User talk:Ttonyb1/December 2009 Archives

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Drowningman - COI?

I patrolled Drowningman in the first place, and have since been involved with some substantial copyedit. You tagged it with the COI template. You haven't left any notes on the talk page. I presume you're suggesting User:Ohnonono123 has a connection with the band. Where's the evidence? I still can't see any. Yours, in curiosity, Shem (talk) 16:35, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

It appears he has some sort of connection with them. Per the page history, "01:58, 1 December 2009 Ohnonono123 (talk | contribs) (9,878 bytes) (removed all objectionable copywritten material. Everything else is either from interviews with me (simon brody) and equally my Intellectual Property or from material written BY me.) (undo) (Tag: references removed)" (bolding added by me) My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 16:53, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes - I see where you got it from. In the meantime that's been confirmed by his comments at User_talk:2over0#drowningman_article. I think it's fair to say that he needs to declare his interest in accordance with Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, and I've asked him on his talk page to do so. Thanks for the prompt reply. Shem (talk) 17:01, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
My pleasure... ttonyb (talk) 17:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

New Bill Newmark article

Newmark has been an influential political figure in the Bronx, New York for a couple of decades, and has been a frequent candidate for office. I have noticed that Wikipedia does have entries on unsuccessful political candidates and third party figures such as Fred Newman. The entry for the Working Families Party in New York has its executive, Dan Cantor, highlighted.

Thank you for your attention.Bronxpolwatcher (talk) 05:27, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

The article fails WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN. The Newman article is notable for much more than being an unsuccessful candidate. Not sure what is the significance of your mentioning the Working Families Party article. ttonyb (talk) 05:28, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the Mayor of Menlo Park, CA

http://www.almanacnews.com/news/show_story.php?id=5487 24.4.189.46 (talk) 07:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I looked at the Menlo Park website and it had not been changed. Thanks for clearing it up for me. ttonyb (talk) 15:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Managing Partners Limited - maintenance templates

Hi Ttonyb1, Sorry for removing the maintenance template on the MPL page; I'm still relatively new. I wasn't sure what to do with it as I had made significant changes to the article a few weeks ago (relating to the instructions in the template) and assumed after a while that, as no further instruction had been given, it was safe to remove them. Could you please be so kind as to tell me how I can go about having the template removed legally? Thanks, AM AtomicMonarch 09:28, 2 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atomic Monarch (talkcontribs)

I removed the Wikify tag, all the others seem to still apply. ttonyb (talk) 15:33, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air Solutions

With regard to User:68.157.0.87 and User:Md80stud, I am willing to assume good faith that they simply forgot to log in rather than trying to pass themselves off as two different people. But assuming that they are the same person, I wouldn't want the closing admin to be misled into counting them as two separate supporters of keeping the article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree, I also think your posted comment will bring it to the closing admin's attention. I would go ahead an report them as a potential SP if there is no response in a couple of days. With that said, I would also understand if you immediately reported the issue. My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 04:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
That user and myself are both different users, while we do know each other and worked together in the past that has nothing to do with expressing the way we feel about the article in question. I have been trying to find information as he suggested and you all recommended to make this a more notable article. Please review is any information from this 3rd party is useful and how it could be applied to the article. http://www.madcowprod.com/06252007a.html , they make reference to the number of flights that Air Solutions operated to Haiti. I will continue to research for other 3rd party references and verification. --Aviationfreak 20:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Md80stud (talkcontribs)
This is not really enough to support notability. The source does little more than support the existence of the airline. ttonyb (talk) 00:15, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Sean Jasso

Hello Ttonyb1,I appreciate your interest in my article. I trust there is a good reason you have tagged my article, although I am an experienced Wikipedia editor and I don't understand why you have tagged my article for speedy deletion. If you could provide some evidence for why it doesn't meet the criteria for an article, that would be much appreciated. Until then, could you please remove the speedy deletion tag since it has not yet been justified by evidence. Thanks, BDS2006 (talk) 17:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
The article has been changed to an AfD. It appears to fail WP:BIO and fails to provide independent references of substance - they are mostly press releases. The subject has only one very minor GNews and the GHits lack substance. ttonyb (talk) 17:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Kirstie Maude

