User talk:Ottawahitech/Archive 3

Nomination of Microsoft v. Internal Revenue Service for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Microsoft v. Internal Revenue Service is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Microsoft v. Internal Revenue Service until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 20:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC) 21:10, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Joe Landolina for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe Landolina is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Landolina until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 20:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC) 18:06, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Ottawahitech!

Happy New Year!

Ottawahitech,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:48, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

Nomination of Microsoft v. Internal Revenue Service for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Microsoft v. Internal Revenue Service is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Microsoft v. Internal Revenue Service until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 20:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC) 21:10, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Joe Landolina for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe Landolina is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Landolina until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 20:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC) 18:06, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year Ottawahitech!

Happy New Year!

Ottawahitech,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:48, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2015}} to user talk pages.

Speedy deletion nomination of Us military command hacker by isis

If fellow editors continue to post a quote box and leave a message for this editor with friendly advice how to create his/her first article they create the impression that such a quote box was carelessly posted because it is quite obvious that this editor has authored quite a few articles. Content creators should be encouraged and not vaguely insulted.   Bfpage |leave a message  00:47, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Us military command hacker by isis, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 01:01, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Identity theft in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page UTube. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Us military command hacked by ISIS listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Us military command hacked by ISIS. Since you had some involvement with the Us military command hacked by ISIS redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mrfrobinson (talk) 20:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC) 21:33, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Americans for Tax Reform

added a link pointing to Tax return

Nina E. Olson

added a link pointing to Tax return

Washington Apple Health

added a link pointing to CHIP

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

Asset protection

Just curious what you mean by your edit summary here at Asset protection ("just to see if anyone else will get involved")? --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:32, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Just curious to find out why you saw fit to post this on my user talkpage? Why not on the article's talkpage where others who are interested in the topic would normally opine? Ottawahitech (talk) 04:58, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Because you removed it with a strange and perhaps pointed (though I can't really tell) edit summary. That you're asking why I'm asking you on your talk page just makes this all the stranger, but by all means respond at the article talk page if you prefer? --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 05:00, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Canadian Marketing Association

added links pointing to Conference and Self-regulatory

Percy Downe

added a link pointing to Veterans Affairs

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Dan Lamothe for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dan Lamothe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Lamothe until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 17:51, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

TurboTax database knows your secret listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect TurboTax database knows your secret. Since you had some involvement with the TurboTax database knows your secret redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mrfrobinson (talk) 04:06, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

for reminding me of that edit. It was a long time ago. I probably still had a sense of humour in those days ;( Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:54, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

The need to communicate

• Hey Ottawahitech! Regarding your comment, I'm certainly interested in your perspective. Mine is that people aren't obligated to respond to every comment that comes their way; everyone chooses what they do here, and if they personally find a discussion too boring or time-consuming, they don't need to justify that. But if you're doing something other editors (correctly or not) object to and you continue to do it while ignoring repeated attempts to initiate discussion, that is a problem (I wouldn't call it a crime). This is a collaborative project after all. —Neil P. Quinn (talk) 16:47, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

@Neil P. Quinn: I agree, I think. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of IRS Nationwide Tax Forums Online

If fellow editors continue to post a quote box and leave a message for this editor with friendly advice how to create his/her first article they create the impression that such a quote box was carelessly posted because it is quite obvious that this editor has authored quite a few articles. Content creators should be encouraged and not vaguely insulted.   Bfpage |leave a message  00:46, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on IRS Nationwide Tax Forums Online requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Vanjagenije (talk) 17:11, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia-related lists

Category:Wikipedia-related lists, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 13:10, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:Companies of the United States with untaxed profits

Category:Companies of the United States with untaxed profits, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mrfrobinson (talk) 00:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Companies of the United States with untaxed profits for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Companies of the United States with untaxed profits is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Companies of the United States with untaxed profits until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 03:37, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

References

We at Wikipedia love evidence-based medicine. Please cite high-quality reliable sources. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. A list of resources to help edit such articles can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. WP:MEDHOW walks through editing step by step. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:39, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

No problem - I have placed the information on the article's talkpage for those interested. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:51, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I hope things are going well for you.Lbhiggin (talk) 16:06, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

RfA Question

Hello, I think you broke the template asking your question. If you want to fix it I will post and answer. Fenix down (talk) 17:10, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

some ideas

Hi Ottawatech, I've noticed our overlapping in a few AFDs and elsewhere. Hmm I thought more so than I see in wp:EditorInteractionAnalyzer, maybe I've been observing and agreeing with your comments in discussions where i didn't actually post. Anyhow I think we have similar views: we're both inclusionists, we're both being concerned about negative effects of Wikipedia deletion processes, we've both created lots of articles, maybe we both have been criticized for creating lots of articles (i have, and I see on your User page and above that you've had a lot deleted). We're both interested in business topics or at least not afraid of them. And I recently noticed your mentioning (at some "WikiProject X"-related page?) about not really having a home project, and I am pretty much in the same way. I wonder if we could team up usefully somehow. Maybe:

• engage in a collaboration to change deletion processes, maybe with a new wp:WER-like WikiProject?
• develop the repatriation of profits area? You created Companies of the United States with untaxed profits and I supported keeping at AFD, and it was kept, i think by no consensus. It's incomplete as a list-article and maybe we should make an effort to fill it out: actually identify the firms having more than some level $X of untaxed profits abroad, maybe using some business library resources, maybe easily if companies are required to report this in a footnote in their financial statements. It's within an important topic area which could be in the news prominently. Besides Obama's proposal, maybe U.S. presidential candidates of various parties will make proposals. Yet there's scant development in Wikipedia, nothing that could be updated to support Wikipedia front-page "in the news" linking, if/when the issue area is hot. The Repatriation article is about persons being returned to their home countries, and there's no "Repatriation of profits" article or other main article(s) in the general topic area.
• systematically create a lot of business-focused list-articles, that could guide a lot of future development? E.g., we both participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Birungyi Barata and it led me to notice that coverage of law firms in Africa is minimal, while there's tons of coverage of firms in U.S. and U.K. There was a List of law firms in Uganda that was deleted, and I asked for a copy and have it at Draft:List of law firms in Uganda, planning to restore it perhaps. I would expect the top law firms in any country should be covered in Wikipedia. And the top firms in any professional services area, e.g. top architectural firms. But it looks like there never was a List of law firms in Africa or lists within individual African countries besides Uganda and South Africa. Use the sources found in the AFD to create them.

Just thinking out loud, no biggie. cheers, --doncram 18:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wulf Schiefenhövel

If fellow editors continue to post a quote box and leave a message for this editor with friendly advice how to create his/her first article they create the impression that such a quote box was carelessly posted because it is quite obvious that this editor has authored quite a few articles. Content creators should be encouraged and not vaguely insulted.   Bfpage |leave a message  00:40, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Wulf Schiefenhövel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here.  CombieTractor        talk 16:58, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to Participate in a WikiProject Study

Hello Ottawahitech,

We’d like to invite you to participate in a study that aims to explore how WikiProject members coordinate activities of distributed group members to complete project goals. We are specifically seeking to talk to people who have been active in at least one WikiProject in their time in Wikipedia. Compensation will be provided to each participant in the form of a $10 Amazon gift card.

The purpose of this study is to better understanding the coordination practices of Wikipedians active within WikiProjects, and to explore the potential for tool-mediated coordination to improve those practices. Interviews will be semi-structured, and should last between 45-60 minutes. If you decide to participate, we will schedule an appointment for the online chat session. During the appointment you will be asked some basic questions about your experience interacting in WikiProjects, how that process has worked for you in the past and what ideas you might have to improve the future.

You must be over 18 years old, speak English, and you must currently be or have been at one time an active member of a WikiProject. The interview can be conducted over an audio chatting channel such as Skype or Google Hangouts, or via an instant messaging client. If you have questions about the research or are interested in participating, please contact Michael Gilbert at (206) 354-3741 or by email at mdg@uw.edu.

We cannot guarantee the confidentiality of information sent by email.

The link to the relevant research page is m:Research:Means_and_methods_of_coordination_in_WikiProjects

Ryzhou (talk) 02:23, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Identity theft in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tax returns. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Spelling corrections

Just curious. Why would you undo my correction of your spelling mistake? It's drama not dramah. GoodDay (talk) 00:17, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Harold Kahn

Hello, Ottawahitech. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Harold Kahn, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. ubiquity (talk) 20:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I posted a question on the article's talkpage. Ottawahitech (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dan Rosensweig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Little Theatre. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Turbotax database knows your secret

. A tag has been placed on Turbotax database knows your secret, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Mrfrobinson (talk) 01:43, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Aileen Lee

.A tag has been placed on Aileen Lee requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. reddogsix (talk) 03:31, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

@Reddogsix: What do you mean by "lack of asserted importance"? Ottawahitech (talk) 03:47, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Turbotax database knows your secret

I am not sure what you were requesting on my talk page. Did you want me to restore the redirect? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:52, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

@Metropolitan90: Thanks for asking. Actually what I want you to do is wave a magic wand and get User:Mrfrobinson to leave me alone, just kidding :-)

But seriously I don’t know what processes Wikipedia has in place to stop User:Mrfrobinson from nipping at my wiki-heels. I don’t believe in wiki capital punishment and really have no desire to go to wp:ANI and start another wp:dramah to try and have him/her blocked (and possibly end up being blocked myself). But it is hard enough to contribute content here without the constant stream of deletion nominations and reversions of legitimate content. I just want to be left alone to contribute content and not be involved in "talk" exclusively.

So... to answer your question: I was just trying to bring this user's behavior to the attention of the community, and your talk page provided me one such opportunity. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:23, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

(added as an afterthought) The proximity of your post to the one that follows it reminded me that my hassels with USER:Mrfrobinson go back a long way, and that trying to prove my case at Wikipedia is hopeless. Back in March 2014 I tried to illustrate how this user was one of those targeting my edits, but failed to convince 4 editors (user:DGG /user:Cullen328/ user:Voceditenore/ user:PamD) involved in that discussion, Ottawahitech (talk) 14:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

and in the meantime User:Mrfrobinson continues to revert my edits with impunity, sigh... Ottawahitech (talk) 15:08, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Who are you talking too? If you have a problem with an editor bring it up at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. You just need to show your position that you feel stocked and they are doing wrong..for example this revert that you mention above is not what should have happened as per WP:CONTESTED. You need to make a case that your editing in good faith but some guy is following you not in good faith (with differences). Be aware he has the same right to explain his POV at any investigation. -- Moxy (talk) 15:52, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Since I have been pinged above, I'll just point out that the revert that Moxy is talking about was entirely appropriate. It was a completely unreferenced BLP, with the tag BLPPROD. Such tags may not be removed unless a source is provided. If they are removed without adding a source, the tag is restored. Ottawahitech, as for your other assertions, I see no evidence that Mrfrobinson is "stalking" you. One only has to look at the multiplicity of notices on this page from many other editors for your inappropriate and/or completely unreferenced articles to see that the problem does not lie with Mrfrobinson, but with your own approach to creating articles here. Voceditenore (talk) 19:26, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

@Voceditenore, Did you just say that even if I am a victim stalking, I brought it on myself and therefore it is my own fault? Just trying to understand. Ottawahitech (talk) 21:06, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

No, that's not what I am saying. I'm saying that:

• Your perception that this person is "stalking" you is incorrect and a misinterpretation of WP:HOUND. Incidentally, we don't use "stalk" any more.
• The problematic nature of your editing has been observed by many editors. It is not the case that only one editor sees problems with your edits or "has it in for you".
• You should think very seriously about why you have so many of these messages on your talk page and do something about it.
• Accusations of "hounding" should not be used to deflect attention from problems in one's own editing or to avoid confronting an obvious problem. Ditto describing oneself as a "victim".

It is quite common when an editor finds a problematic article to start also checking the various articles and categories linked from it as well those which link to the article. In my experience, one often finds many more problems. If one editor is connected to all those articles and categories, it can look like "hounding", but in my view it's not. Likewise if an editor finds problematic editing from another editor, checking their other edits can also be permissible and is even advised for new page and recent changes patrollers. I have tracked such editors myself, although not you. I consider repeated creation of unreferenced BLPs, removing BLPPROD from articles without adding a reference, and a tendency to treat Wikipedia like a newspaper rather than an encyclopedia to be quite problematic. This revert of yours was particularly egregious. That completely unreferenced article contained the subject's exact date of birth and alleged partner's name—both serious BLP violations. You obviously don't consider this problematic, and I think that's where the the problem lies. Note also that the person you are objecting to has only dealt with a very small proportion of your edits, and in a particular area. I suggest you re-read WP:HOUND. I also suggest you re-read very carefully the excellent advice DGG gave you in that conversation you linked. So far, you seem to be largely ignoring it. Voceditenore (talk) 08:13, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

@Voceditenore:

The problematic nature of your editing has been observed by many editors Lets agree to disagree on the best way to add content to Wikipedia, at least for the moment.

Accusations of "hounding" should not be used… Please note I have been very careful in my choice of words and have not accused user:mrfrobinson of stalking me, however, I do consider myself a victim.

Your perception that this person is "stalking" you is incorrect Just wondering if you have actually assessed this or whether you just decided that I am simply not worth the effort?

I have tracked such editors myself Tracking is one thing, but going on fishing trips to nominate articles for deletion, for example Aileen Lee, using this type of rationale: a businesswomen who lacks any real n notability. No significant award or achievements may end up hurting Wikipedia's credibility.

a tendency to treat Wikipedia like a newspaper rather than an encyclopedia to be quite problematic I have more to say, if you are interested? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:20, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Your contention that you have been "very careful" in your "choice of words" and have not accused Mrfrobinson of hounding you is nonsense and pure Wikilawyering. Below is just a sample of the stuff you have been posting about him on other editors' talk pages (clearly identifying him by linking his name or via a diff). This is in addition to pinging 4 more editors (one of whom is an admin) to this section to continue your assertion that he is "targeting" your edits, and your continued assertions here that you are his "victim":

• The nominator has made it his wiki-mission to pursue my edits almost exclusively. Just thought you may want to know
• whether you have second thoughts about his insistence on driving me out of Wikipedfia.
• an editor who has been relentlessly pursuing Ottawahitech for weeks ... you seem quite content in perpetuating the continued harrassement ottawahitech is experiencing. (Why you are referring to yourself in the third person is beyond me.)

