User talk:Amalthea/Archive 1

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Amalthea/Archive 1! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! Kukini 15:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Sure thing...but just so you know...blanking your user talk page is broadly considered vandalism on Wikipedia. Happy editing, Kukini 22:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

24

Just a note, my bot can do that, I spotted this. It's the bot for the 24 Wikiproject. If you wouldn't mind :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 15:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, alright, I'll stop then. :) Thanks for the notice, Amalthea (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

• Oh noes. My bot has stopped working :/ You can continue, if you like :). Have any interest in 24, or just some random task? :) Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 15:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

• Hehe, well if there *is* a bot for that I'll happily let him do that, assuming that he can be convinced to get to work again.
  And it basically was a random thing - I heard some news about Tony Almeida, noticed that there was a stray bullet point at the Wiki24-template, had a look at how it was included in other pages, and got carried away with fixing it in all of the season pages. :)
  I'm not enough of an expert to help out in the 24 Wikiproject I guess. Amalthea (talk) 15:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Latymer School

Hello,

I go to the Latymer school, therefore I know what I'm talking about. There is a Habbo-Hotel society run by members of the lower school and seeing as though we are listing Jewish societies, Muslim societies and Christian societies, it should be in there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.242.151.126 (talk) 12:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Response: User_talk:87.242.151.126#The Latymer School Amalthea (talk) 12:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Organized criminal activity

I found this to be a possible search term and removed your CSD tag. If you disagree, let's talk about it. Otherwise, cheers and happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks very much for reverting the vandalism on my userpage, much appreciated! :) ——Ryan | t • c 20:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

About Pornstar link???

I really think that an internet section with pornstars website are now a reality en 2008 everybody know's that the most exposure a pornstar have is in the web ????? So what is the reason not to publish them??

--Drew100 (talk) 20:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Userpage

Howdy, thanks for the note about User:Thermonuclear fission12. I didn't check the user's edits before deciding against deleting the page; I suppose my feeling is userspaces have a wider latitude to be a bit random or nonsensical (many well established users have reasonably nonsensical pages) so I didn't feel it was a speedible page. I suppose others may disagree. If the user continues vandalizing and gets indefinitely blocked, I'll be happy to delete the page. Thanks, --TeaDrinker (talk) 16:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Francine hardaway

Not all articles do have redirects from alternate capitalisations because it would be a waste of time to create them, but here it is produced automatically. It does also deter people from trying to create a redundant article at the old title. Having a redirect here isn't doing any harm, and there's no reason to delete it. Hut 8.5 17:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of the articles: Carlos C. Estrella, Ez math and EZ Math Learning Center

Hello Amalthea!

Thank you for writing a message to me. With regards to your message as stated below:

"Hi As it is, your three pages lack noteability in the sense of WP:NOTE. You have to show that this math teaching method is noteable, e.g. by including web links to independant press articles about this method, or they will get deleted. Cheers, Amalthea (talk) 02:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)"

I would like to inform you that I won't be able to provide you with Verifiable Sources about my math system. I was featured twice in Rated-K, a Sunday TV program in Channel 2, Manila Philippines. Rated-K is kind enough to provide me a personal copy of the interview but I signed an agreement with them that I can't use the video tape for commercial purposes without their permission except for personal use. I can upload to you the taped interview if that will verify my existence. I have registered the eZ Math Learning Center in the Department of Trade and Industries here in Makati City Philippines.

If you are looking for web links to independent press articles about this method, as of this moment I regret to inform you that I will be unable to provide you with any web links to independent press articles about my math system.

I just started my tutorial center in Pasig City, Philippines. I have taught more than 500 students and it is still growing. That is also the reason why I was featured because I am slowly gaining popularity compared with other math methods available in Manila, Philippines.

I can also send you pictures with my students who won the Battle of the Brains contest and the certificate that I have the copyright for the same title. I have also students who can subtract in billion digit very fast. I have also a letter from a parent who express her satisfaction about her daughter's improved performance especially in math subject.

I am still studying on how to set-up a website properly for eZ Math but as of this moment, I am partially successful. You can check my partially completed websites at http://www.geocities.com/ez.math and at www.ezmathlive.com.

At http://www.geocities.com/ez.math, I was able to upload a picture of my daughter Nicole Ann Louise Estrella during the interview with ABS-CBN reporter. I am also new to this type of "publishing in website" since I am a technical person.

You can also check my friendster address at ez.mathyahoo.com. Kindly follow this link: http://profiles.friendster.com/31287227 to view my friendter page. To view about my daughter's television interview with channel 2, kindly follow this link: http://www.friendster.com/photos/31287227/0/486052923 and http://www.friendster.com/photos/31287227/1/621549224.

This friendster address acts as a forum for my students to send me any messages they wish to express. It also acts as a way to communicate to each other personally. You can also see my pictures with my students, my interview and my student's comments.

Other than those I have stated, I will be unable to provide you with any web links to independent press articles about my math system.

I hope my explanations will be enough to merit me an article. This will be my first time to produce an article about a math system which I truly love to teach.

I can prove to you that indeed my math system is very easy and it exist if you will only allow me to show you my system. I am an Engineering graduate from the Mapua Institute of Technology but I shift my career to teaching because I saw that I can help students appreciate and love math through my system. I also envisioned that someday I can contribute changing the world through eZ Math, my own math system.

If you will allow me to improve my article, I will try to improve them except the web links you requested me to provide you. I may also ask you for an assistance e.g. tips on how to improve notability of my articles.

If you will be unable to process my concern and you still decided to delete my articles about eZ Math, its okey. I just pray that when the time comes that I will be again featured in any Manila based press article, I pray that you will allow me to be included in the Wikipedia.

I really appreciate your time writing to me and giving me an opportunity to express my thoughts.

For further inquiries, you can also send me a reply at my email: ez.mathyahoo.com.

Again, thank you for your time and understanding.

Sincerely,

Carlos C. Estrella eZ Math system founder, a Math teacher

Barnstar for you...

		The Guestbook Barnstar
		For being the fifteenth person what signed my guestbook. Anyone else? Kubek15 (Sign!) (Contribs) (UBX) 09:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Innovation Exchange

Hi Amalthea, thanks for your note about Innovation Exchange. I didn't realize that blog posts weren't considered appropriate 3rd party references. The company has some upcoming press coverage, but as it stands, nothing beyond blog posts for the time being.

Thanks!

Makecoffeenotwar (talk) 20:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Notorious Online

Hi I am asking why you have deleted my page, I don't know much about wikipedia but I felt this interesting period in pirate broadcasting in the midlands had to be documented. I referenced my sources and have actual facts to back up everything said —Preceding unsigned comment added by Notoriousonline (talk • contribs) 12:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Notoriousonline's talk page

Nicholas Boyle

Hi,

According to his inaugural lecture (http://www.mml.cam.ac.uk/german/news/nbi.pdf) Schroder is the person who provided the funding for the professorship. G0eth8 (talk) 21:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Reply on G0eth8's talk page

Hi, I think there has been a misunderstanding

Hi,

I am the creator of the article (History of Color Analysis) on the Website Impression Strategies Institute. The reason I have put it up on wikipedia is because I wanted to share this information along with everyone besides my students. I understand it was deleted because it appeared like a copyright infringement but I have added the GNU release notice on the bottom of the article.

I only wish to put up this article for people to acquire information on Color Analysis. So please let me know what other measurements I need to do to have the article back up.

Thank you

Sincerely, Sdumont132 (talk) 16:33, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Sdumont132's talk page

Commons

Usurp done. Yours now - cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Copying pages from user sandboxes and creating a new article from it

Why is it bad? --Wikinerd20 (talk) 23:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Wikinerd20's talk page

Well, if someone searched for an article, they would find it if it wasn't in a sandbox. That article I copied was from a sandbox. Why was it there? --Wikinerd20 (talk) 23:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Wikinerd20's talk page

Also, where do you find those templates, like the one that said "Please leave a message" on this talk page. --Wikinerd20 (talk) 23:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, how do you create a guestbook and things like that? --Wikinerd20 (talk) 23:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Wikinerd20's talk page

Basic Black

Hello Amalthea, why did you put back the conflict of interest on the Basic Black page. I'm napierk and since I am an intern at Basic Black I also have access to the account Basic B. This is my internship that's on the line. The page is fine now so why keep that COI up. The producers of the show Basic Black were already hesitant to have me set up this page. Now I fixed it and that COI is drawing attention. People are going to want to tamper with it. Please, it's fine now with the right info. The auto Bot made a mistake but now it's fine so please take off that COI. Thank you :) BasicB (talk) 18:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on BasicB's talk page

Hey,

Let me clarify. I'm fully aware of the rules of wiki. I have my own personal account -napierk. The producer of Basic Black has Basic B. I sent it up for her and am showing her how to use wiki. Once I leave Basic Black this summer I will no longer have access to it so no one is violating any rules.

You said: Those producers were correct to be hesitant. Do you understand what conflict of interest means? Please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. It's ok for you to correct false information, but everything you add (especially you, due to your conflict of interest) must be verifiable. Add links to reliable, secondary sources. The tags are supposed to be drawing attention, so that people who know the show can fix it and remove the tags.

I say: The producers are my boss and gave me permission to correct the info. I know what conflict of interest means. I read the rules. There is no longer a conflict of interest. If you click on the link you will see everything is right now. Did you click on the link. What is written was put up there by the Basic Black producer herself. If you believe there is a conflict of interest can you please state what it is because the conflict has been resolved. Also tell me who has the conflict.

You said: That's the basic principle of wikipedia. The neutrality tag was placed there due to this sentence, I guess: [...] has served as a vehicle for African-American community engagement and for the sharing and celebration of its rich history and culture. That might be true, it might also be a promo line. Verify that with secondary sources and we can remove the issue tags, I think. A reference for the Emmy award would also be nice, preferably not from the show's website.

I say: No the neutrality tag was put there because I posted a statement about the auto bot changing things. I was just trying to tell people what I was doing and people misunderstood what I was saying and put up the tag. It's not because of the statement. Have you watched the show. That's exactly what the show does. Promotes African-American culture. PBS is a well established television network and is a great source. What I find strange is that for a long time the wrong info was on that page and no one cared. Now I finally fix it and someone has a problem. Why do I need all these references for Basic Black, but with all the other shows like American Idol, 90210, or thousands of others, no one is asking for references or put up a conflict of interest. If wiki only requires sources for Basic Black but not for other shows that would be bias.

I'm not trying to be difficult. I just that I've been trying to fix this page and people keep misunderstanding things. Believe me no one has a conflict with the page. I will remove the tag now. Thanx :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BasicB (talk • contribs) 01:29, July 3, 2008

Reply on BasicB's talk page

Amalthea, You have not answered the question I asked you. Why are you only asking for sources for Basic Black and requiring a tag, but you don't require it for other shows. There's no reference cited for the description of American Idol, 90210, etc. You need to put up a COI tag with those shows to be fair, right. I'm not trying to start a problem, but I think you are being bias because you are only requiring a tag for a show called BASIC BLACK.—Preceding unsigned comment added by BasicB (talk • contribs) 14:43, July 3, 2008

Reply on BasicB's talk page

Amalthea: if I look at 90210 (TV series), almost every sentence is followed by a link to the reference there too. Basic B: No I mean Beverly Hills 90210 - there is not one reference in the intro paragraph. The same for American Idol, not one reference for the intro paragraph. This goes for many articles on wiki. Wiki usually doesn't site sources for the first paragraph because that's a "summary" paragraph. Like in school when you write a thesis you usually don't need to reference the topic sentence so why should I reference every single sentence for Basic Black. Also you don't have to live in the US to watch the show. Just go to the WGBH website and watch. Anyone is open to watch Basic Black you know.

BasicB: Here's all the stuff for Beverly Hills 90210 that needs references. They list nothing in all this info like we discussed. Can you fix it:

Beverly Hills 90210 was a popular primetime television drama series that aired from October 4, 1990, to May 17, 2000, on FOX in the United States and subsequently on various networks around the world. The show followed the lives of a group of teenagers living in the upscale, star-studded community of Beverly Hills, California and attending the fictitious West Beverly Hills High School and then-fictitious California University. The show was created by Darren Star and produced by Aaron Spelling and Spelling Television. The "90210" in the title refers to one of the suburb's postal ZIP codes.

The original premise of the show was based around the adjustment and culture shock that twins Brandon (played by Jason Priestley) and Brenda Walsh (played by Shannen Doherty) had after they and their parents, Jim and Cindy moved from Minneapolis, Minnesota to Beverly Hills. The show addressed several topical issues like date rape, alcoholism, domestic violence, gay rights, drug abuse, teenage suicide, AIDS, and teenage pregnancy.

The show gained popularity during the summer of 1991, when FOX aired a special "summer season" of the show while most other series were in reruns. The series became one of FOX's top shows when it began its next season that fall. Viewership increased dramatically and the cast members, particularly Jason Priestley and Luke Perry, became teen idols, while the series would make actresses Shannen Doherty, Jennie Garth and Tori Spelling household names.

I will search for some more shows and let you know :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BasicB (talk • contribs) 07:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on BasicB's talk page

sorry

sorry that was my little brother it won't happen again Bustedrim (talk) 23:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Harassment

Hello, As a Wikipedia user I've taken it upon myself to make sure harassment is not taking place among other users. I've been tracking some of your comments on various user pages. Threatening users with the possibility of being blocked for disputes goes against Wikipedia policy. It also seems like you are exhibiting behavior listed under Wikipedia's definition of harassment. I'm going to be watching your interactions with others and if I see this behavior continue I will have to report it. Cheers Amazingstix (talk) 07:42, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

That coming from a user with two edits, one on his talk page and one here, is a bit dubious.
I guess I reverted one of your edits and put a warning on your user page? Feel free to discuss the edit in question with me. Until then, please read up on the Wikipedia user warnings and Wikipedia:Harassment. --Amalthea (talk) 10:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I was coming here to leave a message about accusing me of sock what ever and I found that your being accused of harassment. Unbelievable. And you have all these complaints on your page from other people. You are trying to fake like an administrator. I'm going to report this too. You have no right to damage people's account, but accusing them of something they have not done. I'm reporting you. Napierk (talk) 16:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

And why won't you even allow the word African-American to be on the page with Basic Black like DoubleBlue suggested? The show is clearly about African Americans? Hence Basic Black.Napierk (talk) 16:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Whoa, I have been reviewing your history and it does look like you’ve been bothering people. At first I was upset and was going to stoop to your level, but in all honesty, I feel sorry for you. If the only way you can feel some sense of power in the world is by living through Wiki then that’s sad. Yes, you are not an administrator, but if one’s life revolves around cyberspace then perhaps that is a person that is not happy and I should not allow them to take me into petty quarrels. I don’t know if you made up those three people or not and try to pin it on me, but if someone has to do something like that then Wiki is not where I want to be. Feel free to message me back even though I will not read them. Take care and I truly do feel sorry for you :) Napierk (talk) 22:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Napierk's talk page

Van Vlissingen & Company

sorry about that i was just about to add somthing that was in response to the change you can check it out if you like. Did'nt mean to cause a problem just wanted people to know about a very inportant peice of the North Shores Economics. - PreHerodotus

Reply on PreHerodotus's talk page

Ok cool i will try to fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PreHerodotus (talk • contribs) 15:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you take a look at what i have changed, some advice would be helpful. -Preherodotus

Yeah thanks for the help i found a periodical about thier codtributions to the local job market. Thanks for the sujestion, any other idea's? -PreHerodotus

Reply on PreHerodotus's talk page

about the translation of "serer"

Hi, Please, stop to leave message on my page called "serer". It's truth, I try to translate one part of the french version but not all. Others ideas, I take them in others books. If you see that the translation is not good, tell me where and then I will understand. I am Dadiouf from Senegal (french speaker country). Cordialy. dadiouf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dadiouf (talk • contribs) 08:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Dadiouf's talk page

Hey, thanks for the heads up. I try to be generous with translation clean-ups as my expository writing in French comes out poorly. Also there are pretty darn important topics (IMHO) and there's lots to keep which non-francophones might not see at first glance. I'll watchlist it first and take a crack at it in a bit. Cheers, T L Miles (talk) 20:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Marc Ratner

Before you nominate something to be deleted for copyright make sure you can prove it. You have no credibility to say that it was copyrighted that is your opinion. Your opinion is like an a**hole every has one. Put up or shut up and provide some proof to your claims pal if not go bother someone else.