I would like to enquire as to why you deleted my article on Kirstie Maude. I clearly stated that she was one of the foremot experts on the use of macromedia programs, which is more than sufficient reason to make it a valid encyclopedic article. Despite this, you still felt the need to delete it because it did not state why this article would make a suitable encyclopedic contribution. So what, pray, IS sufficient to make it appropriate and "notable"?? If you deleted all articles pertaining to less notable people than this, you would have a very small encyclopedia. I would like to state that I am thoroughly disgusted with your treatment of my article and think you should be releived of your administrative duties. Furthermore, I should like to inform you that I will not be using wikipedia in the future, in protest at this ridiculous abuse of power. I spent much of my valuable time on this article, simply to have it deleted immediately and treated with utter contempt. If you truly did delete articles less notable than mine, you would be able to count both the articles on this site and the number of it's users on one hand. I would finally like you to reconsider this deletion, due to the evidence I have given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamcjones1995 (talkcontribs) 18:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Rather than yelling at me because your article was deleted, I would suggest you step back and consider that the article might not have been up to Wikipedia standards.
I did not delete the article, I only nominated it for deletion. The nomination was independently reviewed by an Admin and then deleted by them - this meant they concurred with my assessment that the article was not up to Wikipedia standards. If you decide not to return to Wikipedia, I am sorry to hear that you will not be taking advantage of a wonderful tool for the dissemination of information; however, there are standards that need to be met in order for an article to be included in Wikipedia. The article you wrote failed to meet the criteria for notability. I suggest you read the text of the guideline to familiarize yourself with what is needed and try again. I would also review the links in Welcome message on your talk page to help understand Wikipedia a bit better. My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 18:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Firstly, I did not "yell" at you, i put forward a perfectly logical argument in an appropriate and civilized way. Secondly, I would like you to reassess the deletion of my article, as i do beleive it meets the criteria, which I have looked through extensively. Thank you.
Adamcjones1995, you have shown yourself to be incapable of a civilized discussion as a result of this edit. [1]. I suggest you reread the comments above. ttonyb (talk) 18:56, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
I am trying to have a civilized discussion, that was my little brother being an idiot , I am sorry about that. I would just like you to please review your decision to nominate my article for speedy deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamcjones1995 (talkcontribs) 19:07, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Please see WP:BROTHER, because what you are saying is not an excuse. Please own up to your mistake and learn from it. Thanks! - Zhang He (talk) 19:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
yes, i can understand how you would think I did this, but I assure you I did not. Finally, I realise this is going nowhere. Tony, I appreciate you are a volunteer and are giving up your own time. I am sorry if I came across badly in my earlier posts. Thank you and merry christmas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamcjones1995 (talkcontribs) 19:24, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
That response could very well be a lie. - Zhang He (talk) 19:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
it could very well be, but please believe me when i say it is not. I am not a liar and do not appreciate being called one. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adamcjones1995 (talkcontribs) 19:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Please use indents when responding. Thanks! Also, I was not calling you a liar. All I said was that it could very well be a lie. - Zhang He (talk) 19:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Zhang He, in light of the original comment, I too doubt the veracity of the statement and believe that WP:BROTHER applies; however, the proof will be Adamcjones1995's discontinued or continued behavior. With that said, I look forward to being proven right or wrong. My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 19:56, 3 December 2009 (UT
Ok guys. I am sorry for any offence or annoyance I caused. let's draw a line under it. Merry Christmas to you.
My best to all... ttonyb (talk) 20:03, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Can You Help?!

I need to get to know how to add photos on 2 a page, but I just can't seem 2!! Can u please help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SRT8 (talkcontribs)

Take a look at WP:UPIMAGE. Let me know if you have any questions. ttonyb (talk) 02:12, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Baby Tree

why do you deleted my page?,--Viktor Lichtmann (talk) 21:44, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

The page was deleted because it did not have any significant content and was deemed a test page. ttonyb (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

John cena (wrestler)

Hi there! That was my first A10 deletion! Just a little note to say thanks! GedUK  20:38, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure, it was my first nomination for this reason. Cheers... ttonyb (talk) 20:40, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Why was Alex Dorf (American Actor) deleted?

