patrolling tasks. Where appropriate, doing so saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page, so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thanks again for volunteering your time at the new pages patrol project. — Abhishek  ^Talk 14:58, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Again, you don't seem to have warned the user about the speedy deletion on Need for speed all games. Please do that. Cheers. — Abhishek  ^Talk 15:04, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

As you will notice from the relevant edit summaries, I use Twinkle. I apologise that Twinkle appears not to have marked pages as patrolled or informed the user about the speedy delete suggestion, but really you ought to be addressing these bugs to the developer of Twinkle, not to me. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 15:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

A new page will have 'mark this page as patrolled' only if you open it from Special:NewPages. If you open the page from Special:RecentChanges or Special:Contributions/newbies, you won't find that and hence twinkle too does not mark it as patrolled. So I suggest if you come across a new page anywhere other than Special:NewPages, go to Special:NewPages and open the new article so that the page ends up being marked as patrolled. But Cheers. — Abhishek  ^Talk 15:12, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, its definitely a Twinkle bug. I just added a Prod tag to Inseo Chung after getting to the page from Special:NewPages and it left the page marked as unpatrolled. I had to go back to the page and manually mark it as patrolled. Sparthorse (talk) 15:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

PROD's are not marked as patrolled by TW. The reason being that the page author may remove it from an otherwise unnecessary page. So there's no bug here. Cheers. — Abhishek  ^Talk 15:35, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Do you think?

I don't think that it has enough context.Please do not remove the deletion tags. Please do not think I'm being rude.Look,the article,has only one line definition,and therefore,It does not has enough context to define it.Wikipedia is not a place for only one line definition articles,It should be improved.Dipankan001 (talk) 15:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I will see that:-)By the way sorry if I was rude.Dipankan001 (talk) 15:47, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Good luck having every page on Template:Autonomous_republics_of_the_Soviet_Union deleted as A1. →Στc. 02:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExecutiveSurf

Could you please tell me the reason why I still get the red box referring to the "speedy deletion"? Is it going to disappear or do I have to do something myself? Thanks, Barbara — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barbara70 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sparthorse. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 05:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrolling

Hi. I'm just letting you know that I have declined your CSD A7 on Dwijavanti Athreya. As an academic, the subject may be notable if correctly researched and sourced - did you search for sources? In the case of unreferenced biographies of living persons like these, please consider using WP:BLPPROD instead. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:43, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I just wanted to thank you for withdrawing your deletion recommendation for the new page I created on John Isaac. And I appreciate the reformatting that you did to make its layout more wikipedia consistent. It was my first attempt and while I was able to figure a few things out quickly, I was going to have to take a little time to work out the rest. Thanks Debsmusings (talk) 18:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

One more quick addition/question... How does one make it so that a search for John Isaac will bring up a choice of pages? Thanks Debsmusings (talk) 18:11, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Sparthorse! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:23, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caligola (Secret Society)

Since it was contested so strongly, I sent it to AfD. Please discuss. Bearian (talk) 21:39, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Bertie Gilbert

Take a look at my edit again. I didn't remove any references. I removed ref tags from something that wasn't a reference. 69.181.251.214 (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Moxon Huddersfield

Read WP:NOPRICES. 69.181.251.214 (talk) 20:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

From WP:PRICES: "Product prices should not be quoted in an article unless they can be sourced and there is a justified reason for their mention". Note the word unless and the clauses that follow it. That price is both sourced and relevant. See the articles talkpage for an extensive discussion. Best, Sparthorse (talk) 20:20, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I read both the guideline and the talk page. I saw no discussion about a justified reason, merely which source and which price to use. The article likewise lack any compelling reason to include any price. 69.181.251.214 (talk) 20:24, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thanks for fixing my talk pgae. Bearian (talk) 21:24, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Project Accessory

Sparthorse, you may want to add the deletion notice regarding Project Accessory to the talk page of Worstcook's sock, the IP 205.209.83.211. (S)he flips between the two constantly, and won't acknowledge your communication on his/her talk page. Drmargi (talk) 00:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I've learned from long experience that the editor using the two accounts is no guarantee that anything relating to text, be it in the article, on the article's talk page or on his/her own is any guarantee he/she will process what is being said. This is a person to whom an edit summary is a virtual stranger. Instead, he/she seems to have a mania for creating tables and overly complicated systems of color coding. The article is about a spin-off from another of Bravo's endless stable of elimination shows, and is about as notable as any other of their shows is, but there's little hope he/she will invest any effort in writing narrative until the table are done, if ever. Drmargi (talk) 00:29, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Flying Pen Press

I appreciate that you put a notice on my talk page about your proposed speedy deletion of Flying Pen Press. That gave me the opportunity to work on it and to know what to do if the article was deleted before I could finish my second edit.

As I edit several Wikis and haven't been very active here since my first account ended years ago, I'm not terribly familiar with Wikipedia's current and ever-changing policies.

Is it standard now to mark an article for speedy deletion three minutes after the first edit? In this case, a simple search could have indicated the publisher is mentioned several times on Wikipedia which has full articles on some of its authors. I'm not complaining (it's my fault I didn't put the construction tag on the first edit), but it might discourage newer editors who haven't been doing this for several years.

Thanks for listening! Alden Loveshade (talk) 02:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I posted a very similar note on the article talk page but wanted to put one here. I believe I've followed your helpful suggestions correctly and have added highly reliable sources. Therefore I've followed the instructions on the deletion template and removed it and the construction template. If I've done something wrong please let me know! Alden Loveshade (talk) 04:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

A tool for you!

Hi Sparthorse! I've just come across one of your edits (or that you have been patrolling new pages), and noticed that you might appreciate some help with references.

