Wikipedia:Articles for creation/2007-08-18

Built Like Alaska

This request for creation has been accepted. Please do not modify it.
This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text. Built Like Alaska are a band from Oakdale, CA. Discography If You Rearrange the Letters it Spells Satan (Christmas compilation, 1997) This Song Will Bury You (self-released, 2000) Little Echoes Presents Sleeping Off Stolen Dreams (compilation 2001) Pamphlets and Films EP (self-released, 2002) Hopalong (Sweat of the Alps, 2003) Autumnland (Future Farmer/Sweat of the Alps, 2005) The band also provided the score to the film Ellie Parker External links Official website Built Like Alaska on Myspace Built Like Alaska at Future Farmer Sources http://www.futurefarmer.com/artists/alaska.html http://www.builtlikealaska.com/ 86.133.31.251 13:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Article created. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia! Precious Roy 20:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Saltwell and Bensham Residents Association

This request for creation has been declined. Please do not modify it.
This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text. If you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there. Saltwell and Bensham Residents Association is the independent community group that has come to represent the views of residents in the area of Gateshead that live in the area enclosed by Bensham Road, the east coast main railway line, Saltwell Park and Prince Consort Road. The organisation is both a representative group, advisory group and a sponsor/enabler of local activities. The Residents Association developed in early May 2005 as a response to vague plans to demolish 1200 homes in the area under the UK government's housing renewal pathfinder programme. Sources BBC Politics Show 2005 Website of Saltwell and Bensham Residents Association Sege122 17:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Declined. This suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. See the speedy deletion criteria A7 and/or guidelines on biographies. Please provide more information on why the person or group is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Precious Roy 18:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Kiel McClung (Soccer)

This request for creation has been accepted. Please do not modify it.
This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text. Kiel McClung (born May 1, 1985 in Fresno, California) is an American soccer player who currently plays defense for California Victory of the USL First Division. McClung played soccer at the University of California, Los Angeles where he is obtaining his bachelors of arts in Sociology. McClung played 72 games in his four years at UCLA, and started in 56. His freshman year he was selected to the College Soccer News All-Freshman selection. Senior year, McClung was named captain and led his team to the 2006 NCAA National Final. In January of 2007, McClung was drafted as the 44th overall in the MLS Supplemental Draft to the Los Angeles Galaxy. He trained with the team for several months before signing a contract with California Victory. McClung was named the Victory's first ever player of the week with goals against Necaxa FC and Rochester Rhinos. McClung is one of few members in the Antelope Valley Sports Hall of Fame. Sources http://uclabruins.cstv.com/sports/m-soccer/mtt/mcclung_kiel00.html http://californiavictorysoccer.com/Team/179508.html http://avsports.com/halloffame/kmclung.asp 24.23.239.193 18:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Article created. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia! Boricuaeddie 20:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Matt Landau

This request for creation has been declined. Please do not modify it.
This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text. If you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there. Matt Landau is a real estate analyst and travel enthusiast based out of Central America. The majority of his writing tackles subjects most are not willing to address and does so with a humorous yet inoffensive tone. In the developing tourism and real estate industries of Panama, Landau made headway by creating the country's first reliable guide to buying real estate entitled The Panama Real Estate Report. His articles, featured in numerous online and print publications, are known for not taking himself nor the subjects he talks about too seriously. Landau is also the owner of a boutique hotel in Panama City's historic Casco Antiguo district. Sources http://www.escapeartist.com/e_Books/Panama_Real_Estate/Panama_Real_Estate.html http://www.netspace.com/articles/A-New-Voice-Panama-Company.php http://www.expatexchange.com/lib.cfm?articleid=2618&networkid=87 201.227.149.4 21:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Declined. This suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. See the speedy deletion criteria A7 and/or guidelines on biographies. Please provide more information on why the person or group is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Precious Roy 21:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