Reallmmablogger (talk) 17:40, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I read the pages that you provided for the copyright they hold no water. There is no copyright . You would have known that if you read through each page you put. The only thing that each site has in common with page is that they all state Marc Ratner was a started as an Inspector for the Nevada State Athletic Commission, which is not copyright. Have you even graduated college and if so please go back.

Reallmmablogger (talk) 17:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no copyright the information you submitted to me and wikipedia proves that there is no copyright. And if you dont like my tone then make sure you are properly going about you business.

Reallmmablogger (talk) 17:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey listen If I was personally attacking you you would know about it. I am stating the facts. The facts are you are providing false information about a supposed copyright, and you are wrong that is not an attack on you personally. It is a voice against injustice that you are trying to pull.

Reallmmablogger (talk) 17:53, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your comments on User talk:Amalthea: Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Amalthea (talk)

I read wikipedia policy on personal attacks. It does not state anything about proving someone wrong for recommending your aticle for a deletion when there is nothing wrong. You are trying to pull something but you have the wrong guy to try that with. Your information is mest up and it is absolutely wrong and should hold no water. thank you

Reallmmablogger (talk) 17:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Reallmmablogger's talk page

Jørgen Pursti

Hey, I don't know what to say, I left my laptop on and a friend decided to create a Wiki page for my brother-in-law. I am quite new to the Wiki membership thing so I don't know how to remove the page.

Any help would be GREATLY appreciated since I do not take too kindly to having my membership on websites abused by idiots!

Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by RealVillan (talk • contribs) 18:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on RealVillan's talk page

Excellent, many thanks

--RealVillan (talk) 19:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Bujarrr

Way too strong a warning. This looks like a very clueless newbie who is here to self promote, but he is not a vandal and the introduction page specifically invites bold edits plus it has a bot to restore. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on Theresa knott's talk page

Pictures

My pictures aren't blurry! 67.163.90.107 (talk) 15:39, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well I'm sorry, but I'm afraid they are. Taking pictures of moving trains is not easy as it is, but some of them appear to have been taken from a car? E.g. Image:MetratraindepartingElmhurst.jpg and Image:CN.jpg. Image:CSXTH2.JPG is very hazy, I guess it was taken through a train window?
I can live with adding one of them to related articles (e.g. I've left Elmhurst (Metra) untouched), but adding a whole gallery of pictures to articles that aren't even about trains just doesn't improve the articles.
--Amalthea (talk) 16:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

re: phil jones (songwriter)

i'm confused on what needs to be changed. help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RoughGlamour (talk • contribs) 19:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on RoughGlamour's talk page

i'm trying to get this together, there is more to add which will easily fulfill the criteria, i just don't have it together yet - i am new to this, and i thought i was in sandbox this whole time - wasn't aware that i was saving/publishing - i'm trying to figure out 2 things: 1 how to make this into a stub, like Robynn Ragland's article, and 2 how to get this over into sandbox so i can continue fixing this w/o getting messages all the time reminding me that it's not right. so yeah. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.66.249 (talk) 01:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on RoughGlamour's talk page

wow. you're fast. :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.66.249 (talk) 02:10, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

attacking

I was responding to being called a bitch after I pointed out that the use of the word 'must' was not appropriate (the user wasn't even the one I was referring to). I hadn't realised that by doing so I was attacking anyone. Nina137.111.47.29 (talk) 09:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply on 137.111.47.29's talk page

Scooby Doo

Yeah... what the site carries is no verification of anything, just a method of collecting pre-orders, which could be dropped/refunded if the film does not appear. A studio presss release, on the other hand, would help enormously, let alone press coverage, but I've seen nothing reliable. --Dweller (talk) 12:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

ePost

Answers to your questions created on discussion page of ePost mentioned below:

Why was it a substantial copy of pages from http://indiapost.nic.in only with India replaced by Pakistan and India Post or Department of Post replaced by Al Tayyeb Group, which had an article here that was deleted?

I found this article somewhere in Wikiproject Pakistan and I impress to see such a social service organization that converts emails into postal mails and delivert Free of cost around the country Pakistan. I remember I heard about this in a program named GEOBOT listing on GEO Tv but i was unable to search website at that time. Still I am not able to search exact website of ePost. I have called Geo Tv about this and asked them about that. They told me that ePost now changed to Click2Mail and website under construction according to ePost team and they are coming back again on this independence day of pakistan on 14 August 2008. So i think about writing an article on Epost. becuase i dont have much information about this organiztion so i used website of India post which is offering services something like that to pick up some good words to introduce about Epost.

Why is it rated as a "high importance" article?

regarding this. i thnks its the only service in Pakistan & only in world which providing everything free of cost. Geo Tv told me that they will charge nothing.

Why is the company website link dead? As i told you its under construction according to Epost team. i heared this from Geo Tv

Why is the only reference a blog with exactly one article describing this service, under a different name even? i found it over internet. may be someone like me heared about this service but unable to find any thing exact. Why was it moved to Click2Mail which isn't mentioned anywhere else? Geo Tv told me that.

any thing more you wanted to know . please ask

• Oh you *found* the article? How comes you created an article called I-Post in the past then, if you just happened to find it later?
  Furthermore, you know by now, since you have been told a number of times on your talk page, that you can't simply copy content from arbitrary websites to wikipedia in violation of copyright. Stop doing that please.
• Wikipedia only accepts articles about companies that are notable and can be verified.
• Funny that you have high regards of all of the articles you came in contact with, or created: Talk:Pakistan German Business Forum, Talk:Japan - Pakistan business co-operation committee, Talk:Federation of Pakistan Chamber of Commerce & Industry. Please inform yourself about the meaning of the quality and importance scale at Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan.
• Lastly, how comes that the original author of the article, User:Unitedequipment, happened add your name to a list on Wikipedia 19 months ago?

--Amalthea (talk) 19:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Asian Tiger Capital Partners

See my reply on my talk page. Let us keep the discussion there. --Bduke (talk) 23:19, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Template:Characters of The Bill (Detective Constables)

Hi
I saw that you removed the transclusion of Template:Characters of The Bill (Detective Constables) on a number of character pages, probably because it was broken. I fixed it and restored it in Kezia Walker, but maybe you had a different reason for removing them?
Cheers, Amalthea (talk) 23:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Amalthea. Yes I removed the template, but only because it was broken. Well done for repairing it, feel free to add it to any other relevant pages. Mark Bickley 09:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

No Warning and no reminder, its final notice

Hey man. You have almost delete my every articles. Now its my time to ruin and destroy every article you created and edited. You cant ban me cause i havm aroud 15 uses ids.good luck and be carefull.---- user:SaqibChaudhry —Preceding undated comment was added at 06:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Gb/Anvil

Thank you for your help on this - I've gone through the last few and added a couple more suspicious names to the checkuser - as the page has served it's purpose I've deleted it. _GB^T/C 07:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing, but would you mind giving me a copy of it? I would like to watchlist a number of this pages. You can send it via E-Mail if you want, or just restore it in your userspace for a short while. Thanks, Amalthea (talk) 08:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

No worries - have restored it to User:Gb/Anvil. I don't have a problem with it being in my userspace, so just let me know when you're done with it. Hope you have (had) a good weekend. _GB^T/C 11:08, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

you caught my error

I apparently didnt check the history Internet Journal of Medical Update enough when I removed he deletion tag. It did sound familiar, but I had forgotten the earlier AfD. I could probably rewrite it, somenday but not now. Thanks. I've speedied it. DGG (talk) 09:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

No problemo. :) --Amalthea (talk) 09:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

scooby-doo

Alright, I guess that I understand your basic reasoning for deleting the article for SD& Goblin King article that I made, except for the fact that you consider taking information FROM THE BOX OF THE VIDEO and putting it on there? I put a reference to a website on there because all of the obsessive people who spend their time searching for errors clearly think that I would be lying about that. I'm not an 11 year old which is why I know that you don't copy other peoples words, which is why I copied the words from the box of the movie. Therefore, if the creator of the website was the author of the description of the video (nope! It was one of those websites that copies stuff from everywhere else, I don't know why I cited it except for the "Wiki team" makes sure all of their precious information is valid! Of course!). I can't write a plot about a video that's NOT OUT YET so I guess I took the only information any of us has (none of these websites has seen the movies, I'm guessing?) from the back of the DVD from the OFFICIAL website, which released the information to the public. Coinboybrian (talk) 15:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Dunwoody

I left a reply on the talk page, opposing the idea of listing it as incorporated because I can't read the provided PDF charter. I've asked two other experienced geography editors to weigh in and see if they can read the charter. Can you? Nyttend (talk) 20:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Chaudhary

Thanks. I moved it again, now. My understanding was that 'Chaudhary' was a family name (its that way in India, Bangladesh and Nepal). However, after googling a bit it seems its used differently in Kashmir. --Soman (talk) 20:32, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

see Chowdhury, --Soman (talk) 20:43, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hello Amalthea, I noticed that you revert vandalism. Would you like me to grant your account rollback rights to help make vandal-fighting easier for you? Just remember that rollback, like Twinkle, should only be used to revert vandalism, and that misuse of the tool, either by reverting good-faith edits or revert-warring can lead to its removal. Tell me what you think. Thanks. Acalamari 16:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Rollback granted. Good luck with your new tool. :) Acalamari 17:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Of course. :) You're welcome. Acalamari 18:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

User talk:138.88.35.77 and CSX Transportation

Hi Amalthea, I agree that the revert action was possibly the right one to make but the edit comments had to be addressed as this appeared to be the behaviour of a vandal rather than a legitimate contributor. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC).

Mike Tyson

I redid the page see if you like it Reallmmablogger (talk) 14:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Manning Galloway

There is no copyright that is in my own words. Thank YouReallmmablogger (talk) 14:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Closing

The template code says to remove it when closing the AfD, so... DS (talk) 03:15, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Tegan and Sara

Response on my talk. Thanks :) -FrankTobia (talk) 07:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I insist on nothing

Your comment simply was not appearing outside of previewing the edit itself, I was attempting to rectify that. –– Lid^(Talk) 13:00, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• Really? I can see it in both versions, that's why I figured you wanted it to be more prominent. I didn't want to sound harsh though, "insist" was probably too strong a word, sorry.
  Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 13:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• Well you can in those versions, as I said it appeared if you previewed the edit (or looked at the direct id). It wasn't however appearing on the main page due to some technical glitch probably. –– Lid^(Talk) 21:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Boxing

I am looking forward to working with other editors on the articles but some editors do not want a resolution they just want it there way. I will try my hardest to work things out with them Thank You for everything Reallmmablogger (talk) 16:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Mike Tyson

I like that there is at least a mention to the event at Wrestlemania so I am satisfied. Reallmmablogger (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Manning Galloway

I am also satisfied with the article for Manning I will let it be. Reallmmablogger (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Charley Belanger

I tried to come to a solution with Mk but he does not want one this will be the only article i will protest too thank you for all of your help with these issues. Reallmmablogger (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Young Corbet II

I am also satisfied with this article as well it is well written. Reallmmablogger (talk) 16:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Charley Belanger

I like the new changes you made I am happy Thank You Reallmmablogger (talk) 20:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Quick question on the Belanger edits: is it really necessary to list the titles and opponents faced by Belanger when this info is in the main part of the article?MKil (talk) 21:10, 3 August 2008 (UTC)MKil

I mostly wanted the edit warring to stop before anyone breaks 3RR, and didn't think much about the two list sections that are still in. I don't know what the best form is here. It's not that there isn't precedent for having a detailed list of his boxing record, like with Mike Tyson#Professional boxing record. I doubt that this boxer is notable enough to warrant a list with *all* his fights though, and since all but one of the blue-linked boxers are already part of the prose, I'm inclined to agree with you. --Amalthea^Talk 21:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

What the Bleep is going on

I thought we were cool now your writing me on some stuff I have no clue about there is no copyright ob billy soose. I will let you have your way with it I am done with this non sense. Enjoy watching the Billy Soose page. Just make sure that Charley Belanger stays the same. Stop taking sides Reallmmablogger (talk) 04:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

There will be no more edits from me on Billy Soose so dont write me on him again. I want to thank you for the time you take out to help Wikipedia. You have helped find a resolution with both Tyson and Belanger and I am thankful. So this comes to an end now let MK know too just like you let me know. No more BS I do not care about this just want to make sure that researchers can get the most of what they are researching. Reallmmablogger (talk) 04:58, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Reallmmablogger

I'm fed up with trying to deal with this guy. I took my side of it to the Editor Assistance board here [1]. Since you are somewhat involved I figured you should know.MKil (talk) 19:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)MKil

• Ok, I just skimmed through the EAR and 3RR sections (to think that I probably gave Reallmmablogger the idea …). If anyone still wants me to give a statement of some sort, feel free to tell me, but as far as I can tell everthing's sorted out already and we can move on.
  Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 16:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Thanks.MKil (talk) 17:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)MKil

Everything is ok now. Thanks for the help in the disputes..... I hope we can all work together in the future. Reallmmablogger (talk) 19:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

regarding volkan

hi amalthea, this is volkan's cousin in turkey...

he has played professionally for vestel manisaspor. sorry many other people have edited the page, but he is now playing at NYU and should be up on the team's page shortly.

thanks, can —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluebellll (talk • contribs) 00:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• What needs to be shown for him to pass WP:ATHLETE is that he competed in a fully professional league. Is that what you mean by "has played professionally", and can that be verified? --Amalthea^Talk 00:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

To explain, the original turkish article of him playing was posted on the team's website last summer, but since they have changed the site you can no longer see it. His dad however had obtained the article and posted it on his blog, which can be found here, which basically says he played the second half...

http://turkeyfootball.blogspot.com/2007/07/volkan-turgut-in-vestel-manisa-camp.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluebellll (talk • contribs) 00:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• As far as I understand that blog post it wasn't a league game, it was a friendly, so it doesn't make him pass WP:ATHLETE. Since you removed your last comment I copied over to the discussion page I won't do that again, so if you disagree please go to that page and make your case.
  Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 08:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

would him playing at nyu make it alright? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluebellll (talk • contribs) 12:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Since the NYU Men's Basketball team is not competing in a "fully professional league" it wouldn't. --Amalthea^Talk 12:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

alright you can delete then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluebellll (talk • contribs) 12:29, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

My talk page

No problem with your watching my page, and I'm grateful whenever your watching my page is helpful :-) You're not the first: Polaron has watched my page for a while; just a day or two ago he reverted vandalism to it. Nyttend (talk) 12:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

By the way, the reason I didn't do anything on the tilde issue on my talk page is that I already took it to the talk page :-) Nyttend (talk) 12:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

And just like that you'll loose my presence on your talk page. ;)
BTW, I don't think the google hits can really give you the most common spelling since both searches find both spellings (I have no idea why the number-of-hits differ), and the Census Bureau website itself couldn't call it Española if it wanted to, since it can't cope with non-Latin-1. But if no one can prove that Española is the official name (in which case I'd definitely think it should also be the page title) none of that really matters.
Cheers, and see you around, Amalthea^Talk 12:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Paris Hilton

Hi Amalthea, I left a note there. I am no great fan or follower of celebs like Paris, I do follow politics and I must admit I was pleasantly surprised and even impressed with her reaction to McCain's ad. I am certainly not the only one. The same views were aired yesterday on MSNBC e.g. I don't think it is appropriate to remove all notice of the event from Paris' lemma. Jcwf (talk) 14:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

the passion hifi

Although the actual statement of "the most downloaded in UK history" is without fact, its not without validity. The average UK mixtape manages about 2000-5000 pos sales in shops, online stores and maybe the same in downloads if you check the stats on his soundclick.com page it has over 175,000 downloads which is fair assumption that it is the most downloaded. I have noticed that there are over 1,070,000 total plays on downloads which would give credibility to his claims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.22.125 (talk) 23:47, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• If it's not verifiable though then it is of little value. And even if, a high number of downloads doesn't make him noteworthy for an encyclopaedia unless there's significant coverage of him in secondary, reliable sources (that is if he doesn't meet any criteria of WP:MUSIC).
  Feel free to go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Passion hifi though and take part in the discussion.
  Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 10:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Anvilmedia

Hi
Just noticed that Yesmail, Inc (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), one of the Anvilmedia clients, was recreated by a brand-new user. It has been speedied before. Can you check if it is the same version as before, or similar enough to assume that it was created by a sock/meatpuppet?
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 09:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the message - it's identical to the earlier deleted version, so I have deleted it under G11. Thanks for keeping your eyes open. _Gb^T/c 11:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Jamario Thomas

Thank you for your concerns on the notability of Jamario Thomas. The Wikipedia:WikiProject College football welcomes discussions on notability of players. You can read and discuss notability of college football players at the College Football Notability essay.