Repeatedly casting aspersions on another editor is in itself a form of harassment. I strongly suggest you cut it out. And yes, I have examined the editor's contributions and yours very carefully. That is precisely why I said that your perception that the editor is "stalking" you is incorrect. This is my final comment here. I am not interested in discussing your editing philosophy any further. Voceditenore (talk) 17:31, 25 March 2015 (UTC) Updated by Voceditenore (talk) 18:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Aileen Lee

The article Aileen Lee has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable: 3 references: 2 are her own work, one is a mention.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 17:57, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Therese Lawless

If fellow editors continue to post a quote box and leave a message for this editor with friendly advice how to create his/her first article they create the impression that such a quote box was carelessly posted because it is quite obvious that this editor has authored quite a few articles. Content creators should be encouraged and not vaguely insulted.   Bfpage |leave a message  00:42, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Therese Lawless requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Weegeerunner (talk) 18:14, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nitasha Tiku

The article Nitasha Tiku has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Wgolf (talk) 18:15, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Vauhini Vara

The article Vauhini Vara has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. BiH (talk) 18:15, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Your article has three references now. One primary, two secondary. I certainly consider the person to be notable. I just can't find the place to participate in the deletion discussion. The template was one I wasn't used to seeing for some reason.

  Bfpage |leave a message  00:21, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bfpage: Deletions at Wikipedia are strange rituals: there wp:CSDs. wp:PRODs (at least 2 kinds,apparently), and wp:AFDs. Then there is also other rituals for nuking categories, redirects, templates, wikipedia pages, to name the few I remember of the top, sigh ... Ottawahitech (talk) 02:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Portia Li

The article Portia Li has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Wgolf (talk) 18:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Nitasha Tiku

If fellow editors continue to post a quote box and leave a message for this editor with friendly advice how to create his/her first article they create the impression that such a quote box was carelessly posted because it is quite obvious that this editor has authored quite a few articles. Content creators should be encouraged and not vaguely insulted.   Bfpage |leave a message  00:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Nitasha Tiku requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Wgolf (talk) 23:09, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Aileen Lee for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aileen Lee is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aileen Lee until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 03:21, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Employment Law Alliance

added links pointing to Labor, Client and Member

Fadl Shaker

added a link pointing to Saida Y

Xenia Wickett

added a link pointing to Dean

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:49, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your thank you

Thank you for sending me a 'thank you' for my editing on the Animal attacks article. I often wonder how and why editors like yourself even notice such things and I am flattered.

  Bfpage |leave a message  19:22, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bfpage: The pleasure is all mine - what a great article you have created. How did you find all these bits and pieces and put them together? And, to answer your question, I was notified when you linked an article I created long ago (and forgot all about). This is one of the brownies wiki-editors get for creating articles on Wikipedia. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Again, thanks for responding back to me. I'd love to chat via email about how I find all that stuff. I have taken a look at your editing history and I believe that I've discovered a kindred spirit-someone who appreciates all that wikimedia has to bring to the world yet at the same time frustrated with the problems inherent in its' operation, Am I right? I love your user page, and how you boldly proclaim how creative you have been and yet how it looks like all you do is get ...ummm well, the opposite of encouraged on your creative endeavors. May I send you an email?

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:55, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bfpage: One thing I noticed from looking at your contribution history is that we both started editing wikipedia in 2007 (The number of active editors on the English-language Wikipedia peaked in 2007 at more than 51,000 and has been declining ever since). I have always wondered if those who started in 2007 simply experienced the wikipedia version of Eternal September. Ottawahitech (talk) 05:01, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

There are a lot of things I like about 2007. I almost gave up because I didn't realize how trigger-happy some administrators are and are so quick to NOT assume good faith. I've got your talk page on my watchlist and whenever I see that you have gone and found somebody wanting to delete one of your articles I'll just go right in and find all your references for you. It's quite simple if you ever want to learn I'd love to help you out. Very Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  21:30, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bfpage: I rarely use my watchlist, but any tips on how to find references I am sure would be welcomed by me and others reading this page. BTW since you like animal pages have you seen this: List of animals with fraudulent diplomas? Ottawahitech (talk) 04:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Thomas Hazelrigg

Effectively I "nominated" it myself. Admins are allowed to use their own judgement, and directly delete pages that they believe meet the Speedy Deletion criteria. In this case, A7, notability. Please read WP:BIO. To pass A7, an article needs to show that there is at least an indication that the person might be notable by Wikipedia's definition of notability. Just being a "developer", a "lender", or even being sent to prison for tax evasion, none of that shows at all that the person might be notable.

And even if you pass A7, you then have to actually show that they do indeed meet the criteria, or the article is likely to be deleted at AFD fairly swiftly. Independent, reliable, non-trivial sources are needed for that. And if they are notable only for the jailing issue, you need to get past WP:BLP1E. And especially if the article is written mostly as a way to show the negative information, it is going to get extra BLP scrutiny. - TexasAndroid (talk) 12:56, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

@TexasAndroid: Thanks for taking the time to reply. Since you have nominated Thomas Hazelrigg for deletion I am wondering:

• Why you did not notify me of the pending deletion that took place only 20 minutes after the article was started?
• How can the wording be changed so that it passes CSD#A7 without using wp:peacock words? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:42, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Notice is not required. Many, many non-notable people get articles written every day. Most get deleted fairly quickly, as yours was.

As for avoiding it being deleted, one good way is to astart off with one of the article creation systems. Draft article space, WP:AFC, etc. These allow articles to be developed without being under threat of sudden deletion.

That said, you really should be thinking not about how to avoid A7 deletion, but how to avoid deletion at a full deletion debate. Just building in Draft or User space will avoid A7 for now, but the article is still subject to deletion as soon as it moves to article space. If you want your article to stand, aim for avoiding that from the beginning. As for how to avoid that, please do read WP:BIO and WP:BLP1E]]. It's not really a matter of wording, as much as it's a matter of sourcing/references. You need to be able to provide (preferably multiple) sources that are Reliable, Independent, and Non-Trivial. All three of those points are critical in determining if a source is enough to help show notability. As examples, a blog is no Reliable. A press release is not Independent. And a brief mention in a list or article on a tangential subject is a Trival reference. You should be gathering your references now, rather than later. Otherwise, even if you get past A7, you'll just find yourself in the middle of a deletion debate, facing deletion. And full deletion debates carry more precedent, are harder to get past, than simple A7 deletions. - TexasAndroid (talk) 14:09, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

@TexasAndroid: One thing that struck me when reading your reply above is your suggestion of using draft-space for article creation, which is something I did a while ago, thinking it would buy me time to collect information, but my article was deleted anyway. Ottawahitech (talk) 04:37, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Are you referring to Draft:Julie Ireton? That one was deleted as "abandoned". It had not been edited in six months or more. Draft space is not free web hosting, it's a place for articles that are being actively worked on. So yeah, it's not the case that articles in Draft will never be deleted, but they generally will not as long as they are actively being worked on. And if one *is* deleted under G13, like the Julie article was, all you have to do is ask, and it can be restored. I could restore that specific one for you if you want. If it sits unedited for another six months, it'll likely again be deleted as "abandoned" again.

There are a lot of different reasons things get deleted. Some are more easily undone than others. G13, G7, and WP:PROD are among the most easily undone. All those really take is a request to have it restored. On the other extreme, copyright violations and attack pages would be reasons for deletion that would IMHO likely be the least likely to be easily restored. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:37, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Editing abuse filter

You need to add sources to these new articles because your getting alot of abuse filters the pass few months. This leads to even more people looking at what is going on and thus deleting your work.... because they see no sources. Just have to add sources and a cat to stop this. -- Moxy (talk) 19:58, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

@Moxy: Thanks for reminding me of the abuse filter -- I remember seeing it before and not understanding its purpose. I am still confused because it appears that all the recent "abuses" have been triggered by Creation of a new article without any categories (650) which I had no idea was considered abuse. Ottawahitech (talk) 04:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Funny

not everyone likes my new article Here is thw one I created today: Empathy in chickens, one of my finest.

  Bfpage |leave a message  15:20, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Robert Duggan (CEO)

The article Robert Duggan (CEO) has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. --Finngall ^talk 18:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

fixed,   Bfpage |leave a message  21:46, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Congratulations and much in encouragement and admiration do you for putting up with all the people who want to delete your work. I am the new president of your fan club. Best Regards,   Bfpage |leave a message  21:32, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Missing Wikipedian

Thanks for considering me for the list of missing Wikipedians. Though I can't think of much reason to have such a list at all (feel free to enlighten me if there is some such reason). Actually, per the policy notes, I've just been on a long break. My "day job" has kept me very busy. As an aside, it currently involves the Chapter 9 case of a public hospital district! I'll be back some day. Cheers. --Pechmerle (talk) 07:19, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

@Pechmerle: Wow, am I glad to hear from you and to know you are considering returning. You are one of the editors I met here for whom I have a great deal of admiration. It is great to know that you will be returning — there are just so many editors who simply vanish.

I guess you are referring to Wikipedia_talk:Missing_Wikipedians#.22Don.27t_add_users_with_fewer_than_.7E1.2C000_edits.22? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:01, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Portia Li for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Portia Li is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Portia Li until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onorem (talk) 15:20, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

fixed,   Bfpage |leave a message  18:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

You may want to comment on the Portia Li deletion since the discussion has expanded to include other editors.

  Bfpage |leave a message  14:20, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tina Huang v. Twitter

Hello Ottawahitech,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Tina Huang v. Twitter for deletion, because it seems to be vandalism or a hoax.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Karlhard (talk) 18:18, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• You thoroughly deserved to have this deleted. Surely you know by now that it is article suicide to start ad article in mainspace. I have moved it to your sandbox. Do not even think about moving it back until you have clothed those naked URLs. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 18:42, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

The naked are clothed.   Bfpage |leave a message  19:10, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

• @Bfpage: sorry mate, they are still naked according to my definition of the term. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

You are quite charming in your replies... I haven't decided which link I'm going to click on yet, the suspense is killing me. I do see your point, though. Best regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  21:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Hey! I'm pretty sure I'm one of those hags! I'm going to get you for copivio. Your new friend,

  Bfpage |leave a message  21:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:CAC 40 companies

Category:CAC 40 companies has 12 members. Category:CAC 40 has 29 members, and only one of them is about the index. I see that Category:Dow Jones Industrial Average has members such as Dogs of the Dow and List of largest daily changes in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. Are you planning on adding similar articles to Category:CAC 40? Otherwise, I don't see the point of your partially completed category split. Wbm1058 (talk) 21:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

See Category:Wikipedia categories named after stock market indices for examples of other stock indexes. For example, Category:TOPIX 100, not Category:TOPIX 100 companies. As your project to change this category configuration remains unfinished, I am reverting your changes. I'm open to the idea of renaming the category, though I don't think that's necessary. I don't see the point of a category with just a single member, that's WP:Overcategorization. Wbm1058 (talk) 21:58, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited San Mateo County Superior Court, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page San Mateo. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:02, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Chia Hong v. Facebook for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chia Hong v. Facebook is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chia Hong v. Facebook until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 15:23, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

talk p.

You're in the right, and I don't mind your invoking me, but for various reasons I'd prefer not to comment there. I'd gladly merge them back for you except that my experience in performing history merges is that I mess them up further about half the time. DGG ( talk ) 17:06, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Civility Barnstar

Thank you! I was really impressed by the constructive and non-acrimonious tone and contributions from everyone involved in the recent AFD discussion on the Alliance of Women Directors article. What could have been—with the wrong editors involved—a very nasty debate, turned into a very positive discussion. Even editors who strongly felt that the article should be deleted worked hard to find sources and fix problems with it. This is the kind of positive collaboration people don't hear a lot about in Wikipedia-land and I'd like to recognize it. Carl Henderson (talk) 19:57, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brad D. Smith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aquinas College. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Small Business Health Care tax credit

Hi Ottawa. Some interesting editing going on in relation to Healthcare in the USA at the moment, including this Small Business Health Care tax credit page you started. Possible SPA activity, not sure if it is legitimate or not. See here. 220 of ^Borg 06:34, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael Drobot, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Irvine and Long Beach. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject TAFI

	Hello, Ottawahitech. You're invited to join WikiProject Today's articles for improvement. Feel free to nominate an article for improvement at the project's Nominated articles page. Also feel free to contribute to !voting for new weekly selections at the project's talk page. If interested in joining, please add your name to the list of members. North America1000 09:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

New article: Excellence Canada

Assuming you haven't already seen it, I'd like to bring it to your attention. It could use some strengthening and I'm guessing you're in a position where you could make a difference. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 09:37, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Hi, Ottawahitech,
I'm not sure how long your wikibreak is but it was nice to see you edited this week. You've been missed! There is a project I'd like to work with you on whenever you are able to return. Be well, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:46, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank user:Liz. I am just here for a short visit - still on a longish wikibreak. Ottawahitech (talk) 11:33, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Understood. Ping me whenever you decide to return. Take care, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 11:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Linda Pinizzotto

Last year, a discussion took place here about deleting the Linda Pinizzotto article. The result of that discussion was to redirect the article to COA Ontario, and that edit was made here by User:Davey2010. Could you please explain why you removed that redirect here? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:08, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

@Magnolia677 Please see discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Redirects_for_discussion#Can_.22anyone_can_overwrite_any_redirect_with_an_article_at_any_time.22.3F Ottawahitech (talk) 20:25, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Scotiabank, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The fifth estate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject. Y

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

August 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Scotiabank may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• This information became public only in 2013 when [[Canadian Broadcasting Corporation]]’s [[The Fifth Estate (TV)|[The fifth estate]] broadcast a program about it on October 18, 2013. Y

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

archiving

to be honest, I am way behind; I am following my method from yras ago when I was a little less busy here, and I know I need to change. DGG ( talk ) 19:36, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Orla Tinsley, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hachette. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Seattle in Progress

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Seattle in Progress requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. SounderBruce 22:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

@SounderBruce, You left me scratching my head trying to figure out how anyone would think such an interesting idea can be described as subject not important or significant. What am I missing? How many cities have such a wonderful public service that allows the public to view building permit information with a mere click of a button? Can you please educate me? Ottawahitech (talk) 22:55, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

@SounderBruce, not much point in discussing this at the article talkpage if it is to be speedy deleted, is there? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:10, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I didn't notice this earlier, since you didn't use {{ping}} to send it to my notifications. Anyway, the indie app is not notable enough for its own article and would be better served as part of the Shaping Seattle article (which is notable as being a city app with multiple mentions from national news outlets), citing the GeekWire article as its "inspiration" (though I speculate that it was coincidental and not direct inspiration). SounderBruce 01:39, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

@SounderBruce: I thought Notability had nothing to do with A7, but since you seemed to know more than I did I asked the question here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Wbm1058#A7vNotability. BTW I am not sure if I am representative of the typical editor, but I find the removal of content I slave over very demoralizing. Ottawahitech (talk) 05:50, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Patient ombudsman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Patient ombudsman is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patient ombudsman until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{Ping|I dream of horses}} to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @ 20:02, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dubai Design District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Freezone. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Las Brisas condominium for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Las Brisas condominium is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Las Brisas condominium until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Sigh... here we go again: even the nomination is inaccurate. Ottawahitech (talk) 01:31, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of condominiums in the United States

The article List of condominiums in the United States has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not a directory; also fails WP:LISTN

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Inks.LWC (talk) 02:57, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

@Inks.LWC: I don’t believe I have met you before? Can you tell me what is the point of proposing for deletion an article I just created yesterday earlier today? You do realize that I can simply remove your deletion tag (I think)? Ottawahitech (talk) 11:47, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

The point is that the list has so many potential items that could be included that it seemed relatively uncontroversial to propose it for deletion. True, you could remove it; however, then I would nominated it for Articles for Deletion, where I am almost certain that the consensus would be delete. Inks.LWC (talk) 22:05, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

@Inks.LWC: Since I continue to spend a fair bit of time building List of condominiums in the United States, I would appreciate it if you let me know if you intend to take it to AfD. I would really appreciate an answer because I hate to waste my time. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 08:35, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

What is your end plan for the page? Inks.LWC (talk) 14:25, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

I am not the owner of this page, but this does not mean that I will willingly continue contributing my volunteer time to it, if you are adamant that this page does not belong on Wikipedia. I'm trying to minimize my contribution in areas that are likely to go into the bit-bucket, there is enough work to be done around here. Thanks for your continued dialogue. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:44, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

so many potential items that could be included

It is not clear to me why this is an objection? BTW why do you feel that there are so many potential items that can be included? Ottawahitech (talk) 13:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

The list in question also links to every one of the condominiums and essentially pulls together information that would be tedious for a reader to put together on their own. Since each wikilink links to a notable topic, the list itself is notable. I quietly suggest that the article/list should remain part of the encyclopedia. Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  10:55, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

@Inks.LWC and Bfpage: Since the article List of condominiums in the United States has been ‘stuck in deletion discussion since the end of September, I thought I may use this opportunity (again, sigh) to tell you both what it is like to be an editor who seems to be a target for deletion of many of the articles that they start on Wikipedia.

