User talk:Velella

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

This talk page contents prior to January 2016 have been archived. Please feel free to start new discussions below.  Velella  Velella Talk   17:22, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Houston Heights Woman's Club[edit]

Dear Mr. Velella, I am extremely sorry if the page I created was not sufficient, however I am a freshman in High school and this is a very important project that I have worked very hard on and spent a large amount of time on. Please don't try and delete my page. I will take any suggestions on how to make my sources more useful and valid and I will also and the tag letting people know that I am a student working on the page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellietycer (talkcontribs) 04:44, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Please first read the notability guideline to understand what it needs to establish notability for an article. You might also want to consider using the new article wizard to help you create an article in draft space where it is less vulnerable to deletion - I am sure you can find your way to the wizard. Please don't be put off editing because some of your work has been nominated for detion - you probably have about a week to improve it and save it. I apologise, but I have no idea what age a "freshman" in "high school" is so it is difficult to give more advice appropriate to your age. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   06:26, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Teahouse revert[edit]

Hi. Can you explain this revert? I'm not sure what I did wrong! Cordless Larry (talk) 19:37, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Many apologies. Very much not intended. I am editing using a tablet, very many miles from home and using a stylus on a small screen is proving taxing to old eyes. When mistakes do occur, I try to fix them immediately but this one I missed. I am not sure that I can restore the content as other discussions have moved on but I would be happy to try if that would be useful. Regards.  Velella  Velella Talk   19:53, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
No worries, Velella. I've re-edited the page. Thanks. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated[edit]

Hi, I'm Md Hashim azmi shaikh. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Pritam Kumar Jha, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Hashim 07:40, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

I have simply tagged it as unreferenced: I see no evidence that you have made any edits. Neverthless I have Prodded it as an unreferenced BLP.  Velella  Velella Talk   09:27, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement[edit]

Hi, I just saw that you're interested in making the Wikimedia movement more sustainable. I created an essay regarding the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement on Meta. I'd love to hear your ideas and maybe even have your support! Thanks, --Gnom (talk) 22:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Sarmad Sindhi[edit]

You seem to have overlooked the "Living" aspect of WP:BLPPROD. Regards, Bazj (talk) 08:28, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Ah, very true. I was trying to avoid nominating it for a speedy deletion just in case some refs came along. I should have gone with a PROD as you have done. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   08:41, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Robert Joshua Danao[edit]

I noticed you removed the CSD from the article because there is a claim of notability. If this was tagged as a A7 this would be logical, but the article was tagged as a G11. Your logic does not apply. reddogsix (talk) 23:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[edit]

update content[edit]

Hi Velella,

I am trying to update content for fruit shoot based on its website sources so as to be reliable. How can I do that please? Many thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SMfruitshoot (talkcontribs) 08:23, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

The promotional website of a product is nearly always the worst place to find information. Wikipedia requires robust independent sources for its information. You replaced moderately good encyclopaedic text with almost meaningless marketing hype. That is not what Wikipedia is about. Please have a look at Wikipedia's notability guidelines for more help. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   09:29, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Stick to what you know[edit]

How can indepth marketing information be "way,way too marketing orientated" on the Marketing Mix page??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Audrey094 (talkcontribs) 09:16, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Simply because this is Wikipedia, an online encyclopaedia which requires that all pages are written in a neutral encyclopaedic way. Therefore pages about advertising should not contain advertisements, and pages on marketing should not contain marketing hype. The page might well describe that fact that marketing often uses hyperbole and may be economical with the truth, but the way it is written should still be encyclopaedic and supported with robust, independent references that provide the required notability.  Velella  Velella Talk   09:26, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

About Alan Rickman's page[edit]