I case you're not aware, you might consider using this tool – it makes your life a whole heap easier, by filling in complete citation templates for your links. All you do is install the script:

// Add [[WP:Reflinks]] launcher in the toolbox on left
addOnloadHook(function () {
 addPortletLink(
  "p-tb",     // toolbox portlet
  "http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webreflinks.py/" + wgPageName 
   + "?client=script&citeweb=on&overwrite=&limit=30&lang=" + wgContentLanguage,
  "Reflinks"  // link label
)});

onto Special:MyPage/skin.js, then paste the bare URL (without [...] brackets) between your <ref></ref> tabs, and you'll find a clickable link called Reflinks in your toolbox section of the page (probably in the left hand column). Then click that tool. It does all the rest of the work (provided that you remember to save the page! It doesn't work for everything (particularly often not for PDF documents), but for pretty much anything ending in "htm" or "html" (and with a title) it will do really, really well. So long! --Sp33dyphil © • © 04:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

James stunt

The discussion was in 2007, where the article was deleted as a possible hoax, and the sources cited in the article didn't exist then, so I don't think Template:Db-repost can be used. I've nominated the article for deletion as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James stunt. Peter E. James (talk) 20:54, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

A tool for you!

Hi Sparthorse! I've just come across one of your edits (or that you have been patrolling new pages), and noticed that you might appreciate some help with references.

I case you're not aware, you might consider using this tool – it makes your life a whole heap easier, by filling in complete citation templates for your links. All you do is install the script:

// Add [[WP:Reflinks]] launcher in the toolbox on left
addOnloadHook(function () {
 addPortletLink(
  "p-tb",     // toolbox portlet
  "http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webreflinks.py/" + wgPageName 
   + "?client=script&citeweb=on&overwrite=&limit=30&lang=" + wgContentLanguage,
  "Reflinks"  // link label
)});

onto Special:MyPage/skin.js, then paste the bare URL (without [...] brackets) between your <ref></ref> tabs, and you'll find a clickable link called Reflinks in your toolbox section of the page (probably in the left hand column). Then click that tool. It does all the rest of the work (provided that you remember to save the page! It doesn't work for everything (particularly often not for PDF documents), but for pretty much anything ending in "htm" or "html" (and with a title) it will do really, really well. So long! --Sp33dyphil © • © 04:05, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar

FGF is currently a full-time college student NOT attempting to promote anything what-so-ever. Information added was only a mere attempt to update few people (lol) who may be interested in her (un-paid) community services & passion in good health.I will read & learn more how to edit Wiki (smile). Meanwhile, I believe it was you who compromised with me, and correctly formated the Freeda G. Foreman page. I sincerely thank you for trying to help instead of injuring the page to win this situation. ;-) Monkfree (talk) 03:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Aaron Hanson

The policy has two different standards which is the result of protracted discussions on the talk page. To add a BLP PROD the article must contain no sources at all, whether reliable or not. To remove a BLP PROD you need a reliable source. At the time you tagged it the article did have a source (a link to the guy's website), which while unreliable is still a source so the article doesn't qualify for BLP PROD. There have been several proposals to allow articles which cite only unreliable sources to be tagged with BLP PROD (indeed there's a discussion ongoing right now about it), but none of them have got consensus. I suggest you send the article through regular PROD or AFD. Hut 8.5 19:50, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Question

Were you the one who placed the speedy deletion tag? If you are, you made a big mistake. If not, can you tell me who did it?Mark (talk) 14:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Sparthorse, is the hauntng of the Anguished Man painting real or not. You said was a HOAX. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImhotepBallZ (talk • contribs) 20:50, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Apologies

Sparthorse,

I would like to apologize for any breaches of the rules that I may have done, as I am only new to the site and still learning many new things. did not mean to make trouble and I look forward to making a good contribution to Wikipedia with factual, non-subjective evidence, which in previous articles I have accidentally my own opinions and signed off the article with my name. I went through any things you sent to me in terms of help and getting started and understood many points. Maybe, in my English writing you may find some grammatical or spelling errors, which if permitted you can edit and correct such things. Is it possible for me to be granted permissions for the Albanian version of Wikipedia, guaranteeing I will not break any of your rules? Please do not delete my article about the Pelasgian people, as I will correct it as the rules require.

Adrian LUKA Melbourne, Australia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrian LUKA (talk • contribs) 02:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Bi yongxiang

Hi Sparthorse. While anyone can upload anything to Youtube, this particular video includes a professional set and credits indicating that it was a commercial television broadcast in Taiwan. I think that it qualifies as a reliable source. (The station identifier is included at the end of the 3rd part). However I'd like someone with a better (i.e. any) grasp of Cantonese(?) to review it and confirm my conclusion. Pburka (talk) 03:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

"Redirect to: Pagename"

I noticed you correctly redirected pages from Tennisbestsport (talk · contribs). He's a quacking sockpuppet of Saihimesh (talk · contribs).

If you ever see a user create pages with "Redirect to: Pagename", chances are he's a sock, and should be reported to WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Saihimesh. Thanks. →Στc. 05:28, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

It appears that you have been "STALKING" me. Please stop doing this and don't ever edit my user page. ImhotepBallZ

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	HI Sparthorse. I was not trying to add links to Credit Counselling. I was trying to add the references of where I got the info. NCR Debt Counsellor (talk) 07:29, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Journal of Foreign Relations

Look again, there were two AfDs and the second one was closed as "delete". Please restore the speedy tag. Thanks. --Crusio (talk) 10:04, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Randy Bettis

I've fixed the reference - which has brought the article to view. (Apart from the first line, all the article had got into the ref...) Don't know if you saw the rest of the thing. You might have another look just in case. Peridon (talk) 20:17, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Rich Tosi

Thanks for spotting it. Ideally, you should have actually checked that external source, and then you would have seen the article is an exact copy of it [1]. I accordingly deleted it as copyvio. Anything that sounds like it was written as a promotional bio is more than half the time a copyvio, and that's a very convenient & indisputable way of removing them quickly. In patrolling, always keep a special watch for the most serious problems that would justify speedy.