Alex Dorf has been on CSI and has been in many productions at the oldest theatre in the U.S.A the Fulton Opera House. Go to google and type in like Alex Dorf Fulton Opera House and it will show you on Fulton Opera House actors bio him. He also co wrote the script and lyrics for the play anti-smoking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sitchmhenk (talkcontribs) 04:17, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

He failed to meet the criteria in WP:ENTERTAINER. ttonyb (talk) 04:20, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Fairfax Circle Baptist Church speedy deletion on page

Hi, I know there maybe justifiable copyright issues, but the content was created by me as the webmaster of the Fairfax Circle Baptist Church webmaster. Any help would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nacnud22032 (talkcontribs) 06:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

There are a couple of options, you can donate the material for use in Wikipedia; however, there are some issues with the donation. Since the text is so short, the easiest path to take is to rewrite the material. The other issue is that it fails to meet the criteria needed to establish notability. ttonyb (talk) 06:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
OK, I re-wrote the content and added notability references. Also, I designed and own the image I added. So it's not copyright infringement right? --Nacnud22032 15:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
So, I licensed the image under Creative Commons 3.0, see on the footer on homepage: http://www.fairfaxcirclechurch.org/ --Nacnud22032 15:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nacnud22032 (talkcontribs)
So is it all good now? Can you take off the tag? --Nacnud22032 16:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nacnud22032 (talkcontribs)
I removed the copyvio tag, but the organization tag still applies. ttonyb (talk) 18:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand. Notability links were added. What am I missing? Nacnud22032 20:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nacnud22032 (talkcontribs)
Sources need to be independent, third-party, and verifiable. You should read notability, verifiability and reliable sources for information concerning acceptable sources. Let me know if you have any questions. ttonyb (talk) 20:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Understood, I had 2 independent external links on there? Doesn't that count?
I see only one external link that serves to confirm the existence of the church. The church's existence is not in question. The article needs to meet the criteria of Wikipedia based notability. There is nothing to support that in the article. ttonyb (talk) 23:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

International notability

Hello! Do year articles have a regulation where only figures of international notability may be included in the Births and Deaths section? Is there a page where I can read about these guidelines? I've tried to calm myself and not feel discouraged after discovering the revert because it's not to made myself feel bad, but to bring more accuracy and credibility to the wiki. Thanks, Schfifty3 19:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Please do not feel bad, remember this is only Wikipedia, not "real-life". 8-) Generally the recent years are for internationally known events. The rules for recent years are covered in WP:RY. If you notice, there are "19XX in United States", "19XX in United Kingdom, and "19XX in Sports", etc. – the items might fit better in those articles than in the "19XX". With regards to "..bring[ing] more accuracy and credibility to the Wiki[pedia]", the information already exists in the source articles. My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mitchsteinfeld

Hi Ttony, I added User:Bepurdy15 to the list in light of the article Wadsworth Jarrell and the AFRI-COBRA movement. I'm not overly familiar with the procedures for these investigations, so if that wasn't the right thing to do please let me know and I'll be grateful to learn-- Glenfarclas (talk) 06:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Perfect...I am not sure if they are all related, but might as well include all suspects. Thanks for following up and I'll be curious to see what the investigation reveals. ttonyb (talk) 07:03, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

1986

Regarding this revert, the IP editor's contribution seems appropriate (it links to an article, with what seems to be a valid 1986 date). Apologies if I am confused. Cheers, --4wajzkd02 (talk) 16:28, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Birth's go in the birth's section. The item was already there. My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 16:32, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Apologies I did not notice. Thanks! --4wajzkd02 (talk) 01:46, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Michelle Price

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Michelle Price. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michelle Price. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:09, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

December 2009

When 2010 becomes the current year, here's how the 2010 article will probably look like:

2010 (MMX) is the current year, in accordance with the Gregorian Calendar, a common year that started on Friday of the Anno Domini or Common Era. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Homerjay90 (talkcontribs) 06:40, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