Dear Velella,

I apologise with utmost sincerity for the unintended vandalism I did on Alan Rickman's page. It was definitely not my intention to vandalise his page, I only wanted to add to it. Ever since he died, I wanted to find out about his funeral, as I felt sad having to say goodbye to one of my favourite actors. Unfortunately, there were no online sources available, so I had to ask some fans instead. After finding out he was apparently cremated (with his ashes retained by his wife), I assumed this was fact as I was even sent a picture of the invite, which I have attached. I knew that asking fans is an unreliable source, but I had to do it because there was no information about his funeral online. I only wanted to add to his page, not vandalise it. I noticed that Simple English Wikipedia has a category for people who were cremated, but none on the main Wikipedia, so I had to create it. Unfortunately, I have no experience with HTML and had to create the category by adding it onto his page, then creating the category page itself. I added a few other famous cremated people into it (e.g. Marc Bolan) to add to it. I am deeply sorry for any trouble I may have caused and I regret my actions. I promise to be a better Wikipedian in the future and use more reliable sources.

Yours truly,

Lembowman — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lembowman (talkcontribs) 21:50, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

People who were cremated[edit]

Dear Velella,

I just want you to know that "People who were cremated" is now an official Wikipedia category and I have linked it up with the original Simple English version. I created the page and published it so it now an official category that can be attached to the articles of notable people who were cremated.

Yours truly,


Lembowman (talk) 22:19, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Suspension bridge[edit]

Hello, I noticed you removed my addition of suspension and cable bridges to Croatian inventions. I would just like to note that Fausto Vernazio (Faust Vrancic), a Croatian polymath, then part of the Venetian Republic, is credited for designing the first suspension bridge. Please allow me to keep this change on Croatian inventions Spacetime123 (talk) 14:34, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Ashley Chinner[edit]

Gimme a break, I wrote a little paragraph about my father for him when he comes home, can you delete the article in a day? Payton Chinner (talk) 10:03, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

I's sorry but Wikipedia is not part of social media and nor is it a web-host. Only articles about notable people are retained here and Wikipedia uses its own definition of notability. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   18:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

new article[edit]

Hello! sir this is Kiran, just i created one article, actually its my first article with proper reliable sources. If u agree with it. then i proceed. Plz Suggest me what i have to do. Is it correct way what i have created article? Kiran Kirak (talk) 12:47, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

I am not quite sure what your message means but I suspect that it derives from my tagging Duniya Rashmi for speedy deletion. This very short article has no references and nothing to suggest any notability. Reading this may help. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   12:59, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
im reqeusting that you please leave my article alone Dennis Adonis (talk) 19:24, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
I believe that I have made the only edit that is required. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   19:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Crusade against Emily Ratajkowski images[edit]

What is your crusade against Emily Ratajkowski images that depict content better than present and or absent images in many articles?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:29, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Are you in doubt about the licensing of the images. It seems you removed every last one of the placements regardless of their usefulness.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:14, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Because it is a form of link spamming.  Velella  Velella Talk   07:40, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
As I am quite sure you are aware, it is not link spamming to add images/videos that depict the prose content in ways that are superior to the preexisting image content. In most articles, the images/videos that I added depicted the content in superior ways to the preexisting content. With these edits you seem to be trying to extend WP:COI editor policy to a well intended editor who has come across great media content and is attempting to improve individual articles while improving the interconnectedness of WP, which is a desirable feature. Keep in mind that the first two sentences at WP:MOSLINK read "Linking through hyperlinks is an important feature of Wikipedia. Internal links are used to bind the project together into an interconnected whole." My objective of adding the professional quality media content was to improve the visual elements of each article while improving the interconnectedness of Ratajkowski to various articles.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:22, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
No I am quite sure that it is link spamming - all to promote a particular model and a particular magazine photo-shoot. The videos of of very poor quality and do nothing to add to the encyclopaedic quality of the articles. Moreover, many (most, all?) the additions are demeaning to women where there is no justification for the use of such imagery. Wikipedia is not censored, but equally Wikipedia articles are balanced and fair and do not go out of their way to demean or belittle any ethnic group, religious interest , or sexual orientation. Your additions are odious in the context in which they have been used.  Velella  Velella Talk   19:48, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
It has nothing to do with promoting a particular model or magazine photo shoot. It is uncommon for a professional photo shoot to have a behind the scenes production that is availed in creative commons licensing. Thus, we have a lot of photo and video imagery of a particular shoot that we might not otherwise have available for use on WP. Some of the depictions are topless or nude. This is a touchy issue. However, to some it is artistic. I understand that we have to be careful how we present topics on WP. I don't look at File:Emily Ratajkowski with party balloons for 2013 GQ Türkiye photo shoot tight.png and see a topless woman. There are plenty of ways to see boobs on the internet that are not covered up. I see an image of a subject in use by a notable person. Thus, I see a priority depiction of the subject.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:59, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sonu Lal (actress)[edit]