Please don't be discouraged at the notices on this page. It takes a while to learn all the possibilities, and what we're doing is trying to help you learn, because the work needs doing. As a more general guide you may gfind it helpful to reread WP:Deletion policy and WP:CSD every week or so as you gain experience. The next step is watching some of the discussions at WP:Deletion Review and AfD and WT:CSD so you see what standards and interpretations are being used. Those discussions can get complicated; watch them for a while first, but once you see the style and the manner of argumentation, then join in, because we always need new voices. DGG ( talk ) 21:22, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Garside Grange

I deleted it, and then put it back. It ain't a hoax - it's something on CBBC. I've added a ref and stub. Needs some work (including a copyed.......), but I think the author is rather young. Peridon (talk) 22:09, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I've left her a message - have a look at it and see if you can help too. The Grange isn't mentioned in Young Dracula, and I've told her we may have to merge it. Peridon (talk) 22:27, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Just looked in the history of your userpage. Interesting. You must be getting under people's skins... :) I've never had anyone create a page on mine. :( Peridon (talk) 22:31, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that was weird, wasn't it :-) Sparthorse (talk) 08:00, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrolling

Hi. Thank you for patrolling new pages. I noticed that you recently patrolled Tudur Hen. This page appears to have no references. Please consider returning to the article and placing an appropriate maintenance template. Thanks, and happy patrolling! --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:15, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that. I've tagged the article. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 10:22, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Gotta let this one go...

You can't A7 (person) something about Ash Ketchum, as he ain't real... It's not web-based either, so a PROD is probably the best idea. Peridon (talk) 11:11, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: PixelMags

Hello Sparthorse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of PixelMags, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims coverage in reliable sources. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 22:08, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Infinite Campus

I've contested the speedy, see talk page for more details. C_(u)w_(t)C_(c) 20:09, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Varsha Gupta

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Varsha Gupta whether the article Varsha Gupta should be in Wikipedia. I hope you'd be glad to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.Thanks Abdul raja (talk) 14:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Cache Sapphire socks

Looks like we both had the same idea at about the same time - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Flowers of Romance... :) MikeWazowski (talk) 19:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Wow - a LOT more socks than I realized... busy little sockfarm we uncovered... MikeWazowski (talk) 22:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Impressive indeed. Nice work! Sparthorse (talk) 22:47, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Twister Mania Page

I imagine that telling you that I actually wrote the copy on that Majesco site doesn't help my case at all does it? Is there a way for me to access the version deleted? I worked hard on all of the inernal and external links and formatting them correctly. I'd like to at least use that to pull from.

Ejlenard (talk) 14:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC)Ejlenard

Noel's Christmas Presents

Apologies; I'm not trying to vandalise but I believe it's a legitimate article. --Vexuris6 (talk) 11:57, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

• The pixellation comment isn't meant to be nonsense, sorry about that, it was what I thought was relevant, not knowing here well (on the editing side, not reading). --Vexuris6 (talk) 12:02, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you like Baklava.

Do you like Baklava? Baklava is a rich, sweet pastry made of layers of filo pastry filled with chopped nuts and sweetened with syrup or honey. If you like Baklava, you can try one today! Your friend ImhotepBallZ (talk) 17:36, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Regal Maid flagged?

Please explain how I can fix the Regal Maid wording to fit Wikipedia needs. I have read what Maid Pro had written and it is very close to what I have written. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dirtydrew (talk • contribs) 19:23, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Mohammad Qazalbash

I like the wording of your PROD. Good stuff! :)  -- WikHead (talk) 21:12, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Delete

I haven't had too much time to edit Infinite Campus, so I copied it to user space and will edit it there, and when done will recreate the page. Sorry about that, cheers. C_(u)w_(t)C_(c) 11:31, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

You've been mentioned at the 3RR noticeboard

Please see WP:AN3#User:Worstcook reported by User:Tenebrae (Result: ). It has been argued in that report that your edits violate the WP:3RR rule. You may respond there if you wish. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:52, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Al-Manzoor

Hello Sparthorse. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Al-Manzoor, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to journals or newspapers. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:38, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: City Sky app

Hello Sparthorse. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on City Sky app to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:59, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

As a quick note: A7 does not cover software or phone apps. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:01, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Which I did know, but for some reason forgot on that particular article. Sigh, Thanks for fixing my mistake. Sparthorse (talk) 18:03, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corruption Gov

As the article needs more work before it is ready, I ask that you consider my suggestion that it be Userfied back to its author for continued work OUT OF MAINSPACE, as the topic IS verifiable and might well be seen as passing WP:NF when completed. I will be glad to oversee its growth and improvement away from the ticking clock and I have strongly urged on the author's talk page that he use userspace for creation of his drafts for new articles in the future, and not mainspace. I think its reasoable to give him guidence and time to learn. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:24, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the comment about userfication at the AFD. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 04:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

"Impulse Economy" feedback

Sparthorse, Thanks for the input on this article - it is my first attempt at publishing content. I have added various references and resources to the article per your instruction. The reason I am so interested in posting this article on The Impulse Economy book is that this is the first NFC-enabled book which is key milestone in mobile marketing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitwezambia (talk • contribs) 02:26, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Datavo Communications - proposed deletion notify

The page initially been in AfC space and moved by administrator Alpha_Quadrant after reviewing it and assigning the name Datavo Communications to it. Datavo it is PCS1 exactly in the same way that AT&T it is SBC. I am still looking for more reliable sources and will add and modify the page accordantly. If you can please remove the "Proposed deletion" message or give me the permission to do it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by At4470 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Liberation Frequency

I believe there has been a misunderstanding as to what this online magazine is. It is not simply a forum for unverified comment. It is a reputable interview source, from what I can see, and from how I can see its interviews have been cited. I can start referencing the interviews, but would appreciate knowing if there is enough clarity as to the magazine's substance, that the speedy deletion tag can be removed.

