User talk:WilyD

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Plato and Aristotle discussing something. Unexplained:Plato's laptop.

Page Deletion question[edit]

Boxing Ego deletion. Hii i was wondering if i can grab an archive of the deletion of Boxing Ego, I want to try and do it within the guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacbradley2 (talkcontribs) 02:03, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello i was currently working on my page RedArcGaming and was deleted in the proccess by you, could i ask how it was advertising.

You have an itchy deletion finger. Comedy Dynamics was deleted without any discussion or consideration and it shouldn't have been. The organization or product has attracted the notice of reliable sources unrelated to the organization or product, including The New York Times. Notability is not synonymous with fame or importance and the organization has had significant or demonstrable effects on culture and entertainment. Just because large organizations and their products are likely to have more readily available verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability doesn’t mean smaller organizations and their products can’t be notable. Arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations or their products.ComedyGuy15 (talk) 16:07, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I put a page up, Republic Metals Corporation, which you deleted for not having notable sources. I would like to put the page back up, but rather then linking all of the sources to Republic Metals website, as was done before, link the citations directly to the independent sources. Would this be acceptable? Please let me know so I can begin on putting it back up. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilastrul (talkcontribs) 18:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

In your version of English...[edit]

...whatever it happens to be, are these two words pronounced the same?

  • You ought to go to the store right now!
  • Please go out the door and get the newspaper.

If not, then "withought" is in no respect a plausible typo for "without", which is a combination of "with" and "out", "without". Please do not remove the speedy delete request again. BMK (talk) 10:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015[edit]

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to I Am (Leona Lewis album), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page.The album doesn't have a release date, so it's not notable. The draft was created to make an article until it has a release date, and has a whole edit history spanning months. You say I blanked it, but the draft was simply copied and pasted into the new mainspace article, and wasn't created with that prose. So please do your research before you assume.  — ₳aron 11:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at I Am (Leona Lewis album). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in loss of editing privileges. Again, don't add copied and pasted content from a draft article with a whole edit history.  — ₳aron 11:14, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Baumann Skin Types[edit]

This appears to reproduce entire paragraphs from [1] as seen at [2]. While that Raymondlouis page appears to mirror the earlier (now deleted) Wikipedia page as of 1 Aug 2011, I can't see that, as I am not an admin. Could you please verify? LeadSongDog come howl! 13:42, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

If you look at the original AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baumann skin types, it was deleted as a copyvio of [3], which it was (and the current version is not). The current version does look like a copy of [4] - which both contains a copyright notice, and a notice that the guy doesn't own the content. So it probably is a copyvio (though of a different source) - though the weirdness might make using Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations worthwhile, I don't know. WilyD 14:20, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Well, the para from the article (p.128 bottom) beginning "This is the only" is still there almost verbatim. Was that para in the old article, too? LeadSongDog come howl! 16:34, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
It's there almost word for word (indeed, the whole article is almost word for word), but I don't see what you're seeing in the current version. WilyD 17:29, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

May 2015[edit]

Information icon Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages, as you did with ReGlobe. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Instead of deleting the tag, contest the speedy deletion if you have a problem with it. JZCL 15:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, WilyD. You have new messages at JZCL's talk page.
Message added 16:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JZCL 16:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, WilyD. You have new messages at JZCL's talk page.
Message added 16:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JZCL 16:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, WilyD. You have new messages at JZCL's talk page.
Message added 17:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JZCL 17:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey Wily, You are removing speedy deletion tags without giving any reasons. You should better challenge the deletion at appropriate forum. Can you tell where the earlier deletion of Shailesh J. Mehta School of Management is declined? Was there any discussion over it which resulted of keeping it? There are enough reasons given for deleting the page which is a complete promotional page of a non notable college. Kindly challenge the reasons before removing any wikitag. Shekhar 09:10, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Peter May[edit]

When you performed the G6 move on Peter May, you should have restored it to the article Peter May (cricketer)- this was how it was before the controversial move here. On another note, please could you also move Peter May (obscure nobody) back to Peter May (writer)- I was trying to make a point about controversial moves, but realise that it was stupid and inappropriate. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Old Catholic Confederation[edit]

Just FYI on the speedy delete i put on that page. The Article was created, as was Old Catholic Confederation in the United States and Collegium augustinianum by one or more editors.. who.. how shall I say it? There are people out there, anglican-related mostly, who create elaborate church entities and give themselves fancy titles and the like, when there is really nothing there. They seem harmless (as far as I know right now) but these articles were created in furtherance of their fancy. The articles really are promotional in the sense of creating something that tries to show the validity of these entities; to promote something like this, the tone is very serious etc; it isn't promo like you find for some weight loss dietary supplement Anyway, we've gotten two deleted; this is the last to go. I only recently learned about this, and am still learning. Just wanted to let you know why i G11'ed it. Jytdog (talk) 11:24, 7 May 2015 (UTC)


Sorry about Sunkalp Energy. I had not noticed it had been unsucessfully speedied before. I should have noticed, of course. I listed it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sunkalp Energy DGG ( talk ) 18:43, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your work at RfD[edit]