Would you have any objections if I add a +1 to your afd? Sidra Noor (actress) is essentially in the same boat as Sonu Lal, and it seems a waste to create a whole new afd when one that hits the essential notes is already running for a similar article. TomStar81 (Talk) 05:01, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Not a problem. I am all for making these processes simpler ! Velella  Velella Talk   07:39, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Dunellen Red Devils[edit]

My page for the Dunellen Red Devils should have not been deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thagreatbaldino (talkcontribs) 14:29, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

I disagree. There was no evidence of notability, there was no evidence that the team played in a national league or any other form of notability.  Velella  Velella Talk   15:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


Hi. Thank you for patrolling new pages. Please remember to inform the creator when tagging a page for deletion, this will give them time to address the issue or raise an objection. Using an appropriate script will do this automatically. Since 2012 all new pages should be patrolled using WP:Page curation although for isolated pages, the Twinkle script will also automatically inform the user. For more information please see WP:NPP or ask me on my talk page. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:15, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of any omissions on that front and apologize if so. Could you point me to the relevant page so that I can work out what want wrong please. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   08:16, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Ah, it looks as though Twinkle is mis-behaving. I will try and re-boot it. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   08:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
No, it looks as though Twinkle is behaving well. Review of my history doesn't immediately flag up any Twinkle failures. Can you point me to the problem please ? Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   12:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


Hi, So the SaltCON (Convention) Page was deleted. It is simular in construction as other pages, such as

what am I missing? Where can I get help?


Several things probably. First life isn't fair. Second, the argument that there are other similar aticles on Wikipedia does not justify another unsatisfactory article - have a look at this for another view. The real answer is that it failed to meet the notability criteria required of Wikipedia articles. I can't see the article any more - I am not an admin, so I can't comment in any detail, but I formed the view that it wasn't notable and the deleting admin appears to have agreed with that judgement. As regards help, it is always much better to create an article in Draft using the article wizard. This gives you time to knock the article into shape and the process includes a review by an experienced editor before the article is published. It also protects the draft article from deletion (unless it is offensive or a copyright infringement etc). Hope that this helps. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   22:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

CSD tagging[edit]

Hi Velella. Why did you tag Thiel Audio with a {{db-corp}} as you did in this diff? Sam Sailor Talk! 17:53, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Because it did not seem to me to be a notable company based on the information and references provided.  Velella  Velella Talk   19:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
I am sorry to say that this is a repeated mistake of yours. Could you please have a read of what several people have politely written here above? Sam Sailor Talk! 20:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

April 2016[edit]

Information icon Hello Velella. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that you shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and content (CSD A3) moments after they are created, as you did at Stefun Jahangir Carzon. It is also suggested that pages that might meet CSD A7 criteria not be tagged for deletion immediately after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 22:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

You mistake how I work. I have performed searches on the individual and can find nothing that remotely suggests at notability. An article creator who can fix up an infobox but not produce a single reference flags up concerns in my eyes. As a photographer, his Instagram account lends very little credibility to his claims and has only 208 followers. Is this the mark of a notable photographer? The inability of google to produce a single valid reference only amplifies that concern. In addition we have the article wizard to help create articles in a more protected environment.  Velella  Velella Talk   22:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Which is beside the point. You didn't even give the author a chance. Just because you didn't find anything doesn't necessarily mean there isn't anything. He may simply not have finished it yet. And the existence of AfC isn't an excuse to tag articles that are created by other means for deletion mere minutes after creation. Adam9007 (talk) 22:53, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Velella, I second Adam9007 here, you have been advised multiple times to stop your hasty tagging, and you demonstrate over and over again that you are A7-tagging in breach of policy. Please take a break. This is not the end of the world, but you need to stop, listen, and change bad habit patterns. Regards, Sam Sailor Talk! 00:16, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Wild Bunch Paintball Team[edit]