Dreadarthur (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of eliminating the proposed deletion tag, based on reputable (and cited)interview activities, involving notable artists profiled elsewhere in Wikipedia, where Liberation Frequency interviews are cited therein. Examples: Lou Rhodes, Imelda May, Matt Berry. This raises an issue as to how to establish the credibility of online publications, other than through the legitimacy of their own activities.

Hope that the justification and related tag removal appear to be reasonable.

Dreadarthur (talk) 00:40, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I cannot find an independent review of Liberation Frequency, but again wonder whether the Wikipedia "notability" criteria should be reviewed, in terms of the world of online journals. A search of "Liberation Frequency" discloses multiple references to Liberation Frequency interviews and publications, by artists notable in their own right, on their own websites or pages, including Wikipedia pages.

I am at a loss as to what more to do here. This online journal is clearly notable, but only notable through references by the "independently notable". I hope that the page can stay up, since Liberation Frequency activities are referenced on multiple occasions elsewhere in Wikipedia.

I didn't know about this online publication until quite recently. I developed a page on an album by Lulu, Independence. It turned out that the album was released by Dome Records, which didn't have a Wikipedia page, but where the term was redirected to Full Flava, one of the label's artists. I decided to commence a Dome Records page, and found that one of the few profiles of the label that I could find was in an article published in Liberation Frequency. Since Liberation Frequency didn't have a Wikipedia page...

I hope that the page can stay up, under the circumstances.

Dreadarthur (talk) 05:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for advising me of the potential deletion of the page. I have expressed my argument against deletion and in support of maintaining the page, on the related talk page. Here's hoping. It would be a shame if such a notable and cited online publication were deleted, under the circumstances.

Dreadarthur (talk) 06:09, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your further comments. I have made representations at the link you directed me to, in relation to the notability discussion, but on the proposed for deletion talk page, somebody else referred to another link. I ask you to spend five minutes at the Liberation Frequency site. I am certain that you will agree with me that it is far more than a personal blog or discussion forum. Its reviews and interviews are regarded as authoritative, in terms of how they are cited. It seems to me that, faced with an online journal that is viewed by many notable artists as making a positive and objective contribution to the arts, one should see how the Wikipedia notability criteria may be interpreted to accommodate it, rather than bureaucratically applying a rule that then prevents Wikipedia from disseminating knowledge about this online journal to others. One ends up being procedurally correct, but substantially somewhere else, it seems to me.

Please note that I have no vested interest here, one way or another. I didn't know about Liberation Frequency myself until roughly two weeks ago. It is an online magazine, established for several years, featuring a roster of writers and interviewers. I now believe that it contributes much to the arts, and that others would benefit knowing about it through Wikipedia. If the page goes, it goes, but it's a shame, in my view.

03:25, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I reverted your vandalism

in Pivovarov.--Islamocid (talk) 21:18, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

• So uou decided to delete it? Now is it normal with my souce?--Islamocid (talk) 21:26, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Church of the Incarnation

Dear Sparthorse.

I am one of the clergy at www.incarnationnwa.org

The information that was previously on there reflects our beliefs (and of the Diocese we are in).

Am I able to reaffirm it? Irvinyalom (talk) 20:37, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Lordehytta

Do you really want to delete this article? -- බිඟුවා ^{සාකච්ඡාව} 06:11, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Challenge Speedy

Hi Sparthorse, if you don't agree with the Speedy Deletion tag I've added onto the Ahmed mohamed elSeyoufi article, you may, by all means, challenge it here, instead of removing it.

Also, the subject may be this... he may be that... but we don't know this, because the BLP article, is not sourced. Thank you, -- MST☆R ^{(Chat Me!)} 11:01, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

December 2011

Hello Sparthorse. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know however, regarding Anthony young music, that tagging articles for speedy deletion moments after creation as lacking context (CSD A1), content (CSD A3) and articles created through the Article Wizard, is too fast. It's best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), pure vandalism (G3), and copyright violations (G12) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. →Στc. 20:56, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I tagged Anthony young music as CSD:A7, not A1 or A3 [2]. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 21:06, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

The article has no context for you to be sure that A7 applies. →Στc. 21:08, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

A7 does not require the article to have enough context it only requires that the article make no assertion of importance. If you want to rescue this article, please go ahead. But don't make up rules to justify leaving an inappropriate templated message on my talk page. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 21:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

And if the article were about a notable subject, but the creator only accidentally hit "Save" instead of "Preview"? →Στc. 21:36, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Then they could easily recreate the article, with the claim of notability included. By the way, I do look forward to your complaint on Seraphimblade's talk page, since they deleted the article as... CSD:A7. Sparthorse (talk) 21:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

You miss my point - newbies have a tendency to write articles with as many edits as possible. You might've interrupted him in his work and scared him off Wikipedia with a deletion notice,^[1] so you could get another CSD tag endorsed? Oh, and your condescending tone helps a lot. →Στc. 22:09, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