The correct format would be:
2009 (MMIX) is a common year starting on Thursday and is the current year. In the Gregorian calendar, it is the 2009th year of the Common Era, or of Anno Domini; the 9th year of the 3rd millennium and of the 21st century; and the 10th and last of the 2000s decade. ttonyb (talk) 06:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
or: correct format will be changed sometine
2010 (MMX) is a common year starting on Friday, in accordance with the Gregorian calendar. It is the 2010th year of the Anno Domini/Common Era, the 10th year of the 3rd millennium and 21st century, and the 1st year of the 2010s decade. It is also the current year.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Homerjay90 (talkcontribs)
Again, I suggest you read WP:RY for the agreed upon format. Also, please sign you posts. ttonyb (talk) 06:46, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Melodycatcher

I have asked for help or comments on several places / talk pages but I do not seem to exist any more since I did not get any reply since Excirials comment at the end of october. My article on a melodyfinder called Melodycatcher has been deleted again, even in a last very limited version. It has never been explained to me why this article was not accepted while an article on a similar melody finder Musipedia is. Jvos (talk) 14:27, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

David Evans, Baron Evans of Watford

Hi, may I ask you why you've moved this article? We generally locate articles about peers in connection with their titles and make exceptions only when an incumbent has decided not use his title or was more known under another name (see also Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(names_and_titles)#British_peerage for this). I think that the latter two cases do not apply here and since a qualifier for disambiguation is necessary, the use of the title is the most oblivious solution. ~~ Phoe talk ~~ 19:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

You are absolutely right, my mistake. I corrected the mistake by reinstating the original article and redirecting the new one (businessman) to it. ttonyb (talk) 20:09, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi again, no problem, however to avoid a cut-and-paste move, I have reverted you on both the article and the redirect and have taken it to Wikipedia:Requested moves. Best wishes ~~ Phoe talk ~~ 21:39, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Benutzer:Hanky27/Werkstatt-->User:Hanky27/Werkstatt

I moved the sandbox article to where it was obviously intended to be. You could have done that instead of tagging it for A2 deletion. :) LadyofShalott 06:59, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I somehow missed that earlier today. ttonyb (talk) 07:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Indy Winners

Hello, I just now noticed that you had been deleting all the Indy winners I posted and did not see any of your warning emails until just now. Sorry. My account is new and I didn't realize I was getting warning messages. I only found out because I realized I'd made a mistake on one of the years and when I went back to fix it, I noticed all my work had been deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DARTHGALE (talkcontribs) 19:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they deleted because they are better suited to the 19XX in Sports pages. If you have any questions, please let me know. ttonyb (talk) 20:37, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

spacing and layout of photos - Henry Lozano

Hi Tony, Thanks for trying to help me. When all the spaces are removed, the text and headlines all crunch together and the pictures are all in the wrong place. Also the table of contents pulls up into the wrong place, and no longer lays out along the left side of the page where it belongs. This helps the layout I worked so carefully and so hard to create. Please view this page to see how nice the layout looks in my test version:

