User talk:Deunanknute/Archive 6

BillVol (talk) 22:45, 14 February 2015 (UTC)Notable alumni

Must there be an article for an alumnus/alumna to be considered "notable"? Is there a rule here that states this? I'm not sure were to put the tildes.

It's not 100%, but it's the best defining guideline per WP:NLIST. There may be a few exceptions, but those are probably best done under a consensus. (PS. tildes go at the end of your comment and are replaced automatically) Deunanknute (talk) 22:57, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

So, if I make a page for someone who is notable, then it would be acceptable to include that name in the article? By the way, even though I enjoy Wikipedia, I'm not familiar with all the rules. I will not deliberately break a rule. How is "consensus" on something here established?BillVol (talk) 01:45, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

By the way, as an example, look at Baylor School entry. Actually, there is separate page for alumni from Baylor School. There are not articles for several of them. They only link to the Baylor School website that says they are notable. But there is no article. Should those alumni be allowed to remain?BillVol (talk) 01:50, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

@BillVol:Best bet is to "edit, revert, discuss", which is exactly what happened. If you make a page for the person you can definitely include it. Just make sure the person is notable (see WP:BIO to start). You can start a new page at User:BillVol/John Doe (replace "John Doe" as appropriate) if you want time to create it, then move it to the main space when ready. This way nobody should mess with it until it's ready.

As far as Baylor School goes; head faculty doesn't always need as much notability because they are a part of the school. List of Baylor School alumni could probably be trimmed some. One good thing to know about content here is WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, articles aren't always even, and even if it's been there for a while, doesn't mean it's ok.

If you need anything else don't hesitate to ask. Deunanknute (talk) 02:04, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the help.BillVol (talk) 02:14, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Let me ask one more question. I know how to edit, but I do not know how to start a new article from scratch. I'm sure it's as simple as a click, but I don't know how to do it. I have other questions, as well. How did you find the article I was editing in the millions of articles on Wiki? Thanks, again.BillVol (talk) 02:38, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

@BillVol:Just click the link I gave you above User:BillVol/John Doe and change "John Doe" in the address bar to the title you want, and press enter. Then just follow the directions on the page like editing. The "BillVol/" part means it's one of your subpages.

I think I found your page under Special:Recentchanges, it lists all changes to Wikipedia, selectively narrowed down. There are a lot of ways to watch changes; en mass, in selective categories/types, by possible vandalism potential, and more. I honestly don't know why I chose to look at Hixson High School specifically, but from what I've noticed school pages seem to suffer a lot from both vandalism and promotional edits. Deunanknute (talk) 02:56, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Devil's Advocate here. If you say that the list of Baylor School notable alumni "could probably be trimmed some," why don't you trim it? I am not going to trim it, because if they (the authors of that page) think the alums they mention are "notable," then they are notable. What is and what is notable is purely a matter of opinion and nothing more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BillVol (talk • contribs) 05:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

@BillVol:I removed 14(?) entries. Notability can be somewhat subjective, but WP:N covers most of it, and Wikipedia is full of discussions on what is and isn't notable. Deunanknute (talk) 05:31, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Good enough. Thanks, again. BillVol (talk) 05:35, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, D, I finally added my first article to Wikipedia. I would have done it earlier if I'd just known how to. The subject of the article is Tim Downey, who went to Hixson High School, where I went to school, also, and whose page I've been editing the heck out of. I didn't realize that when you type in something in the search bar that does not have an article, that those words or name you type in the search bar will be the heading in the new article. So there's an article now for Tim Downey, someone who is definitely notable. A huge player in the Nashville business scene. Right away, someone labeled it a stub and added the living persons tab. Your comments about notability got me to thinking. We have inner city schools here in town (not Hixson High) that have had graduates go on to great careers in many fields. I know the alums of that school would think that those people are notable alumni. I would think they are notable alumni. But rules are rules and it is the editors here who determine who is notable. I think a good thing. So, I'm re-thinking some of the people I had mentioned as notable. I will probably add some new articles on people I think are notable from Hixson High, such as Kim White. But others I may not add. You've been a very good instructor through all of this. I would give you a star or a cold beer, but I don't know how to do that, either! LOLBillVol (talk) 03:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Definitely looks like a good start. I'm glad I could help. Deunanknute (talk) 03:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

D, would you mind looking at my article on Tim Downey? It looks like a bot has put a message at the top. All of the rules and terminology here is way over my head. What do I need to do? There are certainly plenty of links about Downey available, so that isn't a problem.BillVol (talk) 15:37, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

That just means you need to add wikilinks to other articles in the text. i.e. change Franklin, Tennessee to [[Franklin, Tennessee]] using double brackets "[[" and "]]". Like you did for Hixson High School. Deunanknute (talk) 16:05, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Trying not to wear out my welcome...BillVol (talk) 17:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

No problems here. Deunanknute (talk) 17:08, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Merged page

I received a message stating that the page I edited was deleted due to conflict of interest.