I might have "interrupted him in his work and scared him off Wikipedia with a deletion notice", perhaps. I might also have stopped a vandal before he/she disrupted Wikipedia. If you search for: "Anthony Young" rapper, its pretty clear this is an extremely non-notable person. There was enough context in the article to see it was about a rapper. It was clear there was no assertion of notability. There is no consensus that you have to wait "at least 10-15 minutes" before CSD:A7 applies. The message you left me was factually incorrect. I pointed out that Seraphimblade deleted the article under the criteria I proposed not because I wanted to "get another CSD tag endorsed" but to show you that another user, an experienced admin no less, agreed with my interpretation of the CSD guidelines, not yours. You made a mistake here. I'm sorry you find it condescending that I pointed it out to you. Sparthorse (talk) 22:26, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Well of course there isn't an assertation of significance if you can't even make out what the article's about. I assure you, if the title hadn't contained "music" in it, it would've been deleted as A1. Happy patrolling, →Στc. 22:54, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Like I said, I could tell what it was about because the contents of the article were an infobox which clearly identified the subject as a rapper. If the article had not contained this information I would not have tagged it for A1 for at least 10 minutes because I know about the consensus for not doing so. Sparthorse (talk) 22:58, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Evidence

What type of evidence do u want on this page ? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amanat_Ali_%28singer%29&action=historysubmit&diff=461565485&oldid=461558462 Sabi43 09:36, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

deletion

sir no problem you may delete my article Arjun Kiolp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arjun kiolp (talk • contribs) 11:34, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Sparthorse: Now that Arjun Kiolp has requested the article be deleted, I have substituted the PROD for CSD G7. Thank you, -- MST☆R ^{(Chat Me!)} 12:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

December 10th 2011 You deleted my article twice due to limited sources. I want to say that most of the source for that article came from watching the 2 programs that i am now writing about. If you could tell me how to site that i would be happy to do so and this should be a sufficient source for my article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamecrazy500 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sparthorse. You have new messages at Tgeairn's talk page.
Message added 05:02, 10 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

) At least it brought a laugh on a cold day. Tgeairn (talk) 05:02, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Image upload

Hi I got your message about the RMS Titanic Iceberg message. I was wondering if you could help me with image uploading to page Jack Thayer. I found a picture of him and I want it to be put on his page. Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captian Griggs (talk • contribs) 13:16, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy tag

Hey, I noticed you tagged History of Hersheypark for speedy deletion; I'm splitting the history section about Hersheypark into it's own article. I noticed you just reverted it, just wanted to make sure that everything's fine.

Regards, --Son (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Fraggles

I'm not trying to disrupt the site. I just don't know what info to put. Plus they are real but i just need help on them so that i can find out what those creatures are and what they do so i know the correct info.--HappyLogolover2011 (talk) 05:41, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Pazity

Hello Sparthorse. I am just letting you know that I deleted Pazity, 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. SmartSE (talk) 14:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Oops, I didn't mean to send this, but CSD helper gets a bit confused when articles are tagged with two criteria and obviously in this case I didn't untick a box. As you can see from the log, I deleted it under A7, but you were right that G11 equally applied. Thanks for your work patrolling. SmartSE (talk) 15:10, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Mark McDaniel

Hello Sparthorse. I am just letting you know that I deleted Mark McDaniel, 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. Guerillero | My Talk 06:40, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Singapore Real Estate Exchange

Hi Sparthorse,

Thanks for your comments. Kindly assist me in making the necessary changes for the articles.

In terms of formatting, need your expertise : )

For content wise, do note that SRX is covered in all major media in Singapore on e 9th December and every statement in our current article is backed with inline citations to public sources.

Thanks for your kind assistance.

LinusLow — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linuslow (talk • contribs) 10:27, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sparthorse. You have new messages at Ebikeguy's talk page.
Message added 21:08, 20 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ebikeguy (talk) 21:08, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sparthorse. You have new messages at Guerillero's talk page.
Message added 07:12, 21 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Guerillero | My Talk 07:12, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Armslist.com

I appreciate you taking time to help edit wikipedia and I take that seriously. However I do not understand your recommendation for speedy deletion because this is actually informative and provides credible sources. Any input? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.186.202.141 (talk) 22:37, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with Classical Movements

I CSD'ed the page at the beginning which was (unfortunately) declined and I've been watching the battle ever since. I just wanted to say thanks for your defending the wiki against what sure does appear to be blatant advertising. You've been 1 step ahead of me the whole time... I was about to open a SPI and I found you already had. Keep up the good work! Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 20:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Help please

I edited a page and added some information to the page Kane in the re-masking section on December 21, and I provided a legitimate reference link with it, but it was deleted, is this the right way to motivate a Wikipedia contributor?--Singhaldipanshu (talk) 22:05, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello

	Hello
	May we post some pictures on the page titled, Red Hood and the Outlaws??? El137717 (talk) 17:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Im sorry

	Im sorry
	I'm sorry but how would I find pictures that are legal to use? Could I find them on Wikimedia? El137717 (talk) 17:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Simon Hollyhead

Hi, I'm well informed about Malmö FF and I fail to see how Hollyhead is a notable person. He is not notable as a coach (not having managed a team in a professional league) nor as a player (not having played professional football for a professional team, the only thing mentioned is youth football). Can I renominate the article for deletion based on this? --Reckless182 (talk) 18:58, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't mean to sound accusing or anything. Thanks for endorsing the PROD. --Reckless182 (talk) 19:42, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Pardon my Article. It was my First time to do such and I hope you won't Recommend again my article for deletion. Thanks (just joking) =) Rupert Avanzado (talk) 11:52, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Nicholas Michaletos

Hello Sparthorse, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Nicholas Michaletos, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: winning awards is usually taken as an assertion of importance. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 12:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Why ?????please explain briefly........