Hello, there seems to be some confusion on a page that I created. After the page had been placed into AfD and a discussion developed, you posted in favor of speedy deletion, in violation of the process rules. I did not want to remove your comments without talking to you first. Please remove your PROD support endorsement from the page listing as soon as possible. Thank you. FeelTheBernBaby (talk) 02:23, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Removed as requested  Velella  Velella Talk   13:56, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Help for new editor dealing with potential copyright issues?[edit]

Hi Velella. I am a very new editor. I found your username while reading through listings of possible copyright problems in order to figure out how to ask for help from the folks that process potential copyright problems. As I couldn't figure out where to post my own question on that page, and only got so far on the Teahouse, I thought I might ask you. I'd like the support of an experienced editor to help me navigate the potentially murky waters of whether it is a actually a problem, what category of problem, and if necessary and how to get it listed on Copyright Problems Page.

Is this something you are available to discuss with me?

Best wishes and thanks too, AD64 (talk) 06:48, 5 May 2016 (UTC) 6

Not a problem as long as is it in the next 24 hours - after that I shall be without an internet connection for about two weeks.  Velella  Velella Talk  
After I posted details of my concern to you here, I was going through the rest of my notifications, and it appears that someone has stepped in at the Teahouse to take care of things. Thus, I no longer need your support. I have deleted my original message to clear up your talk space. Please have a great two weeks away. I'm happy for your offer of support. Best, AD64 (talk) 16:29, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

AfD for Rene Heger[edit]

I have opened a deletion discussion for the article Rene Heger. You may want to participate. ubiquity (talk) 15:50, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Deleted page for endsight[edit]

Hi Verella,

My article "Endsight" was deleted from articles for deletion process. I did not edit the article for 5 months and it was deleted. I would love to retrieve the information that I had on the article. I do not wish to post as of right now. Please let me know if you can help me out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egarcia2057 (talkcontribs) 23:32, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Self-written living person articles[edit]

Hi Velella, your tag of vandalism is a surprise to me and I have contested it. This is an important category, in my view, and others agree. I look forward to seeing discussion on the question. Best, Guest11111 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guest11111 (talkcontribs) 05:13, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

your welcome.  Velella  Velella Talk   08:18, 25 May 2016 (UTC)


Hey, this might be interesting to you. --Jayron32 14:26, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated[edit]

Thanks for reviewing White Nationalist and Supremacist Support for Donald Trump in 2016, Velella.

Unfortunately MrX has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

I'm unreviewing this so that other page patrollers can review it. It may have been created by a sock puppet and the article needs to be edited to comply with WP:BLP.

To reply, leave a comment on MrX's talk page.


Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Delilah_Alvares, CYA there. --OGfromtheGut (talk) 21:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Certainly did  Velella  Velella Talk   17:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)


Please see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Schools and the discussions relevant to it. Educational institutions are specifically excluded from the A7 guideline, because regardless of notability they are handled in a particular way. For high schools and colleges,they are considered for convenience as if hey are notable and kept. This is one half of a purely empirical compromise intended to lessen the burden of AfD discussions on them. The other half off the compromise is that primary and junior high schools are not kept unless they actually do clearly meet the standards for notability , which is quite rare. Instead they are either merged to a section on education for the locality, or listed on s list or sometimes a combination article for the schools in a particular area. This is one of the purposes of lists: to deal with things that ought to be mentioned but are not sufficiently notable for a separate article. It's specifically mentioned as a technique in Deletion policy. (their inclusion on a list for the locality is not unique--we handle churches and cultural institutions the same way in most cases)