Thanks for pinging me on this. I am trying to figure out why article creation isn't supported more-especially concerning your contributions. I'm going to your list of 'page watchers' but it appears to me that there is a bit of trolling that may be taking place here. Every article/list is a stub, that turns into a start article, then a C article, then B, then Good, then FA. I want to know if the same editors participate in deletion discussions regarding your articles. If there is a pattern here, we should first, contact those who have a pattern of trolling individually and in good faith and point this out. We can tell them what it looks like without questioning their intentions. Then, if the same editors continue to participate in proposing deletions or consistently commenting that your content should be deleted, we will ask for the opinion of an administrator. I will do this on your behalf, or it might seem like 'whining'.

  Bfpage |leave a message  19:03, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

@Bfpage: It sounds simple, but in my experience extremely time consumming to try and figure out who is "trolling" and who is not. Every once in a while I get so fed up I decide to try and find a pattern, but I always stop before I get anywhere because it is an occupation I do not enjoy and it takes time away from adding content. Some editors that I have crossed wiki-swords with show up only in certain areas of the project, for example anything to do with large U.S. companies. The only problem I have with those editors is their automatic assumption of bad faith and personal attacks, and I see one of them has managed to antagonize enough others to be hauled before the arbitration committee.

Actually when I think of it, things have gotten much much better, for me at least. A couple of years ago I had 3 editors pursuing me relentlessly evereywhere I went one of them an admin using personal attacks all over, including well attended WikiProject talk pages, to my surprise with total immunity. Now there is only one such editor left and the "training" I got while being pursued by the three is coming in handy.

What I worry about most though, is that if I am experiencing this treatment after being on wikipedia since 2007, surely there are others who are more recent Wikipedians who are suffering even more and have yet to develop the thick wiki-skin necessary to survive here. It worries me because we sorely need these editors here to keep the momentum and continue building this resource that is far from finished.

Sorry for dumping this wp:tldr on youOttawahitech (talk) 10:32, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

There is too much WP:OWN, and I am talking about projects! I'm not even talking about individual articles. You need to be part of the regular, recognized, and coordinated crew that run a project. Not a cadre, of course, but those, in good faith, trying to maintain the high quality of their areas of knowledge and hopefully expertise. I've yet to be able to encourage a newer editor to 'stick with it' through all the tagging, deleting and general gruffness that comes with project ownership. Bless you and your persistence. I know you don't like to 'get into it' on your talk page because it does take away from content creation. So I won't belabor my comments, but I continue to be amazed that instead of recognizing your incredible content creation volume, many prefer to send you through a gauntlet of AfDs... I just don't get it. The Very Best of Regards,

Barbara Page,   Bfpage |leave a message  02:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

In this particular case I have put a fair bit of work into this article and it appears that not too many others care about this area of Wikipedia. Yes some of the participants of the deletion discussion have some pretty strong views, but it sure looks like few care about condominiums, sigh... Why is this happening me so often? Ottawahitech (talk) 12:17, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

• Article should be kept. Deletion argument has no merit. Lists are a perfectly acceptable navigation tool within WP. They do not make WP a directory or all WP lists would be deleted. Hmains (talk) 02:10, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of condominiums in the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Condominiums. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:37, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Pao effect for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pao effect is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pao effect until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 01:59, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

This is only my opinion about the AfD on this article, but methinks that the discussion of the AfD hints at the "Pao effect" happening in the discussion! Please take a look. Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  10:50, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited LeBreton Flats, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lock. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: James J. Kellaris (September 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Worldbruce was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:James J. Kellaris and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Worldbruce (talk) 09:55, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello! Ottawahitech, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Worldbruce (talk) 09:55, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

• @Worldbruce: i did not create this article -- User:Beckcomm did. So why are you plastering all these banners on my talk page, but have not informed Beckcomm? Ottawahitech (talk) 07:35, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Ottawahitech, AfC notices go to whoever submits the draft, which you did in this edit. If you submit a draft on behalf of someone else, and want them rather than yourself to receive future communications about the draft, you can use a parameter in the submit template like so: {{subst:submit|username}}. I'll leave Beckcomm a note about the declined draft. Worldbruce (talk) 07:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Avraham Hirschson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Breach of trust. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of List of condominiums in the United States for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of condominiums in the United States is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of condominiums in the United States until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Inks.LWC (talk) 21:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Pao effect AfD talk

Hi Ottawahitech. The talk pages of AfD discussions aren't typically watched by editors, especially after an AfD has closed. Comments for the AfD talk page should be to discuss the formatting of the AfD discussion itself, not on the proposed deletion—that should go on the main AfD page. As a result, messages you post to that page after the AfD has closed might not receive a lot of input, and that's ultimately why I closed it off.

There are better places to start a discussion where it would receive more attention. If you have a complaint about another user's conduct, the first step is generally that editor's user talk page. Explain to them respectfully what you feel they are doing. The next step following that is dispute resolution—typically Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for conduct disputes. If you have an issue with the AfD close, contact the closer on their talk page. The next step then would be deletion review. Content or editorial discussion should be posted to relevant article talk pages. Best, Mz7 (talk) 01:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@Mz7: I am not trying to "receive more attention", if I was I would have posted my comment regarding user:Mrfrobinson's behavior when the AfD was still open. All I am attempting to do is document this editor's behavior, which has been going on for years but which I have been told time and again is a figment of my imagination.

Thanks for your comments above, but are you seriously suggesting that wp:AN/I is the right place to go???!!! Ottawahitech (talk) 02:46, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

If you've already tried talking to Mrfrobinson and the problems persist, ANI is one of the venues that exists for such situations. An AfD talk page seems like a very strange place to want to air grievances about other editors' behavior outside the context of the AfD -- especially when it's acknowledged to be "off-topic" and the AfD is already closed. If you just want to document behavior, wouldn't your own user space serve just as well? That's not to say what you say about the other user is without merit (I don't know), it just seems like a strange place for it. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:14, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I really only took a cursory glance at what you posted and haven't yet fully examined the merits of your complaint. I was speaking generally, and here's some more general advice: Be very cautious about accusing other editors of conduct issues. If you've already received advice that the other editor's behavior is okay, I would take that advice into strong consideration. Only approach WP:ANI if you are sure you have a solid case (supported by diffs)—remember, your own actions will also be considered in the discussion. If the community has already decided on a case, it generally isn't helpful to keep bringing it up in hopes of an alternate outcome. Accusations about personal behavior that lack sufficient evidence (e.g. diffs) can sometimes be taken as a personal attack, so be careful. Remember, all of us are here to build an encyclopedia, and we sometimes get into disagreements—that's okay, as long as everyone stays cool, it's exactly what should be expected out of a collaborative project. All the best, Mz7 (talk) 03:17, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 2

Y Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Derek Sikua, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Under Secretary. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Your tagging of articles for the WikiProject Sanitation

You have tagged a long list of articles and category pages with the WikiProject Sanitation, e.g. "violence against women in country XX". Whilst the article violence against women is indeed also tagged with this WikiProject Sanitation, it is only relevant "on the borderline" (via the female genital mutilation link). Specific articles about VAW in certain countries are not relevant enough for the WikiProject Sanitation. I will therefore remove those tags. Thanks for your understanding. I am trying to keep the WikiProject Sanitation focussed on its core topic: sanitation. EvM-Susana (talk) 11:39, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

@EvM-Susana: I did? If so I must have been sleep-surfing. In fact I don't remember ever tagging any talk-page with a Sanitation banner. I searched my last 1,000 contributions but cannot find it. Would you be kind enough to provide an example? Ottawahitech (talk) 12:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I am sorry. I mean here where I can track new tags for this project: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Sanitation_articles_by_quality_log#Assessed_2 I thought I saw your name on the history page of some of the talk pages (and also I knew that you were working on the violence against women lists). Oh wait, I think now I got it right, it was Dimadick. Sorry for the confusion, will speak to him/her now. EvM-Susana (talk) 13:19, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Your RfA question

Ottawahitech, I thought I'd answer your question since it isn't my place to respond for the candidate at the RfA but I can see the deleted edits and figure out what happened.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was created by Ed Poor in October 2003. In August 2013, Paine Ellsworth created a redirect at Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. In November 2013,‎ Huntster deleted the redirect page and moved page Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. So, Ellsworth did create the redirect which was later deleted to make way for the page move. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:23, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

@Liz: thanks for the explanation. BTW I just found another puzzle: [1] -- can any editor create such re-directs -- isn't there some process requiring discussion before this type of thing happens?

There are procedures for category renames, category moves, category mergers and category deletions but not a strict policy about redirects. What exists is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Redirecting categories but redirects don't go through a discussion process. There are over 30,000 soft redirected categories so they aren't uncommon. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:06, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ottawahitech. You have new messages at WP:Requests for adminship/Paine Ellsworth.
Message added 14:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Peridon (talk) 14:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Basically the same as Liz said above. Peridon (talk) 14:59, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Re: unsigned comments

Hi Ottawahitech, use the {{unsigned}} template like this (the UTC timestamp is important!): {{subst:unsigned|Example|01:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)}} Graham87 11:32, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Human resource management women

Category:Human resource management women, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:22, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Hélène Pastor

Isn't Category:Monegasque women in business a subcategory of Category:Businesswomen?Zigzig20s (talk) 10:42, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

@Zigzig20s: thanks for stopping by to ask. Have a look at (for example) Category:Women in finance. It contains biographies of women in finance as well as an article: Women in venture capital which would not be a proper entry in Category: Women financiers if such a category existed and was the parent of Category:Women in finance . Am I making any sense? Ottawahitech (talk) 10:56, 12 October 2015 (UTC)/ Ottawahitech (talk) 11:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC)(addition)

Disambiguation link notification for October 12

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Karen Rubin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cross-country. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:39, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Health professions appeal and review board

Hello, Ottawahitech,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Health professions appeal and review board should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Health professions appeal and review board .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, TheLongTone (talk) 14:57, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about the process for articles for deletion. Unfortunately I find this way too complicated, and don't really have that much time to figure it out. Just wondering if there is anything else I can do to try and preserve content that may help some readers on wikipedia? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 10:03, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of women investors

The article List of women investors has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:LISTCRUFT

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gbawden (talk) 07:13, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

@Gbawden: I don’t believe I have met you before? Can you tell me what is the point of proposing for deletion an article I just created yesterday? You do realize that I can simply remove your deletion tag (I think)? Ottawahitech (talk) 09:51, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of List of women investors for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of women investors is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of women investors until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Gbawden (talk) 10:47, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Nikki Jackson

Hello Ottawahitech,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Nikki Jackson for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. TheLongTone (talk) 13:49, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Nikki Jackson for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nikki Jackson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikki Jackson (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:18, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Achcham Enbadhu Madamaiyada, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Telugu. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Dance teachers

Category:Dance teachers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Zanhe (talk) 00:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of List of 60 Minutes segments for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of 60 Minutes segments is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of 60 Minutes segments until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — Cirt (talk) 22:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nigerian Academy of Science, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fellowship. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

---

Hello Ottawahitech:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
Sent to users on my mailing list. To opt-out forever, just remove your name.

Deleted pages

I couldn't help but notice the message you left on your user page about the large numbers of deleted articles you have accumulated. Yes, while it is an administrator who deletes these articles, it is ordinary editors who must waste countless hours reviewing your articles, searching for sources, digging for notability, and debating the deletion. I have contributed 223 new articles, and had 0 deleted (2 were renamed). Can I suggest you submit your new articles for review first, and not burden other editors who have more meaningful editing to conduct? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 01:26, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

That is not very helpful advice and seems just like a ploy to make her feel guilty for some reason. Ottawahitech is discussing deleted edits and I know I have thousands. Every time I tag an article for deletion that gets deleted, that's one more deleted edit. I've tagged hundreds of empty categories for deletion and that is hundreds of deleted edits. You don't know what type of edits are that Ottawahitech is pointing out or whether the pages were ones she created 8 years ago or last week. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:38, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

The user page seems entirely factual and accurate. It reports facts of 3042 edits deleted and 696 pages deleted based on xtools report about deleted edits and deleted pages linked from Ottawahitech's user page. It does imply arbitrary administrative actions have lost contributions, which is perfectly fair to imply. But I note that the extent of contributions lost is not as much as one might assume: of 696 deleted pages, the deletions included just 65 mainspace articles (regular or redirects). The other deletions were of 69 Talk pages, 428 categories, 126 category Talk pages, and 7 others. 65 articles lost could represent a lot of work lost, but is a lot less dramatic than 696. Anyhow, while Magnolia677 made no claim otherwise, any editor is free to post their opinions about how well or poorly Wikipedia works, on their User page or elsewhere. --doncram 11:28, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

@Doncram: Yes interesting. It appears that, at least if the x-tool can be trusted, I have not lost any more articles since you posted your message on 2 November 2015. It appears that I lose categories at a much faster rate. I wish I could remember how to convert an excel table to wiki so I can share some statistics which I have been collecting. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:07, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

About categories, i really don't pay much attention to them. But Excel2wiki.net is one Excel to wikitable converter. As i recall it generates a wikitable that is perfectly fine appearance-wise, but it looks hard to edit to refine the wikitable any further. --doncram 19:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Looks like my count of lost articles has increased to 68. The number of deleted cats is up to 451 which is 18% of the 2,496 Category pages that I started on Wikipeida. Still have not had a chance to try the converter you suggested above - too busy fighting deletions, sigh... BTW I am surprised that you do not find Categories useful. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:51, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

about list of firsts in architecture

I like your enthusiasm, and I am almost always on inclusionist side regarding historic buildings, but I have to say that I think List of firsts in architecture is not ready to be a mainspace article. I appreciate your contacting me about it. But it appears likely to be the product of just some google-searching or Wikipedia-searching looking for "firsts" and it has come up with a pretty lame list, if you really take a look at it. There are certainly hundreds and thousands and probably hundreds of thousands of "firsts" equivalent to the Hamilton Building being the "first building in Portland designed in the Classical Revival style". There exist many architectural styles, and there exist many cities. Say you're going to cover the top 1,000 cities in the world (which probably each have at least 100 architectural styles within them), that allows for 100,000 firsts of that nature...it is not very special. I am afraid you are unduly, temporarily impressed by the natural and acceptable "puffery" that is commonly found in historic register nomination documents and in Wikipedia articles. I think I have seen thousands, or at least many hundreds, of historic buildings where a "first" claim is made. One I thought was fun was the first two-story building in California. There are just too many claims possible, and your draft list of them seems random, is not certified by any source as being a notable collection.