Why did U Proposed deletion of Bright Student???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yamaaan (talk • contribs) 07:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: Speedy deletion for article Drama (2012 film)

Dear Sir, I was still adding the citations and categories needed for tht... I didn't know English Wikipedia would be so fast to put it for deletion process.. Now I've cited a refernce and also a category... Hope it satisfies....Abhiram (talk) 11:41, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Paul Klinger

Hi Sparthorse. Thank you for your work on patrolling new pages and tagging for speedy deletion. I'm just letting you know that I declined your deletion request for Paul Klinger, a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to look at the suggested tasks for patrollers and review the criteria for speedy deletion. Particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion, proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Person is notable. Needs sourcing. Alexf^(talk) 23:47, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Just Because You THINK A Subject May Be Invalid, Does Not Suggest That It Is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GenghisKhan12 (talk • contribs) 03:01, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Same problem here, regarding another article. This user is vandalizing wikipedia and making hoax accusations without doing a minimum of research himself! AugustinMa (talk) 10:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I suggest you both take a read of WP:AGF. -- MST☆R ^{(Merry Christmas!)} 10:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Precisely, Spartshore should assume good faith instead of blindly accusing long standing contributors of vandalizing and publishing hoaxes. I haven't felt so insulted in a long time... His blind nominations for deletion without a modicum of research on his part is wasting people's time. Please, assume good faith, indeed! AugustinMa (talk) 10:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:BOOMERANG. -- MST☆R ^{(Merry Christmas!)} 10:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

AugustinMa, read the article talk page. Your assumption that I did not research is false. As a longstanding contributor you should be aware that WP:V is policy and cannot be circumvented. I'm rewriting the article to reflect actual sources for what a tubaphone is: [3]. It is not a banjo-like instrument. Sparthorse (talk) 10:32, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

At least, stop insulting people. I am neither a vandal nor a hoaxer. I like wikipedia too much and use it too often for that. AugustinMa (talk) 10:40, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the warning from your talk page. Sparthorse (talk) 10:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

How can I find out why my page (Lynxsquare) was deleted? In my opinion it describes the company and the business process. I have seen others similar or actually with a lot more details in terms of sales (chegg for e.g.). What is it that I can change ore remove? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amoledina (talk • contribs) 00:20, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sparthorse

For the new ISS no java page, the suggested box would go onto a edit notice page, when you go here there is a small link to an page notice template. It's edit protected and as far as I can tell I have to get an admin to make a similar one for the new article for me, a cut'n'paste affair. Hence the request. The edit notice would assist as not all of the links in the new article link back to the main article, the two edit links closest the top of the page would attempt to edit the new page. Am I asking in the correct place ? Penyulap _talk 16:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Myfavoritereview

Hi, I had added two pages a couple of months back which were deleted. One was regarding Independent Film Reviews and the second MyFavoriteReview which is a site for independent and international film and book reviews. For the latter, the reasons cited were lack of external references and links to the site. We worked diligently to get this addressed and also improved the article itself. You have now flagged it for speedy deletion, citing that on Alexa search it comes way down on the list as well as link backs. This issue was not flagged before, so I wonder, eg even if we could address this, what's to say you come up with another reason infinitum that the article cannot be posted. Most film and reviews are all dominated by large studios and sites like Rotten Tomatoes etc. Wiki as I understand it (in lay terms), is a platform which highlights significant people, organizations who make contributions that are worthy in some way shape or form to be recognized or to educate people. If Wiki only becomes a platform for the large, rich, or famous people or organizations, then it is not a good representation of a cross section of society. MyFavoriteReview and the contribution of Independent Film Reviews are the small players that are going against the flow and giving people a diversity of books and films which by themselves would not garner attention. They do not have huge if any marketing budgets to get their name out and up in the rankings, that you cite. However, they do bring value to society and for that merit alone, I ask you to reconsider your decision. thanks Aliyah.jmohammed (talk) 21:46, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I did not propose the latest version of this article for deletion. You should talk to GabrielF, who did. Sparthorse (talk) 21:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy converted to prod: Jim K Davenport

Hi, I have contested the A7 speedy deletion you placed on Jim K Davenport. Despite some bad wiki markup (an attempt to use the {{infobox baseball player}} template), there is a credible claim to significance there, specifically that he played for the Seattle Mariners and Joliet Jackhammers. I have verified through reliable sources that the subject did play in the Mariners' minor league system, which is enough to escape A7; however, he does not meet the notability criteria at WP:MLB/N. I have prodded the article accordingly. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:05, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Just a heads up, this article is now at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim K Davenport. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:41, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

inre Treasure Island (2012 movie)

I just tagged the article with an A10 speedy. It duplicates existing article Treasure Island (2012 TV miniseries). The well-intended AFD is unneccessary. Though a redirect from the new to old might be worth consideration, such does not require an AFD... simply some housekeeping. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:43, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Radio program

Well, this is new to me, so thank you. Calabe1992 20:53, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sparthorse. You have new messages at Calabe1992's talk page.
Message added 20:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Calabe1992 20:58, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

STOP!!!

Stop proposing to delete my article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Androzaniamy (talk • contribs) 14:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The NEW Uncle Gregory Horror Hour

Hello - my article on the above got flagged for quick deletion by you, and I just wanted to clarify something...