The College Football project considers notability discussions of existing articles in the project a priority. While the project maintains in good faith that the article does indeed meet notability standards, we will begin additional work to improve the article in question through addressing specific concerns, providing more details, and supplying stronger sources as much as is appropriate. In return, we ask that you consider our essay on notability. If you feel an article needs a specific improvement, please feel free to make those changes yourself.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:12, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

• Hi Paul.
  I just read CFB:PLAYER (I admittedly didn't know it before), and am still not quite convinced.
  First of all, thus far I never applied the "highest level in amateur sports" to team sports if there's also fully professional league in the country. I would assume that something similar is also consensus at WP:CFB, since your interpretation at CFB:PLAYER lists a number of secondary criteria that alone would establish notability (essentially passes WP:BIO or competed in a fully professional league).
  Now if "led the nation in rushing as a true freshman" is really enough to pass the "completed a special noteworthy play or achievement" criterion by some kind of consensus at WP:CFB I will gladly withdraw my nominiation, although I personally think that this is not enough, since it's only one of a large number of statistical feats.
  Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 13:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the comments. I wonder why wouldn't the highest level of amatuer apply? I've heard that before and haven't really gotten an answer that makes sense. As to the rushing: Personally, I would definitely say that leading the nation in rushing as a Freshman is a noteworthy achievement, but I also would recommend against taking just my word for it--let the discussion play out and see what consensus comes up with. I've found that the occasional AfD on a player article really helps us at WP:CFB to come up with better guidelines. Also, the "active player" guidelines have yet to meet anything remotely looking like consensus at CFB.--Paul McDonald (talk) 16:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The Volten Sins

Hi
I'm curious about this deletion. You speedily deleted it as "A7 (group): Doesn't indicate importance or significance of a group/company/etc.", yet the article did say that the notable singer Jessica Jacobs was a member, which to me is not only an assertion of notability, but is a clear cut case of notability according to WP:MUSIC#Criteria for musicians and ensembles, just as I said in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Volten Sins. Do you disagree?
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 18:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Amalthea,

I didn't realize there was an AfD going on for that article - there wasn't a notice on the page, just a speedy delete tag. The article itself did not assert any notability of the band, only that Jessica Jacobs was in the band. That's a tenuous claim of notability if that's all that's stated. I did see all the links in the article, but were either self-promotional (which doesn't satisfy notability claims) and/or were links about Jacobs' notability, which doesn't mean the band is notable.

If you'd like, I can restore the article to your namespace, and/or restore it so that the deletion disscion can continue. Let me know on my talk page? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I don't want it restored, and I think it's very clear that the article wouldn't have survived the AfD in any case. I was just asking because, as I understand WP:MUSIC, it *is* considered notable by having "at least one member …", so it seems obvious that it does count as an assertion of notability. FWIW, Stifle was also of the opinion to speedy it, and I too think that this notability guideline is too strong, but I also think that speedy deletions should really go by the book.
Are you OK with me recreating it as a redirect to Jessica Jacobs, which I think is what WP:MUSIC suggests?
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 19:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely - just did that. Thanks for writing - and thanks for your work! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. See you around, Amalthea^Talk 20:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Git SCM webpage

FYI, I have not been editing the Git page to change the URL back and forth. I'm hoping Petr and I can combine the sites at some point, but I have not been changing the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schacon (talk • contribs) 17:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Volten Sins

Hi
I'm curious to know why you didn't consider Jessie Jacobs having been a member of The Volten Sins an assertion of notability in the AfD although that information is establishing notability according to WP:MUSIC? Note that you're not alone with this opinion since it was speedily deleted as an A7 in the meantime (and recreated as a redirect), so it's purely academic. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I thought it was more a side-project of hers. However since I wasn't especially sure, rather than deleting the page on my own motion I tagged it for another admin. Stifle (talk) 18:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Amalthea!

Just to let you know that when I deleted the reference from the Sugababes' discography page, it wasn't because I didnt think that it was not going to be a single. When I deleted the whole thing the first time, there was no reference and no release date. When I deleted the reference, it was because it had been given a designated page and there was a clear reference and a lot more information. I hope that you dont think it was anything personal. Can't wait for the new single. BTW - now that it has its own page, there is no need for a reference. It is almost certain that it will be a single, but I'll let you get rid of the reference on the discography page, so that you dont get offended.91.105.177.73 (talk) 17:15, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

No worries, I thought you removed it because it wasn't a particularly reliable source in the first place, and a bit redundant with the source at the album.
I'd still rather keep it, because 1) it doesn't hurt, and 2) there technically shouldn't even be an article on an upcoming single yet (See WP:MUSIC). But I don't have a strong opinion on this either way, so if you want to remove it again feel free. Please put your reasoning into the edit summary though, lest someone mistakes the edit for vandalism.
Thanks for the message & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 17:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Pyroptics

Hi. We must have edit-conflicted. I spent some time wondering what speedy would cover it, and thought it didn't quite fit either "no context" or "nonsense" and decided I had better PROD it. I've replaced your warning notice on his talk page with a PROD one. See you at the AfD, if he takes it off! Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:36, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Yes, I noticed. I undid the speedy tag right away again, but when I remembered to remove the user notification too I saw that you had already done so.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 16:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk: Paris Hilton

Hi
I don't really appreciate it if my talk page comments are significantly altered without me being notified.
That being said, I undid your edit at Talk:Paris Hilton to restore the discussion, but still replaced the spam by a tag.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I was only trying to remove the spam from that IP. It wasn't my intention to alter the meaning of your comment. I'll be more careful in the future. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 20:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:59, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/House of Binary

You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/House of Binary as Keep? I see two opinons to keep it and effectively two opinions to delete it (not counting the nom), and one pure vote by McCart42. I could both see a close as no consensus or a relist, but where do you see a consensus here? --Amalthea^Talk 06:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The way I saw the AfD was with three keeps, two of which cite [[WP:#ALBUMS]]. I didn't look closely enough though, and counted as three keeps, one delete, and one redirect. I should of considered the redirect as a delete, and then wouldn't have closed it. At this point, should I change the outcome from "keep" to "no consensus" or relist it all together? /my inexperience shines through/ Leonard^(Bloom) 16:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The Delete and the Redirect also cited WP:MUSIC, which I find remarkable in itself ;)
Since I've formed an opinion on the article before I don't really want to tell you what to do, both options sound reasonable to me.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 16:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Then I'm going to close as no consensus. Your civility is much appreciated. Leonard^(Bloom) 17:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks.
It's very easy to remain civil if you don't have a strong feeling towards either side.
That being said, I'm of course convinced that my interpretation of WP:MUSIC is the correct one. ;-)
Cheers, and happy editing, Amalthea^Talk 17:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Civility has never been a problem for me, but being WP:BOLD doesn't mean I'm exempt from nervousness. Much appreciated, and happy editing. Leonard^(Bloom) 17:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Richa Ghimire

Hello!!!

I have fixed the improper link on the talk page of this article. Please look the comment there, Thanks for letting me know.

Hitro 21:27, 28 August 2008 (UTC)hitrohit2001

Sure. --Amalthea^Talk 21:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the backup

Hey, I truly appreciate your help cleaning up a couple of my messes. I'm trying to be as involved as possible, but sometimes I get in a hurry. Thanks again for having my back! --Josh3580_{user / talk / hist} 01:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Of course. --Amalthea^Talk 08:23, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Christopher Hughes

Hi there! Thanks for reverting this vandalism. As you may well realise, this vandal likes hitting articles he knows I edit! I've got a big list of IPs that he's used in the past, I'll add this one to the list! --Ged UK (talk) 14:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Eh, that's what that "Ged" was supposed to mean. Good to know for the future. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 14:14, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Aye, if you see 'Ged' vandalism, and you look in the edit history, chances are you'll see me! --Ged UK (talk) 14:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Xnoegars

This redirect should be deleted as it's a misspelling of the game Xenogears. Xnoegars has not been used by anyone but the creator of the redirect to refer to Xenogears, so why should it not be deleted? If I created a redirect called Xenogors, would it not be deleted? The Prince (talk) 15:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Having forgotten to unwatch your page after our convo earlier, I saw this, and have tagged it for a speedy. I'll stop watching your page now, reply on mine if you want :) --Ged UK (talk) 15:43, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to keep watching ;).
Anyway, I had already taken it to Talk:Xnoegars since I noticed that you retagged it. --Amalthea^Talk 15:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Racing guantanamo

Racing Guantanamo are a regional team but the league is well known throughout the Kimberley area of Western Australia. They have appeared on local TV news, as well as print and radio media. There are other regional based teams with articles on Wikipedia, such as ECU Joondalup Soccer Club and Perth Soccer Club, both of which have never played in the A-League. Therefore I would suggest that this page is allowed to stand. Broome26 (talk) 13:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Paris Hilton

LOL. I can't believe 1) I missed that when I read the sentence and 2) it was in the lead. "She known"... painful. Thanks for fixing that. -SpuriousQ (talk) 01:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure. And you weren't alone in missing that I guess, it was in there for a while, and Iridescent also changed something in the lead (if AWB-assisted). Amalthea^Talk 08:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Money On My Mind- Lil Wayne

I noticed you requested speedy deletion of Money on My Mind per WP:CSD#G6, claiming that consensus has been reached at an AfD. However, I did not find such a consensus. Am I missing something?
I also did not find however that the article in question passed WP:MUSIC#Songs, which is why I redirected it to the parent album.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 11:30, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

• Thx for redirecting it.
  It is a song but it's not a single. Therefore no page should be there for the song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Y5nthon5a (talk • contribs) 5:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

• More or less, yes. Nonetheless though, please be very thorough when you propose something for speedy deletion, the guidelines are very strict. I assume that this was a mistake, but the song didn't qualify for a WP:CSD#G6 at all.
  Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 15:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it was a mistake, haha. Y5nthon5a (talk) 07:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Dates

Hi
Regarding your recent edit to Jenna Haze, the guideline concerning to link dates has recently been deprecated which is why Tony removed the links a couple of days ago.
If you're interested, the very lenghty discussions about the change can be seen at the talk page archives.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the advice. I guess I should have looked at the page history first. Does this apply to all such articles where dates of birth are linked? TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, it is a rather unexpected change.
Per current consensus it applies to all articles, unless the link target is relevant to the article. But I wouldn't bother manually unlinking them. Lightmouse and Tony are doing it script-assisted, which also converts all dates on an article to the proper format for it, i.e. either 1 September 2008 or September 1, 2008.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

ok. Thanks for getting back to me. TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Greg Nelson (producer)

Hi Greg.
I the page blanking at Greg Nelson (producer) to be understood that you want to delete the page again? It was reverted in the meantime, but typically the only significant contributer can request an article to be deleted again if no one disagrees.
Since the article is already at discussion for deletion, I would just let it run its course. If you have anything to add to the discussion though, feel free to leave your comments here.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 16:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

Greg Nelson here. I was confused by procedure and really didn't understand the process. Terminally right brained. I apologize for any improper entries or waste of your time I have caused no matter how innocently. Maybe some day I'll get it right.

Nelgreg (talk) 02:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, you did nothing wrong! And furthermore, if you have a look at the discussion here, it very much looks like your article will be kept.
Also, let me say that yours is the most neutral autobiography I've seen written here so far. So keep up the good work, maybe you want to write about other topics, too. One thing though, one of the most important priciples for an encyclopaedia is verifiability, so in a perfect article all facts should be backed by reliable sources.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 07:41, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Why was NewsCred removed as a news aggregator?

Hi - I noticed you removed NewsCred from the list of feed aggregators (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_feed_aggregators). The comment was 'no article', so wondering what that meant? Do you mean that there is no WikiPedia article on NewsCred itself?

It seems a bit strange since very similar sites like Daylife, Topix etc are all listed, and NewsCred is just as 'notable' - whether its web traffic, coverage on mainstream press etc.

Just curious... Full disclaimer: I'm involved with NewsCred, but it was someone I know who added the entry. He also added an article about NewsCred, which was also taken down due to notability reasons. That was before our full public launch, so I can understand and will ask him to resubmit if he wishes.

I'm new to Wikipedia, and quite fascinated by this so appreciate the guidance.

Cheers, Shafqat —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shafqatislam (talk • contribs) 08:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi

First of all, welcome to Wikipedia!
I did indeed remove the Newscred article from the List of feed aggregators. In the past, this list has often been used to promote very small and non-notable (with respect to encyclopaedic inclusion) RSS readers, which is why per consensus only items with either an article here or some other assertion of notability should be included.
I researched NewsCred for a bit now, and although it is very young, I still saw enough news coverage in independant sources that led me to readd it to the list.
I personally don't think that it meets the notability guidelines for its own article yet. Per Wikipedia:Notability (web) it needs to "notable and of historical significance", which I don't see yet for NewsCred (I'm the first to agree though that this is violated by a number of articles in that list at the moment, but nevertheless).

Anyway, thank you very much for your civil message, and I especially appreciate your full disclosure of your co-foundership of Newscred. I hope that you stick around, I'm sure that there are also a lot of other articles that you can contribute to. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 10:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

One more thing, adding links to newscred in the external links section of arbitrary articles is probably not a good idea, per WP:LINKSTOAVOID and WP:LINKSPAM.
I also saw that you already opened a deletion review, so let's see how that turns out. As I mentioned above, WP:WEB is pretty strict, so don't be disappointed if it doesn't work out yet. Once it's been around a bit longer and there is enough in-depth coverage about it to be encyclopaedic and pass WP:WEB, it can simply be recreated.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 12:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Editing user page

Thanx! It looks good!- Stereorock

Thanks

Thanks for all the feedback. I guess I will band together with some others and create a version on my the NewsCred article on my userspace (as someone suggested on the deletion review). Once it's of a high enough quality and there are more reputable sources/citations to back it up, will create a new article.

Also, I added a link to external news articles to a couple of Wikipedia articles. I read the guidelines, and will ensure I keep within them. It seems a bit strange not to have atleast one link to major news articles about a big event. It seems like it would add a lot of value. But point taken. Thanks for all your help again. Will start helping out in areas that I am familiar with! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shafqatislam (talk • contribs) 15:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Note that if you still want the old article as a starting point, talk to someone in Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles to do just that. They can undelete the old article and move it to your user space, so that you can work on it there. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 16:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Latrun

Hi,
I have written the whole French version. My English is not good enough to translate this myself. So, I asked so support on different pages and Deborahjay agreed -step by step- doing the job.
We could have done the translation on a personal user page BUT she suggested we did it directly in order to leave people correct the article or information. But, if possible, not after the properly translated sections.
It is not wp:OWN. But it is hard job and it is easier and quieter if we can just work step by step.
In practice, I could simply remove all that came after the tag and claim : "not proper English" (some sections avec even 100% in French)... That is just easier.
Feel free to comment on my talk page if you don't understand my point or if your don't share my mind.
Thank you :-)
Ceedjee (talk) 15:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you should mention that in the inuse template explanation then—see {{Inuse-section}}, it allows for customized comments. I thought it only affected the one section, and the template originally was intended to minimize edit conflicts, which is why it's typically used to for less than a day only.
Anyway, I undid my edit, I hope that's enough to make future editors think twice.
Thanks for your comment, and for your work. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 17:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation.

I was not aware of that and unfortunately, Deborah is occupied on other topics.

Do you think a good solution would be to transfer "the non translated text" somewhere else while waiting she is ready ?

I follow your advice and add a comment.

Ceedjee (talk) 21:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

No, I agree with Deborah, if it's in the article space right away maybe someone else will find it and help out. I replaced the inuse-template with a completely customized notice now, to make it clearer that everything below is not finished yet. That should really be enough to have people at least look at the talk page before making big structural changes that could be problematic for the translation.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:38, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help.