The compromise has been pretty stable since about 2008. There are occasional challenges, and you are welcome to discuss it again, but before you do, ask yourself if you really want to participate in the 50,000 or so afds that would result, because if it fails, not only every high school, but every elementary school, will be defended there, as used to be the case. DGG ( talk ) 15:16, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. That was a discussion that I hadn't seen. I have no intention of rocking the boat despite the illogicality of the compromise outcome. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   16:44, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Just had a chance to read through the guidance which is not quite as clear cut as it might have been. Nevertheless I am not inclined to set out upon a mass deletion of non-notable school names from lists of British unitary authorities (tempting though it may be). However, it does beg the question, that without notability, how do we judge what is a hoax and what is not? In years past in Britain, the relevant Education Authority web-site could provide an authoritative list. Now with academies and private schools which sometimes outnumber LA schools, there is no definitive list and no ready means of checking. An own web-site cited as a source only means that somebody has learnt to make a web-site and not that there is actually a school. Any thoughts ?  Velella  Velella Talk   17:31, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Kaan Akalın and Arar Mı[edit]

Hello currently creating content for these pages but they are valuable enough to be in wikipedia. It's a debut single and currently trending alot in Turkey. Creating multilingual pages now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kayipadam (talkcontribs) 22:10, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Currently fixed the uncited information as I was adding text already. All sources are refered right now. Album and artist page linked.Kayipadam (talk) 22:47, 21 June 2016 (UTC) Hello, I'd kindly request to learn if there are any issues regarding to the new article. As I am in a gmt +3 time zone will be leaving in half an hour. If there is an issue about the page (which I guess there isnt any as I fixed all citation and reference errors) I'd be happy to learn them so I can fix and then leave. Thanks in advance. Kayipadam (talk) 23:12, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

The issue is not about citations, it is about notability.Please read WP:GNG and specifically WP:MUSIC for help. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   23:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I read those articles. And did confirm that the criteria was met. As there are more than 4 major newspaper news. Almost a million viewed youtube music video. Two album that the artist appeared on. And one album compilation which is already in wikipedia TR which contains the artists name in it. You reviewed the page when there were not enough content as I was saving and editing at the same time. Please re-review the article so it can be accepted. Thanks in advance. Ps: all links between sarticles and translations from Turkish are made. Kayipadam (talk) 02:07, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Direct Action Everywhere[edit]

Aloha Velella,

I was editing the Direct Action Everywhere wiki page and was about to add my sources when you kept removing my edits. :) Ok, fair enough, but I am new to the process and simply need some guidance, can you help? I need instructions on how to add my edits while inserting references, removing all my edits simply appears rude, but hey, I'm new to this, so will accept the behavior as standard for wiki. A disappointing first experience with wiki edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by 808alles (talkcontribs) 22:20, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

What you were doing was adding contentious material without any sources. You had been actively editing the page for 25 minutes in 14 separate edits without adding a single source. If you add material like this it must be sourced as you go along otherwise it will certainly be deleted. It might seem harsh but without good sources , unscrupulous editor could get away with inserting anything they liked, truths, half-truths and downright lies. I am sure that it wasn't in your mind to inserted untrue material, but what you have been adding seemed certainly one sided and potentially contentious.  Velella  Velella Talk   22:34, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm not clear on what "one sided" means? What was added was factual material and I was ready to add the citations when my edits were removed. I'll redo my work with citations, sections at a time, and a question, what is your capacity at wiki? Are you a proofer or an interested third party watching over edits? Simply curious and thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 808alles (talkcontribs) 23:14, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

I am just an editor, like almost everyone else here. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   23:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Too speedy[edit]