But about the Pioneer Building (disambiguation page) one in St. Paul asserted to have been the tallest building west of the Mississippi, that deserves coverage in some list of tallest buildings. Looking at "what links here" for it, it does not seem to be included in any such list. Perhaps some variation on List of tallest buildings in the United States is needed, e.g. perhaps to add a section to that article focusing on tallest ones west of the Mississippi, which I agree seems to be a valid class to talk about. (And possibly splitting it out if the section there grows too large.) I believe I have seen claims about various insurance company buildings in Omaha, Nebraska or elsewhere having had that distinction, and/or about buildings in San Francisco or Los Angeles or Seattle or Denver. It is a class that many sources talk about, I believe.

Also the article that you meant to link to, Pioneer and Endicott Buildings, is lacking any claim like that, so it would be a contribution if you could add the claim with support there.

But "List of firsts in architecture" is too grand a topic, and the current version is too weak a collection, so I really think it should be removed by your requesting it to be moved without leaving a redirect, into your workspace. And I would not myself be very interested in trying to discern what are the most important "firsts" to include in such a list, it is just too ambitious.

I hope my comments here are helpful. cheers, --doncram 04:48, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Women investors

Category:Women investors, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:02, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Siri Inc., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SRI. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:34, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Inappropriate pages

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as List of founders of companies of the United States, to Wikipedia, as doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Wikipedia:Your first article; you might also consider using the Article Wizard. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

I have redirected your page, List of founders of companies of the United States, to Category:American company founders, because the list is entirely redundant with the category (it provides no additional information). Please only use lists to present information that cannot be completely covered with an existing category. It seems you've had quite a few lists deleted before; it might be wise to go over the guideline Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates to understand when each is appropriate. I'm not sure why you're apparently proud to have had so many pages deleted; it wastes others' time and makes it seem like you don't know (or don't care) about what makes an appropriate page. If you keep it up, you may find yourself blocked from editing. —Swpb^talk 18:29, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

What user:swpb has done there is the exact opposite of what WP:NOTDUP actually instructs. James500 (talk) 12:12, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi @James500: Sorry for taking so long to respond — but I just cannot keep up up with all that is happening. Since user:swpb redirected this page here is a timeline of other related wiki-events:

• On 15 December 2015 List of founders of companies of the United States was deleted by User:Bearcat(ADMIN) without any notice whatsoever.
• On 23 December 2015 I started another List of founders of companies of the United States
• On 28 December 2015 Iamoctopus notified me that the new list has been nonimated for deletion (discussion still ongoing, I think).

What an absolute waste of time and resources for me, the other editors who edit this page, the editors who participate in the AfD/CfD, the nominators, the ADMINs who decide what to do with it and lastly DPL bot. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:25, 31 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me

Of course it's a waste of time; the question is who's fault that is. If the page is deleted, as looks likely, then it's you who have wasted everyone's time, so it's odd for you to be the one complaining. —swpb^T 20:51, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

user:swpb: Would you be so kind and explain why you believe creating a list that duplicates a category is "wasting" everyone's time? Ottawahitech (talk) 22:20, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

The deletion discussion made abundantly clear why the page was not appropriate. You don't have to like it, but you have to accept it and learn the lesson for next time. —swpb^T 16:14, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

David Teeuwen

added links pointing to Producer, Hosting, Real-time and Radio America

Margit Wennmachers

added links pointing to World Affairs Council and Amazon

Annika Biørnstad

added a link pointing to Scripting

Four11.com

added a link pointing to Video phone

List of firsts in architecture

added a link pointing to NOMA

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:04, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Margit Wennmachers article still needs your attention. There was one dab link I couldn't resolve. Fleet Command (talk) 10:03, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Reporters covering gender discrimination

Category:Reporters covering gender discrimination, which you created, has been nominated for deletion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:30, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Outlook.com

Hey. I was watching Outlook.com article and noticed that two of your attempts to add contents to it got reverted. (No comments on it though.) But I was wondering whether your latest change (addition of Category:Microsoft acquisitions) is right. Are you sure the company was called "hotmail.com"? Are you sure there was even a company? (If I am not mistaken ".com" could not have been registered as part of a company name in 1996.) Your source is silent about this. Fleet Command (talk) 09:07, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Alfred Roth (Concordia)

Hello, Ottawahitech. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Alfred Roth (Concordia), for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Alfred Roth (Concordia) to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks, JamesG5 (talk) 05:45, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Bois Beckett Forest for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bois Beckett Forest is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bois Beckett Forest until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. KDS4444^Talk 00:29, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Just discovered that this article which I innocently started on 15 November 2015‎ after seeing it red-linked somewhere on wiki (I think?), and which had been closed as Keep on 1 December 2015, has already gone through a Deletion review, which I was not notified of, and which wasted the time of more than ten editors, some of whom I am sure could use their wiki-time to do better things, sigh... As I said somewhere else: the wp:Deletion industry is taking over everything else we do here. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:57, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Elizabeth Weise for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elizabeth Weise is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elizabeth Weise until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 03:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiProjects in The Signpost

Hi, Ottawahitech,
While you were on a wikibreak, I spent a few months categorizing every article issued by The Signpost (well, up to August). There ended up being more than 4 thousand, which I didn't know when I started. Most of the articles were not categorized at all except the WikiProject articles which had also had valuable redirects to the projects each article covered. It looked like you put a lot of work into it. I was wondering if you would consider spending some of your editing time bringing that categorization scheme up to date (2015). I believe that there are WikiProjects that have had such turnover, they aren't aware that they've been profiled and I think it would be encouraging for them to be aware of older articles.
Everyone has limited editing time and I know you have a number of interests. But if this appeals to you, I think you could make a great contribution, for the Signpost and for the WikiProjects. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks user:Liz for recognizing my past work. I don’t get this often.

As far as resuming this work-of-love I have mixed feelings about it. I love category work, and categorizing signpost articles written by one of the most talented editors we had (and lost), was one of the most time-consuming but enjoyable things I had the pleasure to work on Wikipedia.

On the other hand I must consider the fact that not everyone here liked what I was doing, and several subcategories associated with this work were nominated for deletion in 2013. When I finally located the category which took me months to build, I found that its history has disappeared, so was not able to find the old 2013 deletion discussion to see if I really have the heart to resume this.

Sorry for dithering. Ottawahitech (talk) 21:46, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, now that I can look at the deleted contributions and logs for pages, I looked at Category:WikiProjects featured in The Signpost and I don't see any deleted history that could be recovered. Did the category go by another name? I will go looking for the CfD discussion and see if there is someway to recover your work. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:57, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Actually I found the deletion nominations by mike on my talk page, but they lead to a dead end (I think). Sorry I have to goOttawahitech (talk) 22:00, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

…@Liz:continued: here is what I see on my talk page:

Category:Wikipedia Signpost wikiproject report archives 2007

Category:Wikipedia Signpost wikiproject report archives 2007 which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike (talk) 19:18, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

There are four more nominations posted by the same nominator with the same timestamp on my talk page. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:14, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Just found out to my delight that user:SusunW added a Signpost article about WikiProject_Women_in_Red to Category:WikiProjects featured in The Signpost after it was mentioned at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Council/Archive_22#WikiProject_Women_in_Red. Yes! Ottawahitech (talk) 18:12, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

2016 update

The typical waste-of-time-category-discussion about wikipedia-categories at: Wikipedia_talk:User_categories#Request_for_comment_on_our_proposed_policy_for_users_remaining_in_redlinked_categories prompted me to continue looking for missing puzzle pieces of this thread that was started in 2015 by User:Liz (who unfortunately is no longer active?)

I found a series of notifications at User_talk:Ottawahitech/Archive_2#WikiProject_India_in_The_Signpost_listed_at_Redirects_for_discussion (archived against my wishes), which pointed to wp:RFDs that decreed I could not use a redirect named WikiProject xxx in The Signpost, but must instead use Wikipedia: WikiProject xxx in The Signpost. So now I had a category named Wikirojects featured in the signpost' containing entries named wikipedia:wikiproject... Very consistent eh?, sigh… Ottawahitech (talk) 15:08, 10 January 2017 (UTC)please ping me

Disambiguation link notification for November 20

Y Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bois Beckett Forest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hemlock. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Of course this can be a waste of time, since this article has been nominated for deletion. Ottawahitech (talk) 10:17, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Mongols live in Mongolia!

If we need a WikiProject for Mongolia, how can we achieve it?--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:21, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Simple Real Estate Solutions

A tag has been placed on Simple Real Estate Solutions requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 16:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, user:Stefan2. However I wonder if there was any point in notifying me since Simple Real Estate Solutions was deleted within 15 minutes by user:Sphilbrick and had I wanted to contest this speedy deletion I could not have possibly done so. Just wondering what the urgency was since this was an article I tried to save from a wp:PROD by moving it to wp:Draft hours earlier. I don't remember the particulars, but I believe it was created by a new editor weeks ago - it looks like I should have just de-prodded the article instead?Ottawahitech (talk) 23:20, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I think you are mistaken. I didn't delete an article but a cross namespace redirect which is inappropriate. I realize you are not an admin so cannot see the deleted material but I just double checked on the chance a made a mistake and it was indeed a cross namespace redirect.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:50, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Note that Draft:Simple Real Estate Solutions still exists.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:52, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I think the problem is that when you moved it to draft space which was appropriate, a redirect was automatically created. You probably did not have the ability to suppress the creation of the redirect. That redirect is inappropriate, but not your fault. It was deleted rather quickly as is appropriate and the only question is whether the notification should have been suppressed on the argument that it was a technical deletion. In any event, the main content of the article is not gone and if someone wants to work on it and prove that they can.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:55, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

I think that it is useful to notify the original author in as many situations as possible in the event that the original author (in this case the user who created the redirect) opposes the deletion. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I tend to agree. --S Philbrick(Talk) 01:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick: You said It was deleted rather quickly as is appropriate -- would you be kind enough to point me to a wiki-guideline that says that? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Autodesk acquisitions for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Autodesk acquisitions is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Autodesk acquisitions until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mrfrobinson (talk) 12:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

E. Peter Raynes

added a link pointing to Chief scientist

Pfizer

added a link pointing to Groton

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:13, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Guitar Hero people

Category:Guitar Hero people, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. The1337gamer (talk) 19:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@The1337gamer: Another category created by another editor has been added to the same deletion discussion on 11 December 2015‎ without notifying the creator and without making an official announcement on the discussion page? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:10, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Missouri State Board of Education

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Missouri State Board of Education. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:31, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	This is for the 3,181 edits and 732 pages that you edited that has since been deleted on Wikipedia. Hopefully some of those were saved by Deletionpedia (and that the numbers don't grow)!!! MurderByDeadcopy"bang!" 20:36, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much user: MurderByDeadcopy I know from experience it takes some work to produce one of these. Having said this I am afraid what I really need is one of those, since at last count my account is now 29 edits and 11 pages lighter. Ottawahitech (talk) 17:36, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, well that's just sad! Unfortunately, I believe AfD culture is much worse than most editors on Wikipedia realize. It's one of the most depressive spots on Wikipedia. Not only do individuals argue vehemently against topics they know nothing about, editors seem to believe there's some prize for the most deletes. There's a definite backfire effect going on. Not to mention, the incredibly huge number of new editors AfD runs off Wikipedia! It boggles my mind that so many here don't seem to see what's actually going on and that it will eventually destroy the very site that they love. --MurderByDeletionism^"bang!" 18:07, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Late to the party, as usual but a hearty amen to all the comment above!