I also found an explanation that states that the page I updated, Sainsbury Management Fellowship, was merged into the target page Royal Academy of Engineering - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Academy_of_Engineering.

I am not sure which is the accurate outcome of the editing.

Is there a way of restore the charity's page separately from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Academy_of_Engineering but they need to be separate entries.

If it is not possible to restore the page live is it possible to have access to the text so that I can review, make any changes that does not cause conflict and submit it for review?

thank you.

Althea Taylor-Salmon (talk) 12:14, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@Althea Taylor-Salmon:The page Sainsbury Management Fellowship wasn't deleted due to a conflict of interest. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of Wikipedia's policies on editing pages for which you have a COI. I then edited the page to remove non-encyclopedic material (see WP:PEACOCK and WP:PROMO)(differences here). Having done so, I found that the page was quite short, and looked for additional material. I found Royal Academy of Engineering and edited it for the same reasons (difference here). I then decided to merge the articles, as the notability of Sainsbury Management Fellowship is questionable, but it fits in fine with Royal Academy of Engineering. As far as I could tell the charity is a part of, or administrated by the Academy. If I was incorrect in this assumption, they will need to be separated. You can view the history of the page here, but please read WP:COI before making any further edits. Deunanknute (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Merged page

Thank you for responding to my query on Sainsbury Management Fellows page so quickly, and pointing out my mistake. I've done as advised and read WP:COI.

You are correct in seeing a link between Royal Academy of Engineering and Sainsbury Management Fellows (SMF). The charity (SMF) is responsible for the scholarship scheme, while the assessment panels are run by the Royal Academy of Engineering with SMF members sitting on the panels.

The charity would like to have its own page as engineers seeking info about the scholarship scheme will get more info than the Academy publishes on its page.

In the history of the SMF page I can see an "undo" link - if I select this will the SMF page be unmerged from the Academy's page?

Thanks

Althea Taylor-Salmon (talk) 15:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

The charity wanting to have it's own page is not a valid reason to have a separate page. Wikipedia is not for advertising/promotion. Much of the info about the scholarship scheme is unencyclopedic. Anyone seeking further information can easily visit the respective sites run by the Academy and the charity, as linked in the article. If there is information missing, let me know and I can add it to the article as appropriate.

Realistically, I feel that anyone with half a chance at this scholarship is going to know enough to take Wikipedia with a grain of salt, and check more reliable sources.

Undo only applies to the current page, it won't change the page to which an article was merged. Deunanknute (talk) 15:22, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Alex Kerr

I believe that user Zoidberg262 has resorted to using sockpuppets to back up his proposed deletion of the Alex Kerr article. Check out those who support the deletion. They seem to have only joined Wikipedia to back Zoidberg as they only have one edit each!!--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:10, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

@Jeanne boleyn:I don't doubt it. Bring it up at WP:SPI. While I definitely don't agree with the edit warring, or the use of socks, I don't see enough notability to keep the article yet, either. Deunanknute (talk) 16:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

That's for us to debate but sans sock puppets. I left a note with said article's creator regarding the AfD as he should be informed.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:25, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I personally think the editor is a troll as he's already begun to attack another article.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 17:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Reply

I'm not sure why you made this edit to my talk page. If it was to draw an admin's attention, note that the speedy tag itself will do that. I've deleted the tagged page, and I'll remove your message since as far as I can see it has no further purpose.