This might sound a strange thing to say, since we are usually protagonists battling against each other at WP:RFD, but I sincerely appreciate your contributions. You are always wrong, almost by definition (and so am I), but that is how we make the encyclopaedia better, isn't it? I will often oppose you, but it's not personal, and you have never personally attacked me (and I hope I haven't you, if it seemed so, was simply a mistake: I attack the argument not the person). We're both just making the encylopaedia better. I reckon we are about fifty-fifty on who "Wins", at RfD, but I sincerely thank you for contributing, there aren't many of we regulars there, and we all keep it kinda spinning. Back to the battle, then! Si Trew (talk) 10:20, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Oort cloud and asteroid[edit]

No, I'm not trying to. You should read the source and carefully look into what they are actually saying. --JorisvS (talk) 11:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

If you've read the cited article, you'll know it's about asteroids and not rocky bodies. We've had this discussion before. Look at the Weissman & Levison article before assuming you know what it says. Funnily enough, these guys actually try to draw a distinction between rocky and icy bodies, though of course they repeated call them "asteroids" (and of course, there's possibly metallic non-rocky bodies and so on as well. If you want to fix the terminology problems in how we refer to minor planets, that's admirable, but through the IAU or MNRAS or something is the place to do it, not Wikipedia. WilyD 11:48, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
DO NOT RESPOND ON MY TALK PAGE, BUT HERE. I'll see your responses.
They do indeed make a distinction between rocky and icy bodies! And they repeatedly called them asteroids. Now, of course, the term "asteroid" is not precisely defined. This means that a) the term is somewhat vague, b) Wikipedia has to decide which definition to use. Wikipedia uses the definition "any minor planet up to the orbit of Jupiter, incl. its trojans" (no, I had nothing to do with that), which includes some rather icy bodies such as Ceres. Normally, and especially in an encyclopedia, it is better to use precise language. Because "asteroid" is vague, it is better to use a different term to be precise in what they exactly mean to say. Instead of "rocky bodies", we could alternatively say "bodies that formed in the inner Solar System". --JorisvS (talk) 14:00, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Your talk page isn't just for you to receive messages, it also serves as an archive of messages you've received so it's clear to all you've already been cautioned about your problematic behaviour (and help connect patterns of bad behaviour). As such, it's important that messages to you about how it's inappropriate for you to use Wikipedia to publish your own ideas belong here. Your own ideas about what minor planets should be called (or what Paul, Hal, or whoever might secretly) aren't appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia. Instead, we need to stick to what sources say and mean - we can't say "bodies that formed in the inner solar system, because Weissman & Levison don't say or mean that. You might not like asteroid (nor, really, do I, though I recognise the practical difficulties in re-aligning all the literature terminology in a single fell swoop), but that's not for here. Try the IAU or MNRAS or whoever. WilyD 15:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I like to keep discussions in one place, so that they're actually a good archive and not fragmented. If you like to have a notice on my talk page (or even have the entire discussion copied there), that's fine with me. Either you're not actually reading what I'm saying, or you don't understand what I'm saying (or you don't want to?). In the former case, read it, carefully. Else you can ask questions or at least say that something isn't quite clear. In any case, don't assume my motivations (like you've been doing), because you're dead wrong about them. In fact, if you'd read what I've said, it shoud've been clear to you already that they are dead wrong. --JorisvS (talk) 17:21, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Just a note about Book talk:War Book talk: Volume 1[edit]

This page is probably going to be recreated by Cyberbot I (run by Cyberpower678). Please see User talk:Cyberpower678/Archive 23#Bug with Cyberbot I creating Book talk: pages for further information. Steel1943 (talk) 13:33, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I took a stab at fixing it again. It should work this time.—cyberpowerChat:Online 19:54, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
You can deleted the page now. The bug has been fixed.—cyberpowerChat:Online 17:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

James Dello Russo[edit]

FYI, I just restored the CSD you removed from this article. The references you referred to were not for the subject of the article, but were for his father. If my actions are a concern, I can move to an AfD. Let me know, thanks. reddogsix (talk) 17:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

TUJF Deletion[edit]

Hello, you deleted the Toronto Undergraduate Jazz Festival recently I believe because of non-independent sources which could not be considered as appropriate references in regards to its importance. Before I create the article again I am requesting you review new sources I have gathered from the founder's previous work in establishing the Korean Undergraduate Jazz Festival.

Please get back to me, thanks.

Claytoncarmichael (talk) 21:51, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Fletchers Solicitors[edit]

Thanks for the temporary undelete. I can't find the page. When I click on the link I am taken only to an empty page with a tag on the top. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:35, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I am uncertain about what to do. I asked for the WP:Speedy deletion to be rescinded and for the article instead to go for discussion to WP:AFD so that I can get some idea from the WP:Community as to how it can be improved. The whole thrust of my discussion was to prevent deletion, and then to improve it. I'd appreciate your advice on how to proceed because this is uncharted territory for me, even though I've BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 23:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Not having heard from you, I am making my points at the Speedy deletion appeal, which is probably what you would have told me to do anyway. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 04:50, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I read your comments on my talk page. Thanks for responding. Regarding Fletchers, there is now a truncated version at User:BeenAroundAWhile/sandbox. What do you suggest I do with it? Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 17:09, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Regarding my correspondence with you, I will be paid by 90 Digital for all of my work on this article. If I write you about something else, it's my dime. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 17:43, 27 May 2015 (UTC)