Eric PS - I'm trying to put up a video, and no matter what I do it doesn't play and it doesn't have the play button. Will you please look at the video in "Six Billion Paths to Peace" and see what I did wrong? Scubeesnax (talk) 04:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scubeesnax (talkcontribs) 03:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the added whitespace does not look better. Part of the reason is that I look at so many Wikipedia articles and this is not the format used. The whitespace has a tendency to segregate the title for the text. I have added the extra spacing to fix the overlapping (shift right) titles, but beyond that it is not Wikipedia format.
Give me a second to look at the video. ttonyb (talk) 04:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Could you give me a URL for "Six Billion Paths to Peace". I am having trouble finding it. There is nothing that precludes an article looking good; however, it should also follow the established Wikipedia format. Also, I should mention that the article you authored is far better than most I see added to Wikipedia. I am impressed. I know you have worked had on it and you should know it is appreciated by me and the countless others that will use it for reference. ttonyb (talk) 04:10, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Tony. Wow, thanks for the compliment. You know how hard these pages are to do right! May I respectfully make two requests? Is it possible to move the Table of Contents down just a little so it lays out on the left side of the page below the picture of Laura Bush? And is it possible to move the References at the bottom down a little bit further? On my browser, the photo of President Bush cuts off the 1. and 2. of the References section, which could be fixed by moving it down. Thanks! Eric PS - I really appreciate your help on the video/movie. PSS - I'm looking for the Six Billion Paths to Peace link for youScubeesnax (talk) 04:15, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
  • I moved the refs a little and moved the See also section to conform with the WP:MOS. One of the issues that one experiences when trying to format the pictures is the location depends on the size and resolution of the user's screen and the size of the window. What you are asking to do depends on those factors. For items such as the images and the TOC, they can be artificially moved to a lower position, but for people that have smaller screens or use a smaller window on a very wide screen (myself included) this will cause a lot of white space in the article. One solution is to make the pictures smaller. Users will be able to click on the picture to increase the size of the image. As far as the TOC, I am not sure you can really resolve the issue. ttonyb (talk) 06:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Is this the link you're looking for on "Six Billion Paths to Peace"? http://www.sixbillionpaths.org/about/ Eric Scubeesnax (talk) 04:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
It looks like you may have posted an issue with the photo of John Bridgeland? But I believe it's in good shape and should not be deleted. It's copyright permission is: This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States Federal Government, etc. I actually spoke to the photographer and he works for the White House. Sorry to take so much of your time, Tony, but I'm still learning. Again, thanks for the help! Eric Scubeesnax (talk) 04:45, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't see any issue with [2]. I have not tagged it for a copyvio nor has anyone else. It is not in danger of deletion. ttonyb (talk)
I am not sure if you can upload movies for use in an article, so I need to plead ignorance. Sorry, I could not be of help. You might want to post a question on the help desk page. ttonyb (talk) 06:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi Tony. Very creative solution to the layout problem. Thanks! How can I find out how to post a video/movie? There are zillions of them on Wiki, for example on Barack Obama's page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_obama (near the bottom, just above the references) But I have no idea how to learn to do it properly. Who can I ask? My best for the Holidays! EricScubeesnax (talk) 07:00, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Oops! I was asking you the video question at the same time you were answering, so I hadn't seen your reply. Thanks. Scubeesnax (talk) 07:01, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
If this helps, the code used is:
File:20090124 WeeklyAddress.ogv|left|thumb|Obama presents his first weekly address as President of the United States, discussing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
The code is between double brackets "[[ ]]". ttonyb (talk) 07:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I followed your advice and posted a question on the Wikipedia helpdesk. Meanwhile, I pasted the video code from the Obama page into my own wikipage and it works perfectly. File:20090124 WeeklyAddress.ogv|left|thumb|Obama presents his first weekly address as President of the United States, discussing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
But when I paste my own code into the page...File:Pathfinders_to_Peace.ogg|right|thumb|The Shinnyo-en Foundation presents Maria Shriver with its 2009 "Pathfinders to Peace" Award.
See above? It doesn't look or play the same. Obama's video has a nice picture of him and a play button. My video does not. I can't get the play button to appear. It's a mystery! Eric. Scubeesnax (talk) 07:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
It could have something to do with the creation of the .ogg file. BTW - the Obama file is a .ogv file. ttonyb (talk) 15:54, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm researching the difference between ogv and ogg now, but from what I can see they're both the same except ogg is the updated standard. I once saw a listing in Wikipedia of all the videos uploaded that day and it was dozens. I wonder how I can find an expert on this topic? Once again, I really want to say Thank you for your help. Eric. Scubeesnax (talk) 21:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Logan Lynn ...for the umpteenth time.

Will you please stop reverting my edits of Logan Lynn? This is getting nauseating. You always balk at the same pieces of information which are clearly sourced. I even doubled up citations on the piece regarding Logan's grandmother who tutored Johnny Cash. I hardly think mentioning the fact that Logan has a brother constitutes as vandalism. Come on, now. Just hold your horses and wait until I am done. You will see that everything I have tried to add is substantial and not fluff. XXSoulSurvivorXx (talk) 19:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)XXSoulSurvivorXx.

