User talk:Surfer43/Archive 1

Can You Please Reply To the Bottom

the luan kalana page

South Carolina's 1st congressional district

Just an FYI that I removed your edit as Sanford has not yet won the Republican primary, which will require a run-off. Grsz 11 03:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Your review of Melica brevicoronata

Yes, I forgot to change the reference and added an o in the middle, so now it should be good. You can delete the old one, I recreate it. For the future references though just google the species name and try to renaming it rather than nominating it for deletion, unless you are implying that the article that I created was a synonym.--Mishae (talk) 03:57, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I googled the species name and got 0 results because of the misspelled name. I thought it was the same species because of the source, 0 results, and similarities. Surfer43 (talk) 04:05, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

So what about the above mentioned one, strong keep? By the way, sorry for the misspelling. My native language is Russian so my English can be a bit odd. :)--Mishae (talk) 04:07, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Pipistrellus Bat coronavirus HKU5

Hello Surfer43, thank you for reviewing the article I just created. I don't believe it needs a citation tag. If you check the citations you'll see that all the information in the article is covered by the citations. I'll be expanding the article tomorrow. I'm too tired tonight. Can I remove the tag please? Malke 2010 (talk) 05:18, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I removed the tag, sorry for the inconvenience. Surfer43 (talk) 05:28, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

No problem, thanks. And thanks for reviewing the article so fast. Appreciate it. Malke 2010 (talk) 05:39, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Melica brevicornata

Hello Surfer43. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Melica brevicornata, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: although ref is the same, descriptions and location are different; reference may be an error, let's see what article author says. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 09:14, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Why do want to delete List of Everybody Loves Raymond writers.

I just think it's informative for readers to know who wrote the most episodes of TV shows. --StewieBaby05 (talk) 12:26, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

It would be fine if there were sources. Surfer43 (talk) 15:27, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Tentinator. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Punchbag entertainment, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.  Tentinator  20:38, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Surfer43. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 02:08, 2 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Please email me what I need to change in my article that you would not consider it advertising.Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by IamIrina (talk • contribs) 15:53, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Dear Surfer43, I meant no offense to anybody by my contributions to the Wikipedia article on the "Drama Köprüsü". I only wanted to call attention to the following facts: 1) Mr Latsistalis is not a "Greek historian", even if he likes to be referred to as such. He is indeed a Drama kebab house owner (nothing bad with it), whith no historical education (which is very bad, if he wants to decide on historical matters). 2) The "Bridge of Drama" was not where Mr. Latsistalis and his Turkish friends allegedly "pinpointed" it. What Mr Latsistalis exhibits to visitors –mostly from Turkey– as the "Bridge of Drama" is definitely an aquaduct, 16 kilometres away from the city of Drama. It goes, however, without saying that a bridge called "Drama Köprüsü" should be somewhere downtown Drama and not so far away from it. 3) Unfortunately, Mr Latsistalis, due to his lack of knowledge and his disability to rightly understand historical evidence, deceives not only himself but also the Turkish visitors of Drama; and this I consider a much bigger "vandalism", than to say the harsh truth, even in a... cynical manner. Who is going to stop the charlatans? Nonnamer im sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.107.18.229 (talk) 13:09, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm MusikAnimal. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Precious National College, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. — MusikAnimal ^talk 15:37, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Page Curator marks pages as reviewed whenever tags are placed. Surfer43 (talk) 15:39, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi

I've removed your templated notice from MartzCreative. The 'created in violation' criterion is really for sockpupped-created articles, although it could possibly apply to topic banned editors. Apart from topic banned users, you have to be able to create an article to create an article. And if you can create an article with your only account, you're not blocked. Things might happen later, but it's not a retrospective criterion for any user not site banned and declared anathema for all time. (Even then, a lot things pre-ban are left up if they're worth having or edited by others as well.) Any spamuser blocked user's stuff isn't likely to come under this criterion, unless they're socking as well - and then it is contingent on the result of the investigation. And it's likely to come under the spam criterion anyway.... Good to see you reverted yourself on the tag, anyway. I like to clear notices that don't apply too (but sometimes forget - as do we all, I think...). Peridon (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Modes of mechanical ventilation

stop reverting this. Turn off that terrible bot. | pulmonological ^{talk • contribs} 17:51, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

review request

Hi Surfer, if you get around to it, can you review Human coronavirus HKU1. I just put it up today. Thanks. Malke 2010 (talk) 23:52, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

Hello, Surfer43, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Information about STiki, including: Using STiki and its hotkeys Comparison with other tools Information about vandalism on Wikipedia Here are some pages which are a little more fun: The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users! Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes! We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (developer) and Strike Σagle 05:23, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Trigonometry solved problems