  Bfpage |leave a message  22:07, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

@Bfpage: I am slowly discovering we are not the only editors who are sick of deletions. On 9 October 2015 user:Megalibrarygirl started a well-written thread which she named AfD culture at the Village Pump and several editors who have been in the trenches at the AfD boards, such as User:MurderByDeadcopy/ User:SusunW/User:James500/User:Dcs002 have been tirelessly participating in it to this day. If you have the time I believe it is a good read, including some thoughts by so-called delitionists, for example User:Purplebackpack89. Ottawahitech (talk) 00:50, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Jenny Doan

added a link pointing to Retreat

Waste collection

added a link pointing to Garbage collector

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Phabricator is a communication platform used by software developers to track discussion about the development of software. It helps create to-do lists and identifies who is responsible for doing tasks. The Wikimedia Foundation's developers use this and the community can talk with them there. Application programming interface (API) in this case means what data non-Wikipedians should be able to easily get from Wikipedia with software. In Twitter, for example, any Twitter user can get dashboard and metrics software to see how many people read their content. All corporations use these dashboards to judge value of paid staff twitter communication. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:55, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

Wow, it's not often that I get thanked for a three-year-old edit! That put a smile on my face, so thank you :-] --Slashme (talk) 09:23, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

@Slashme: Did I really thank you for that? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:37, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Luciana Zogbi

If you'd like me to refloat an article on LZ, let me know in six months to a year, when there will (probably) be more references available for an article on her.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 09:52, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

@Tomwsulcer: Actually the reason I thanked you had to do with your unofficial test which you outlined at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luciana Zogbi. Here is another good candidate. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:31, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes I realize pageview counts are not an official test, but my experience has been that they're a fairly consistent test about whether a subject is notable or not. And, conversely, articles with few or barely existent pageview tallies should maybe come on the chopping block more often. I think it would be great if Wikipedia could put more effort into making sure these tally counts were more accurate (not just bots, but real (unique) persons really searching for information on a topic.)--Tomwsulcer (talk) 20:35, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

@Tomwsulcer: BTW I forgot to thank you for saving Jenny Doan from deletion in 2014. Besides having a good nature and a healthy sense of humour you are also one of the few white knights I have encountered on Wikipedia who helped save from the Guillotine articles that I started. Ottawahitech (talk) 05:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh thanks, I generally like to rescue articles when I can, fixing them up according to the Heymann standard, but in recent months I've been busy with other stuff so I haven't done as much rescuing as in the past. If one of your articles is in jeopardy and you feel it can be saved, write something on my talk page and I'll see what I can do.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:09, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

I know I'm still missing. It's nice to know you care. Miss seeing you and folks around. :( Syrthiss (talk) 00:32, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Re your question

Hi, it's a while back but noting that the "parent category" doesn't exist, I recall that there was a problem whereby some category obsessives on Wikipedia, in their bid to make the world a homogenous place free of complication, had created a American-centric category tree which made no sense in the rest of the world, and a series of CfDs and other discussions saw them unable to defend this (and other similar) views. (One particularly hilarious one I remember being involved in was the change of "port cities" to "port settlements", a portmanteau literally only used on Wikipedia!) The word "colleges" has diverse meanings depending on which part of the world it's used, and outside the US and countries where US English has influence, a college is not something which can be logically grouped with a university due to differences in purpose, audience etc. (In some countries it's an upper secondary school, in others it's a one-year vocational or trades institution, in many jurisdictions they are completely unlicenced, etc.) So yes, it was a dispute between the "standardisers" and the rest of the world. I hope that answers the question - sorry I couldn't be more specific about this particular example (Iraq), but that was the overall debate as I remember it from years ago. Orderinchaos 03:36, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

On further investigation I understand better the basis for your question - it looks like the US system has regrettably resprouted, but rather than try to replace the world system completely as previously, the two systems now live in some sort of awkward harmony. For whatever reason, the Iraq and Iran categories weren't reached by the former when they came back. As some might say, "only on Wikipedia"... Orderinchaos 03:45, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your elaborate reply to my question on your talkpage regarding the removal of Category:Universities and colleges in Iraq. I wish I could find the particular wp:CfD you are talking about because the way I remember it, it is a British wiki-admin, not an American, who is adament about keeping the category tree under Category:Universities and colleges, and not separating out universities as a category.

A bit of background: The insistence on lumping universities together with colleges as the parent category has caused me no end of frustration over the years. and when I could not locate any universities in either Iran or Iraq in Category:Universities and colleges I had enough and I decided it is time to start investigating what went wrong. Looks like it is not going to be easy, sigh... Ottawahitech (talk) 15:55, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Monette-Horwitz Trust Award

Hello Ottawahitech,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Monette-Horwitz Trust Award for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:43, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

This was subsequently speedy deleted as A7 by DGG, and rightly so. It consisted of one sentence which made no claim whatsoever to significance for this award and provided zero citations which might have indicated potential notability—just an external link to its official web page. The reason the link remains blue is that I added a section on the award, properly referenced, to the article on Paul Monette and re-created Monette-Horwitz Trust Award as a redirect. In my view, while there is independent coverage of some its recipients, there probably isn't enough independent coverage of the award itself to justify a stand-alone article. Voceditenore (talk) 11:36, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know user:Kudpung. As you advised me above I clicked on the Contest button and explained why I thought this should not have been deleted.BTW I am having trouble with my notifications which I intend to ask about at the wp:notification page as soon as I get arond to it. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:24, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

no reason not to start it again if w you have the material, but in practice it has proven difficult to establish notability for such awards DGG ( talk ) 17:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree with DGG. That's why I went ahead and created a section on the awards (which are essentially small-ish grants) at Paul Monette#Monette-Horwitz Trust and re-created Monette-Horwitz Trust Award as a redirect (see my comment above). Not every item ever mentioned somewhere or other is suitable for a stand-alone article. I've not been able to locate any coverage of the awards themselves or even regular announcements of the winners, apart from one article at the Lambda Literary Foundation announcing the 2010 winners, and that was probably because one of the recipients had previously received a Lambda Literary Foundation award. Voceditenore (talk) 17:45, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Category sort keys

When adding sort keys to categories, preference should be to use some derivative of the name of the article. Moreover, avoid using generic terms that would themselves be categories. For example, don't use 'sports' as a key for 2015 American League Championship Series, as 'American League Championship Series' is more descriptive, and moreover the category may later be updated to Category:2015 sporting events in Ontario or some such. Mindmatrix 17:02, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Another reason, the typical reader will look for 'American League Championship Series' with the entries under 'A', not with those under 'S'. Mindmatrix 17:03, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Moussouris v. Microsoft Corp., you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Promotion, Federal court and Pay. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 11 December 2015 (UTC) sorryKardinalCypher (talk) 20:30, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Huang v. Twitter

If you make an article "Huang v. Twitter", then the new entry at List of gender equality lawsuits will not be liable to removal in accord with WP:WTAF. I do hope that no one would delete the new article.
—Wavelength (talk) 21:56, 12 December 2015 (UTC) and 21:57, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

I know you hate wiki-politics -- and so do I. Here is some history of my initial attempt to start this article. Should I ping you when replying? Ottawahitech (talk) 22:08, 12 December 2015 (UTC) As you can see it was labelled G3: Vandalism by the deleting ADMIN. Ottawahitech (talk) 22:14, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

You can use Template:Ping, but I prefer that you alert me by addressing me with my username wikified, thus: [[User:Wavelength|Wavelength]]. I am unable to see the deleted article, but the nine references at User:Ottawahitech/archived/sandbox seem to be sufficient for a substantial article worthy of being accepted (that is to say, not deleted). The March 2015 links at this page do not help me to understand why the article was deleted.

—Wavelength (talk) 01:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks User:Wavelength (is that what you mean by " username wikified"?), this happened at the beginning of the year, which to me is decades in wiki-years, so forgive me if my memory is a bit hazy. Anyway this is what I remember:

• I was notified the article was CSDed in March 2015
• a little later I approached the deleting ADMIN and inquired about the reason for the deletion
• This ADMIN (who used this opportunity to forcefully archive my talk-page in an unstandard fashion against my wishes ) userified my article, again in a way that, I think, is not recommeded.
• The end result is that the userified article cannot be moved to mainspace (because its history goes back to February of 2014 and includes material that is irrelevant).

Ottawahitech (talk) 02:01, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Ottawahitech, your link notified me (and I thank you), but I meant this: Wavelength. Your previous link has a link to this section, which indicates that the administrator has a strict position on bare URLs. (Please acquaint yourself with him here.) Apparently, he believes that it goes without saying that a bare URL in a reference is no better than a missing reference, so an article with only bare URLs is unreferenced. In turn, he apparently considers an unreferenced article to be a hoax comparable to vandalism.

I suggest that you use the userfied article as a basis for starting a new article with a new history. You can use a completely new subpage, as if all the past were forgotten. I recommend that you convert the bare URLs in the userfied article to links with titles. I recommend that you use the references to produce an article of at least two paragraphs of at least three sentences each. I recommend that you expand the article to that size in your userspace before you transfer it to mainspace. Alternatively, you can develop the article in a file on your computer before you transfer it to Wikipedia mainspace.

—Wavelength (talk) 03:11, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

• Once again this page is seriously overdue for archiving - when do you intend to do something? "Cannot moved to mainspace" - don't be ridiculous. Please confirm that User:Ottawahitech/archived/huang contains all the relevant edits and that User:Ottawahitech/archived/sandbox contains none of them. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:35, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Google Get Your Business Online

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Google Get Your Business Online requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Mrfrobinson (talk) 17:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Notice of CFD Category:Founders_of_companies_of_the_United_States

I have just been notified that this category which I created has been nominated for deletion umm…discusion. I was notified, not by the nominator but by a kind bystander.

With all this extra make-work, I doubt I will have the time to participate, but wanted to thank Softlavender for the extra work he/she had to do to let me know. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!

I always appreciate a grammar correction! FYI - Would love to implement a way to eliminate widows!!! --MurderByDeletionism^"bang!" 16:25, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Concerns over edit

Although I am unsure about which sandbox in particular, but I most likely removed a Project tag due to the fact that the article was drafted and was not viewable to any users, and therefore needed to be worked on and then the tag would be added back. Lucasstar1 (talk) 02:52, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of MSMB Capital Management

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on MSMB Capital Management requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Eteethan(talk)🎄 17:42, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings!

Hello Ottawahitech: Enjoy the holiday season and upcoming winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:48, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Empty categories

Hey, Ottawahitech,
I regularly tag empty categories so I guess I'm the person to ask. I use Twinkle to tag empty categories with a CSD C1 tag and Twinkle says it notifies the category creator but, unlike other CSD categories or PRODs, it actually doesn't (see CSD criteria here Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#C1. Unpopulated categories). The principle is that categories are applied to articles first and then a category page is created. Empty categories shouldn't be created that then filled. But categories are not supposed to "be emptied out of process", that is, the categories should not be removed from pages in order to empty a category and tag it with a CSD C1 tag. Relevant information is Wikipedia:Categories for discussion#Categories possibly emptied out of process. But it can be difficult to tell if a category has been emptied out of process. The easiest way is if you have a clue which editor might have done so, check their contribution page and you can see a straight list of pertinent articles that might have had the category removed.
I should say that although I tag empty categories, I create twice or three times as many new categories every day. This is through looking at Wikipedia:Database reports/Red-linked categories with incoming links which have red links for categories that have links to them but which have yet to be created. It is not uncommon for me to come across categories that had been deleted because they were empty that now can be recreated because they have been assigned to a page. Since I have the admin buttons, I just go into the deleted contributions and restore the category.
I guess the only advice I can offer is to look to see if a category structure you are interested is already created. The category might go by a different name that the one you think is logical. At WP:CFD, categories are often merged if two categories are different names for the same group of articles. It is always easier and preferable to work with the category structures that exist rather than trying to create a whole new category tree. With the best of intentions, some editors have made hundred of edits inventing dozens of categories which then are deleted and must be cleaned up because they duplicate an existing category tree. It's best to start small, with an area that you know well. OR extend an existing category to cover a new editor (like creating French male actor from Male actor if the category didn't already exist). If you have a question about a deletion you think was inappropriate, visit Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. I hope this answers your question. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:46, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's greetings!

Hello Ottawahitech: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Esquivalience ^t 00:16, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Disambiguation link notification for December 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of founders of companies of the United States, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Dick Jones, Jonathan Schwartz and Gary Green. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:49, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Flow / projectbreakfast RFC

The discussion there is so tangled that it was hard to see exactly how it was going. I tried reading it as if I were a closer sorting out the !votes. Aside from you, it's 6-2. You gave a strong initial opposition, then made quite a few negative comments about problems on the board, and in particular this:

To make this short, if FLOW will allow us to edit others comments... I see no reason to support it.

I'm not arguing to change your !vote, I just wanted to check whether there had been a shift in your position. Alsee (talk) 03:44, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi user:Alsee, First of all thanks for all the work you do around FLOW. Even though I am keenly interested in FLOW, I just don't get the time to do it justice (too busy trying to save categories that took years to develop from being trashed by editors who could not care less).

To answer your question: Yes FLOW is terribly buggy right now, but I still want to continue testing it at BF. I believe it is worth the try to save FLOW if at all possible. Looks to me like the team working on FLOW is just not getting the resources it needs becuase top management at WMF does not see FLOW's value? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:33, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

• Hi user:Alsee, There are developements at User_talk:AlbinoFerret#Your_summary_of_.22RFC_-_Remove_Flow_from_WikiProject_Breakfast.3F.22 are you aware? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:49, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Flow at projectbreakfast RFC - too depressing

This whole thing is just way too depressing - its time for me to move on to doing some real work here. For those interested, if any, I have added my final thoughts at: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment#RFCs_on_Wikiprojects_-_a_hijacking_strategy and at: Community consensus reached? -- discussion that will soon be buried in archives, sigh... Ottawahitech (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I will be appealing the close of projectbreakfast RFC

I believe the close is fauly and plan to appeal it (if time permits). For more:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic:Stn15z0u230zcbve
• https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ottawahitech

Thank you to user: AlbinoFerret for providing appeal information. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

@AlbinoFerret: Can we keep this discussion between the two of us here to avoid fracturing the conversation? You have already archived the thread I started on you own page, so this seems the logical place to continue?Ottawahitech (talk) 21:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Thats fine, but now the review has started on WP:AN Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Request_close_review_of_RFC_-_Remove_Flow_from_WikiProject_Breakfast.3F and discussions in general should happen there. If you have a question, I will try and answer it if you place it here, just ping me. AlbinoFerret 21:24, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

@AlbinoFerret: I think you meant well, but I believe the way you went about it is counterproductive . I did not ask you to appeal on my behalf and frankly, I believe the urgency is not necessary, and there is no need for a process that does not follow the traditional approach. There was no need to skip the step recommended in WP:CLOSECHALLENGE which stipulates:contact the editor who performed the closure and try to resolve the issue through discussion. If you are unable to resolve the issue through discussion with the closer, you may request review

So can we start over again? Will you withdraw the challenge to your own RFC closure and try to work this out first before involving the community at large? Ottawahitech (talk) 02:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

No, you didnt ask me to appeal on your behalf, but an appeal can be started by anyone, including the closer. You had already discussed the close with me, and with uninvolved editors on other pages. Under the circumstances the appeal was IMHO the appropriate action because it had left the page the RFC was on already. Had this stayed there and my talk page it could have been discussed more. But I think at this point the review should continue. You are free to join the review and make comments, if I have gotten something wrong, point it out. AlbinoFerret 14:38, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

@AlbinoFerret: You said: you had already discussed the close with me but I don’t recall discussing your close with you. All that happened is this exchange on your talkpage which you archived beforeI had a chance to continue asking, IIRC. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:33, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

I thought the discussion was done after a day and no new comments. I tend to like a clean talk page. But you could have still opened a section if you had any questions or asked them here with a ping. AlbinoFerret 18:45, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

FLOW - Consensus_is_not_working

Looks like I am not the only one complaining. See: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Consensus_is_not_working/ Ottawahitech (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Businesspeople of companies in Canada

Category:Businesspeople of companies in Canada, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mrfrobinson (talk) 14:48, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Untagging Categories in Open Category for Discussion Nominations

Hello,

Obviously you feel strongly against deleting the Category:Women translators and took the following actions:

• 1. You gave a long opposition the CFD nomination to remove the male translators category here.
• 2. You removed my tag of the related women translators category here without reverting my edit so I would receive an edit here.
• 3. You tagged me in a sort of help desk confessional here. (Was there something that lead to this?)
• 4. You were so alarmed by my suggestion in the CfD discussion that you alerted a WikiProject here.