Not sure why you are nauseated, just below the "save page" button it states, "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." We have already discussed this. The items about Lynn's grandmother do not add anything to the Lynn article. The items might add to an article about Lynn's grandmother but do nothing for this one. As far as what I changed today, I just made the text more readable and more encyclopedic in nature and format. My best to you... ttonyb (talk) 19:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the fact about Lynn's grandmother does add something to his article, because it demonstrates where Logan may have very well received his natural musical ability from. Unfortunately, outside of the Cash connection, LaVanda Mae Fielder may not be notable enough for her own Wikipedia article, seeing that her life and accomplishments were more on the private scale. Even if Logan's fame grows in the coming years (knock on wood), that would only add one more piece of notability, but posthumously in regards to her. As for this disclaimer you mention..I never said at any time that I had a problem with my text being edited or redistributed. The only recurring issue was your unnecessary revision of my edits (i.e. deleting Landon Lynn, cutting Fielder one second before I added the citations on her, etc.). XXSoulSurvivorXx (talk) 19:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)XXSoulSurvivorXx.
If you may have noticed, I edited the text a little bit, but the reference to his grandmother is still there. Believe it or not I am actually trying to help the article by removing fluff and unneeded material to provide a more encyclopedic article. Rather than assuming I am working against you, I suggest you look at the changes I am making as possible improvements. Again, if you noticed, I did not remove the reference to his grandmother, I only worked to improve the text. ttonyb (talk) 19:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Audrey Colton

Dear Tony, Im sorry about vandalizing, i just didnt liek how u delted my page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aecaec1123 (talkcontribs) 22:39, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, please take a look at the welcome message on your talk page for information on how to create great articles. My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 22:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Ra Luhse

Hello Ttonyb1, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Ra Luhse - a page you tagged - because: Marginal, but I think enough to pass A7, and Google suggests more sources are there. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. JohnCD (talk) 11:08, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... ttonyb (talk) 01:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Frank Sinatra

Hi, Tony. Thanks for looking over the Sinatra page. I am confused why you labeled the Sinatra memorabilia I listed as advertising. Care to elaborate? Thanks! Kilgoretrout89 (talk) 19:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Sure, a couple of reasons. It was a little to close to advertising for the resort and mainly it added little to the Sinatra article. That sort of detail would possibly appropriate for an article on the resort. Thanks for asking. ttonyb (talk) 00:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
I have to disagree. I didn't think I was promoting the resort at all and not even really promoting the restaurant. I was simply listing memorabilia donated by the Sinatra family that represents who Frank Sinatra was. I think this is more than appropriate for the Legacy section. Especially when other stories in this section discuss their memorabilia such as Patsy's restaurant having photos, etc. Can I rework the paragraph to include the memorabilia but not mention Steve Wynn or the resort as much or something along those lines? Kilgoretrout89 (talk) 15:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
That would be great! ttonyb (talk) 16:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Robert McMurrer

There should be a page on here about Robert McMurrer. I several links about him and I downloaded a few pictures of him. He is a great poet and have a great story on his youtube. If you do not like how I write about him then please help me to write something we both can agree on. Just do me a favor watch his youtube videos and I believe he answers his own myspaces message or his rep. His myspace is http://www.myspace.com/rmcmurrer and I do wish we can come to some common ground on Robert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeteSmith81 (talkcontribs) 00:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Please read WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE for what is needed to support an article. After reading the sections if you have questions, please let me know. If you cannot establish Wikipedia notability there is a strong chance it will be deleted. ttonyb (talk) 01:11, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Swindonartscentre / CSDA7

Hello-- Just wanted to let you know that your CSD tag was removed without any reason given from the Swindon Arts Centre article that you'd tied to an improper username. It was done by an experienced editor (but non-admin), so they should know that if removed by a non-involved editor there should to be some explanation given for clarification. I'm not passing judgment on the CSD, but you'd probably be in your rights to replace it if you felt it appropriate and give the removing editor a "huh?" if you'd like. I'll assume it was a mistake, but thought I'd tell you. Cheers~ daTheisen(talk) 01:54, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... ttonyb (talk) 01:59, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MS Paint Adventures

To be honest there's no offense taken, but I usually don't bother logging in to fix things I notice wrong -- by browser just cached my logon so while I'm reading other stuff I jeep getting these yellow popups saying that you're messaging me.