Hello Surfer43 I just wanted to know the reason for speedy deletion of my page i.e. Trigonometry solved problems. Although I am declining it but it is always coming.. So, I just want to ask if u dont delete it cause this article is not finished. I am doing it slowly and I will finish it in few days.. Plz let me make this page.. and plz help me to make.. Waiting for your cooperation and reply.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhisek365 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello Abhisek365, the reason is that your article is not encyclopedic. Worked problems should not be an article on their own. Also, your article is not sourced. Please consider merging some of the content in this into Trigonometry or contributing this to http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Trigonometry, Wikiversity. I mostly recommend the latter. Please do not remove any deletion templates from articles you created. Also, sign your posts with four of these: ~. Surfer43 (talk) 20:50, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Maheu Revert

Hi surf, sorry to hear you didn't like the edit on Maheu,i understand and is ok with me, my reasoning was to my mind it seemed a bit like the implication was a decision on his part whereas from my current work on the family jewels file it seems as if the Agency made it a condition to enable plausible deniability. Personally i reference wiki for info that i expect usually is accurate enough to cite as a reference,i then look for source documents for corroboration. I considered after reviewing the file that if i had come across the Maheu page first,i would believe the CIA exempt of responsibility for encouraging his actions. As such whilst the edit wasn't how you liked may i suggest that you include a suggestion or link to the relevant file? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emergencycode66 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

So, why not revert it to the way it was before I wrote the thing you just reverted it TO?

OH Shit! you are trapped! if you do that, you would be reverting it to what you are reverting it to? OMG!!! something has changed! REVERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You have become adept at clicking on buttons in a game.

You are most assuredly not, as a group, mind, interested in building an encyclopedia. YOU individually Surfer43, may be. But then why mess around blindly reverting something I write which is only that which existed before ... oh fuck it. If you cared, you would not have paid any of this any attention other than contacting the contributors to invite them to write a REAL problem description.

Do you EVER actually pay attention to what you are doing?

Didn't think so.

Actually, that is too harsh. Really though, how about permitting the article to bear some sort of a plea for a proper description of the supposed problem.

Carry on, don't let a few exasperated folk like me ruin your efforts. I mean that, whether you credit it or not.

I will just have to do my research on this particular, critical piece of computer science theory, without Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.19.183.102 (talk) 03:21, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way. I made that revert because of replacing description with ???. Feel free to edit it again. Surfer43 (talk) 03:26, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Landis Valley Museum

I guess you're right. I was trying to get a few columns of bulleted text, like you can see in the "Boroughs", "Townships", and "Census-designated places" portions of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Could you help me fix it? 149.160.168.215 (talk) 18:47, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry I reverted that, I'm not that familliar with that formatting. You can do it any way you like. Surfer43 (talk) 18:51, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Hispaniola greater funnel-eared bat in Los Haitises National Park.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Hispaniola greater funnel-eared bat in Los Haitises National Park.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 19:15, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to know why you think that this picture could be replaced by non-free content or "adequately described by words". The full picture is freely accessible on Panoramio. This is the only picture of the species on the internet. I carefully examined all of the non-free content requirements and see no problem with this picture. Thanks, Surfer43 (talk) 23:42, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

None of that argument makes the photo fair use. Fair use doesn't apply just because you find it hard to get a free photo. The bat still exists and a picture can be taken of it, therefore grabbing a non-free picture isn't legit. Eeekster (talk) 08:48, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

The argument for free use is: this meets all ten criteria on Wikipedia:Non-free content. Why is there such a big problem showing a picture that is not used commercially by the photo taker? And what criteria do you think this does not meet? If you would read the policy, it says that it can be used if no freer alternative of acceptable quality exists, and none does. "Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?" and "Could the subject be adequately conveyed by properly sourced text without using the non-free content at all?" both answer no. This complies with fair use law in every way. Would you have a problem with using the only picture of another solar system from inside it and freely accessible online, but it happened to have rights reserved because they don't want people to pretend it is theirs?Surfer43 (talk) 11:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

It does NOT meet all the criteria since it is most certainly a picture that can be taken be someone. You cannot just grab a picture to use here and say it's okay because it's not being use commercially, that's just theft. Eeekster (talk) 02:42, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

It is NOT theft because it obviously applies to fair use law and all other 9 criterion and gives full credit to the author. You are misusing criterion 1. There is very little known about this species, so only experts/locals would know which bat is the right one. By your logic anything but official logos would fail criterion 1. Wikipedia's content guidlines are best treated with common sense. It should say "could be created" with any reasonableness whatsoever. I was saying that the Photographer was not using the image commercially. I am almost 100% sure the photographer would be fine with this because he is fine with putting it on Google Earth so half the people that look at take it and use it with no credit. That is just theft. Thanks for keeping Wikipedia a content-free place, Surfer43 (talk) 03:25, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