All of these edits are completely constructive except for #2. If I wasn't assuming good faith, I could interpret that as an attempt to sabotage an open CFD discussion by not having the category tagged for a week as is required. But, you make constructive edits all the time and tagged me in the help desk post.

So let me just ask you here: what are we doing here? RevelationDirect (talk) 03:26, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

I think we were editing at the same time. Thank you for your constructive suggestions for making sure the nominations is correctly handled. All of your suggestions are implemented. I'm retagging the category on the assumption that we are in consensus now about the process. (Obviously we disagree about the actual nomination though.) Merry Christmas (if applicable)! RevelationDirect (talk) 04:17, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Emptying a category out of process with an open Category for Merge nomination

Hello,

It's not correct procedure to merge a category with an open CFM nomination. As the nominator, I obviously favor that outcome but other editors need a week to weigh in so I'm going to undo those changes to Category:Cleaners. Additionally, it looks like you are interested in ruporposing that same category name to house biography articles (1, 2, 3) instead of occupation articles. If you decide to proceed with that plan, let's wait until after this nomination closes so that we don't complicate things for the closing admin. (I would be concerned that grouping janitors, housekeepers, and industrial cleaners would be problematic but we can discuss that later.)

More information on the category for discussion process is at WP:CFD. RevelationDirect (talk) 12:08, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about List of founders of companies of the United States

Hello, Ottawahitech,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether List of founders of companies of the United States should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of founders of companies of the United States .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Iamoctopus (talk) 10:55, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Tagging, tagging and more tagging

You must be a very patient person. If tags were real, you would be squished by now. Checking in to see what you are up to. Thanks for thanking me and giving me support and encouragement....unlike what I see here on your talk page. Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  22:42, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

@Bfpage: I have another candidate for cat:Over-templated-experienced-editors: User_talk:Jiang#Copyright_problem:_Ti.E1.BA.BFn_Qu.C3.A2n_Ca -- do you think Jiang qualifies (been an editor since 2003 and an ADMIN to boot)? Ottawahitech (talk) 02:37, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Discussion about the over-templating on this talk page

Hello, Ottawahitech,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether your talk page is excessively templated and tagged; The discussion may be deleted..or not. Your comments are welcome but likely to be completely ignored by whoever placed the template on your talk page in the first place. Your comments are welcome at talk.

If you're new to the process, a sly remark suggesting that you are inexperienced, feel free to make use of articles for deletion. This is a group (with regularly expected participants) that discuss (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days or however long it takes to get it deleted. Just to add another insult in questioning your experience in editing let me suggest if you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top. Doing so is considered naughty. Thanks,

  Bfpage |leave a message  22:55, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

2016

	Happy New Year 2016!
	Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unneccessary blisters.    – Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:47, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Debt collection

Category:Debt collection, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Redrose64 (talk) 11:37, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Ottawahitech!

Happy New Year!

Ottawahitech,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Ottawahitech!

Happy New Year!

Ottawahitech,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:19, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Cancer deaths by country category

I submitted the original request and it was exactly like it says - Rename to be consistent with the naming of some other categories in the same tree. What I didn't realize is that there are a group of users who had previously been involved in a "Categories for deletion" discussion related to cause of death which was organized as you describe = submit a small subset first and then submit other subsequent categories from the same tree later for deletion. So, they have all jumped on this band-wagon. I don't know if we will see a reasonable outcome. Someone else described CfD as a mushroom territory: "so many changes occur in the darkness of the shadow of the few who inhabit the territory". I naively just tried to do things by the book. --Big_iron (talk) 20:32, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

In recent years, the CFD discussions haven't had enough editors participating. I hope you both stick around! Thanks for your contributions. @Big iron: RevelationDirect (talk) 02:52, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

@RevelationDirect and Big iron: In my opinion wp:CfD is the most dysfunctional process around by far. For starters what is the point of Categories for discussion when ADMINs make their own rules never mind what others say? ..but I am going to leave this for others who enjoy "talk" -- I would like to get back to "creation" Ottawahitech (talk) 13:46, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

@RevelationDirect: I felt a little guilty rebuffing your invitation to participate in CfD discussions, but I just happened to come across an old CfD in which I did participate and it appears nothing has changed since 2013 - ADMINs still inititiate CfDs without notifying the creators and no one cares about consistency. Since you seem to belong to the group of editors who actually enjoys debating endlessly, I hope you will care enough to try and fix those glaring issues. Cateories are getting such a poor reputation at wikipedia I fear the community will simply shut them down if nothing is done. Just my $.02 Ottawahitech (talk) 14:50, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Haha, that might be the best/worst compliment to receive. I've worked on making the Category Discussions more accessible to casual editors but those improvements have been more around the edges, unfortunately. For what it's worth I just voted "Weak Keep" on the category abolition discussion. RevelationDirect (talk) 01:23, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

@RevelationDirect: When you refer to best/worst compliment I assume you are talking about belong to the group of editors who actually enjoys debating endlessly? If so, I did not mean it as a compliment/non-compliment. There are several editors I highly regard who do nothing but participate in wiki-talk and vice verse. I personally try to stay away talk because the primitive wiki-talk software makes it too time consuming. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:14, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Container category

Please don't add articles to container categories, as you did Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. I've reverted your edits. -- Scjessey (talk) 20:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Maple Batalia

I created Maple Batalia in October of 2011. This article is one of many speedily deleted without notifying me, and now I also discovered it is not included in the list of articles I created. Odd... BTW those doing research on the topic of wiki-deletions may be interested in looking at the article's What links here which is public history that survives wiki-deletions. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:19, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

It was deleted, userfied to another user, and then deleted again at that location, which shouldn't have happened. I have restored it to maple Batalia and then redeleted it (just putting back the status quo, not a decision on content). It should now appear in your contributions as a deleted article. Fram (talk) 08:06, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Victimology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Federal agency. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:38, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

WP:MIA

Thanks for the note! Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:18, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Doc glasgow at WP:MISS

I removed the Missing entry for Doc glasgow because this editor is still active with a new account. See the latest entry in his rights log, where the connection was sufficiently recognized for his admin bit to be ‘bequeathed’ to the present account. I don’t know what it took to demonstrate the continuity, but it was evidently enough to convince at least one bureaucrat. (There might be some back-story in talk-page or noticeboard archives, but I haven’t gone looking.)—Odysseus1479 01:26, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Meaning of edit - Article alerts?

Would you please explain what these edits to Wikiproject Years means? I have no idea what you're getting at. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:44, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jc3s5h, I guess you are asking about article alerts? If so have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Canada/Article_alerts where the wp:Article alerts BOT has last delivered the alerts to the project at 09:07, 9 January 2016‎(UTC). Please let me know if I have answered your question. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:18, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I guess the link in your edit was supposed to go somewhere, but it is a read link. If the link were correct, maybe I would have understood. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:48, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

@Jc3s5h: The link should stay red only until the next delivery of alerts to the project, which should be around 09:07, 10 January 2016‎(UTC). If the BOT fails to deliver please let me know. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)please ping me

OK, I'll keep an eye out. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Appeal information

Here is a link to the section on challenging a close. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Closing_discussions#Challenging_other_closures AlbinoFerret 19:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Since you have indicated your time was limited I started a RFC review request here [Request close review of [2] Please add your input. AlbinoFerret 20:31, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Editing of other editors posts on noticeboards

I would recommend you undo your edit of my post in the WP:AN noticeboard. You can respond if you choose, but editing other editors posts isnt a good idea and can lead to sanctions. AlbinoFerret 20:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pat Dowell, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ordinance. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Thought you would like this

An off-wiki discussion of The Ten Best Wikipedia Articles Deleted This Week. The President of Your Fan Club,

  Bfpage |leave a message  20:24, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bernie Sanders interview with Diane Rehm

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Bernie Sanders interview with Diane Rehm requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organized event (tour, function, meeting, party, etc.), but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. SirLagsalott (talk) 01:44, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Bernie Sanders interview with Diane Rehm listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Bernie Sanders interview with Diane Rehm. Since you had some involvement with the Bernie Sanders interview with Diane Rehm redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. SirLagsalott (talk) 21:05, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Americans renouncing citizenship in records numbers listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Americans renouncing citizenship in records numbers. Since you had some involvement with the Americans renouncing citizenship in records numbers redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mrfrobinson (talk) 22:48, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Allison Christians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bill C-31. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:20, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tax Connections

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Tax Connections requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Hot Pork Pie 20:04, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Defunct power stations has been nominated for discussion

Category:Defunct power stations, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rehman 07:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Martijn Hoekstra missing

Yeah. I sent him an email. Thanks for noting that. Drmies (talk) 03:03, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Your question at the Help desk

	Hello Ottawahitech. Replies have been posted to your question at the Help desk. If the problem is solved, please place {{Resolved|1=~~~~}} at the top of the section. Thank you!
	Message added on 17:47, 25 January 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{helpdeskreply}} template.

A cup of tea for you!

Here's a relaxing cup of tea for you for being a leader, not a follower! Cheers! MurderByDeletionism"bang!" 15:39, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Just in time. It is extremely exhausting, isn't it? :-) Ottawahitech (talk) 16:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi

I've seen your name appear a lot on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. I was wondering if you would give your opinion Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Clarification of Wikipedia:WikiProject Sia proposal? where I've opened up a concern about a Wikiproject that was created on a whim and not done through a proposal. The founder and original member has since asked a few people to join it, and now there are only two. I personally don't think the WP should exist because the scope isn't broad enough, it was never official proposed despite the founder knowing that there is a system in place for the proposal of the creation of WP's, and as a result we don't know if there is even a need/any interest for it to exist. Thank you.  — Calvin999 09:33, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Disney collusion litigation listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Disney collusion litigation. Since you had some involvement with the Disney collusion litigation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mrfrobinson (talk) 14:52, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Chancellors by country has been nominated for discussion

Category:Chancellors by country, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. PanchoS (talk) 13:31, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Vice-Chancellors has been nominated for discussion

Category:Vice-Chancellors, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. PanchoS (talk) 13:33, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ottawahitech. You have new messages at Jiang's talk page.
Message added 21:50, 27 February 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jiang still edits every now and then. MB298 (talk) 21:50, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Women religious leaders has been nominated for discussion

Category:Women religious leaders, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:24, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Microsoft Canada listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Microsoft Canada. Since you had some involvement with the Microsoft Canada redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

'Microsoft Corp listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 'Microsoft Corp. Since you had some involvement with the Microsoft Corp redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234') 22:34, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ottawahitech. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol.
Message added 06:13, 26 March 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your draft article, Draft:James J. Kellaris

Hello, Ottawahitech. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "James J. Kellaris".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:40, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of people who have been quoted as having used Wikipedia

The article List of people who have been quoted as having used Wikipedia has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:TRIVIA.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 103.6.159.85 (talk) 19:06, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Arctic Deeply

The article Arctic Deeply has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (websites) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you,

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:37, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Criticism of Berkshire Hathaway listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Criticism of Berkshire Hathaway. Since you had some involvement with the Criticism of Berkshire Hathaway redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ÷seresin 16:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Reddit employees has been nominated for discussion

Category:Reddit employees, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:33, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Reddit employees has been nominated for discussion

Category:Reddit employees, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:34, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

you're not alone

sorry to read your user page ottawahitech. wp sucks and I know it. admins that is. deep sigh.--Wuerzele (talk) 19:59, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Chez Piggy

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Chez Piggy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Magnolia677 (talk) 02:51, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Moussouris v. Microsoft Corp. for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Moussouris v. Microsoft Corp. is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moussouris v. Microsoft Corp. until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 02:55, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pitaroudia

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Pitaroudia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Magnolia677 (talk) 02:56, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Clayton Homes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bloomberg. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year Award winners has been nominated for discussion

Category:Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year Award winners, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:30, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

@RevelationDirect:, I see you have been doing a lot of work trying to get more editors involved in Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. Are you making any progress? Ottawahitech (talk) 17:44, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I've had some success with getting individual editors and WikiProjects to participate in specific discussions. Also, rather than using jargon, many other nominators are using the section links I created on Wikipedia:Overcategorization which makes it easier for new editors to participate. What I have not been successful with is getting any of those editors to stick around for other nominations outside of their subject area; the total number of participants on a typical discussion remains too low. RevelationDirect (talk) 00:45, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

@RevelationDirect: Talking of Wikipedia:Overcategorization, this is an a guideline I do not understand at all. It seems that it was written by editors who think the purpose of categorization is to summarize the contents of an article at the bottom, not to provide a mechanism for readers to find articles. I suspect there are others who shun categories because of the contradictory and confrontational attitudes dispalyed by category-oldtimers. IMO, of course. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:05, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

With the exception of WP:SMALLCAT, which is very harmful, and WP:OCAWARD, which is redundant with the non-defining one, I actually do think the WP:OC guidelines are sound. My perception is that participation in WP:CFD has declined much more rapidly than editors overall if you look at the discussions from a couple years ago. I don't have a good theory as to why so I'm not going to disregard yours out of hand that the in-crowd there is hostile to outsiders. I don't see that, but I suspect I'm one of the old timers you're describing! RevelationDirect (talk) 02:39, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

@RevelationDirect: BTW when we talk about wp:overcategorization it appears that there are editors who think overcatgorization is a different concept than that described in the guideline. See for example the response to question question 20 at the RFA for user:BU Rob13. Ottawahitech (talk) 21:08, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

The WP:SMALLCAT guideline is often ignored in CFD. I think that guideline is garbage because it creates whole trees of underpopulated subcategories, which is what is being described by that other editor. That guideline should be changed to match the current consensus though; see this discussion. When we have this sort of discussion-based precedent outside of the guidelines, it makes it harder for new editors to participate. (WP:C2D is often ignored too, even though I think that guideline is sound.) RevelationDirect (talk) 02:39, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pauline Thornhill, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Host and Here & Now. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2016 Ottawa sinkhole

The article 2016 Ottawa sinkhole has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NOTNEWS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DGG ( talk ) 01:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of 2016 Ottawa sinkhole for deletion

Just a note to myself Ottawahitech (talk) 22:03, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2016 Ottawa sinkhole, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Evacuation. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:30, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Re: The Signpost

Yo Ottawa, I reverted two of your edits over at The Signpost because the Internet Archive was only temporarily unavailable (see eg [3]). Just wanted to give you a more detailed reason in case you saw my edit. :-) Best, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:20, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Birds by common name

(moved from mypage. Ottawahitech (talk) 18:10, 16 June 2016 (UTC))

Hi! Just wondering what the point of this category is. And are you going to add all 10,000 species of birds on the planet? MeegsC (talk) 08:49, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