JD Web Publishing

This request for creation has been declined. Please do not modify it.
This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text. If you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there. JD Web Publishing is companny based out of the clearwater area of the state of Florida. They offer many services including: web-design, SEO, computer training and more! Sources Jdwebpublishing.com 96.228.170.6 21:42, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Declined. This suggestion doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. See the speedy deletion criteria A7 and/or guidelines on organizations and companies. Please provide more information on why the organization is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Precious Roy 21:49, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Monica Harris

This request for creation has been declined. Please do not modify it.
This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

intellectual technology

This request for creation has been declined. Please do not modify it.
This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text. If you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there. (Wikipedia process has evolved to the institutionally gooberized point where, as a registered and past successful contributor, after much effort I could not find any page, other than this one, to submit a newly worded proposal for a new/prior deleted page. I am Logicdoug. My email is Doug@DougBuchanan.com.) 18 August 2007 Wikipedia attempt. intellectual technology (for a separate page in the Technology category) A technology understood only by reasoning. Intellectual technology is the controlling technology of the human phenomenon, existent since humans were invented, the understanding of which is the most valuable knowledge known to humans, and so poorly understood at this date that even the mention of it creates diverse arrays of rhetorical attacks on the concept for reason accurately identifiable only from understanding the concept. Those attacks define the current primitive nature of humans in relation to the intellectual development of the species, by design. When intellectual technology is belatedly understood by more than a few individuals who have been routinely denigrated for their related expressions throughout history, the human phenomenon will exponentially advance, with the era before that noticeable time described in terms of the original primitive form of humans. Instructive among other adverse reactions to the expressed concept of intellectual technology is that of the invention of the computer, internet and Wikipedia, which, beyond the invention of written language, printing presses, radio, television, etceteras, (mass communication of concepts), would seem to facilitate the mass learning of the most valuable knowledge known to humans, but instead demonstrates only the current extent of the balance in all things inherently including the balance to the value of the human understanding of intellectual technology. Think. Wikipedia. An encyclopedia of the world, by the world, for the world. What concept would introduce to the world the most valuable concepts that power, money and ego-based institutions theretofore repressed, inherent to the institutional concepts of power, money and ego which cannot tolerate competition by knowledge, if Wikipedia were not inherently among the aforementioned because its personnel are institutionally trained minds as accurately understood with intellectual technology. The technology is technology, the electro-chemical process of a biological computer. To discount or disregard it as thinking or any otherwise explained phenomenon not worthy of mention or inclusion in an encyclopedia of human understood phenomena is by analogy to suggest that the new invention of computers is just a primitive duplication of rudimentary brain mechanics therefore not worth their time, or worthy of mention in Wikipedia. The human brain, a device that is primarily trained for its practical social application, such as by encountering new knowledge in Wikipedia, is primarily trained by the words it uses. If it used the word, walk, for its only reference to get from point A to point B, the wheel would have never been invented. If the brain uses the words, think or thinking, and references the institutional dictionary definitions of those words (Wiktionary also refuses to print a real definition of, think), it will remain pre-wheel era for the utility of the human brain. If the brain combines the prior invented words, intellectual and technology, therefore training itself with a old but therein more efficiently recognizable concept, it can learn the real definition of thinking found nowhere in any English dictionary, and therefore how to think, a process verifiably stagnated until intellectual technology is learned. Notice that the words, intellectual and technology, are not newly invented something-or-other-isms. To suggest that they cannot be expressed together and remain suitable for Wikipedia is for Wikipedia personnel to defy the utility of language. For how long did humans watch birds fly before humans recognized the technology, rather than only the beauty, of flight, and therefore its results? For how long will Wikipedia and other institutionally trained editors think about thinking before they recognize the technology of intellectual phenomena, and therefore the available results vastly beyond their current understanding? World peace? Already laughably too easy for one person with a personal computer, if there were any incentive. No government could possibly escape because its personnel hold human minds whose process is flawlessly understood with intellectual technology. Intellectual technology facilitates the discovery of the complete functioning design of the human mind, not otherwise identifiable. To suggest that the description or