Kind Regards,

Ceedjee (talk) 05:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

(also posted on Ceedjee's talk page) If your translator is a bit busy atm, you might like to post a request at Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English and/or use the {{Notenglish|NameOfLanguage}} template as well to help flag up the article to editors who work on translation. --Ged UK (talk) 07:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Just now I became aware of this discussion, trying to follow up after Garion96 objected to the use of Amalthea's template. Even though it's more explanatory than the simple "in-use" — apparently both are intended for brief-term use. It was actually a surprise to me that Ceedjee included unedited text, and even passages not translated to English, directly on the mainspace page, rather than continuing to use the sandbox. I applied the "in-use" template after the fact because it was the only one I found, so I appreciate your intervention, Amalthea. However, some other means is evidently required. Please see Garion96's User talk page where I'm trying to get this sorted out. Shall now investigate the suggestion made by Ged UK, above, or "not-proper-English" as suggested by Ceedjee, whom I'll also advise. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 03:00, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Billy Soose

I didn't "vandalize" the Billy Soose imput on Wiki. I knew the man- I knew him well and called him Uncle Bill. I had NO external links on that post. Don't get your posting a violation against me. Please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gamtnrealtor (talk • contribs) 03:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi
I agree that your edit was made in good faith, and I removed the revert notice again.
I would like to readd the first two paragraphs of your edit, that he opened "Billy Soose's Place". However as it was it doesn't fulfill one of the most important principles of this encyclopaedia, which is verifiability. There needs to be reliable sources where all facts can be checked against. An eye-witness account, like yours, does not qualify as such, I'm afraid. Do you know of a reliable source that can confirm that? It doesn't need to be available online.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 09:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Pop Culture Whore

It's ok about the song title mix up. I was confused when I first read it too. Just wanted to say I'm not mad or anything :P Harry** (talk) 14:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Radar

Hi
I noticed that you started an AfD nomination of Radar (song), but didn't finish it. I undid for now, since I'm pretty sure that this article will be kept according to the guidelines. However, if you do want to nominate it and need help, feel free to reply here or on my talk page and I will help you with the steps or nominate it for you.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 13:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

hey...yes can you help me complete it.......Onceturn (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, the steps are listed at WP:AFDHOWTO.

1. First, add {{subst:afd1}} to the top of the page you want to nominate. Make sure to provide an edit summary with the article explaining that you nominate it for deletion
2. Then follow the redlink in the AfD notification box saying "this article's entry" to open the deletion-debate page. Insert this text: {{subst:afd2 | pg=Radar (song) | cat=M | text=Reason the page should be deleted}} ~~~~
   Make sure to provide your reason why you think this article should be deleted.
3. At last, follow this link to the deletion log page and add the deletion discussion, by adding {{subst:afd3 | pg=Radar (song)}} to the top of the list.

Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 13:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello!

I noticed that you were kind enough to help User:Onceturn complete the nomination of Radar (song) for deletion. I wanted to let you know that a checkuser confirmed that Onceturn (talk · contribs) is a sockpuppet of banned user Brexx (talk · contribs), an infamous sockpuppeteer with a long history of copyright violations and disruptive editing. Subsequently, Onceturn has been indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia, the same as all of Brexx's sockpuppets. As a result of that, I wanted to inform you of this so that, if you so wish, you can withdraw the AfD nomination since you were the one posting it in the first place and the user on whose behalf you posted the nomination is not allowed to edit as per Wikipedia:Banning policy#Editing on behalf of banned users. You were very kind in helping, what seemed to be, a new user unfamiliar with Wikipedia and for that I commend you.

This is just a friendly heads-up.

Peace! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

As you suggested in your comment, I closed the debate of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radar (song) as speedy keep.

Peace! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks for the heads up, and the closure. I removed the AfD-Tag from the article.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Pop Culture Whore

It's ok about the song title mix up. I was confused when I first read it too. Just wanted to say I'm not mad or anything :P Harry** (talk) 14:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Radar

Hi
I noticed that you started an AfD nomination of Radar (song), but didn't finish it. I undid for now, since I'm pretty sure that this article will be kept according to the guidelines. However, if you do want to nominate it and need help, feel free to reply here or on my talk page and I will help you with the steps or nominate it for you.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 13:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

hey...yes can you help me complete it.......Onceturn (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, the steps are listed at WP:AFDHOWTO.

1. First, add {{subst:afd1}} to the top of the page you want to nominate. Make sure to provide an edit summary with the article explaining that you nominate it for deletion
2. Then follow the redlink in the AfD notification box saying "this article's entry" to open the deletion-debate page. Insert this text: {{subst:afd2 | pg=Radar (song) | cat=M | text=Reason the page should be deleted}} ~~~~
   Make sure to provide your reason why you think this article should be deleted.
3. At last, follow this link to the deletion log page and add the deletion discussion, by adding {{subst:afd3 | pg=Radar (song)}} to the top of the list.

Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 13:54, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello!

I noticed that you were kind enough to help User:Onceturn complete the nomination of Radar (song) for deletion. I wanted to let you know that a checkuser confirmed that Onceturn (talk · contribs) is a sockpuppet of banned user Brexx (talk · contribs), an infamous sockpuppeteer with a long history of copyright violations and disruptive editing. Subsequently, Onceturn has been indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia, the same as all of Brexx's sockpuppets. As a result of that, I wanted to inform you of this so that, if you so wish, you can withdraw the AfD nomination since you were the one posting it in the first place and the user on whose behalf you posted the nomination is not allowed to edit as per Wikipedia:Banning policy#Editing on behalf of banned users. You were very kind in helping, what seemed to be, a new user unfamiliar with Wikipedia and for that I commend you.

This is just a friendly heads-up.

Peace! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

As you suggested in your comment, I closed the debate of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radar (song) as speedy keep.

Peace! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks for the heads up, and the closure. I removed the AfD-Tag from the article.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Courtney Love

Hi Cirt
76.29.59.179 previously rereverted the change at the list of Scientologists after our discussion at User talk:76.29.59.179#List of Scientologists. He might very well be right with it, although I can't find a good reliable source for Courtney Love following Buddhism either. I created a new section at Talk:Courtney Love#Religion about this, but as it is I'd remove her from the list of Scientologists, the source doesn't seem to be good enough for calling here one.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 21:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

The full text of the source says "are also followers...". Cirt (talk) 22:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I found some alternate sources saying she is Buddhist, that she practices Kabbalah, so not too sure about this one. Cirt (talk) 22:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, so did I just now. OK, I'll make note of it at her talk page. Thanks. --Amalthea^Talk 22:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Please also note that Eileen Barker writes in the WP:RS/WP:V secondary source New Religious Movements: Challenge and Response that the Church of Scientology considers any individual who has taken at least one Scientology course to be a Scientologist:

• Wilson, Bryan R.; Jamie Cresswell (editors) (1999). New Religious Movements: Challenge and Response. Routledge. pp. Page 18. ISBN 0415200504. Being familiar with the phrase 'Once a Catholic, always a Catholic', we should not be surprised that the Church of Scientology considers all those who have ever done one of their courses to be a Scientologist, and counts them as such even if they have not been in touch with the movement for years - even, presumably, if they are among the movement's most virtiolic opponents. - Eileen Barker {{cite book}}: |first= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Cirt (talk) 22:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. I guess that list should then be better qualified to say if a particular person is a "follower of the doctrines and beliefs", or has only "attended at least one course". As I understand it there's a lot of notable people who have taken a course, but who wouldn't call themselves Scientologists. --Amalthea^Talk 22:30, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure whether or not that is a good idea, but was merely bringing that information to your attention. For the time being consensus appears to be to defer to what is reported on in WP:RS/WP:V secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 22:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

United World Chart

Hi
Seriously, please don't add chart positions on or chart information of the United World Chart to articles. It has been found not notable time and again, e.g. at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United World Chart . Thank you. --Amalthea^Talk 13:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't get how it's a bad chart, i'll get other users to make and Article and show you why wee need it for song articles. Hometown Kid Talk 10:10, 24 September 2008.

Ok, block notwithstanding, the United World Charts has serious verifiability problems. See an older discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 15#United World Chart and aCharts.us, and WP:CHARTS for the general guideline. --Amalthea^Talk 14:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

EliteAnswers AfD

Thanks for this. I didn't know how to do that before. Is there a shortcut? TravellingCari 03:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I know that {{Afd2}} adds the box per default while Twinkle doesn't. I usually just copy it from some other deletion discussion from today's log when I need it.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 03:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Found one: {{Priorxfd}} :) --Amalthea^Talk 03:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! TravellingCari 14:50, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Protection of List of Scientologists

Replied on my talk page. Cirt (talk) 10:19, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Curious, if you started out your commment with While I don't completely disagree with semi-protecting the List of Scientologists..... -- please let me know next time when you do think that semi-protection would be warranted for blatant persistent WP:BLP-violating vandalism on the article. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 10:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Please also note this portion from WP:UNINVOLVED: If a matter is blatantly, clearly obvious (genuinely vandalistic for example), then historically the community has sometimes endorsed any admin acting on it, even if involved, if any reasonable admin would have probably come to the same conclusion. -- In particular this case is sensitive because it deals with vandalism relating to WP:BLP. However, like I said, in any event I will submit future requests for protection for this article to WP:RFPP. Cirt (talk) 10:29, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Sharp & Smooth

Why would you delete the Sharp and Smooth page when it passes according to Wikipedia policy? That is quite ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.136.89 (talk • contribs) 13:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't delete it, I recommended a relist. The admin who closed the discussion felt that a consensus for deletion was reached. The notability guideline is a formulation of community consensus, and is not binding. However, if you want you can open a case for this at the Deletion review. If you need help with it please get back to me, although I'm probably going to be offline till Monday. --Amalthea^Talk 16:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Also note though that it doesn't clearly pass the notability criterion of WP:MUSIC#C10, I personally don't think that the compilation albums themselves are notable, lacking significant coverage. --Amalthea^Talk 17:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

• Hey, thanks for getting back to me. Your help would be highly appreciated. Please do help me open the case! Thank you very much! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amg1234 (talk • contribs) 15:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

• by the way - I did a search on Yahoo "Cream Ibiza Paul Van Dyk" - there are 614,000 DIRECT results.. tell me there is no notability! : ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amg1234 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

• The deleting admin has restored the article and relisted the deletion discussion for three more days. I've invited the editors who commented before to review their opinion.
  Let me repeat here that I still think that the duo lacks sufficient notability for encyclopaedic inclusion. To get technical, the two compilations are not notable by themselves (they lack significant coverage in reliable third-party sources), they only inherit notability through WP:MUSIC#Albums from the notable musicians PvD and Peter Rauhofer. I'm convinced that WP:MUSIC can't be daisy-chained to pass on notability even further.
  Let's see if there is going to be consensus, in the end that's all that counts. --Amalthea^Talk 16:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

• Hey, I appreciate your help. Let me ask you.. if they and an article by a third party publisher - would that help? If so, within a few days there is supposed to be a major article written about some of their work in a very reputable music news website! Let me know. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.100.16 (talk) 03:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• Hmm. That would have to be very significant coverage from a very significant music reviewer.
  So far, there is strong consensus against encyclopaedic inclusion. To pass the notability inclusion guideline a topic needs significant coverage in multiple reliable third-party sources. Not knowing the article I can only assume that it will not be enough to show the duo's encyclopaedic notability.
  If it gets deleted once the AfD is closed again please don't try and recreate it under some other name. Instead, if you think at some point in the future that it now passes WP:NOTABILITY, create the article in your user space (e.g. at User:Amg1234/Sharp and Smooth), include the new references, write it from a neutral point of view, make sure all facts are verifiable, and once you think it is ready contact me, User:VirtualSteve‎ or any administrator to have a look at it, so that it can be moved into article space.
  Amalthea^Talk 09:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• Who is eligible to vote for consensus? Anyone or just admins? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.100.16 (talk) 13:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• Please note that it's not a majority vote. It's editors (any editors, not only admins) expressing opinions why the topic at hand passes or fails the notability guideline.
  In particular, you shouldn't encourage likeminded people to join the discussion, per WP:Canvassing. It will give the closing admin a harder time, but he will discard such opinions pretty quickly when trying to determine community consensus. --Amalthea^Talk 14:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Say OK

You requested a redirect for Say OK in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Say OK. An editor has since built a new version of the article in userspace, in hopes of being able to restore the article. Can you look at User:Kikkokalabud/Sandbox/Say OK and see if your objections have been satisfied? Please discuss at the sandbox talk page, User talk:Kikkokalabud/Sandbox/Say OK.Kww (talk) 13:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course, it looks fine. Notability was never in question, and there is enough verifiable material to warrant an article. Once it is moved into article space Image:Vanessa Hudgens - Say OK.jpg should be restored and used in the article. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 22:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Shogun

Sorry I didn't see that, someone removed my citation petition and I accidentaly put that non notable review back. --Kmaster (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Jessie Jacobs

Hi
Thanks for the clarification in the Jessica Jacobs article. Do you have a source handy that Sound of Music was in production in 1999, cause I haven't found one.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 13:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

http://kids.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=53711 - the article is misleading by omission though - the Sound of Music was cast and went into rehearsals in late '99. Paul Austin (talk) 13:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

No, it's good, it mentions a successful audition in 1999, that's pretty explicit. I added it to the article. Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 19:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edit at List of Scientologists‎

You may not have been aware but there was quite a bit of discussion on this and also a Request for Comment and the majority of users seemed to consider various primary sources associated with the Church of Scientology as not satisfactory for usage with this list (archived discussion). Best to rely on secondary sources that satisfy WP:RS and WP:V, and avoid usage of primary sources affiliated with the subject of the article. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 22:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Hmm, OK, sorry about the revert then, I honestly thought you just missed the reference in the article.
I removed the Scientology membership allegation from her article as well, since a cursory search didn't bring up any reliable source confirming it.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 22:21, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

No worries, thanks. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 22:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

un-constructive edits on Jordin Sparks page?

=> I am not sure what you are talking about. I took out vandalism text as below: She also went on to say that her favourite kind of ring is the onion ring, because she is such a fat fuck and eats them all day long. She also said she wears a promise ring too, but we all know this is so she has an excuse to why no one will sleep with her, and this way she doesnt have to admit she gets no action because of her excess weight.

is that not constructive?

Oops ... I must say, I apparently clicked on the wrong IP, I meant to warn the user who introduced the sentence, not you. I'm very sorry, and struck my comment from above, and let me instead say thank you for taking care of it. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh okay

Hi
I noticed that you made some editing tests in the Keke Palmer article. Can I ask you to, in the future, do such tests in the sandbox instead? Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC), who hopes you find your inspiration :)

I will i just didnt understand how do you make your own page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashley Tucker (talk • contribs) 23:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Your own user page is at User:Ashley Tucker. Please don't mistake the article at "Ashley Tucker" for your user page. I moved your text from there to your user page. I requested deletion of the article at Ashley Tucker again, since I'm afraid you are probably not yet famous enough for an article in an encyclopaedia. Well, neither am I. :)
All articles about users should be in their own "user space", so for you that's usually User:Ashley Tucker.
Feel very free to ask me if you have further questions, or go to the help desk. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Edit summary

Whoa... that is a weird bug... Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 20:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

90210

Hi
I removed your addition of the http://watch-90210.com episode list again: we already have an on-wiki list of episodes, and I believe it shouldn't be in the article per WP:LINKSTOAVOID. If you disagree, can you come to Talk:90210 (TV series) and discuss it please?
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 19:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I'm a bit disappointed that you ignored me so completely. Can you please, instead of readding it, discuss the link at Talk:90210 (TV series) first, to get other editors' opinions? Thanks. --Amalthea^Talk 11:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

hello,

I just saw your messages, sorry! I didn't notice them. I can't figure out how to use the "talk" page you sent me to.

I understand why you deleted the link. However, the other 90210 episodes link is a summary of the episodes. The link that I sent people to is a place where they can watch the episodes for free. Big Difference, see? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.12.70 (talk) 04:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Just click on the "new section" link at the top of the talk page to start a new thread.
After looking at the external page a bit more, and at your other contributions, I'm even more convinced that it shouldn't be in the article. It is apparent that you have a conflict of interest since you seem to be affiliated with the watch-*.com articles, and all you are doing is promoting your external websites, which is violating WP:LINKSPAM and WP:LINKSTOAVOID. Also, the software used on the pages to watch the episodes, Zango, seems a bit dubious.
There are many places where one can get episodes of a TV series. Encyclopaedic articles on Wikipedia are, however not a guide to the TV or the internet, and as I said the external links guideline quite explicitly forbids links like yours. Also note that all your other links were removed as spam as well, and not by me.
But, as I said before, if you still disagree fell very free to go Talk:90210 (TV series), open an new section and ask other editors who are involved with the article.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 12:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Please see WT:Only_make_links_that_are_relevant_to_the_context#Break 1 for the current discussion. I'm letting everyone know who has a comment on the relevant talk pages. Obviously, we're not going to push anything through without a full discussion of every issue, including whether to merge at all. My sense is that there's wide agreement on all the big points, but the devil is in the details.