Really, I find all this bureaucracy obnoxious so I'm just going to log out. Make all the changes you want to my comment; I just bothered to log in because I knew a pure-IP login wouldn't be taken well in a AFD vote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oesor (talkcontribs) 20:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Mark Heller

Hello Ttonyb1, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Mark Heller - a page you tagged - because: Appears to have directed Stephen Dorff in a film with it's own article; credible assertion of notablilty. PROD or take to AfD if required. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. GedUK  20:33, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. ttonyb (talk) 20:35, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Johnny Shacklett

Hello Ttonyb1, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Johnny Shacklett - a page you tagged - because: A7: article asserts subject designed and built unique instrument, recorded very rare record that was the subject of an article in Downbeat. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:39, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

What disruptive edits? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Taylor

You keep sending me messages re: disruptive edits. PLEASE ELABORATE. --99.231.163.135 (talk) 07:52, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Your edits to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Taylor and the article. Unless you wish to be banned from editing I suggest you stop. ttonyb (talk) 07:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Global Environment Organisation

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Global Environment Organisation. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Environment Organisation (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:13, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:RY-inspired deletions

I don't see consensus that the 9-article minimum applies to years before 2008, although I'm not going to restore any of your removals. This is just a heads-up. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:12, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but the WP:RY comment exists at the top of the talk page for each year starting about 2000. ttonyb (talk) 17:16, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Actually it starts in 1999. ttonyb (talk) 17:18, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'm not sure the addtion of the pointers had consensus, but I don't feel like researching it. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure either, but WP:RY appears to be a good standard to use to keep the articles focused. My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 17:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Formats for the current year

Here's some previous formats:

1) 2006 (MMVI) is a common year starting on Sunday of the Gregorian calendar. It is also the current year

2) Year 2007 (MMVII) is now the current year, a common year starting on Monday of the Gregorian calendar in the 21st century.

3) 2008 (MMVIII) is the current year, in accordance with the Gregorian calendar, a leap year that started on Tuesday of the Anno Domini (or Common Era)

4) 2009 (MMIX) is the current year of the Anno Domini/Common Era in accordance with the Gregorian calendar. It is a common year starting on Thursday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Homerjay90 (talkcontribs) 22:25, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

When 2009 finally rolls into 2010, the format could be the 2008 or 2006 format:

2010 (MMX) is a common year starting on Friday, in accordance with the Gregorian Calendar. It is the 2010th year of the AD/CE, the 10th year of the 3rd millennium and 21st century, and the 1st year of the 2010s decade. It is also the current year

or

2010 (MMX) is the current year, in accordance with the Gregorian calendar, a common year that started on Friday. It is the 2010th year of the Anno Domini/Common Era, the 10th year of the 21st century and 3rd millennium, and the 1st year of the 2010s decade. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Homerjay90 (talkcontribs) 22:30, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

...and the point of this is? There is an agreed format in WP:RY. Unless there is agreement to change it, the format in WP:RY should be used. ttonyb (talk) 04:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

You and I agreed to change it for 2010, and here's what it will look like.

2010 (MMX) is a common year starting on Friday of the Anno Domini/Common Era, in accordance with the Gregorian Calendar. It is the 2010th year of the AD/CE, the 10th year of the 3rd millennium and 21st century, and the 1st year of the 2010s decade. It is also the current year. (Homerjay90 (talk) 07:24, 30 December 2009 (UTC))

We have come to an agreement. We will slightly change the format for the current year.

2010 (MMX) is a common year starting on Friday, in accordance with the Gregorian calendar, and is the current year. It is the 2010th year of the Anno Domini/Common Era, the 10th year of the 3rd millennium and 21st century, and the 1st year of the 2010s decade. Homerjay90 (talk) 08:01, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion: Carlos & Alejandra

Thank you for your patrolling of New Pages. Unfortunately, the page you tagged to be speedily deleted was a requested page and you tagged it too early. It is currently under construction and will have more information added to it in the future. You can assist by adding more information about the group if you like. The group is of credible source as it already has pages linked to it and it is nominated in a prestigious latin award ceremony for best tropical album. Thank you for your kind assistance. Monkeytheboy (talk) 06:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I suggest you add a {{hangon}} tag to the page and provide a reference to support the nominiation. ttonyb (talk) 06:51, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Declined: Wife Tax