It's says: "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created" That's not negotiable. So please stop arguing and accept the reality of our policy. Eeekster (talk) 03:33, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Five pillars says Wikipedia does not have firm rules. That's not negotiable. So please stop arguing and accept the reality of our policy, reasonableness. Surfer43 (talk) 03:46, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

And yet the image will be deleted. Why? Because it isn't Wikipedia's rule, it's the law. You stole and image and fair use doesn't apply because it can be replaced. Whining about it being too hard doesn't change that. Eeekster (talk) 06:52, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I broke no law. The only law I broke is Wikipedia's firm rules. Please read fair use and stop whining about how any picture that could possibly be recreated does not apply to Wikipedia's fair use, because it complies 100% with the law. US law does not say if it can be recreated, it can't be used. That is just Wikipedia's firm rules.

• I'm done with this discussion. Please take any concerns to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Eeekster (talk) 03:36, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

• I'm also done with this discussion. Surfer43 (talk) 19:24, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

• I'm not. I think Eeekster is WAY out of line, flailing about with accusations of "breaking the law", etc... Completely failing to utilize both common sense and reasonableness. Not only is Eeekster wrong in this instance, but I think the argument can be made and accepted that ANY image that appears in Google Earth is "fair game" for Wikipedia. If the photographer has a problem with that, let him sue Google, or call the cops on Google, and see how far he gets with his demand for justice. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a stooge intended to enforce Eeekster's stunted and hysteric interpretation of "the law". Another "common sense" and "reasonable" consideration is the liklihood that, even in Eeekster's goose-stepping reality is how likely it is to be enforced, and what penalty there may be. Again, the poor, disgruntled photographer can issue a DMCA takedown notice, like millions of other intellectual property owners do each and every day. It's not Wikipedia's job to save him from the effort of doing this, either.Jonny Quick (talk) 05:50, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Filthy Thirteen

Hello Surfer43,

I'm new to this Wikipedia thing. How do I add information about a certain member of the Filthy Thirteen to "flesh out" one of the persons named, whom I knew personally? Any assistance would be appreciated. Hheckler (talk) 05:02, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll see if I can gather all the information needed. Hheckler (talk) 22:04, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Recent edits to AB magnitude

Hello, my edition of that page was a lack of basic information for the use of the formula. Please, if the format was not right, fix it, do not delete.

Thank you. Pmisson (talk) 15:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Surfer43 Its Me Shea I Just Want To Ask Why U Delte My Ash Gray -SheaYayIsDaMaster — Preceding unsigned comment added by SheaYayIsDaMaster (talk • contribs) 16:28, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Archicebus move

Why did you move Archicebus to the species name? The convention for these articles is to use the genus name for fossils when there is only one species described. The only exception is where the generic name is already in use, e.g. Afrasia djijidae because Afrasia is a disambig page. – Maky ^« talk » 18:02, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I was not aware of that. Surfer43 (talk) 18:03, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

It was noted the last time I moved it. Unfortunately, it now requires an admin to move. – Maky ^« talk » 18:06, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

Hi Surfer43/Archive 1. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! -- Mentifisto 03:50, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. INeverCry 02:08, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

WLQR AM TheMojoMan aka Sid D Grubbs

Hello Surfer 43 I'm TheMojoMan aka Sid D Grubbs. I recently added simply "the way I used to say the whole line" I used when I was "on the air" at different radio stations. I trademarked TheMojoMan as a professional name Class 41 (used for radio/tv and personal appearances) USTM # 2 343 775 first used in 1959 when I first started in radio. I apologize if I caused any problems. I'm new to all this and I hope you get this message. I have a webpage TheMojoMan.com which I put up way before FB after I heard a rumor I had died years ago. I don't know how to 'sign my posts" as you say above. But my email address is themojoman@yahoo.com. Please let me know if you got this message. I hope I did this right. Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMojoMan (talk • contribs) 23:10, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Surfer43. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 21:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ERACED EDITS TO KQED

Surfer43:

I have no idea who you are, but I work at KQED and am therefore more qualified than you to determine what is correct or not on our Wikipedia page. KQED has been reorganized and the information that I updated is the most current. It is legally correct. Please refrain from undoing my edits. Sandra HudsonSandra hudson (talk) 00:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Shenyang Jianzhu University

i want you to please upload the details of the website completely or otherwise let me to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali Shah Maknojia (talk • contribs) 09:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Add the details but neutrally. Don't say "the only comprehensive university" or other biased sentences. Please leave your new sections at the bottom of the page. Surfer43 (talk) 12:29, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

"Reasonable" and replaceability

I think it's clear that reasonable people (ha) could disagree about what is meant by "reasonable". I'm just intrigued to test your intuitions. The following two articles were written by me.