discussion of intellectual technology is original research and therefore not suitable for Wikipedia readers is to first relegate Wikipedia to no more utility than Encyclopedia Britannica, and then to suggest that this author is the first person to discuss the process of thinking, much to anyone’s amusement. To suggest that the author must cite inherently arbitrary references to prior excerpts of billions of discussions of intellectual technology when those speakers or writers did not yet combine the two English language words, intellectual and technology, for this particular and obviously not original concept, would be to suggest that the author alter the expressed perceptions of those other people, which for intellectual technology must be as flawlessly arranged as the on-off switching of a electric pulse based computer chip. Such a suggestion would defy intellectual technology. If the concept cannot be discussed by Wikipedia because the author does not mention that Plato and Socrates mentioned parts of the concept, that which Plato and Socrates discussed cannot be mentioned because they did not cite the prior billions of references to the concepts which were in part what their minds used to form new parts of knowledge that advances in the human mind by use of intellectual technology, not by institutional technology which stagnates intellectual technology in societies. Citations of prior knowledge are arbitrary and demonstrate comparable contempt for the countless individuals who provided the institutionally titled egotists the parts of the knowledge creating the praised conclusion. As with other humans, nothing is original to me, and I can accurately claim no credit. Intellectual technology and other concepts of the design of the universe are not within the human ability to create, but can be learned with intellectual technology. If institutions, as opposed to individuals, were curious of newly described old concepts (new arrangements of words that create new knowledge within the brain's technology), rather than institutionally attacking them back when Leonardo of Vinci described the technology rather than the beauty of flight, humans would have started flying 400 years sooner. Four hundred years of human flight technology advancement and related human benefit were not effected because institutions inherently attack new knowledge, such as the Wikipedia attacks intellectual technology, by the design recognizable and therefore correctable only within intellectual technology, and not by thinking, if Wikipedia were sufficiently curious. In the future, computer records will be reviewed to recognize and laugh robustly at the time interval between the invention of the internet and its institutional recognition of intellectual technology, the most valuable technology known to humans, with specific reference to Wikipedia. Notice and laugh at the search engine results for intellectual technology, that alter it to intellectual property which has no functional relationship to the technology. Notice the same process of shifting word meanings that trained the human mind to perceive that peace can be achieved by starting yet another war, or an honest government can be formed with openly acknowledged liars, much to the robust laughter of those who learn intellectual technology. Thinking allows wars to be started for peace. Intellectual technology and computer technology allow no (zero) system contradictions, to therefore achieve flawless conclusions upon which sustainable knowledge can be advanced. The currently primitive humans yet mire themselves deep within the intellectual dark ages, at great and ongoing grief, for fear of knowledge not yet granted institutional recognition by a concept within their mind designed for that specific result, to create the mind's perception of time. May you learn the most knowledge of the most concepts, most efficiently, easily done with intellectual technology available to your mind for the asking. Now, shall Wikipedia recognize and institutionally introduce the existing, inordinately valuable concept of intellectual technology to Wikipedians, or must they remain as ignorant as the humans who still start wars for peace, and support liars for social governance? No human has the ability to sustain a contradiction, and the effort to do so only defines their current ignorance of the design of their mind. DougBuchanan.com cc: the observers Sources To comply with a flawed decree: Socrates, Wikipedia, Socratic method: "The practice involves asking a series of questions surrounding a central issue (such as intellectual technology),... to make the opponent contradict themselves in some way that proves the inquirer's own point.") http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method Logicdoug 22:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Declined. We cannot accept unsourced suggestions or sources that are not reliable per the verifiability policy. Please provide reputable, third-party sources with your suggestions. Third party sources are needed both to establish the verifiability of the submission as well as its notability. You can create this yourself in intellectual technology. However what you have written is an essay rather than an encyclopedia article, and may fall into the category of original research. Graeme Bartlett 23:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.

Abalama

This request for creation has been declined. Please do not modify it.
This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text. If you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there. Sources http://nona.net/features/map/placedetail.2233520/Abalama/ Population 115,000 196.3.61.4 23:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC) Declined. We cannot accept blank suggestions. Please consider submitting to Wikipedia:Requested articles instead. KTC 00:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it.