P.S. I'm right with you on electronic voting machines; I've been watchlisting Premier Election Solutions for a while now. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 20:01, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

about en.wikipedia.org/wiki/shironamhin

shironamhin site owner ziaur rahman gave me the permission of the history for to write in the shironamhin wiki page.

u can see the permission

http://www.shironamhin.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6295

so plz consider it and inform me about it.

ukhome —Preceding undated comment was added at 05:28, 4 October 2008 (UTC).

Gutza has already replied on your talk page regarding this. --Amalthea^Talk 12:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I have a source that Hoopz wins I Love Money

Just wanted to let you know. It basically predicted who goes home, and has been right so far. Lildandcd93 (talk) 00:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi
I have absolutely no doubt that this is true. The show has been produced quite a while ago, and I'm sure that those rumors are based on leaked information.
However, that's not how this encyclopaedia works. Every bit of fact needs to be verifiable by reliable sources. Verifiability is one of the five pillars this project stands on. The source you found is, as far as I can tell, anything but a reliable source – it's more a gossip blog thing, accepting and distributing anonymous information.
If we'd start accepting sources like those then the amount of plain untrue information in articles would skyrocket in no time, so I'm afraid that I have to remove it again until it is confirmed by a reliable source (which almost certainly isn't going to happen until after the respective episode has aired, since the studios' press releases always come with a don't-print-before date attached).
If you disagree, feel very free to come to Talk:I Love Money again to post your source there and discuss it.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 00:33, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I understand. Thanks for clearing that up. Lildandcd93 (talk) 20:43, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Your warning

Hello, I saw your warning on this user talk page. I'm not an admin and there was another attack...thought I'd let you know, Cheers, ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 14:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Next time, just report them to WP:AIV, they got a level4im warning and another warning was not necessary. I did not block them now though because there were no new edits after your warning. SoWhy 15:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I was about to say once he got blocked. Thanks for the cookie. :)
--Amalthea^Talk 15:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll do that next time...thank you both! ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 15:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

SoWhy has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Thanks for reverting that edit on my userpage and being nice and friendly and explaining to the user who did it. That's the spirit, so here's a cookie for you! :-) SoWhy 15:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

yeah bout the freeze t-pain song...........................

suck my nutts —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.237.153.188 (talk) 22:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

um bout stayin cool..............

stop talking to me when and go suck some nutts —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.237.153.188 (talk • contribs) 22:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

User page

Something on my watch-list led me to your elegantly sparse user page, from which I have pinched an idea for my own. Thanks! JohnCD (talk) 09:28, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

How nice of you to tell me. Feel free to rip it off as you please. :) Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 09:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Sugababes

I removed it because even though it was in the news of the world the Sugababes have not sold 20 million albums world wide it is a near impossible figure when in the U.K which is their biggest market their sales are just over 7 million for singles & albums combined and with them getting very little cirtification outside of the U.K for sales I find it very hard to believe that they have sold 13 million + elsewhere.

when you considder the best they have done is gold in Germany, they have gotten no cirtifications in America, Japan or Australia.

The news of the world obviously have not done their reasearch again, They are the same newspaper that says Mariah Carey has sold over 250 million albums and with them releasing NOTHING apart from a single in the U.K over the past month how have they all of a sudden sold so many albums when 2 months ago there was no talk so much number and as I said its hardly as if Girls has sold several millions to put them in that kind of league. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.236.21 (talk) 00:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks for your notice on my talk page. I undid my edit again, so that sentence is gone now. You were right that it was poorly sourced, it actually only spoke of "20 MILLION record sales", not album sales, and our discography article also has completely different album sales figures.
Sorry that I mistook your edit as unconstructive. As it says above, when removing content, or doing any edits really that aren't self explanatory, it immensly helps if you fill in the edit summary. :)
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 00:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Amalthea

I did not realise I did not sign in when I made the edits, I see you removed it but somebody keeps putting it back up, Is there anyway to stop this? As you see its totally a false claim by a tabloid newspaper.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.236.21 (talk) 00:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

The user is using a dynamic IP, so it's harder to get in contact with him, but there are several ways. First one was to leave explanatory messages in the edit summaries. If he undos again, I'd strike up a discussion on the talk page and refer to it in the edit summary, maybe even leave an additional hidden comment in the article itself referring to it. One could also first try to find a compromise in the article itself, e.g. word it in a way that is acceptable to both sides.
At this point, the user is acting in good faith, since the source can be read in that way, so stronger measures aren't warranted.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 11:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Marguerite and Carl Stephenson/ concerning our bio

Dear Amalthea,

My wife Marguerite and I needed to change elements of our wiki page for Carl Stephenson (producer). Please leave it as it is. The previous version has misinformation and endangers our privacy.

Thank you

Marguerite and Carl Stephenson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrenfrog (talk • contribs) 06:57, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Thanks for getting in touch and explaining your changes.
The article was now significantly reduced in size, to only keep what seems to be well sourced. This in particular includes two pieces of information that were removed in your version of the biography, and that according to secondary sources seem to be highly notable aspects of your career: your co-authorship of "Loser" (Beck song), and your band Forest for the Trees.
I do not know the reasons why you chose to remove those, but best I can tell they are established facts and will remain in the article.
We aspire to write a neutral encyclopaedia here, so we cannot accept you writing your own "official" biography. However, you are of course very welcome to point out errors or suggest changes to the article, preferrably at the article's discussion page Talk:Carl Stephenson (producer).
I hope this is something we can agree upon. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 15:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for communication your thoughts

Dear Amalthea,

We recently took your advice and added more information, including a discography. We reverted some of the phrases to your original document, with minor changes that reflect Carl Stephenson's and his wife Rita Stephenson's perspectives.

Thank you once again for your concern and efforts towards this biography.

Wrenfrog (talk) 10:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)Wrenfrog

double redirect elimination

I just wanted to explain why sometimes I create double redirects, like the one you undid at If I Were A Boy. People created the correct capitalization, If I Were a Boy, too early. It hasn't met WP:NSONGS yet, but there's about a 99% chance that it will within a few weeks of release. It's sitting there, redirected to the parent album, waiting to be restored. Once it is restored, then If I Were A Boy should redirect to If I Were a Boy. By setting up the redirect in advance, nothing will have to be done, and no one will have to remember all the capitalization variations. Now, once the article is created, someone will have to remember that there is an alternate capitalization and that they have to fix it. It isn't such a big deal here, but when it's a title like If a Man and a Woman Try To Repair the Love They Once Had, the capitalization variations can drive you nuts. By having all alternates redirect to the correct title, and the correct title do whatever it should do, life gets simpler.—Kww(talk) 11:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, all right, that makes absolute sense. I think I came to the page through a link, so I experienced the double redirect firsthand. Next time I'll fix all incoming links to the correct capitalization, that's something I should have done anyway. If there's no incoming links, the only thing left is that the search box ATM directs you to If I Were A Boy if you enter "if i were a boy", so a reader would still drop out at the double redirect.
I kinda wonder, that's just another case where multi-redirects would be very useful if they were supported by the software. I can't imagine that implementing them in MediaWiki is that hard, or taxing …
Amalthea^Talk 11:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Ukhome

Hi,

I see you're watching articles in Ukhome's area of interest; I've seen the last warning you sent him. If he does it again please feel free to drop me a line (I unblocked him, so I feel morally responsible for his "probation"). I will watch his contributions anyway, but since my interests don't intersect his I might be less prompt noticing a blunder than you are. Of course, feel free to ignore this message just the same. --Gutza ^{T T+} 21:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

FYI: Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2008 October 4. --Gutza ^{T T+} 19:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Move and formal procedure noted, thank you. --Gutza ^{T T+} 20:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

OK. I've put it up at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images/2008 October 4#Image:Shironamhin01.jpg. Thanks, Amalthea^Talk 20:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I saw that, but I think this is reasonable permission to assume GFDL. I'm aware it's not a formal release under this license, but I think the intention is clear enough not to bother with such details, unless someone actually makes an issue out of this. My opinion is that they're so small they need this kind of publicity -- but if you feel we really need a formal release under GNU FDL I'll support that. --Gutza ^{T T+} 14:29, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, upon more careful inspection I noticed the word "gratis" is actually part of that forum admin's signature, it's not -- as I originally assumed -- specifically related to that picture. That changes my understanding of what he actually meant -- I have to go now, but I'll deal with it later today. If Ukhome starts uploading a ton of pics while I'm gone then I would endorse a speedy block. --Gutza ^{T T+} 14:35, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Blocked him for two weeks, image deleted. --Gutza ^{T T+} 19:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks for taking care of it. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 19:23, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Rihanna

Hi
Heh, yes, I know, I should have first tagged the image as a copyright violation, and then removed it from the article. It took me a little longer then with the previous image to find the copyright holder. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 15:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

You did the right thing by removing it right away. I just always like to take a stroll though the article history to see if there was an image that it can be replaced with. That way, I tend to avoid an edit-war with people trying to restore the copyright violation.—Kww(talk) 16:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Right. I followed this edit to the article yesterday and assumed that we didn't have one, since they replaced a placeholder image. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 16:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Playground (Lindsay Lohan song)

As I was going to mention on the AfD, perhaps a redirect to Spirit in the Dark (Lindsay Lohan album) is a solution? CTJF83Talk 22:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right of course. I tried a redirect, was reverted, wanted to bring it to a discussion, noticed that it had already been discussed, and stupidly G4ed it instead, which I now undid again and redirected, with a proper edit summary and hidden comment, which is what I wanted to do in the first place. Thanks for your note. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 22:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Seems like a good solurion until more on the song is available. The rolling stone article (http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2008/06/26/lindsay-lohan-plots-third-album/) seems enough to me to verify this as a future release. --neon white talk 22:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I read it, and I don't doubt that it's true. It just fails WP:MUSIC#Songs and should be a part of the parent album article. --Amalthea^Talk 22:32, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Glad we got it sorted out, Amalthea. Neon white, we aren't doubting it is a future song, just have no information the soung, therefore it shouldn't have a page, til we have more info. CTJF83Talk 22:38, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi TPH
I see that my noise at AfD didn't go unnoticed, and that you removed the backlinks to Playground (Lindsay Lohan song). I'm not quite sure about that, I think that those links were useful, since we do have some information about the song at the redirect behind it. Would you mind if I restored those (except the self-redirect at the album article)?
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:17, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

• Yeah, you can go ahead and restore the links. I figured they were redundant since the page had been redirected. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
  • OK, thanks! --Amalthea^Talk 23:22, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Engrish

Thank you for explaining. I'm new but learning! StewartNetAddict (talk) 00:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Circus cover

Look at it closely. Look over at the left side, where you see the hinge line. If the cover were where it's supposed to be, the cover would be next to the top of the hinge line. Instead, you have the full depth hinge line in 'front of the image. Note also how the image goes through the entire CD: real CDs have a solid section left of the hinge, and the image is all to the right.

It's possible that this is a real image that someone made look fake by photoshopping it onto a CD box, but it's an image photoshopped onto a CD box.

I like looking for these things. I spend a lot of time at www.photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com ... a fun little site.—Kww(talk) 03:06, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Degenatron

This is the author of Degenatron. What if I made an article about something I was a part of, like a school I attended. How would I cite that information? Daniel Christensen (talk) 18:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC) P.S. I added a reference to Degenatron. Daniel Christensen (talk) 18:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you first look at some of our good school articles. Also note that your school might not be notable enough, or have enough verifiable material to warrant a standalone article. I recommend starting it as a section in the city or municipality it belongs to. Per the above, find information that can be verified by independant, reliable source.
And, if you don't have enough of reading policy pages, you might want to have a peek at the failed proposal at WP:Notability (schools). There was no consensus to accept it as a guideline, so it's not binding, but it might be useful to skim over it.
Hope that helps, and Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I Am… (Beyoncé Knowles album)

Hi
If you have *any* halfway reliable source for those tracks please add it to the talk page of the article so that we can discuss how to incorporate it. If no one can give any source at all though then we needn't discuss adding it to the article, per one of the most basic policies at WP:VERIFIABILITY. Wee need to be very careful not to propage rumors now that Wikipedia has become a news source for many blogs and other unreliable news organizations.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 01:52, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

>>i reverted the edit because it was made very clear that it was a rumor and not a fact, and the author wold most likely change it when it was proven to be true/false —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zicraccozian (talk • contribs) 01:55, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid that that's not the point. We are not a rumor mill, we try to build an encyclopaedia. If the rumor can be verified by reliable sources, as I said per one of the most basic policies at WP:VERIFIABILITY, we can think about how to incorporate it into the article. Unless we have any such source though it must not remain in the article. Earlier today I elaborated quite a bit on a similar topic, at Talk:Degenatron. Imagine if we allowed people to add all kinds of rumors to articles, without giving reliable sources.
I hope that clarifies my edit. I will remove the rumors again, per the policies I just gave you. If you still disagree, I urge you to go to the talk page of the article and strike up a discussion with other editors. Please trust me when I say that this issue is based on fundamental policy, and all other established editors will have the same opinion.
Thanks for your response, and Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 02:03, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

>>You need to CHILL THE FUCK OUT

I'm not quite sure what I did to deserve that? Care to explain? --Amalthea^Talk 11:04, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Images

If you notice any Wikipedia images that should be touched up/cropped etc., tell me, as I make my living doing that. PS Tell others! Zicraccozian (talk) 02:03, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi.
Well, I don't, but you might be interested in the WikiProject Images and Media and say hello at the talk page, or talk to User:Jauerback, one of the participants there who seems to be active these days. I've never looked at what they do exaclty, but I'm sure he can give you better input.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 02:11, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Bad link

WP:MUSIC#Songs doesn't link properly anymore. Try WP:NSONGS instead.—Kww(talk) 20:29, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure it does, I inserted the ids myself to make sure all my old links keep working. :) --Amalthea^Talk 20:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

They must have fixed it while I wasn't looking. A few days ago, it was broken, and I don't see what was changed to fix it. I switched over to WP:NSONGS because of it. Same place, just a different way to get there.—Kww(talk) 20:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

That did the trick, although I just made it prettier. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Thr33 Ringz.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Thr33 Ringz.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

The Thomas Fiss Article

Thank you for saving the Thomas Fiss article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paparazzo Presents (talk • contribs) 17:44, 15 October 2008 (UTC) Paparazzo Presents (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't save the article, I only removed the deletion tag. You saved it from speedy deletion yourself, by asserting notability in the article, and including lots of references, so it was never a candidate for speedy deletion. However, I'm not quite sure if he is notable enough for a standalone article myself. Per the notability guideline for musicians, if a musician hasn't "demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band", he is usually redirected to his band. At this point I'm not sure of that, which is why it's still tagged.
Also, have a look at what I did to the references in the article. If you create another article in the future, try to do it the same way, so you don't have to manually repeat the references at the bottom. You can read up on the details at WP:CITE.
Keep up the good work, and Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 21:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, you did save the article. In its original form, the Thomas Fiss article wasn't much different from the current version. "Darth Panda" tagged it for speedy deletion and, minutes later, another editor (I don't have the name handy) deleted it using the TW (Twinkle) process, which (according to Wikipedia itself) is supposed to be reserved for the deletion of vandalism. I knew that, had my article been a topic for discussion, it would have survived (thanks to editors like you), but some heavy handed types prevented discussion from occurring. You'll notice that the current version was also tagged for speedy deletion, this time by Non-dropframe, an 18-year-old whose Talk page doesn't indicate much flexibility or sensitivity. As for the references, I had to manually repeat them, thanks to something called the XLinkBot. I used a footnote to reference the MySpace site for the Axion Records Support Team (a pretty reliable source) and the XLinkBot deleted all my references. Here again, Wikipedia has an irrational policy. Anyone can post lies on the internet, using any forum or website, and all sources posting on MySpace should not be automatically discredited. It seems as though Wikipedia came under attack for being too democratic (Stephen Colbert's comedy routines immediately come to mind). Wikipedia was satirized for allowing anyone to disseminate whatever information they please, so Wikipedia has now gone in the other direction, to an extreme (allowing dictatorial editors to arbitrarily delete, without debate, accurate, well written articles). In the end, the final decision on Thomas Fiss's notability will be largely subjective, no matter how the decision is justified. Taking a common sense approach to the matter, allowing this information (the Thomas Fiss article) to stand is not detrimental to Wikipedia's reputation. However, the existence of so many poorly written articles (and "stubs") is detrimental, yet they won't be deleted if they involve "protected topics" (e.g., educational institutions and a variety of other entities). Anyway, thank you for helping to strike a balance at Wikipedia. I seem to recall that you advanced the argument for Fiss's notability by recognizing his Broadway career. Fiss is also listed as a writer and producer for Axiom Records at the Support Team site which I mentioned earlier. Any further help on this matter will be greatly and sincerely appreciated.Paparazzo Presents (talk) 18:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Ne-Yo

Hi
I noticed that you changed the birth date in the Ne-Yo article, even though it is sourced by an interview from the guy, and the comment specifically repeated that. Yet you changed it, and left the source intact. Is there a reason why you think that he was born in 1982?
Also, thanks for removing the comment from your user page. Please try to always stay cool, even if people bug you.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 00:43, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

So first off, I'm new to wikipedia but by looking at the comments above and the fact you know a lot about wikipedia makes me think you're on here 24/7 which shows you need some help. Second, I was mistaken because of all the sources i have seen it shows he is 25. So sorry for the mistake, but honestly it is not a big deal it's wikipedia for god sakes, get over it and get a life.