Last time it was flagged for deletion because there were no articles from a verifiable, legitimate source to prove any of the contents.\

However, this time I had a reference from a viable, verifiable news source. So why did it get deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Universehall (talk • contribs) 14:49, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

My Talk Page

Hey Sparthorse, u left a comment on my talkpage regarding an article I nominated for deletion. I didn't create this article or any sort of *test* article, but in regards to the article I nominated, yes, it had to go.NietzscheSpeaks (talk) 19:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks, I will now employ speedy deletion if it is appropriate in these cases.NietzscheSpeaks (talk) 19:54, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Why are you deleting my page i worked really hard on it. The only reason i made a new one is because it got erased — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.243.138.238 (talk) 21:31, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Declined speedies

I see you've had a lot of your speedies declined. While we don't mind double-checking people's judgement – it's our job! – it would be really helpful if you would re-read our speedy guidelines and keep in mind that new articles may be works in progress. A quick speedy tagging isn't always the optimal solution. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 21:55, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I have nominated over 800 articles for speedy deletion. Of those, 8 have been declined, five of those articles have been subsequently deleted. While every mistake is regrettable, I don't think that's an indecent error rate or indeed a "lot" of speedies declined. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 22:26, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Whilst I appreciate the need to keep Wikipedia free of rubbish, all I am saying is that you should be wary that CSD-tagging can scare potentially useful new editors away. More specifically, I do not think that tagging Battle of the Cats as G3 was called for (why is it patently a hoax?), nor was the WP:NFT PROD, since the article seems to talk about College sport (a fairly well-established area; I even found a dedicated WikiProject after a little searching), rather than something the author obviously made up. Initially I thought the article was going to actually be about feline mi

litary manoeuvres, but since the author seems to have their heart in the right place, we should assume good faith. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 16:20, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Why do you delete my article about KILOS!PUP

This is to inform you that the article i am writing entitled KILOS! PUP or KILOS! PUP (Organizaton) is an article letting the students of our University know about our organization. and i am working on it overnight then you will just delete it. Im expecting you to return the said article or else i will opt to report it to somebody else. Thank You Jay Nicolas 21:55, 12 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluecara09 (talk • contribs)

Incoming POSCO related spam articles

Hmm. Think we should look into Posco Baggins as well? --Shirt58 (talk) 08:59, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

:-) Sparthorse (talk) 09:00, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Calling an editor a "mischievous idiot" is not helpful. It contravenes Wikipedia's policy on personal attacks. Even when feeling aggrieved, you should comment on actions not contributors. Personal attacks escalate disputes and damage the collegial editing atmosphere that Wikipedia aspires to. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 10:05, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Because Fastily is doing damage and not properly using Admin authority - all these requests for deletion are spurious, and any fit Admin would not have placed them. Fastily has now deleted images File:Lord Barnard Vanity Fair 15 December 1898.jpg File:Group of hunters, Vanity Fair, 1901-11-28.jpg File:Cecil Legard, Vanity Fair, 1901-07-11.jpg (these are the ones I've detected) from EN Wiki, after using a sockpuppet ID User:FSII and the the transfer bot to (incorrectly) move them to Commons, even though they were clearly marked on EN Wiki as still under copyright in the country of orgin, the UK, and not to be transferred to Commons until a clearly stated year. Any worthwhile Admin would check stuff like validity of the transfer to Commons before deleting the file from EN Wiki. I left a message on Fastily's talk page requesting to cease and desist these actions, and restore any incorrectly deleted images, and my comments were deleted rather than responded to. Fastily is a danger as an Admin. Rcbutcher (talk) 10:20, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

The Admin first used a sockpuppet ID User:FSII to transfer images from EN Wiki Clearly marked as still under copyright in UK and Not to to be transferred to Commons until copyright expired. Hence an Admin ignored clearly-stated Copyright info. Fastily then deleted these images from EN Wiki. This in conjunction with all the spurious delete requests (no value, poor quality - total rubbish). This person is not fit to be an admin. I request you look into it before more damage is done. I do not take to issuing severe criticism lightly, in this case it appears justified. You need to address the facts rather than the wording. Rcbutcher (talk) 10:40, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

I notice that you tagged the page Shoppimon for speedy deletion with the reason "Web content which doesn't indicate notability". While that's a valid reason for speedy deletion in general, this page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because the article is about a piece of software, not a website. If you still want the page to be deleted, please consider tagging it with a speedy deletion template which does apply, redirecting it to another page, propose the page for deletion if it appears to be an uncontroversial matter, or take the page to WP:AFD for discussion on the merits. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 16:22, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Shoppimin is, according to the article, a SaaS app running on EC2. It doesn't execute on the user's local machine, but remotely over the web. So, I'd argue that A7/web content may apply. However, it is a "may" rather than "certainly", so I take you point. I'll use Prod instead. Thanks, Sparthorse (talk) 17:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Sparthorse is a Speedy Deletion troll?

Taking a quick read through your talk page it looks like you habitually find pages that are obviously in the creation process and mark them for speedy deletion before they have a chance to take off... why would you do this instead of messaging the user or marking the page as a stub and giving the creator a chance to add sufficient content? It seems to me - based on the sheer volume of speedy deletion comments in your talk page here - that you're just trying to hamstring people that are creating new pages rather than helping them. That's sad. (BigShawe (talk) 11:48, 15 January 2012 (UTC))

Then you would be sadly mistaken. Not only did I remove the speedy deletion notice from your article, but I've rescued and improved many articles. The vast majority of the complaints here are from vandals. I'm happy to have annoyed them and helped prevent them from damaging Wikiepdia. If you wish to align yourself with those folks, that's fine, but you'll be known by the company you keep. Sparthorse (talk) 11:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if you still persist in saying that I am a vandal and a hoaxer, but I'd be glad to keep BigShawe company. AugustinMa (talk) 13:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Nugent Francis Cachemaille-Day

Hi, a quick observation about the above. A brand new user created the article, about an important architect, at 22.00. At 22.04, you place a "This article does not cite any references or sources" tag on it. I adopted a different approach adding some references and placing a message on the new editor's talk page explaining what I'd done and why. Just a thought. KJP1 (talk) 00:31, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Deleting my article Mere chuninda Geet.

