User talk:Phantomsteve/Archives/2015/March
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The Signpost: 04 March 2015
- From the editor: A sign of the times: the Signpost revamps its internal structure to make contributing easier
- Traffic report: Attack of the movies
- Arbitration report: Bradspeaks—impact, regrets, and advice; current cases hinge on sex, religion, and ... infoboxes
- Interview: Meet a paid editor
- Featured content: Ploughing fields and trading horses with Rosa Bonheur
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:44, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
re: Deleted Page Tepperman's
Hi Phantomsteve. Looks like you deleted the page for Tepperman's that I was working on (18:31, 3 February 2015 Phantomsteve (talk | contribs) deleted page Tepperman's (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tepperman's).
Is there any way for me to recover a copy of this? Based on the note above (that admins are able to revert actions by other admins), I'm hopeful that I might be able to recover the page, if only to continue working on it off-line in an effort to get to compliance. When deleted, the page was under revision (using the feedback received) to try to get it to the point where it was deemed "compliant" with the guidelines. Now that it's been deleted I've not only lost the draft, but also the feedback I was using in my efforts to reach compliance.
Any help/ direction you can offer would be appreciated. If you're able to place a short note on my talk page when you've responded here, I would also appreciate that. Ntepperman (talk) 16:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for contacting me. The consensus for deletion was very clear - indeed you were the only person arguing for keeping it. You have a clear conflict of interest, and having looked again at the text on the deleted page, it looked like promotional copy, despite your effects to prevent this. The references were all either press releases, or other material that was obtained from the company - or were at sites that Wikipedia would not consider to be reliable sources. I also see nothing to indicate that the company meets the notability criteria (and especially the criteria for businesses. I know that you would really like your company to have a Wikipedia article - but it does not meet the criteria for inclusion here. As such, I see nothing worth keeping in the draft, and I am therefore declining your request. Regards, PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 11 March 2015
- Special report: An advance look at the WMF's fundraising survey
- In the media: Gamergate; a Wiki hoax; Kanye West
- Traffic report: Wikipedia: handing knowledge to the world, one prank at a time
- Featured content: Here they come, the couple plighted –
- Op-ed: Why the Core Contest matters
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
kezia noblen deletion letter and request
hi there, Firstly thank you for taking the time to read this, i have been in touch with wikipedia and madia and was notified that this was the best best way to talk a deleted page through, the title kezia noble was originally deleted by yourself and i have gone through the notes of 2010 and since then kezia noble has outgrown a lot of people within her industry, She is an author of a book best seller, and has been in the news and tv chanells very often to discuss ongoings within the dating expert communities. This obviousley shows that she is a person of importance within her field as the top media enterprises are always seeking her for answers. Kezia has gone on to offering a noticed certification to her students kezia Has hit the 1million views mark for TOTAL FREE DATING ADVICE over and over on nearly all her videos on the video forums Kezia Noble References include:
Book http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13229670-the-noble-art-of-seducing-women sky news http://news.sky.com/video/1372939/dating-tips-have-gone-way-too-far This Morning ITV http://www.itv.com/thismorning/hot-topics/are-we-suspicious-of-charming-men
Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/kezia-noble/four-best-pick-up-lines_b_5645506.html
Esquire TV http://tv.esquire.com/shows/women-we-love
The Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2288927/Kezia-Noble-Glamorous-sex-guru-claims-teach-men-woman-bed.html
Men’s Fitness
http://www.mensfitness.co.uk/authors/kezia-noble
Men’s Health http://www.menshealth.co.uk/sex/mens-health-dating/5-flirty-ice-breakers-206957
BUZZFEED http://www.buzzfeed.com/hollybaxter/meet-the-woman-who-teaches-men-to-be-pick-up-artists#.tvkewX3pn
Sir, we are willing to take out any self promoting on our page and make any changes you will require for Kezia Noble page to be back up and running via wikipedia , any other changes and stye that you request we are willing to follow , but i can confirm that Kezia is a noticed coach worldwide and Has much media attention with lots of Free Advice that has helped millions of men around the world.
Thanks for taking the time to read this and i await your response in order to handle this matter
Faithfully
Jimmy Sandhu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kezia12121 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for contacting me. Reading the above, it is clear that you have been given the task of promoting Kezia. Indeed, all the references to you that I can find online which I can identify as being you are all promoting Kezia.