Peace,

Amber (AWall207)

Well, the source that we link to directly after the birth date: [2]. It aired on 23 June 2008, and he said "I'll be 29 years young this year, October 18th". There's also [3], which seems halfway reliable, too.
Looking through the page history I know that we listed 1982 as his year of birth for quite some time, so I think that we are responsible for most of those 1982 birth years out there. Do you have any reliable source that says 1982, one that isn't in some blog, fansite, or other self- or user-published page?
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:46, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Take a chill pill please, I really don't understand why you are so offended by this, it's wikipedia so please get over it. I put the wrong info so big deal, people change it all the time. I'm not the only one

AWall207 (talk) 23:52, 15 October 2008 (UTC)AWall207

I'm not at all offended, I replied to you asking why I think that he is 28, and was honestly only asking if you had a good source for 25. I'm sorry if I came across as impolite.
Peace to you, too. --Amalthea^Talk 23:57, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Well Okay then just curious are you the creator ofwikipedia? You take it very seriously

AWall207 (talk) 23:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)AWall207

Heh, no, it's probably just because I don't have a life. ;-) --Amalthea^Talk 00:02, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Haha ok, well sorry if i came off as rude, take careAWall207 (talk) 00:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC)AWall207

You too. --Amalthea^Talk 00:08, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't give

I don't give, so shove it! Josephjames21 (talk) 20:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Hyper Music/Feeling Good

Hi
Turns out that User:137.154.16.30 was right after all when they tried to change Hyper Music/Feeling Good and was reverted first by you, then by me, then by Jeff G.. And although their last edit is nothing to be proud of and he broke WP:3RR maybe you'll consider removing those warnings on his talk page and unblocking him.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 22:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, he was changing the statement that it was included in the "top five worst covers" of all time. which is not accurate according to the ref, which clearly says "worst". Regards. Thingg^⊕⊗ 00:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes that's what I thought, but it's just a confusing article, it actually was voted the fifth best cover. The last two paragraphs talk about a seperate best cover poll, also see TG's Best Covers EVER!, the primary source for the whole thing. --Amalthea^Talk 00:09, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm pretty sure the statement: "The number one worst cover song - Celine Dion covering AC/DC - is sacrilege," said the magazine's editor, Stephen Lawson. "The best covers are unlikely choices and they do something radical." is contrasting the #1 worst cover with what it takes to have a good cover, not mentioning a seperate poll. Thingg^⊕⊗ 00:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

But combine that with the penultimate paragraph which starts with "Jimi Hendrix's version of Bob Dylan's All Along the Watchtower was voted the best cover", and the primary source which says "TG's Best Covers EVER! [...] Check out the Top 5 below! [...] 5. MUSE - Feeling Good".
There's a second article that lists the worst five, which is the one with Celine Dion at #1. I'm really sure that news.com.au combined the two into one confusing article. We can move this to the article Talk page though if I can't convince you. :) Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 00:47, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

heh. oops. You're right. Major my bad on that one. Sorry I was so hard to convince... :/ Thingg^⊕⊗ 03:25, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. You may also want to adapt the block notice though. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 09:06, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Talkback!

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

Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 13:21, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Non-dropframe (talk) 15:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Bruno Masse

Hi.
Sorry, but I'm still not convinced that Bruno Massé passes the inclusion criteria at this point, which is why I've opened a deletion discussion about the article. I've already linked to the talk page where you've stated your reasoning, but feel very free to participate in the discussion please.
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 14:54, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, what is up with you? Do you have something against anarchists? I don't understand. Wikipedia is riddled with articles who have absolutely no references on subjects with little or no notability. I know that doesn't make up for my article, but how come you're not taking on worse articles than this? I've submitted to your requirements. Is there any... political reasons behind your devotion to the deletion of my article? Lkeryl (talk) 20:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Just for clarification, I'm not an administrator, and I don't have any authority at all about what gets deleted and what doesn't. I've only started the discussion since I'm still convinced the topic fails the inclusion guideline, but consensus will decide.
Concerning your comment "quoting the Internet is generally considered to be the worse possible sort of reference, especially Wikipedia": that's just the point; if we want to improve that, we must base all our articles on reliable sources. Per WP:VERIFIABILITY, we are in deed not looking for truth, we are looking for verifiable facts.
Lastly, I have absolutely no opinion on the subject himself. As I said, he seems incredibly versatile, and I am genuinly impressed, and wouldn't be surprised if he became notable by Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines shortly. I only happened to stumble across the new page, but am also working on reducing the huge number of rather old articles with "unclear notability" (at the moment more than 20,000 articles). Please, don't take it personally. --Amalthea^Talk 20:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Manhasset Bay

In September 2008, you placed a clean-up tag on the Manhasset Bay article. Malcolma and I have made some changes which I hope address your concerns. I have provisionally removed the clean-up tag, not that the article couldn't use more work. If you have further concerns, please could you place them on the discussion page so that they can be addressed? --Bejnar (talk) 22:16, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I noticed, yes, I had it still watchlisted. I gotta say I'm not quite sure what specific issues I had with it, except with the spelling, but it looks a lot better now. Good work, & thanks for getting back! Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 22:36, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

My vandal's new approach

Hello again! Thanks for reverting on Christopher Hughes; as you probably noticed, my IP vandal has found a new way to vandalise, creating accounts with my username in instead, see ToadGed (talk · contribs) and now BonerGed (talk · contribs). Not sure what the best way to progress this is, if any. Any thoughts? --Ged UK (talk) 09:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Got him/it/them blocked via the username reporting thingy. Let me know if you find any others, because it might be possible to do a checkuser thing to see if an IP address can be nailed down. --Ged UK (talk) 10:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I was wondering if I should notify you, but thought that'd you see it soon enough, and as far as I can tell there isn't that much to be done anyway but play whac-a-mole. At a glance he's used User:82.2.143.28, User:82.3.88.27, User:82.14.84.37, User:86.27.98.244, that's 4 different ranges of Manchesters virgin.net adsl provider (and I haven't checked how many they have). I don't see that we can rangeblock them all. You could think about filing an abuse report with virgin.net, but I'm not sure that they'd act on it. Amalthea^Talk 10:48, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think there's much else we can do. Admin User:Bencherlite is watching relevant pages too. User:Ged UK/Vandalwatch shows the range of IPs used. --Ged UK (talk) 11:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I addressed your concerns

about my username. I have requested that it be changed. Thank you. Urbanministries (talk) 20:29, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, thank you. One more thing, I'm assuming that you are affiliated with UMI? You have a conflict of interest then and need to edit that article only very carefully. Have you read the WP:FAQ/Business I pointed you to at the DRV?
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 21:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and patience. I'm trying to be as transparent as possible. I just read the policy regarding conflict of interest. I went back in earlier to make the article as neutral as possible, but I realize I still have a connection to the company and that this makes me suspect. However, I'm not trying to blatantly promote or sell. I would simply like to include a record here of a significant piece of modern evangelical and African American Christian history. If someone else, without my connections, would like to help out, I'd be happy to step aside. Thanks. --Urbanministries (talk) 23:04, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw your edit and your notice at the article after I left the above message. Seemed fine to me, although there are still some issues left in the article that either need to be sourced by reliable sources or rewritten before that COI-tag can be removed, e.g. in the founding-and-history section: "This verse made a great impression on Banks, and he determined to devote his life to [...]". That's not exactly neutral language, and it also could use a reference to confirm it since in my eyes it's a contentious fact. I'm hoping that a better copyeditor than myself will look over the article shortly, else I try myself. I'll keep the article watchlisted in any case, and I'm convinced that it's a notable organization, so I don't think you have to worry that it's going to be deleted again.
Lastly, I commend you for being so open, and for being a very nice and friendly editor. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:32, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Db-bio notice

Hi
Could you unprotect {{Db-bio-notice}} again? It was vandalized only once, and I'd like to adjust the language there to match A7 and the new {{db-album-notice}} (i.e.this edit). You can do it yourself, too, or I can work with {{editprotected}}, but the notices don't really seem like high-risk templates, not even highly-visible ones since they always get substituted.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 12:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Reduced to semi per your request -- thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 00:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Amalthea^Talk 20:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

KARATICS

Sorry that I nominated your first article for deletion, but as I explained there, I don't think it passes our inclusion guideline outlined at WP:NOTABILITY.
I'm guessing by your username that you are Rob Fletcher? If so then WP:FAQ/Business might be of interest to you.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 15:03, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

No I'm not Rob Fletcher, in fact, I think he is using the name KARATICS, which I created in 2002. I learnt of his website only yesterday. --Nobby102008 (talk) 08:17, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

OK still, that FAQ page I linked above is useful to you, since you have a conflict of interest at an article about a concept you inventend and wrote a book about. I opened a deletion discussion about it since the notability issues I mentioned at the articles talk page have not been adressed. Amalthea^Talk 10:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

XfD warning templates (copied from User talk:Suntag)

Hi
Following WT:Twinkle/Bugs#TW-B-219 (closed) I undid some of your changes from here, since the templates {{AFDWarning}} and {{MFDWarning}} are both used by Twinkle which at the moment automatically adds a signature after the warning. That could have been fixed there, but since it had already been removed from {{Adw}} and both {{afd1}} and {{mfd1}} still instructed to manually add the signatures (and so did WP:TFD FWIW) I removed the automatic signatures from the warning templates again.
Also, I for one often enjoy the ability to add some personalized text to AfD warnings whenever I add one manually, which is more difficult with the automatic signature.
I hope that's OK. I wouldn't mind a concerted effort to make them all consistent though, one way or the other (the RFD notice and {{idw}} still have automatic sigs). Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 15:50, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I find it amusing BTW that you, too, fell victim to the duplicate sigs and were one of the first to have uesed the changed version. :) --Amalthea^Talk 15:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm just glad that my antics could bring some joy into your life. : ) -- Suntag ☼ 16:05, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Some of the XfD warning templates carried ~~~~ with them and others required the user to add ~~~~ to the transclusion. At the time, it seemed more efficient to include ~~~~ with the templates. However, on using both methods, I think omitting ~~~~ from the XfD templates is best because most people expect to add ~~~~ after their posts. I had low priority planned to remove ~~~~ from the XfD warning template transclusions, but never got around to it. All the XfD warning templates should be somewhere in Category:Deletion templates. Please feel free to make all XfD warning templates consistent. In fact, it might be possible to have just one XfD warning template by adding a parameter to locate the XfD. I think if you put all the XfD templates on one sandbox page, you could that comparision create a wording that would apply to all XfDs. -- Suntag ☼ 16:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Reverting edits

Hi! Not sure if this is where I am supposed to ask (only following the info on your welcome message really :D), but the other day i had to revert two edits (vandalism/nonsense) and I couldn't find any "go back to ***** particular version" button. Clicking "undo" twice is fine, but I was wondering how I should do this in a major vandalism case ? Thanks Ren ✉ 18:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Of course, that's why I left it there. An easy way to revert to a specific version is clicking on the date in the page history you want to revert to, then just click "edit" (it will display a warning that you are editing an older revision) & "save" (with some edit summary, even if it's just "revert" or "rv").
There are more advanced tools that can be used if you find yourself reverting vandalism often, check out "Navigation Popups" and "Twinkle" in the gadgets tab in Special:Preferences. With NavPopups, you can point on the revision in the history you want to revert to and click "actions"→"revert". That should of course only be used to revert clear vandalism, if good faith edits are undone you should always provide a meaningful edit summary.
HTH & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 18:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I notice you already use Twinkle? In that case, here's how to do it with that:

• If you look at the diff you want to undo, the older revision has a brown "restore this version" link you can click. It will revert, and ask you for an additional edit summary. If you're undoing vandalism or blatantly unconstructive edits, just press return.
• If you're looking at a diff and the newer revision is the current revision, like with this, you also have three links right above the current revision that you can use. Those will undo all consecutive edits made by the user who saved the revision. The Vandal-link will use an automatic edit summary, the other two will let you add something to it. They will also open the users talk page so that you can add a notice or a warning.

See WP:Twinkle/doc#Difference between revisions. --Amalthea^Talk 18:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :D Ren ✉ 10:51, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Britney Woamanizer

Hey I have kinda found a source for the image that was being used for the cd cover, ok so they postend a news blog on the website <http://www.britney.com> a while back but the website has some problems for me connecting so would it be possib;e for you to look through to news blogs to find the oright one it was a bout 2 or 3 weeks ago. thankss —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toxicbomb2004 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the pointer, I found it at [4]. Amalthea^Talk 09:33, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Over Redirect

Hi, how do you move a page over redirect? I thought only administrators can do that..- Unpopular Opinion (talk) 15:41, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

See WP:MOVE#Moving over a redirect. Nothing to it, just move it, and if the conditions are met, every (autoconfirmed) user can do it. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 15:44, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! - Unpopular Opinion (talk) 16:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Circus

Sorry. I've been to the site today. Charmed36 (talk) 17:53, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, my first reflex with any of the new Spears covers was to remove them, and most of the time it's correct. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 17:55, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

The Welcome to the Circus Tour

Hi
I just saw that you deleted The Welcome to the Circus Tour (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), an article that I had bookmarked since I noticed it was using a Fair Use image improperly, and wanted to fix it. I notice that you deleted it as an A3 "no content" article, but I'm sure that it several paragraphs. I don't deny that it might need deleting per WP:NOTE and WP:CRYSTAL in the end anyway, but can you undelete it please since I know there was a non-A3 revision in the history somewhere?
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 12:46, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi. The last 13(!) edits were redirects to Circus (Britney Spears album), Circus (Britney Spears album)#The Welcome to the Circus Tour, and other combinations, and speedy tags. I have provided you with the last edit with any meaningful content at User:Amalthea/Circus Tour; it is exactly the same content as what appears at Circus (Britney Spears album)#2009 World Tour (as I am writing this). If you still want me to undelete it, let me know. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:52, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I neither noticed the edit war nor that it contained the exact same content from the article. Why didn't you just protect it though, if it was an apparent content dispute? Deleting it as an A3 is still very wrong, no content dispute should be solved that way.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 19:17, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't deleted to solve a content dispute as there was no edit war. The content had been copied word-for-word to Circus (Britney Spears album) in this edit. When I deleted it, it was completely blank, as those who had redirected it had gone back and removed the redirect link. There was no content. The content that was there had been moved to another page. If you want the page back, it back it isn't salted. You can recreate it with a redirect, or whatever. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, I only read the content dispute from the "last 13(!) edits were redirects". No contest at all then, and I didn't want to bother you, I was just surprised. :)
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 00:33, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

NP, regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 00:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Block