This speedy deletion tag was too speedy. Since the author had only created the article one minute prior to your tagging, you have no way of knowing whether the author intended to flesh out the one-liner with details that would have positively asserted this person's notability. In general, I feel it is best to allow an article to exist for at least 15 minutes prior to speedy deletion tagging, except in cases of attack or copyright violation pages. Tagging faster than that, especially on new authors' articles, can be very bitey. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:15, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks WikiDan61 you correctly described the situation. I am new to Wikipedia and was in the process of building the article as it was marked for deletion. As I would seem to be the model of the coveted 'new contributor' I can certainly say from my experience that giving me a bit of time to assemble my article would have made for a warmer welcome. Velella, please consider the regular advice on the talk page above and allow those of us who are new contributors a brief period of time to become familiar with the process. (for instance, I was unaware of the ability to draft an article before posting) , perhaps pointing new contributors to that process would be a more constructive place to being a conversation with a new user than simply making a page for deletion. Makersoftheater (talk) 14:02, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
No, I am sorry, but if you choose to jump in at the deep end, it is reasonable to assume that you can swim. There are several ways of creating an article safely including the new article wizard , constructing a Draft: article or drafting in your own sandbox. Equally, most editors spend some time familiarising themselves with Wikipedia and its ways of working before starting on a new article. I also believe that I was fully justified in my tagging. I did two separate searches that yielded nothing notable. This is borne out by the article itself which, as it stands, has nothing to demonstrate any notability. Unless there is some substantial improvement I will take it to AfD as I do not believe it merits inclusion in Wikipedia.  Velella  Velella Talk   13:25, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Agree with Makersoftheater and WikiDan61. There is no rush to delete articles as fast as possible, so there is no reason to rush to tag an article for speedy deletion. Obviously, there are some exceptions, but for content-related problems (rather than attack pages, etc), rushing to delete another editor's article is bitey. Of course there are some processes that the author could have used, but many editors don't know about that. Filling out a redlink article is a pretty simple path to creating an article, so it makes sense that an editor could easily unintentionally bypass that. Regardless, I don't think it's an acceptable justification to immediately tag an article that's likely still a work in progress. If the editor is still actively editing, I prefer to leave it alone until later. Appable (talk) 17:07, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for tine information and converting the article to a draft. I will continue to work on it there. In my original response to the article being tagged for deletion, I provided a number of examples of other personalities of similar stature that do have similar wikipedia pages. The reason I chose this topic was specifically because it seems the this individual has a similar degree of stature in the industry as a number of other people who have wikipedia pages. I would appreciate any input Velella or others might have on what in this case defines notability. My thought was that the number of awards and nominations and lecturing on the topic at an internationally recognized institution met the threshold of notability. Specifically is the question of notability a problem of citations or is it that you feel that there is not a substantial enough level of achievement in the field.Makersoftheater (talk) 18:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Warren County, New Jersey debacle[edit]

Not sure if you got pinged about this, but I thought you should be aware. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:30, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

18:53:01, 30 June 2016 review of submission by[edit]

There seems to be confusion about the references provided as they clearly demonstrate notability. Burgunder has received extensive media recognition in both national and international publications on his accomplishments. Many of the media outlets are independent of the subject, too. Such publications include Running USA, Colorado Runner, ESPN, Pittsburgh City Paper, Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Naples Daily News, Associated Press, Competitor Magazine, CBS The Early Show, (talk) 18:53, 30 June 2016 (UTC)and several of others. All of these publications have highlighted Burgunder's accomplishments.

As for notability in terms of athletics, Burgunder was selected to represent the only US men's team to compete in the Greatest Race on Earth and this was covered by the Associated Press. Burgunder is also a multiple record holder in terms of XTERRA trail running, which is the largest organized trail running circuit in the world. Also, Burgunder has garnered several of other impressive accomplishments that make his background unique and notable.

Lastly, Burgunder has received national recognition as a sports business person as he was named one of the rising stars in sports business by the Sports Networker, which is recognized as a national authority for the sports business industry.

Therefore, Burgunder is notable and is worthy of being published on Wikipedia.

I suspect that these arguments would be better put on the talk page of the article so that any reviewing editor may read them. I very rarely return to a draft article that I have reviewed, preferring to let others take an independent view. It is 12 days since I reviewed the draft article and no changes have been made since then and none of my suggestions have been followed up. I understand your points but I don't agree with your conclusion , however I am happy for others to take an independent view.  Velella  Velella Talk   20:08, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Journal access[edit]

You may be interested in getting free access via WP:LIBRARY. I haven't tried my access yet, and am unsure if I have the relevant journals without much digging. Widefox; talk 22:59, 1 July 2016 (UTC)


Section WP:ANI#User:Widefox disruption. Sorry I included your name per that editor, so the usual notification here. Widefox; talk 12:58, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