@MeegsC: I hope that one day Category:Animal common names will be more like Category:Plant common names Ottawahitech (talk) 13:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Right. I get it. But right now, it's a hodge-podge of animal groupings (i.e. "Duck") and animal species. If you're not planning to add all of the species, then none of them should be in there! And you need to clarify what should be included (i.e. by putting some verbiage at the top of the category page) so that others know what to add. MeegsC (talk) 14:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2016 Ottawa sinkhole

added a link pointing to Pavement

Arthur Cockfield

added a link pointing to Queens University

Basil Jellicoe

added a link pointing to Reformer

List of sinkholes

added a link pointing to Doline

Santa J. Ono

added a link pointing to Provost

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Articles_for_deletion/2016_Ottawa_sinkhole

What happened with Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/2016_Ottawa_sinkhole? DeVerm (talk) 14:13, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@DeVerm: Thanks for asking. This talkpage was blanked by user:Secondarywaltz. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:15, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

@DeVerm and Ottawahitech: C'mon now. The sinkhole article may be part of WikiProject Ottawa, but Articles for deletion are not. What is your problem? Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:31, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Re: User contributions

Hello, this is due to the way that user's edits are stored in the Wikipedia database; it's marked as T36873 in Phabricator. The 2001 edits can be viewed using the API like this. Graham87 14:25, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Controversies

Hey, just wanted to leave a note of explanation for my revert at List of Wikipedia controversies (and feel free to move this to the talk page there -- or open a thread there -- if you want to open it to discussion). It seems like that example is one of countless examples of high-profile citing of Wikipedia (and getting scolded for it), rather than a controversy about Wikipedia itself. I was going to add it to an article I could've sworn existed called something like list of news organizations citing Wikipedia, but I can't seem to find it... — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:40, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: I did not mind your revert -- actually I wasn't sure that was the right place to place it, but thought I would bring it to others attention. Anyway for those interested here is a Signpost article covering Terrorism database cites Wikipedia as a source. Ottawahitech (talk) 22:57, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Missing signature

Hi Ottawahitech, you forgot to sign your comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council; I've labeled it with an {{Unsigned}} for now. Just thought you'd like to know. CabbagePotato (talk) 05:40, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Blocked -unable to edit

I was blocked, but the block lasted only a few minutes. Weird! Ottawahitech (talk) 14:08, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Science technology engineering and mathematics has been nominated for discussion

Category:Science technology engineering and mathematics, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. PanchoS (talk) 23:00, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:People in STEM fields

Category:People in STEM fields has been nominated for deletion. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. --PanchoS (talk) 23:04, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Cross-listing companies in WP:WikiProject Business

Regarding this edit, is there any way I can win you over to the viewpoint that company articles should be moved out of WP:WikiProject Business? According to User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Company, there are 45000+ company articles. There are 26000+ articles in User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/WikiProject Business, and I estimate 50% of those are company articles. If every company article were to be cross-listed into WikiProject Business, there would be such a huge overlap that only about one in five articles in WikiProject Business would actually be a non-company topic (e.g., accounting, human resources, business biographies, etc.). As a project member, you'd have to sift through a lot of companies before finding something to work on and all the while you'd be asking yourself, "Why do they have WP:WikiProject Business and WP:WikiProject Companies if they're 80% the same?" I believe that a certain limited amount of companies (for example, audit firms (a.k.a., accounting firms), human resource consulting firms, management consulting firms, etc.) belong in both, but I believe banks, for example, should go into WP:WikiProject Finance. Thanks in advance for considering this approach. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 20:37, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi User:DanielPenfield thanks for bringing your approach to my attention, but no, I am completely opposed to removing articles from WikiProjects, something that, in my opinion, should be the decision of the WikiProjects themselves. Can we take this discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Why, I am a member of WP:WikiProject Business, but don't see your name among the Wikipedia:WikiProject Business/Participants. Also, I suspect if you took the discussion to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council, the first thing that they would ask is "Why did you bring a project-specific question to us? Why didn't you discuss at WP:WikiProject Business?" -- DanielPenfield (talk) 06:44, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

@DanielPenfield: Are you saying that you only remove wp:WikiProject banners of WikiProjects you are a member of? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:27, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

It sounds like you're trying to change the subject. To quote WP:PROJSCOPE, "A WikiProject's participants define the scope of their project (the articles that they volunteer to track and support), which includes defining an article as being outside the scope of the project." If you're looking to criminalize removal of banners deemed out of scope, you'll have to prosecute editors like these: [4], [5], [6]. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 03:34, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shenzhen Stock Exchange, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Civil law and Conglomerate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Hari Vasudev for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hari Vasudev is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hari Vasudev until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Uncletomwood (talk) 11:28, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Three years ago ...

missing
... you were recipient no. 556 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:50, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Shoppers City East

Hello, Ottawahitech. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Shoppers City East, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

1. edit the page
2. remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
3. save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. ubiquity (talk) 15:06, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I have chosen to walk away from this article, since it appears it will take too much work to fight the stream of wp:deletionists. Too many other deserving areas to work on. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:57, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Category:Treatments and potential treatments for Alzheimer's has been nominated for discussion

Category:Treatments and potential treatments for Alzheimer's, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ChemNerd (talk) 20:20, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

What happened?

What happened to your user page? Peter Horn User talk 01:40, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Property tax, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fine. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

More sections to List of sinkholes

Hello, Could you add more sections to List of sinkholes? like sinkholes in Europe, sinkholes in Asia, sinkholes in Africa and sinkholes in South America. and take them out of List of sinkholes#Others, thus eliminating that section. Peter Horn User talk 00:08, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Add New Zealand separately? Peter Horn User talk 00:15, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Property tax into Owner-occupancy. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 01:10, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of List of sinkholes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of sinkholes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sinkholes until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. EditorDownUnder (talk) 21:49, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Affordable housing in Canada

added a link pointing to Regina

 Done

British Columbia Real Estate Association

added a link pointing to CPE

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Saving Detroit's DIA and worker pensions listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Saving Detroit's DIA and worker pensions. Since you had some involvement with the Saving Detroit's DIA and worker pensions redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. DMacks (talk) 15:26, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited National Research Council (Canada), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Environment. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 22

 Done Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New York City Civil Court, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Civil. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Condominiums in Canada

I have removed the content you added to the above article, as it appears to have been copied from http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/housing-tenancy/strata-housing/operating-a-strata/finances-and-insurance/insurance, a copyright web page. All content you add to Wikipedia must be written in your own words. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa (talk) 19:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Proposal: New Page Reviewer user right

A discussion is taking place to request that New Page Patrollers be suitably experienced for patrolling new pages. Your comments at New pages patrol/RfC for patroller right are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:13, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Backlog

The NPP backlog now stands at 13,158 total unreviewed pages.

Just to recap:

• 13 July 2016: 7,000
• 1 August 2016: 9,000
• 7 August 2016: 10,472
• 16 August 2016: 11,500
• 28 August 2016: 13,158

You naturally don't have to feel obliged, but if there's anything you can do it would be most appreciated. I've spent 40 hours on it this week but it's only a drop in the ocean.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 17:13, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

New York City Civil Court

added links pointing to Action and Calling

Ecogrid

added a link pointing to Grid

Fern Holland

added a link pointing to Vinita

 Done

Michael Cowpland

added a link pointing to Rockcliffe

 Done

Renters' insurance

added a link pointing to Uninhabitable

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of full-block structures in New York City, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Port of New York. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

New article improvement drives

Check out the following new article improvement drives/contests. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge – aims to reach 10,000 article improvements for UK- and Ireland-related articles
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge – aims to reach 10,000 article improvements for Africa-related articles

Proposed deletion of Jeff Storey

The article Jeff Storey has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:13, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Thanks for letting me know. Just wondering if you were aware of User_talk:Ottawahitech/Archive_2#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Jeff_Storey? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:11, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Nope, through I looked at it now and I do not see how it can be helpful to us. My concern is as stated - that the bio fails notability policies. If you'd like, we can start a proper AfD discussion where others can offer their opinions as well. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:12, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Liisa Ladouceur

Hello Ottawahitech, in regards to the speedy deletion of Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Liisa Ladouceur, the speedy deletion rationale was WP:CSD#G7, If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page, a category page, or any type of talk page, this can be taken as a deletion request. This was the edit history:

 2015-02-11T01:29:54 . . Ottawahitech  (empty) (oops)
 2015-02-11T01:25:51 . . Ottawahitech  (29 bytes) ({{WikiProject Women Writers}})

While not "strictly" part of G7 as this was a "type of talk page" your own rapid reversal and edit summary indicated this content was not meant to be there, so I WP:IAR extended the G7 criteria here. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:17, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

You should feel free to recreate that page if you have any content to add. Happy editing, — xaosflux ^Talk 15:15, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Proposal to rename category

Please see my proposal to speedily rename Category:Indian companies by year of establishment to Category:Companies of India by year of establishment per C2C (see Category:Companies by year by country) Hugo999 (talk) 02:19, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Hugo999:: Thanks for informing me even though I am not the creator of this category. I wish everyone emulated your effort to include more editors in wp:Category inner-workings. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Bulgarian companies established in 2007 has been nominated for discussion

Category:Bulgarian companies established in 2007, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 15:22, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

@Rathfelder and Hugo999: Just wondering why Category:Indian companies by year of establishment is a speedy rename while Category:Bulgarian companies established in 2007 is an open discussion? Ottawahitech (talk) 13:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Negligence on my part. I had forgotten the speedy option.Rathfelder (talk) 20:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Eva James

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello. A tag has been placed on Eva James requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. noq (talk) 17:20, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 22

 Done Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bill 28 (BC)

added links pointing to Self-regulation, Gregor Robertson and Windfall

Alexander Bernhard Dräger

added a link pointing to Howe

White Sands: Experiences from the Outside World

added a link pointing to The Telegraph

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

A beer on me

		A beer on me!
		Thanks for wikifying Crowdnetic! Meatsgains (talk) 03:56, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 29

 Done Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Timeline of popular Internet services, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Browser. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

tips wings

Thanksfor the thanks. I ané on elgian lazour but conputer doesnt think so so sorry that tis is not punctuated better? SimonTrew don't know wher the tidke is

ok got eehungarian kebsheit this is jhust as bad osűn right had sisde sheesh sorr user sion trew sorr this is rtupid now

Disambiguation link notification for October 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bill 28 (BC)

added a link pointing to Foreign investment

Call to the bar

added a link pointing to Ryerson

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016

Hello, I'm Moxy. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Moxy (talk) 19:35, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

@Moxy: Which article are you referring to? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:32, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alien (law), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Reside. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:05, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Category:Crude oil companies has been nominated for discussion

Category:Crude oil companies, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 10:49, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of SkunkLock

The article SkunkLock has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Pyrusca (talk) 23:45, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ottawahitech. You have new messages at Od Mishehu's talk page.
Message added 17:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Trick or treat?

Boa noite! I like the facility to speak in French and Portuguese - I think Spanish is such an ugly language. This may be of interest:

Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Vote (X) for Change

I propose the deletion of this page. It is a spoof report Special:Diff/706678161#Why Do We Need Something New?. Its originator, Elockid, has now left the project, while Sunshine, who provided much of the content, appeared before the Arbitration Committee in January charged with abuse. 78.145.31.82 (talk) 11:24, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

This morning's Daily Telegraph reports:

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said people who create false profiles ... could face charges including harassment. New draft guidelines published by the CPS set out how prosecutors should take tough action against anyone who attempts to humiliate or undermine someone else by publishing false information online ...

"... an online footprint will be left by the offender."

A CPS spokesman said the guidelines cover the use of false online profiles ... which are set up to publicise "false and damaging information".

For example, it may be a criminal offence if a profile is created under the name of the victim with fake information uploaded which, if believed, could damage their reputation and humiliate them," the spokesman said.

... "This may amount to an offence, such as grossly offensive communication or harassment."

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.104.33.254 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

A deletion request here is unlikely to succeed; for legal disputes you could try contacting the Wikimedia Foundation. The page you refer to wasn't created for harassment, but to document a suspected pattern of disruption and to be linked to, to provide context when dealing with it. I wouldn't call what is documented there "abuse"; it should probably be moved into user space or into the sockpuppet investigations case. Are you User:Vote (X) for Change or not? Peter James (talk) 23:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Whether the page was created for harassment can be determined by what it says. It starts off

She routinely edit wars with Jc3s5h ...

The overarching reason why we are here is to provide the public with factual information. If you look at Jc3s5h's contributions you find s/he added the following claim at 11:44, 11 May 2016:

the Gregorian calendar ... moved Washington's birthday a year and 11 days to February 22, 1732.

It didn't. Under the calendar reform, eleven (not 376) days were removed. Wednesday, 2 September 1752 was immediately followed by Thursday, 14 September of the same year. 109.154.44.14 (talk) 15:31, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Category:Presbyterian_mayors

A category I created was nominated for deletion by User:Good Olfactory on Nov 4 without notifying me. The discussion is at: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_November_4#Category:Presbyterian_mayors Ottawahitech (talk) 14:12, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Category:Indian_women_by_occupation

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

Thanks, responded at User_talk:BrownHairedGirl#Category:Indian_women_by_occupation. Ottawahitech (talk) 22:53, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

On Ruth Leach Amonette being Swiss

Just curious, how exactly is Ruth Leach Amonette Swiss? Please reply here, I'll see it. Thanks. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 15:41, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

@World's Lamest Critic: I am glad you posted the question, because it is a problem I haven't quite figured out how to tackle. I did not add Category: Swiss people to Ruth Leach Amonette, what I added was Category: People from Switzerland. Categories named People from are used on Wikipedia to describe people who spent time (years) in a particular location (see for example Tom Cruise who is a member of Category:People from Ottawa. Am I making sense? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:53, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps your account has been compromised, then, because someone using your account added the category "Swiss people" with this edit. How long did Ruth Leach Amonette live in Switzerland and how was it significant to her notabilty? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 21:47, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

The Challenge Series

The Challenge Series is a current drive on English Wikipedia to encourage article improvements and creations globally through a series of 50,000/10,000/1000 Challenges for different regions, countries and topics. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are invited to participate.

• Use {{subst:The Challenge series invitation}} to invite others using this template.
• Sent to users at Northamerica1000/Mailing list using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:15, 19 November 2016 (UTC).