If you keep reverting Wesley Holiday, with senseless edits you will be blocked. Josephjames21 (talk) 18:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Consider this your only warning. Continuing to edit war will result in a block. Tiptoety ^talk 20:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tiptoey
Have you, when you evaluated [5], considered the report right above, at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#Josephjames21 reported by Amalthea (Result:_). I've just tweaked it a little, and I think it's very obvious that the user reverted four times.
All of that notwithstanding, and following up on the warning you just gave me, I am honestly very curious how you think I should have reacted in that situation. I noticed the problem at the article in question after a complaint at Josephjames21' talkpage, who I still had watchlisted. I politely asked him *yesterday* to provide a reason for his recent edit, where he removed content and all references the article had. Note that this was before any of the reversions today.
Today he repeated that edit (again: unexplained removal of content and all references). I reverted, which was my first edit *ever* to that article, and again strongly urged him to explain his edits on the talk page. He reverted, I warned, he reverted, I warned again, he reverted, I reported (And Onorem just restored the sourced version again).
Please explain to me where in your opinion I did wrong, and what I should have done instead. I couldn't care less about the topic in question and had no other intention than to restore the article per WP:V, and revert what I considered disruptive editing (removal of content and all references, while showing no willingless to discuss).
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey Amalthea. I will take a look at your report a little later, or just allow another administrator to deal with. As for your question in regards to what action you should have taken. In a nutshell my answer is "anything but continually revert". When you run into users you get into a dispute with, you need to take your issues to the articles talk page, so that a wider audience of users have a chance to pipe in and comment on the dispute too. That in turn creates consensus, which if a a user chooses to violate it and revert against it will result in a block. You can also request a third opinion where a uninvolved party has a chance to give their opinion on the matter and attempt to resolve the issue. I recommend to take a look at all these dispute resolution options. I mean, if it gets so bad that you need administrative action post to the administrators noticeboard. Like I said before, anything but revert over and over. It really does nothing but harm the project. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 20:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. I did think to have consensus strongly on my side, since two other active contributors had undone the very same edit before, and one of them had started a discussion on the talk page, which was ignored by Josephjames21.
Nonetheless, I acknowledge that I probably classified the edit too close to vandalism: replacing sourced content with unsourced content after being asked not to by three people had left me considering both edit and editor as purely disruptive, which is why I reverted and didn't consider dispute resolution.
Thanks again, and I really hope you will have a look at the other 3RR report, too. I'm really looking forward to unwatch both the article and the editor once the 3RR report is closed and and I've taken care of Josephjames21' remaining copyright violations.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 21:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

[removed my ramblings]

You know what, forget what I said. I'll follow my own advice and unwatch everything related, and as I said will follow yours and EdJohnston's in the future when I'm dealing with a disruptive, yet non-vandalistic editor. I guess I'm still somewhat shell-shocked from getting a final warning, I did not see that ever happening to me.
Thanks again for your insight, and see you around. --Amalthea^Talk 22:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Rihanna's Fourth Studio Album

You have added again now that her next album is going to be called Dark Angels. Without a reliabe source saying so though we really can't have that in the article, to prevent spreading rumors as we so often do. Do you have one? --Amalthea^Talk 22:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I do have a source that Rihanna's next album will be entitled "Dark Angels"

this is the site: http://www.atrl.net/forums/showthread.php?t=62107

copy and paste the URL and you will see that I do have a reliable source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Allentan6 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back. Looking at your source however, I don't think one can call them reliable. The two URLs mentioned in the forum post both refer to blogs, i.e. self-published sources, and one of them even says it's only a rumor. One mentions an allmusic interview, but I find nothing there either. I'm afraid we can't list something like that in an encyclopaedic article, independant of if we think it's true, again per WP:VERIFIABILITY. And even if it's true, until it is officially announced it's not unlikely that it will be renamed again, which happens all the time. --Amalthea^Talk 23:03, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

As you've probably noticed an article you created has been nominated for deletion. ;-)
Our basic inclusion guideline can be seen at WP:NOTABILITY, and even though I've looked for reliable sources that cover the topic in detail I've only found press releases and trivial coverage, so I too don't think that it warrants having an encyclopaedic article about it. If you think that it passes WP:NOTABILITY, could you come to the discussion and comment, or add a reference to the article?
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about that, you did nothing wrong, quite to the contrary.
I've looked at the references you added by the way, and the one at BC Stats isn't bad, but in the end it's still just a trivial mention. If they are quoted often in government papers that could very well bring them past WP:NOTABILITY. --Amalthea^Talk 22:04, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

The welcome and the introductory stuff is much appreciated. Very thoughtful.
--Danderson68 (talk) 22:35, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure, you're welcome. You seem to catch on amazingly fast, but if you do have questions feel free to ask, as I said. And let me commend you for being so WP:CIVIL even though your first article was nominated for deletion so quickly. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:18, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

• Congrats on the British Columbia Technology Industry Association article - It is a very good article. - DustyRain (talk) 08:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Note I've requested assistance for defining a redirect BCTIA to British Columbia Technology Industry Association - DustyRain (talk) 09:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I only did minor cleanup on that article, I'm hardly to thank for it. I created the redirect though, check Help:Redirect for information about it. --Amalthea^Talk 10:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, the association has such a long name, BCTIA is a good redirect. - DustyRain (talk) 08:52, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

You Make Me Wanna

That's the Japanese cover if you really want to fix things up. I had to clean up half a dozen bad uploads, 2 hoax albums and 2 hoax singles by this one editor, so since it wasn't absolutely necessary to the article I just nominated it for deletion. I fixed one that was being used as the only cover, and the other album images weren't used at all.—Kww(talk) 00:34, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks, I added the caption. I didn't notice that you tagged it, I only happened to notice it at CAT:CSD and, since I've added FUR to a number of album images lately I thought I'd rescue it. I kinda like having an additional cover variant on articles (if it's not overdone like at Good Girl Gone Bad). Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 00:44, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

posting

I received this:

Hi
I placed the hangon tag on Future Earth Magazine, which is probably where you wanted it to go. You should though assert on the talk page of that article, Talk:Future Earth Magazine, why that magazine is important or significant – the information being true is not enough for an encyclopaedic article.
I hope that helps, and cheers, Amalthea^Talk 00:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I went back to try to insert something acceptable for Wiki and cannot find the page.

Please advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Magicalmans (talk • contribs) 18:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed these two edits of yours which were misplaced, hangon-tags are supposed to be added to the article in question.
And although I contested the deletion on your behalf it still was deleted about an hour later because neither the article as it was nor its talk page had any indication of why the topic was important or significant.
If you want you can recreate the article, but be advised that all topics in this encyclopaedia must pass the inclusion standards, which for a magazine are outlined at WP:NOTABILITY: it needs to be covered significantly in reliable third-party sources. When I looked at the article at the time I didn't find any of that, but maybe you know of something? If you do you can ask one of the admins who deleted it (listed here) to give you the original content. I don't remember if there was anything unseful in it, but if you show them the source you found (i.e. show them a hint that it might be notable after all) they'll usually do it.
The reason for the whole thing is outlined at WP:VERIFIABILITY: information in articles must be verifiable in reliable sources, it's not enough to be true.
I hope that helps, if not please get back to me. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 18:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

First class cricketers.

Start of discussion

That has confused me. But, fine. I will go through the rule in detail. --GPPande talk! 21:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Confusing you was not my intent. :)
The A7 criteria only says that e.g. biographies with no (credible) indication of importance may be speedily deleted. That means that an article with "Bob Smith is one of the best Starcraft players in the world" is indeed not a candidate for speedy deletion, but should get a peer review at PROD or AfD, even though he almost certainly fails WP:NOTE. --Amalthea^Talk 21:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

David Kinkade

Hi
I removed the speedy deletion tag you added since he is allegedly a musician who played in two notable bands. This is usually enough for the musician to be notable himself per WP:MUSIC, and is certainly far more than an "indication of importance" per WP:CSD#A7.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 16:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Enjoy the day wherever you are.
ttonyb1 (talk) 16:58, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

And thanks to you for doing newpage patrol. :)
Just so you know, I also changed that tag at Apart from here from A3 no content to A9 album without assertion of significance and no artist article, since it did have some content with the short description and the image. If the band were notable then this sould have been turned into a useful stub. Also, the Sarah Westfield-Bell article mentions that she has been "featured in Time magazine". If she was really featured or just mentioned should be checked, but it is enough of an indication of significance to get it past A7.
Please try to apply speedy deletion tags by the book, if in doubt you should always give it a chance and PROD it instead.
I hope you don't mind that I had a quick look at some of your recent contributions. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 17:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Concerning Sarah Westfield-Bell:

Did you actually find the article in Time? I searched the site and was unable to - that is why I marked for SD.
ttonyb1 (talk) 17:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate the suggestions and no problem with the review. I have to admit I was unsure of the tag for Apart from Here and looked at your change when it came through. What do you suggest we do about the Sarah Westfield-Bell article given that I cannot find anything in Time?
ttonyb1 (talk) 17:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I apologize, I didn't notice that you added your search results to the talk page. I agree that it's a judgement call if this is a blatant hoax or not, or if those assertions of notability are blatantly incredible. I take back what I said above, and PRODded the article instead, no harm done in letting it stick around for a couple of days, since no reader will ever find it anyway.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 17:25, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

User:81.194.35.225

Hi
How come you called this a vandalism revert? Seems like a good-faith attempt to me, even if I disagree, with no vandalistic purpose at all. I removed the warning at the anon's page.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 14:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

That was simply a mistake.--Megaman en m (talk) 14:49, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I already thought so once I noticed that you let the rereverted version stand. You might consider removing the warning again next time. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 15:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Axisoft

The Axisoft article was deleted a few weeks ago. It was speedily deleted. It was also tagged as WP:COI and WP:N - DustyRain (talk) 07:04, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

it was deleted. - DustyRain (talk) 08:47, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Just as well. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 09:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello there

Thanks for your 'welcome to Wikipedia' message. Truth is that I've been editing on wikipedia for around 3 years now, using various different usernames. I've been editing the Sugababes discography pages for quite a long time. My username is 'Juicybrisket', just can't be bothered to use it for little things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.206.198 (talk) 19:54, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Then it was high time for someone welcoming you, seeing that User talk:Juicybrisket is still a red link. :)
Cheers, and happy editing, Amalthea^Talk 19:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll get it sorted. Need to spruce it up a bit. I'm good at editing what I need to edit, but I'm terrible at doing whole pages myself. I'll get my mate to help me out. He's good at stuff like that. Let's keep working on the Sugababes pages, there's still a lot to improve on. I'm going to improve album pages again first. I did One Touch ages ago and sorted out the charts on every page but then couldn't be bothered to do anymore so left it. I must get back to them. Thank you once again for your nice 'welcome'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.206.198 (talk) 21:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Anytime. :) --Amalthea^Talk 01:17, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Jordin Sparks (album)

Hi
Hmm, I'm unsure with the Gold certification you added to Jordin Sparks (album). I've removed it again since the RIAA database at [6] doesn't confirm it, and Blastro doesn't strike me as particular reliable. I hope that's OK.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:41, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I've added a different link, you can see her holding the plague on the link. I've been trying to find a good, credible source, because she was actually given the gold plaque when she made a special return appearance on American Idol, so I hope this link seems better. - Packerfansam 15 November 2008

Hmm, that's surprising, that was back in April if I'm reading the source correctly? I've readded your previous reference, and change the new one to point to the original source. I've also started a thread at Talk:Jordin Sparks (album) since I find it very surprising that RIAA doesn't mention it :)
Thanks & Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 21:16, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Your ANI report.

I am confused. Wikipedia grants the right for indef semi-protection after vandalism of a userpage. With that definition, the protection of my userpage is by the books. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 02:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, no, it says at WP:SEMI about indef semi protection: "User pages, but not user talk pages, when requested by the user after vandalism".
Amalthea^Talk 11:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

It says "Administrators may apply indefinite semi-protection to pages that are...user pages, but not user talk pages, when requested by the user after vandalism." My page was vandalized, and thus, it is above board, under that definition. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, but I wasn't talking about your user page, protection is perfectly fine there. Your user talk page has indefinite semi-protection and that's what per policy should only be done after persistent and heavy vandalism. --Amalthea^Talk 17:56, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for pointing that out. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 20:19, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Jediism

Hi! An admin suddenly got interested in the article, and managed to reduce and tag the lead to... well, just look by yourself. I'm all for a better article, but this seems very excessive to me. as in no other article is like this. If you could suggest what I should do that'd be great. :) Ren ✉ 06:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm really quite busy right now, so I still haven't gotten around to look into it in depth. In general I agree with Jerzy's initial concerns, the problem with that topic is that there are hardly any reliable secondary sources that can be used to build an article from, last I looked (You'll notice that very early on the talk page I suggested redirecting it to Jedi#Religion altogether). The few non-primary sources seem to always focus on the "nerds in costumes" rather then the ideas behind it.
Also, I don't think it's treated unfairly. If you look at Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism or even Rastafari, the first references provided are to support that those are considered religions, and quite naturally, the more contentious a topic is, the more it needs reliable sources to back its statements, the lead section of Scientology for example is bursting with references.
I'll comment on the talk page once I find the time to work through it, but that won't be before December I'm afraid. You two seem to be working on it constructively, but if you want other opinions on the matter you could ask at WT:RELIGION or request a WP:third opinion.
I hope that helps at least a little, sorry again. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 16:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Things are better now. I was mostly concerned by the fact that (s)he deleted things and excessively tagged others (such as 'when' when using a present tense? :O ). (s)He did make some good points and I made changes according to his/hers ideas. You make a point about the "religion" status. There is a book that talks about Jediism somewhere in the external links, I'll put this as a ref there instead.
Nerds in costumes? yes, unfortunately. Visit the holyhead website, look at their claims, and their handbook... These guys make me want to puke.
About the 'Jedi' article.... I think it's really crap, it constantly gets vandalized and resembles a battlefield for wikipedia editing wars of some sort. Ren ✉ 01:33, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you to all who participated in my RFA- regardless of whether you supported or opposed, all feedback is important to me. I look forward to proving in the coming months that the trust placed in me by the community is not misplaced. Mizu onna sango15

The Barnstar | My RFA | Design by L'Aquatique

		The Mizu onna sango15 Barnstar
		Thank you to all who participated in my RFA- regardless of whether you supported or opposed, all feedback is important to me. I look forward to proving in the coming months that the trust placed in me by the community is not misplaced. —Mizu onna sango15Hello!