- Looking at the links you have given above, they are all either minor mentions, or blatant promotion and/or interviews with Kezia (which are considered promotional, and so not independent). I can find nothing which does not appear to have come directly from you, or from Kezia. The fact that you think that a page about Kezia would be "our page" indicates your close relationship with her/her organisation - a clear conflict of interest. I see nothing to indicate that she meets the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. As such, I see no reason to undelete the article, or for such an article to be on Wikipedia. Regards, PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
dear phantom steve, firstly when i say our page i mean mine and my teams page which we are making, its nothing personal, secondly there are many dating coaches on wikipedia with self promoting all the way, even links to products etc.... heres just one as an example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_La_Ruina . could i please know why there are so many dating coaches on wikipedia who are of much less importamce than kezia please? they are using wiki as a gate way to sales when kezianoble wants to be recognised as an individual expert who provides a lot of free help and an author ?
than you for your time sir
Jimmy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kezia12121 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Jimmy. As mentioned elsewhere, just because other stuff exists doesn't mean that this should - perhaps the others should be deleted too! You obviously think that Kezia has more importance - that is your opinion, but that does not mean that an article should exist. I see nothing in your reply that would persuade me that the thinking I outlined above is wrong, and so I do not believe that there is justification for an article on Wikipedia. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:05, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
WP:RFPP
Hi there's a message that relates to your protection of Cirex in 2011 at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for reduction in protection level. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:37, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- I see you haven't edited in a few days and the request got archived so I unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 19:55, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
- No worries, if there are future problems, it can always be protected again! PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:07, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 March 2015
- From the editor: A salute to Pine
- Featured content: A woman who loved kings
- Traffic report: It's not cricket
.
The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation adopts open-access research policy
- Featured content: A carnival of animals, a river of dung, a wasteland of uncles, and some people with attitude
- Special report: Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year 2014
- Traffic report: Oddly familiar
- Recent research: Most important people; respiratory reliability; academic attitudes
Moved from Wizrdman's talk page:
- Hello Wizardman. I was going to create an article for the information security certification: Information Systems Security Architecture Professional and I saw that you are the Wikipedia Administrator who deleted a prior article about this topic as "No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events))" The earlier article may not have been well written but the certification has significant coverage and industry importance. Can you please restore the old article to my userspace and I will work on it including adding any needed sources to show notability? Thank you. --Thetechgirl (talk) 18:22, 18 February 2015 (UTC) Wizardman. Would this be possible? Thank you. --Thetechgirl (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Thetechgirl: pinging Phantomsteve as he deleted it in 2011 as an advert. Wizardman is currently taking a wikibreak. —George8211 / T 19:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- Hello George8211. Thank you. --Thetechgirl (talk) 20:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- Hello Phantomsteve. Can you please restore the latest version of the article to my userspace and I will work on it including adding any needed sources to show notability? Thank you. --Thetechgirl (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Thetechgirl. There really wasn't much in the article - about 8 lines, basically a brief description of the qualifications and how to obtain the designation. The three refs that were there were included were from Info Security Magazine (which seems to be based on a press release), and the second is from the organisation's own website... neither would be considered independent. The third one was from ZDNET, and the mention of the qualification is on a list of ones that "are paying off" (so one line about this qualification, which hardly could be considered significant coverage). None of these would be suitable in themselves from what I can see. Before I would consider restoring it to your userspace, could you perhaps give a couple of sources here to indicate the kind of independent and reliable sources you would be using? Please leave a talkback on my talk page, as that is easier for me to monitor! Thanks, PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 01:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Are these good?
1) There are multiple books on this topic on Amazon.
2) Also http://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/magazine-features/finding-your-way-an-overview-of-information/
3) http://www.networkworld.com/article/2294624/lan-wan/new-cissp-concentrations.html
4) http://www.zdnet.com/article/20-technology-certifications-that-are-paying-off/
5) http://niccs.us-cert.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/FedVTE%20Course%20List%20072014.pdf
6) https://www.cccure.org/article-print-436.html
7) http://www.myinfosecjob.com/2009/12/certifications-magazine-salary-survey-cissp-concentrations-most-well-paid-professional/
--Thetechgirl (talk) 21:07, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for contacting me again. The multiple books on Amazon do not indicate notability for Wikipedia's purposes; the articles listed above are either minor mentions, or press-release-type mentions. Overall, I'm not seeing the notability for this subject. Sorry. Regards, PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:00, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
License tagging for File:Czech FDC 2015 02 18.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Czech FDC 2015 02 18.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.
To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
- File removed. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 14:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)