It may be that I've misunderstood your action, in which case I'd be grateful for clarification, cheers Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:20, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak:That was one of a group of pages I tagged for deletion that existed under users who were either non-existent, or only created a user page/sandbox page that was (self) promotional. I came across quite a few pages in the "User:" name space that had no actual user, or a user with no edits outside of user space, and appeared to be used as biographical articles to circumvent the usual checks to pages in the mainspace. You were probably alerted simply as the automated function of Twinkle to notify page creators of CSD nomination. I'm assuming you were the page creator? If you weren't, then I'm honestly not sure why you were notified. Deunanknute (talk) 12:49, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Looking at the logs, it appears that I really did create it, although I have no recollection of why I posted that text which clearly wasn't written by me. Noy worth investigating further, you were clearly correct Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:02, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:Smokeonthewater

Hello Deunanknute. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Smokeonthewater, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: U5 is only for users with few mainspace edits. This user has many on de:wp and some here, this user page is within WP:UPYES. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 16:07, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello Deunanknute, thank you for welcoming me to en:wp! As JohnCD already wrote to you, I have many content in de:wp. I am there since October 2009. When I upload a new image in Wiki Commons in order to place it in de:wp, sometimes I place it also in other important languages (en:wp, fr:wp, es:wp) if these articles have a lack in new or good images. That's the only reason why I created a UserPage in en:wp (and the other languages mentioned). Best regards! Smokeonthewater (talk) 17:39, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

@Smokeonthewater:Sorry about that. I was CSDing a bunch of pages that were promotional/resumes and should have looked deeper. Deunanknute (talk) 17:49, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

No problem, Deunanknute. It happens in the sight of a lot of work. I'm sure you do a good and conscientious job. Smokeonthewater (talk) 22:38, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

recent comment on DNA fragmentation

Dear Deunanknute, I understatnd that in some way even if it is not made in a direct way, one could consider my addition to the article as being a publicity. Although it is not promoting a service nor is commercial, my scientific contribution might rise the impression that I have a good knowledge of this matter and this might indirectly give the impression of a publicity. Feel free to propose any revision that could render my publication more proper for the content of wikipedia. By the way, I also tried to contribute in the article regarding "binomial distribution", but I do not know how to edit a math equation. I have recently described the inverse binomial distribution. If I send you a link where you can read the equation of thiw distribution could you edit this equation and send it to me, so that I can then add in the article the new distribution related to the binomial? Spermlabgr (talk) 07:29, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The material you added was directly copied from the source website, which is a clear copyright violation. Also, this website is purely promotional in nature. While the information you added is not, in itself, blatantly promotional; it serves no other obvious purpose.

Formula creating/editing is covered under WP:MATH. Deunanknute (talk) 12:24, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Followup

Yea? Please see WP:GAMEGUIDE for my reasoning behind them! And I never did violate the three revert rule, so did you even BOTHER to check my editing history to determine if that was the case before placing your misguided message? 65.24.40.85 (talk) 17:05, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Regarding your message

The reason I put Sporum Poop on there is because it's a form of YTP, not because I wanted to vandalize the YTP Wiki page. If you don't believe me, check the Sporum Wiki and read the Sporum Poop article for yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TehBoxProductions23 (talk • contribs) 02:16, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@TehBoxProductions23:I sent you a standard message for unacceptable edits. While vandalism is mentioned, it is not the only type. You added have improper links three times; once as an internal link to a non existent page, and twice as an external link to sporum.wikia.com, which is not valid as a source, or an external link. Content on Wikipedia needs to be verifiable from reliable sources. Please see WP:VER for further info. Deunanknute (talk) 02:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For your help with Stanley Hotel, Nairobi, not merely rescuing it from CSD but turning it into a pretty good article about an historically important place. Well done. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:03, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

How I report this mean abuseive message from 65.24.40.85 (from my talk page)

Below

You can report incidents like this at WP:ANI

Here is the diff:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:82.26.236.244&diff=647232779&oldid=647105726

Deunanknute (talk) 15:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Phuck it

And PHUCK YOU! This is what's wrong with Wikipedia! Too many ASSHATS like yourself who DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PHUCKING GUIDELINES!!!!

Talkback

Hello, Deunanknute. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TV5Ozamiz.
Message added 21:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Vanjagenije (talk) 21:09, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... It is being created to show the history, evolution, and future of the indoor shooting range business. The initial post of the page was to get the page started. We plan on adding several articles/links to the page to show how the indoor shooting range business is changing and what factors are contributing to the change. These factors include but are not limited to environmental regulations, online retail demand, violence, and new procedures with regards to background checks. Many of these factors and issues, Calibers has been directly involved in the changing of the culture and regulations. We would appreciate the ability to continue to add this information to our Wikipedia site, as we believe it will serve as a resource for others. This information will take some time to culminate and write properly, therefore we request that Wikipedia provide us with 7 days to work on the page..Thank you.CalibersUSA CalibersUSA (talk) 22:15, 24 February 2015 (UTC)