This is what is mentioned in your wikipedia standard:

5.The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable. This does not simply mean that the book's author is him/herself notable by Wikipedia's standards; rather, the book's author is of exceptional significance and the author's life and body of work would be a common study subject in literature classes.

You gave a reason saying that the article was created only because he's my gandfather. That's not true. He is a noted poet, a historical figure in Hindi Literature. His poems have been posted on so many websites. He was one of the greatest hindi poet in India. Why do you people keep deleting the content like this? Students did Ph. D on him and you say that it is being written only because he's my grandfather. No. Kindly reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsaxena1809 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

A question

If as you say "calling other users bullies is unacceptable" then how do I refer to users who are constantly trying to upset me without vadalising anything? Androzaniamy (talk) 19:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Joe Mant

All I did was move the old Joe Mant article which had a mistake with the name to another place with the mistake fixed so could you delete the other one instead, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Androzaniamy (talk • contribs) 13:00, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

C. George Boeree and Eleni Vitali

Hi, I added references in these articles. Eofren (parler/diskuti/talk) 22:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

For C. George Boeree, I added the good reference. Eofren (parler/diskuti/talk) 22:23, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't do more for references. Eofren (parler/diskuti/talk) 22:29, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Helter Skelter (Manson scenario)". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 5 February 2012.

Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 15:48, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey

• Brilliantly said! Thanks. Wifione ^Message 17:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The request for formal mediation concerning Helter Skelter (Manson scenario), to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, WGFinley (talk) 23:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
(Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Some new changes

To all users who think I'm trouble,

I have been thinking carefully and have come to a final conclusion as to why some other users seem to absolutely hate me and everything I do. These are a list of things I will try to do when I edit Wikipedia. From now on I will:

Not trust Wikipedia when I use it for my own purposes.

Continue editing it for as long as I shall live!

Ignore rude messages to me and report them.

Ignore users that call me names.

Continue fighting vandalism.

Accept all help whether I need it or not.

Ask for help from users that are helpful and polite.

Give help to users who ask for it.

Spend more time on editing Wikipedia instead of trying to persuade others that I don't mean to be mean.

Not give thank you messages to users who do not recieve them well.

Never edit another user's user page.

Continue being polite and competent.

I have sent you this because I think you might benefit from reading it. Androzaniamy (talk) 12:27, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Prods

Prod is for uncontested deletions. Once a prod is removed, by anyone-=-even the original contributor--it may not be replaced for the same reason, since it has been contested. The only way is AfD. DGG ( talk ) 21:46, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Zylog System limited

sorry, what I declined was the speedy, not the prod. But if I decline a speedy saying it might be notable , in practice I'm also going to contest the prod. Whether I contest it at AfD varies. Depends on what others say DGG ( talk ) 22:11, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Winx Club and Trix

I've added some comments about your proposed deletion of the Trix article. I oppose deletion and recommend Keep and Improve. So I'll remove the deletion banner in a few days unless you can convince me that the article deals with a non-notable topic and/or is otherwise worthless. It would help if you respond on the Trix discussion page and not here, since that way we can keep the discussion in one place. Timothy Perper (talk) 14:13, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Charges of "vandalism" and reversion action being used to block correction of malicious text in the biography of a living person.". Thank you.

New Page Triage engagement strategy released

Hey guys!

I'm dropping you a note because you filled out the New Page Patrol survey, and indicated you'd be interested in being contacted about follow-up work. This is to notify you that we've finally released both the initial documentation about the project and also the engagement strategy, which sets out how we plan to work with the community on this. Please give both a read, and leave any comments or suggestions you have on the talkpage, on my talkpage, or in my inbox - okeyeswikimedia.org.

It's awesome to finally get to start work on this! :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 02:54, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Sajda Tere Pyaar Mein

What did you think about this article ????????? Lonesome ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:15, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

A6

You prodded it whilst i was redirecting. Its been widely touted as the A6 however it was launched as the 5x so its more than a valid redirect anyway as people will be searching for A6. Its a valid redirect. Should not of been speedied as no content which is why i reverted you. So whether an A6 is launched or not its a valid redirect until it it.Edinburgh Wanderer 21:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't type anything in that was inappropriate on Thomas and Friends.

I didn't type anything in that was inappropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigshowandkane64 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry... =(

Hey man, I just want to say I'm sorry. I don't want to be mad at you, I just didn't know what I typed in that was inapproprite. I would never type in anything like that and I didn't know I did. I'm sorry if I did and I won't do it again. It was just a mistake I made, sorry. Bigshowandkane64 (talk) 22:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC) Bigshowandkane64

Serial Plots

Hello! I see that you have removed many plots of TV Serials giving reason that they are Original Reaserches or unreferenced. Hence would like to point out that as per WP:FILMPLOT, the film (serial in this case) is itself the primary source and no secondary sources are required to refer the plot. Would hence request you to undo you deletions. I found few. But cant go through all of your history. I suppose it would be easier for you to track it. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 10:14, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Answered on my talk page. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 10:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:KunwarManjar

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User talk:KunwarManjar, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. GregJackP Boomer! 11:59, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Requsting for my articel Jaishankar chigurula keep

hi sir my article Jaishankar Chigurla is in Deletion policy. please help me to re create are keep the article Jaishankar Chigurla.Teena D'souza (talk) 07:12, 22 December 2015 (UTC)