Hello,

I have declined your speedy deletion request on Wife tax. The article is not obviously vandalism or a hoax. It may be a neologism, but this is not a CSD criteria. I have prodded the article instead. Also, I found your negative warning (i.e. one which did not assume good faith) and sockpuppetry allegation on the user's talk page to be a bit bitey. I'm not saying that I support the article's existence - I don't - or that I know for sure that the user is not a sockpuppeteer. I just think that we should be cautious in dealing with new users. I do appreciate your new pages patrolling work; it is a great help to our encyclopedia.--Danaman5 (talk) 07:06, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message... ttonyb (talk) 07:11, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

2010

Please wait until 2009 rolls into 2010 to change it to the current year format. 2010 isn't the current year quite yet. We still have 2 days left of 2009. Homerjay90 (talk) 08:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about. The article edits do not say it is the current year. ttonyb (talk) 08:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, please keep it as 2010 (MMX) will be a common year...

Here's what will do on 31 December 2009.

2010 (MMX) is currently (Australia, Asia, East Africa and Eastern Europe) and will be (Western Europe, West Africa, North and South America) a common year starting on Friday, in accordance with the Gregorian calendar.

2009 (MMIX) was (Australia, Asia, East Africa and Eastern Europe) and is currently (Western Europe, West Africa, North and South America) a common year starting on Thursday, in accordance with the Gregorian calendar.

Then on Jan 1, 2010

2009 (MMIX) was a common year starting on Thursday of the Gregorian calendar

2010 (MMX) is a common year starting on Friday...

Please let me know if you guys have agreed to change the format. Homerjay90 (talk) 08:27, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Homerjay90 (talk) 08:27, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

There is no agreement with your change. What you are missing is that just because the year has not occurred, that does not preclude it from being a common year. I repeat, it does not have to take place to be a common year. Please leave it as is. ttonyb (talk) 08:31, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


Is this OK with you on December 31, 2009: 2009 (MMIX) was (certain regions in the world) and is currently (other regions) a common year starting on Thursday, in accordance with the Gregorian calendar.

2010 (MMIX) is currently (some region in the world) and will be (other regions) a common year starting on Friday, in accordance with the Gregorian calendar.

This is when the clock hits December 31, 2009

Homerjay90 (talk) 08:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

For future years, we use "will be"; past years use "was", and the current year uses "is"

Homerjay90 (talk) 08:44, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

although 2009 will roll into 2010 before we know it, let's keep the formats the way they are right now. Then we'll put in current year when 2009 has already rolled into 2010, and was for the 2009 article

Homerjay90 (talk) 08:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

"Domestic" Events

Please take care when removing "domestic" events from the date and year articles. Some of what you have removed recently refers to the founding of genuine, important international organisations! These are exactly the sort of things that should be in those articles. In fact, they are above average entries for these articles given that they are riddled with many far less notable entries covering events in the English speaking countries that really do deserve to be demoted for being of domestic interest only. Please remember that, although this is the English language Wikipedia, it is meant to cover the whole world without giving undue prominence to the English speaking countries. Events you should kick out as "domestic" should be the ones that only cover one country and are of little interest to people outside that country. --DanielRigal (talk) 15:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... ttonyb (talk) 15:18, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

2009 rolling into 2010

The clock is going to strike 2010 in some regions of the world, so here's my suggestion for the 2009 and 2010 articles until the clock strikes 2010 in Grenwich.

2009 (MMIX) was (some regions) and is currently (other regions) a common year starting on Thursday. In the Gregorian calendar...

2010 (MMX) is currently (some regions) and will be (other regions) a common year starting on Friday. In the Gregorian calendar...Wheelock7002t (talk) 07:47, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

You want to say:

  • 2009 (MMIX) was a common Year starting on Thursday of the Gregorian calendar. When the clock has struck 2010 in all the time zones.Wheelock34T (talk) 19:48, 31 December 2009 (UTC)