On a dead man being a member of an orchestra

Ezra Rachlin is dead, therefore he is not a member of the Fort Worth Symphony Orchestra. You seem to have created a new category Category:Fort Worth Symphony Orchestra members and added Rachin to it. Is that really what you meant to do? It seems like a bad idea to create categories for members of orchestras, since the compostition of the orchestra may change at any time, but that's just my opinion. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:15, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Rachel Maines

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Rachel Maines requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Spike789 ^Talk 22:46, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Please stop editing Vibrator (sex toy) and Female hysteria to add a link to the Rachel Maines page that you created, and that has now been deleted because it is not notable. Mabandalone (talk) 12:46, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Mabandalone: and welcome to my talkpage. Thanks for letting me know that the Rachel Maines page has been deleted because it is not notable. Can you please explain why you believe the page has been deleted because it is not wp:notable? Is this your personal opinion or is it shared by others? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:06, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ottawahitech. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Trump Towers Pune for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Trump Towers Pune is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trump Towers Pune until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mr. Vernon (talk) 22:26, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Re:Help please

I don't know what that means. Apparently the only user groups you belong to are extendedconfirmed,,user,autoconfirmed. Looks as if it's something to do with recent changes but that's not in my parish, I'm afraid. Perhaps someone like MusikAnimal can throw some light on it.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:27, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi! It's where you've edited a Pending Changes-protected article (see WP:PC1) - as you're autoconfirmed, your edits are automatically accepted - that's what the log is recording. It's nothing to do with NPP. Hope that clarifies! Mike1901 (talk) 09:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

@Mike1901: I did not know I had a page stalker. Since I am not an administrator, bureaucrat, or checkuser, I sure hope this does this mean others here think I am a megalomaniac? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:29, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of ByWard Market Square.

Hello Ottawahitech,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged ByWard Market Square. for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. Take a look at our suggestions for essential content in short articles to learn what should be included.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Meatsgains (talk) 03:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

On Loretta Marron being Austrian

@Ottawahitech: How is Loretta Marron Austrian? She was born in Germany and now resides in Australia. You made the edit here. You don't appear to have fixed the mistakes I pointed out earlier - do you intend to fix them? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 05:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Ways to improve List of big data companies

Hi, I'm Robvanvee. Ottawahitech, thanks for creating List of big data companies!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. The article is an orphan and remains unsourced.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Robvanvee 19:00, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about List of residential buildings in India

Hello, Ottawahitech,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether List of residential buildings in India should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of residential buildings in India .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, TheLongTone (talk) 14:44, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of Canadian tribunals

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on List of Canadian tribunals requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:07, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Canadian tribunals for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Canadian tribunals is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Canadian tribunals until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:16, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

List of Canadian tribunals

I suggest that you add some sort of lede to this to give us a bit more ammunition against the AFD. I removed the A1 speedy but the user punted to AFD on the same grounds, so let's make it clear what a tribunal is in Canada. I think the lack of context claim is groundless, but it would be an improvement to the article. I'll do it if you don't want to. Meters (talk) 18:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

List of assets owned by the Trump Organization

Hi Ottawahitech - I'm comparing the List of assets owned by the Trump Organization that you created against the list that's contained in The Trump Organization article, and it appears to me that the latter is more complete and is referenced. Is there a need for a separate/duplicate List of assets owned by the Trump Organization ? PKT(alk) 19:06, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi @PKT: I created the list from the items on Category:Assets owned by the Trump Organization. The Trump Organization has a different list of assets some of which are not included in the category, and at least one item (Beverly Hills estate) which is apparently out of date, or at least undocumented. The AfD is talking about a third list List of things named after Donald Trump, which of course does not mean Trump owns them, so they are not necessarily his assets. What a mess, eh? Ottawahitech (talk) 00:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Indeed ! It's to be expected in the circumstances. That's partly why I don't think the list is necessary - it adds to the mess, somewhat. If the Category exists, in addition to the article I mentioned, the new list is surely redundant, no? PKT(alk) 00:53, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

@PKT: What I think seems is irrelevant, it is now in the hands of the community. Just hold on tight to your seat, the real s will start flying when someone nominates some of the involved categories for deletion (unless it is done quietly behind the scenes). Ottawahitech (talk) 15:19, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of List of assets owned by the Trump Organization for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of assets owned by the Trump Organization is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of assets owned by the Trump Organization until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — JFG ^talk 23:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:Women award winners has been nominated for discussion

Category:Women award winners, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 16:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Your work notes on Talk:Bill 28 (British Columbia)

@Ottawahitech: I've moved your personal notes from Talk:Bill 28 (British Columbia) to User:Ottawahitech/Bill_28_(British_Columbia)_notes. Talk pages are for discussion of article content. News item which are tangentially related (or not related at all) probably don't belong there. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Bill 28

@Ottawahitech: please read Wikipedia's advice about synthesis of information. Bill 28 is a Canadian Provincial bill. If you find reliable third party sources which specifically and directly connect Bill 28 to anti-Chinese sentiment, feel free to add them. And keep your personal notes off the talk page. Thanks. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:Women politicians has been nominated for discussion

Category:Women politicians, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 16:15, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:People who committed sati

[moved from my user talk for the reason more experienced Wikimedians also may participate, quotation start]: == Category:People who committed sati ==Hi Ottawahitech/Archive 3, I know you do a lot of work categorizing India articles and sub-categories, so was wondering if I can ask you a question. Category:People who committed sati is a category that I believe is reserved for women (not people). Am I correct? Would you kindly respond on my talk-page. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:19, 12 December 2016 (UTC)please ping me BTW I know you are not the creator of the category in question, just wanted your opinion, Cheers, Ottawahitech (talk) 16:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Ottawahitech:, as you do, and of course, you may ;-) But, honestly, I would prefer to have involved more experienced Wikimedians who kindly may participate, what about at the category's talk? As you mention imho Sati rather is related to Hindu (Rajput?) women of 19th-century (northern) Indian subcontinent (my personal 'focus' is South India), and centuries before, or even early 20th century? Seasons greetings, Roland zh (talk) 20:01, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

@Roland zh: Thanks for the suggestion: I posted the question at Category_talk:People_who_committed_sati#People_or_women. BTW Roop Kanwar is an example of a woman who committed Sati (practice) in 1987. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:39, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:Women Pulitzer Prize winners has been nominated for discussion

Category:Women Pulitzer Prize winners, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Bearcat (talk) 18:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Bill 165 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bill 165 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill 165 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 04:40, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Hello Ottawahitech: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:30, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Removal of Category: Women administrators?

Moved from user Talk:Good Olfactory in order to keep entire discussion thread together. The request the response be posted here.
Hi Good Olfactory, On 17 November 2016 you removed Category: Women administrators from Suzanne Hale, but left Category: Heads of the Foreign Agricultural Service intact on the same page. Since she is both a woman and a Head of United States federal agency I wonder if you would explain why you removed Category: Women administrators? I would appreciate a response on my talkpage. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:50, 18 December 2016 (UTC)please ping me

Category: Women administrators was not a developed category; it was not part of an overall scheme, and if I recall correctly, Suzanne Hale was the only member in the category. So its application seemed to be an outlier, and I'm not convinced that it's (1) a defining characteristic, which is a general requirement for categories, or (2) properly named. "Administrator" is such a generic term, it could apply to hundreds of different occupations and positions. I wasn't sure if this was meant to mean any woman who is an administrator in any capacity, or whether it was meant to mean women who were administrators of specifically US federal agencies. If the former, it seems way to broad. If the latter, it is woefully misnamed. Either way, with a content count of 1, it would be easier to start over and get things right. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:23, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Just passing by but it's worth having a read of WP:CATGENDER - in general we don't categorise by gender unless it's a notable characteristic. So we have men and women in sport because the competitions are usually gender-segregated, and we have women but not men in cases like astronauts where there's a 90:10 gender ratio, but in general we don't. Or at least shouldn't.... Le Deluge (talk) 01:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@Good Olfactory and Le Deluge: My talkpage is not the place to discuss wikipedia deletion policy. What I would like to know is why this wp:ADMIN participates in underhanded removal of categories created by others. I know GOL did not technically delete category: Women administrators (deleted by User:VegaDark ), but it was his inappropriate action that directly caused this deletion. BTW thank you, GOL, for properly nominating Category:Breakfast restaurants for deletion this time. However, as I am the creator of this category it would have been courteous of you to inform me of your nomination, don’t you agree? Ottawahitech (talk) 20:22, 22 December 2016 (UTC)please ping me

You asked for an explanation on your talkpage of why something was deleted, I thought I was being helpful in pointing you to the appropriate guideline. Woman-iness is no more a WP:DEFINING characteristic of administrators than having a nose, so we don't categorise by gender in this case.Le Deluge (talk) 00:07, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

As an aside, since my name was mentioned, categories deleted via the WP:CSD#C1 criterion can be freely re-created in good faith. If there's a dispute whether this category should exist or not, the likely best course of action would be to re-create and then nominate for CfD where a precedent-setting discussion on the merits can take place. That being said I would tend to agree with the rationale expressed thus far for this category being improper. VegaDark (talk) 03:59, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech:, we've had the discussion several times now (about notification of category creators when CFDs are started). I understand your position and accept it. It's time you make an effort to do the same for my position, which I have explained to you at least 4 or 5 times now. When you repeatedly bring up the same issue with me and I repeatedly explain myself, it starts to look like a case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. If you can't accept it, at least stop bringing it up with me. Next time I won't bother answering. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 09:49, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh, and as for the category—if you really think it is an appropriate category, re-create it (as User:VegaDark indicated, a category deleted as empty can be re-created at any time if it is re-populated). I thought I would save some elbow grease on that one, and possibly some embarrassment for some editors, but if that's not a concern, by all means proceed. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 09:54, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Biographies of filmmakers

Hello! Just a reminder, the Film project does not cover biography articles. Therefore, the {{WikiProject Film}} banner should not be added to articles about actors, directors and filmmakers. Those articles are covered by adding |filmbio-work-group=yes to {{WikiProject Biography}} instead. Thanks! Fortdj33 (talk) 04:23, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Quick FYI...

If you Google search on the exact title of a WSJ, linking to that article from Google somehow always bypasses the WSJ "pay"wall. --MASEM (t) 05:01, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Another reminder to discuss instead of reverting

@Ottawahitech: It's great that you started a discussion on the talk page, but when someone reverts your edit it's a signal to discuss instead of reverting back. You can re-read WP:BRD if this isn't sinking in. Thanks. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 02:34, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@World's Lamest Critic: did you mean over in Homelessness in Vancouver? Ottawahitech (talk) 17:17, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech: I thought was obvious from the diff in my message. I see that you are edit warring there now, too. This seems to be a pattern with you and I will be asking for you to be sanctioned if you don't stop. Thanks. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:05, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

@World's Lamest Critic: You mean like the edit war that started on Royal Bank of Canada on 17:00, 15 January 2014 and ended with a page protection on 00:49, 9 February 2014, and in which only two editors took part? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:48, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech: I'm sure you have a reason for mentioning an edit war from nearly 3 years ago, but that can remain your little secret. The point is when someone reverts you and you don't understand why, do not revert them - start a discussion. You've been editing here a long time and should know how to work with other editors already. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 18:37, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Chris Troutman (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Question at RfA

Sorry I missed your question at RfA. I was regularly checking for new questions but, after a meal, I took a quick look at the recent changes on my watchlist (and somehow missed your question) and then settled down to going through my watchlist which was getting a bit long, so I wanted to process it before things started falling off the end. Time flies when you're having fun! Anyway, I shall be offline for a few hours, shortly. Feel free to ping me.

Seasons greetings!

--Boson (talk) 01:30, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Politicians by religion

After seeing that Jewish mayors have their own category, I tried to create a similar category structure for Presbyterian mayors, but when I got to Presbyterian politicians I saw it had been previously deleted by you. I am not sure it is a good idea to have politicians categorized by their religion, but I do believe we should be consistent. So why are there categories for Jewish X and not for Presbyterian X? I would appreciate it if you could post a response on my talkpage. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 01:48, 28 October 2016 (UTC)please ping mepoliticians by religion

I apologise for the late response.

I suppose the easiest answer would be to point to the addendum to the close which points to Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_November_27#Category:Jewish_politicians, which I presume should answer your question? - jc37 15:22, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

See also: Category:Politicians by ethnicity - jc37 15:27, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Article content

Hi! Here's the content from the article. Cheers! --Tone 17:04, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Liliana Ramos was an illegal immigrant of Mexican nationality who has been deported from the Unites States. Her three minor children, who were born in the United States, continue to live there. Her story was outlined in a USA today article , and started a public debate on deportations of illegal immigrants in the United States

Ramos came to United States with her parents as a teenager. She married, then divorced. She has three minor children who were born in the United States and have American citizenship. She made national headlines when she was deported from the United States after illegally working there for over twenty years. She has been labeled a non-documented worker/ illegal immigrant.

Nomination of List of online real estate databases for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of online real estate databases is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of online real estate databases until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. KAP03 (talk) 20:59, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

business people

You asked whether I still support my 2012 statement that I am not one of the "people who are opposed on principle to articles on businesspeople". You are presumably asking how this is compatible with my recent actions to try to delete man such articles. The answer is that I still would endorse that, but with some significant qualifications.

The reason for the qualifications are the deluge of spam and paid advertising ; it was already a problem 5 years ago, but we weren't as aware of it, and it has expanded greatly since then. I would be strongly in favor of abolishing paid editing altogether, except that this is impossible because we can't eliminate people doing it and hiding, so we need to do the next best thing , which is to permit it if they declare. This restriction, though part of the terms of use, is extremely difficult to actually enforce. So we need additional measures. For example, to increase the interpretation of the notability standards in this area.

This can be done by being more strict in our interpretation of the caveats for "substantial" and"independent" references, but for many years I've supported a more direct approach, which is of formal qualifications. The minimum standard for businessmen should be ceo of an unequivocally notable company, or a VP with major policy making work leading to famous results in a very famous company. (this puts the burden on notable company, and i similarly thing that we need objective qualification here, but that's tricky. My rough cut off is being the dominant national firm in a major industry, or income of >$100 or $200 million (and >$1 or $2 billion assets under management). It would also be useful to have a special rule that round 1 funding for start ups is not reason for inclusion, however strongly documented.

You are therefore right that the net result of this is that I have moved from an inclusionist position for this sort of article to quite the opposite. Variations in the notability standard either way do not really harm the encyclopedia. Accepting advertising destroys it. DGG ( talk ) 16:47, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Ya you both are great! Happy New year!

Rebekahalnablack (talk) 20:12, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Provincial cabinet ministers

Please note that provincial or territorial cabinet ministers do not go directly in Category:Provincial and territorial ministers in Canada — with ten provinces and three territories over 150 years and typically at least one cabinet shuffle per year, that category would be unfathomably and unnavigably large if every provincial or territorial cabinet minister were added directly to it. Rather, each province or territory already has a "Members of the Executive Council of [Province/Territory]" subcategory — if you come across a minister who's missing from that category, then add them there, but please don't add a person directly to "Provincial and territorial ministers in Canada". Bearcat (talk) 04:17, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

@Bearcat: Sorry for stepping into your territory. I'll try to remember in future to let you maintain it all by yourself. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Er, what? It's not "my territory" any more than it is anybody else's, but that still doesn't mean anybody can just do random stuff that's not consistent with the structure. Bearcat (talk) 14:17, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Women politicians. listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Women politicians.. Since you had some involvement with the Women politicians. redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ^Avic_ennasis @ 01:32, 3 Tevet 5777 / 01:32, 1 January 2017 (UTC)