Hello Vallela - re the edit on microorganism - apologies - I realised my mistake after I had gone out. Cheers --Iztwoz (talk) 21:46, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   22:04, 14 July 2016 (UTC)


Hi, re this tagging - it's not eligible for WP:CSD#A10, since the article was not recently created - it's existed since 2 July 2006, i.e. ten years ago. But you might have more success if you tag Jamhore, which was created at 08:46, 15 July 2016 - i.e. less than two hours ago. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:31, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes I realised that some time later. The issue was in the spelling of the name of the settlement and it seemed best to keep the correct spelling even if it was a later article. I agree your analysis and have made the incorrectly spelled version into a redirect. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   10:33, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
What you have now done, in essence, goes against WP:CUTPASTE. Put Jamhaur back how it was, then edit Jamhore to add {{db-move|Jamhaur|(your reason here)}}.
Also, this tagging was also inappropriate, since no part of WP:CSD#T2 applies. Try using {{db-g6|reason=page unambiguously created in the incorrect namespace}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:41, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
That does seem unnecessarily complex , especially since I was not the editor who created the 3 new versions of the same article and who also persists in adding copy-vio material, but ( sigh) it is done, but I cannot provide any reassurance that it will stay in this condition for long! Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   10:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)


Sorry, but I've declined your speedy on the Ratman thing. There is plenty of stuff on Google (I am not guaranteeing the reliability of any of it, though), so it isn't a case of someone posting misinformation to vandalise Wikipedia. The notability of the piece is another matter. It's got more going for it than the usual 'children murdered in the wood' that haunt the classrooms of the nearby school stuff we get, but it could do with evidence of the murder in the underpass being real OR evidence that it is a wifely believed myth. (I've had two of my own creations repeated to me after quite a few years of having nearly forgotten them. I was rather young at the time, but since that I've been suspicious of many myths and legends...) Peridon (talk) 22:43, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Sri Lankabhimanya Sir Arthur C. Clarke[edit]

Why was the page speedily deleted? It was not a test page, it was a redirect! --ColouredFrames (talk) 21:29, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

It wasn't his name.  Velella  Velella Talk   22:35, 19 July 2016 (UTC) --ColouredFrames (talk) 00:23, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate the link which is usful and could have been usfully quoted in the edit summary. However Wikipedia does not use honorifics in article titles and only occasionally in redirects in case where the person is commonly known by thier honorific tile such as Lord Lucan.  Velella  Velella Talk   13:25, 20 July 2016 (UTC)


Hello [Velella], would you please explain in detail about my vandalism? I don't get it; I didn't even edit any Wikipedia pages!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreatestWikiEditor (talkcontribs) 22:46, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

How does harassing a well respected editor on their talk page and the refactoring comments on your talk page to change the apparent signatory sound? All of that is vandalism.  Velella  Velella Talk   22:50, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for the vandalism...[edit]

OK, so I apologize the repeated vandalism. And, I will NOT contribute any sort of edits to Wikipedia from now on. How does this sound? Also, I heard a lot of people saying that you were a professional Wiki editor and scammer. GreatestWikiEditor (talk) 22:56, 27 July 2016 (UTC)GreatestWikiEditor

And that was supposed to help your case ??  Velella  Velella Talk   23:06, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Deletion Inquiry[edit]


I just noticed my page "Buygoodeals" was deleted on 25.07.2016. Since I am new to Wiki, I would like to retrieve the deleted material for future reference and improvement. Could you please let me know how can I get them back? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weibinzha (talkcontribs) 08:49, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Weibinzha: You asked a very similar question at User talk:Maile66#Deletion Inquiry (informing Maile66). I can view the deleted page Draft:Buygoodeals, and it's clear to me that it was unambiguous advertising or promotion, which is speedy deletable under WP:CSD#G11. Phrases like "Buygoodeals is the greatest platform on which users can find" or "Buygoodeals provides latest information of discounts" go very much against WP:NPOV, and there is not one reference (reliable or otherwise) to support these claims, see WP:V. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:21, 28 July 2016 (UTC)