Userpage

Hiya, sorry about the problem with the vandal. Thanks for the report, and I've blocked them. In the meantime, would you like me to semi-protect your userpage, to keep off the anon vandals? There's really no reason that any anon should be editing the page anyway, so let me know, --Elonka 22:53, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but that's OK at the moment. If it happens more often I might get back to you. :) Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 22:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

please

please leave that edit on father christmas. it was funny and people need to know the truth. come on, itll be funny to confuse everyone into thinking Santa is gary glitter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeryerbuggy (talk • contribs) 20:00, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, funny is not really what we're trying to be here, sorry. You are welcome to contribute constructively, but what you did was replacing the hard work of others by misinformation/fun. --Amalthea^Talk 20:07, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Chet Coppock

Hi. I'm afraid that I undid you change to Chet Coppock again, contentious material like that needs a good, reliable source per our policy regarding biographies of living persons. If you have one, feel free to readd it again along with the source where you got the information from.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 23:54, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Try looking at The Chicago Tribune and The Chicago Sun Times regarding the TRUE edit to Chet Coppock page. Stories ran in late 1986. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.167.247.53 (talk • contribs) 23:59, 28 November 2008

Thanks, I found one at the Tribune, and added it to the article. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 00:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

New Moon

I believe that the information that I added to that article was completely factual, and honestly I think it was rather harsh of you to assume that it was incorrect without doing your own research. Why did you change it? -TNO —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.219.153.167 (talk) 00:46, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

You mean that Daniel Fatsy DeVito, who you declared dead a while ago, wrote that book, was "completely factual"?
Just stop it, please. --Amalthea^Talk 00:53, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Your message

I'm assuming that was meant for an editor I reverted, who had attempted to censor an article. Is that correct? --Tyler | Talk - Contributions | 01:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, sorry. :) You happened to beat me to undoing his edit, and somehow my message ended up at your place. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 01:58, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Tyler | Talk - Contributions | has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

fun

Start of discussion
just because you don't like "fun" tabloid facts, that doesn't diminish the fact that they are FACTS. paris has herpes. it's a fact, not a rumor, whether you like it or not. she copyrighted the term "that's hot. your not". that is a fact. it's also a fact that the word is spelled "you're". hence, paris herself has proven her lack of intelligence by copyrighting a phrase that is misspelled and then putting it on a t-shirt and wearing said shirt in public. an encyclopedia has to tell the WHOLE story, otherwise it's just a publicity release from her publicist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellcraft11 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 29 November 2008

Which in turn doesn't diminish that you don't provide any reliable sources for it (and I'm completely disregarding that loads of people have herpes, it's not an encyclopaedic fact per se). And if you want to throw the first stone here, please take a second and look at the spelling mistakes in your posts.
But let's continue this at Talk:Paris Hilton#help, I've moved your comment to the bottom there and replied. --Amalthea^Talk 15:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

what is your problem

what is your problem

no no talk to me we might fall in love 90.210.220.82 (talk) 21:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

If you edit constructively from now on and stop with edits like this and this we just might. --Amalthea^Talk 21:11, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment

I have the strongest feeling that you are a stalker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.9.213 (talk) 22:11, 29 November 2008

Because I undid most of your edits once I stumbled upon your nonsense? --Amalthea^Talk 22:17, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your vandalism revert on my talk page! Regards, Chuckiesdad (talk) 00:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Anytime. --Amalthea^Talk 00:06, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Wellcraft11

if you would please tell me where, in the wiki guidelines, it says that i can't use the "discussion" page of an article to discuss what i feel should be included, even if YOU don't like it, please enlighten me. i just went through the "about wiki" pages and i don't see a thing that says that my thoughts about what should be included in an article are any less important than yours. just because you don't agree with my point of view, that doesn't make my thoughts any less valid than yours. your close mindedness is not reason enough to delete my input from the DISCUSSION PAGE, as that page is intended to promote DISCUSSION about the article and what others feel should be included, not just what YOU feel should included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellcraft11 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 30 November 2008

I've pointed you towards that guideline policy three times already. Read Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons:

Editors must take particular care adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page. [...] Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion, from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space.

Amalthea^Talk 18:53, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

well....i didn't copyright the word "encyclopedia" then stick it on a t-shirt did i? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellcraft11 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 30 November 2008

Thanks Amalthea

I think you are right that I can use pictures. And who are you? I would be happy to know new friend...I´m Milan from Czech Republic, student.--Wabak (talk) 22:52, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm Amalthea. I prefer to remain anonymous. :) --Amalthea^Talk 00:12, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Šāhzādé

Concerning this ...
User:Šāhzādé is a sockpuppet of User:Draco of Utopia, who is also User:Germany2008 and all these are really sockpuppets of User:Tajik. Tajik has changed his way or style of writing to fool admins. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirabono (talk • contribs) 23:42, 30 November 2008

See Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Tajik

OK. --Amalthea^Talk 00:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

CSD G6 feedback appreciated

Your feedback is appreciated in the New "i12"? discussion on the rewording of G6. Thank you. Soundvisions1 (talk) 16:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

contact you here or on my talk page?

Dear Amalthea, On my talk page, you suggested that I contact you on your talk page, but here it appears that you want me to request a review on my talk page. I'm contacting you here because I'd appreciate a review of my Family and Children's Services of Central Maryland article before I open it up to all Wikidedians to review.

BTW, I love your Atheist statement. I didn't know such things existed in Wikipedia!

Although I've referred to Wikipedia for a long time, I'm learning much more about it now that I'm trying to write an article. It's harder than it looks!

Thanks, DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 17:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi.
In your case contacting me either here or at your page would have been fine since I had your user page watchlisted. I prefer to continue a discussion where it was started since it's easier to read. If you want to contact someone about a new issue it's usually best to go to their talk page directly, just like you did.
About your article, I've taken the liberty of moving it to another place into your userspace, to User:DebbieFeldmanJones/Family and Children's Services of Central Maryland. It will look more like when it's moved into article space there since the table of contents is already at the right place, you can (theoretically) work on more than one article in parallel by creating similar pages like User:DebbieFeldmanJones/My other article, and you can use your actual user page to put up a profile about you with those user boxes you seem to like. :)
I'll do some other minor changes to your article if you don't mind.

→ This explains why it looks so much more official now! Thanks DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 15:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I suggest though that you find and add one or two additional references that can show why it is an important or notable organization, otherwise people might question its notability per our inclusion criteria and start a deletion discussion.

→ That's why I put in the reference and links to info about Mary Richmond, widely recognized as instrumental to the development of modern social work, who got her start at the Charity Organization Society. In fact, I also want to reference the Wikipedia article on Social Work, which notes: "In America, the various approaches to social work led to a fundamental question – is social work a profession? This debate can be traced back to the early 20th century debate between Mary Richmond's Charity Organization Society (COS) and Jane Addams's Settlement House Movement. The essence of this debate was whether the problem should be approached from COS' traditional, scientific method focused on efficiency and prevention or the Settlement House Movement's immersion into the problem, blurring the lines of practitioner and client.[10]" but I haven't yet figured out how to link directly to the quote, rather than to the beginning of the article. I will add others, too, but Mary Richmond is really a big name in the history of the profession, although not as famous as Jane Addams... At any rate, is this the sort of reference that meets the requirement of showing why it's a noteable organization? DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 15:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd think that it shouldn't be that hard considering that it was around since 1849.
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 17:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, some thoughts:

Lead

"FCS addresses issues from birth through the end of life with a goal of helping each individual reach his or her highest potential."
Since this is one of the first things people will read, and since it sounds a bit like it could be from a promotional brochure, I would recommend rewriting that sentence, and if possible provide a reliable third-party reference for their goal(s).

→ Not sure what you mean by this. I understand that a claim to have helped each individual reach his/her highest potential needs third-party documentation. But this describes a goal, not a claim. How does one provide a third-party reference for a goal that has been determined from within the organization? DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 15:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Locations

"As of 2008 there are 13 FCS offices located in Baltimore City"
I changed your "Currently" to "As of 2008" here, I hope that's correct. Do you have a reference for that handy? It might make it much easier to keep it up to date in the future.
I like that you removed the list of office locations, I found them misplaced there too. If people are interested they should visit there official website.

History

It still needs to be proven that The Milton S. Eisenhower Library releases that article under the GFDL. At the moment, large parts are verbatim copies from [7], which says quite explicitly "Permission to publish material from this collection must be requested in writing from the Manuscripts Librarian, Milton S. Eisenhower Library". The affirmation by a librarian is not enough. I'd given you the two ways to do that on your talk page, if permission can't be obtained then it has to be rewritten from scratch, I'm afraid, to only include the information, but not the sentences.

I hope that helps a little.
Cheers, and Thanks, Amalthea^Talk 18:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the time and care you are putting into this entry. Your feedback is tremendously helpful.DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 15:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Glad I can help. I have a hard time writing myself, so I at least try to help those who will do a much better job.

Concerning your comments from above: You shouldn't reference the Wikipedia article directly (it's not a reliable source), but the source that's behind it. With that paragraph in Social work, I would add a link to the article in the "See also" section, and then use the source that is used there to support your point. You can easily link to specific sections in others articles ([[Wikipedia#Operation|like this]] → like this), and in principle also to a specific point, but the latter is not usually done.
Also, I'm actually no longer too concerned about the article not meeting the inclusion guideline after having a closer look at the history section and at the amount of news reports out there. What I would do is skim through the google news hits, read the promising ones, and if there's some information that should be or already is in the article, include a reference to that news article.
Lastly, if possible don't put your replies right in the middle of the comments you are replying to. It usually works great for e-mails, but it's not customary here. It tends to get really hard to figure out who said what if more than two people are talking with each other. :) --Amalthea 15:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Amalthea, This message was sent by Margaret Burri of the Eisenhower Library Special Collections to permissions@wikimedia.org on 12/2:
''I hereby assert that I am the creator and/or sole owner of the exclusive copyright of text of the finding aid for the Family and Children's Society Records: http://ead.library.jhu.edu/ms360.xml.

I agree to publish that work under the free license Creative Commons Attribution.

I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product, and to modify it according to their needs, as long as they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.

I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me. I am aware that the free license only concerns copyright, and I reserve the option to take action against anyone who uses this work in a libelous way, or in violation of personality rights, trademark restrictions, etc. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the work may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.

2 December, 2008

Margaret N. Burri, MA, MLS Curator of Manuscripts and Librarian for History Milton S. Eisenhower Library Special Collections The Johns Hopkins University 3400 N. Charles St. Baltimore, Maryland 21218

... I know this because Ms. Burri forwarded the email to me. Does this meet the requirement?DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 15:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

That's very good, Creative Commons is a compatible license with the GFDL. I'll put the tag on the talk page, per Donating copyrighted materials.
I know that this can be an annoying requirement if you already had permission, but Wikipedia takes copyright issues very seriously, which is also why there are so many guidelines and how-to pages about it. You wouldn't believe how many images alone are uploaded everry day where the uploader claims to hold copyright, so a very strict rule is necessary here to protect the copyright owners. --Amalthea 16:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about inserting my questions within your comments. You are right about it being confusing! So here's my question... You said above
you can (theoretically) work on more than one article in parallel by creating similar pages like User:DebbieFeldmanJones/My other article, and you can use your actual user page to put up a profile about you with those user boxes you seem to like. :)
What are the user boxes you referred to? Thanks, DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 17:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I was referring to {{User:Zx-man/Userboxes/Atheist}}, with regards to your "I love your Atheist statement. I didn't know such things existed in Wikipedia!". You can find out more about those at WP:Userboxes. --Amalthea 17:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I would, by the way, recommend to move the page into article space rather quickly, otherwise the person handling the e-mail by Ms. Burri won't find the article in question, to mark it accordingly. --Amalthea 18:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Yikes! Thanks for the warning. I'll do it just as soon as I figure out how -- too tired tonight. I will do it tomorrow for sure.DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 02:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

using real name as signature?

Dear Amalthea, I'm beginning to see evidence of hostility and aggression amongst Wikipedians, and I'm wondering if using my real name was a wise idea. Is there a way for me to take my name off Wikipedia altogether and replace it with something less personal? Thanks. DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 17:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

If you want to change the name of your account you can go to Wikipedia:Changing username and request it, however it would still be possible to trace it back to your original one. If you are concerned about your privacy then you can always permanently retire your current account, and create a new one. There are many high-profile users who use or have announced their real names though, so it's really up to you. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 17:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

On one hand, I don't expect to work on controversial topics that might generate hostility. But if by chance I did set off an unbalanced person, my name is a one-of-a-kind and I could be found and easily tracked right down to my phone and address. So I guess it's wise to get rid of it to the extent I can do so. Questions: If I retire my current account, would I lose the FCS article I've been working on? If so, could I copy the article as it currently exists and use it to start a new one? Wouldn't I lose the history of what it took to get it to its current point? And if I did, would that be a problem for reviewers? Thanks, DebbieFeldmanJones (talk) 14:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I can see two options: You could either "finish" the article and move it into article space with your current account, or you could copy the article now, have it deleted in your user space, and then recreate it with your new account. I hereby release my contributions to it into the public domain, so there won't be any GFDL issues, which means keeping the history is not really necessary.
I guess you have to balance your wish to be credited for that article with your paranoia, since if you touch the article with your new account at some point in the future it is of course possible, if not particularly likely, to make the connection to your old account. :) --Amalthea 15:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Started at WT:CSD, WP:AN, WP:IfD, User talk:Soundvisions1
Just to inform you that I made a long detailed reply to your question at IfD on the A.P image. Thanks. Soundvisions1 (talk) 22:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed, thanks. And literally laughed out loud when I saw the length of that reply. :)
Well, that's why it took me a while longer to reply, I was at the time still thinking (and starting to agree with) Calliopejen1 answer. I still find WP:NFC#2 incredibly vague; "a manner that is likely to replace the original market role" could be argued to apply to every CD and single cover as well: it's used by the production company to illustrate the single, and we are using it the same way.
Nonetheless, I think I see now why it can't be used. I found the comment at {{Non-free historic image}} to be quite good: "Use of historic images from press agencies must only be in a transformative nature, only used when the image itself is the subject of commentary rather than the event it depicts (which is the original market role, and is not allowed per policy)."
Again, thank you for that long answer. I'm not quite sure I agree with you on all of it, though, which plays into the next issue with the Image:Marked-ap-letter.jpg you found. I concur with what Calliopejen1 said on your talk page about it, by the very nature of fair use it ignores the terms of the copyright holder. They explicitly allow the use of Image:TrangBang.jpg, but I'm very sure that e.g. Image:Tank Man (Tiananmen Square protester).jpg and Image:Nguyen.jpg can still be clearly used here in a context that is describing the image itself and the reaction to it, and not only the event. In contrast, it would not be possible to give a similar rationale for Image:Australian embassy bombing flag.jpg. I'm unhappy that the line is so blurry though, and will watch WT:NFCC for a while to hopefully get a clearer picture.
Cheers, Amalthea 04:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Image:PR African Poster.JPG and Image:PR Chinese Poster4.jpg:

Hello and thank you for your message. As creator and owner of the posters I released them for PD use in Wikipedia and as so have taken full responsibility for there content. Thank you, Tony the Marine (talk) 02:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

→ Consolidated discussion at User_talk:Marine_69-71, where it started. --Amalthea 04:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

• O.K., Thank you for all that you have done. Will take care of situation. Cheers! Tony the Marine (talk) 14:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Agree or disagree, one thing is clear - you rock. Is there a "you rock" Barnstar? If there is give it to yourself. Soundvisions1 (talk) 16:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Heh, wait till you read my comment where I disagree with you once more. :)
Cheers, Amalthea 16:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I already did, and responded. I really don't mind civil discussions where we have different view points. It is how we keep learning, not "we" as in you and I, I mean "we" as in the world. I may come off as an asshole at times but I seriously do try to keep my personal viewpoints mostly out of topics about discussions on policy or guidlines. But exceptions are when it is a policy based on the real world law. <opinon>In those discussions I think uses of the phrase "Instruction creep" should, for the most part, not be used because laws are all about being specific. I think many editors also believe that but are hampered because so many like to "assume good faith" for everything, and, in doing so, deduct any "instruction creep" as not assuming good faith. I have said it to you before, I have said it to others; that asking for information, or for clarification, on something that may be a potential copyvio is not assuming bad faith, it is being safe.</opinon> LOL. Soundvisions1 (talk) 17:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad that you don't. I think our fundamental difference of opinion is based on that I am willing to give anything but the most clear cut copyright violation a chance (i.e. IfD or some delayed SD), because:

• It's not hurting the copyright owner. Highly suspicious images can and should, in my opinion, be removed from the article(s) right away, right along with the nomination for deletion, so they are no longer readily visible, thus it doesn't cost the copyright owner anything.
• It's not hurting Wikipedia, since the WmF isn't in legal trouble as long as they react to takedown notices right away (at least that's how I understand it - only the uploader is in potential trouble)
• It limits the BITEiness towards the uploader, so it hurts Wikipedia less in the long run

Because of that I'm very hesitant to extend I9 in any way. It has worked OK so far, and should there be any real legal jeopardy I'm sure User:MGodwin will make himself heard, and force us to handle it more conservatively. --Amalthea 19:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image deletion

Hi, The image that i uploaded on Pandit Jasraj article has been tagged for deletion for lack of sources. I've taken this picture myself with my mobile phone and have given creative commons license on it. what else should i do to protect it from deleting. It is difficult to get pictures that can be used on Wikipedia. And this is what is happening with the ones who have authored them. Pls look into this matter. Cheers! Randhir 07:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

• As I said to the same question on my talk page please take a moment and read the Mini How-To guide and use the template provided. It is best to use this type of formating for image information in order to provide details on the image, the source and the photographer. If the foundation ever releases a book this information assures proper attribution as well as as accurate details on the image's subject. Thanks. Soundvisions1 (talk) 13:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
• I've added the {{Information}} template to it, which is usually used on images for a brief overview. See also the Mini How-To guide Soundvisions left above. Could you look it over and add the date you took it, if you remember? A rough date is enough if you are unsure. Thanks, Amalthea 20:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

CSD TAG

→ User talk:Dekisugi#Best basketball player in the world