• Gymnopilus maritimus is an indistinct mushroom only known for certain from one location in Sardinia. It is likely of no interest to anyone but specialists with an interest in coastal fungal species and/or Gymnopilus species. The only pictures of it online were published with the original description of the species, which is copyrighted and non-free. Attempts to secure a free release have failed.
• Nauru Reed Warbler is a small bird found only on the isolated island of Nauru. There are some pictures of dead specimens in peer reviewed journals and sketches of the species in a few places online (such as have appeared on stamps). Attempts to secure free images have come to nothing.

Would you be inclined to say that these two articles should be illustrated by non-free content? Both are now featured articles, and I have little doubt that they would have failed to pass at FAC if they were illustrated with non-free content. J Milburn (talk) 11:38, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I think it would be reasonable to take a picture of the mushrooms because there is so much information about how it looks. It can be adequately described by words. I also think it would be reasonable to get a picture of the warbler because there is much information on its population, which probably means it can be sighted relatively easy. I really like how you used free pictures of similar species, and in the caption just noted the differences. Free pictures of similar species should probably also have a role in deciding "reasonableness". In my case, if there were free pictures of Natalus stramineus, which can be found in Mexico or nearby Cuba, it would be reasonable to use pictures and describe the "minor" differences. Some books considered them sub-species or even the same. I just found a free image of it on flickr. I will probably use that one. That's my intuitions(can you say it like that?). Nice job getting the articles to featured status even with little sources. Surfer43 (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Please put any other comments on the rfc. It would probably be helpful. I moved this there. Surfer43 (talk) 19:10, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I do find this RfC interesting because it relates so closely to articles I write and work with. J Milburn (talk) 23:36, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Can I also introduce you to Template:External media. I use this on both of the articles I mentioned as a compromise position. Would definitely be suitable for the bat article (or would be, were the article longer- a simple external links section would also work). J Milburn (talk) 23:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

On a loosely related note, I've started work on expanding the article on the bat. Seems like there's a lot of literature out there, and I'm hardly an expert on bats, so while it will take a little while, it shouldn't be too hard to get it up to GAC level. J Milburn (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I will try to help also. Its just a lot to sort through. On the deletion review, Thincat showed me some good sources. Surfer43 (talk) 01:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

There are dozens of sources. I really don't see why you think that the species is "poorly known"- it seems very well known. I actually thought you may have a case concerning irreplaceability when I first saw this article, but I'm really now rather surprised that you think a non-free image could be justified in the slightest. Look again at my examples above- it's less isolated than the Nauru Reed Warbler, far more common and easy to identify than Gymnopilus maritimus, and seemingly better known than both. There are a comparable number of pictures on the internet of all three, and the bat is far closer in appearance to its closest relative than either the mushroom or the bird, it seems. J Milburn (talk) 01:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

(From User Talk:J Milburn) I'm putting the non-free image thing behind me. I didn't realize there was so much information on the species and so many sources. I think I'll be working a lot on the Natalus genus now with the info and sources provided at http://www.jstor.org/stable/1375114. I wasn't lying when I said there was only one picture of it on the internet, I was simply mistaken. Thanks, Surfer43 (talk) 03:09, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm glad to hear that. Perhaps you should make your new position clear on the various discussions? They remain open, and if they aren't decisively closed, we're going to see this keep rearing its head for a while... J Milburn (talk) 08:14, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

 Done I moved to "No need for change". I will endorsed deletion on the deletion review(don't want another discussion on FFD). Thanks, Surfer43 (talk) 17:25, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	good job. Penguinsruleman1 (talk) 03:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Surfer43 (talk) 03:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

That's strange, coming from you. You have barely any edits. I once reverted your vandalism. Surfer43 (talk) 03:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Natalus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rostrum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Tying up a loose end

Re this comment/retraction, when I wrote "our article" I was only trying to distinguish between the Wikipedia article and the sources we were discussing. "Our" referred to you, me, and the Wikipedia community. Sorry for any miscommunication. --Nstrauss (talk) 21:21, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for warning you. Surfer43 (talk) 21:59, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

WLQR AM The MojoMan TheMojoMan (talk) 02:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I was so proud of my days at WOHO (Now known as WLQR) I wanted to put the whole line I used when working there. I think I was "rapping" before it had a name. Nippsy Russell (the Black Comedian)to me was really the first rapper. Anyone that worked there during my days will get it. One of my heroes is LEW DICKEY SENIOR,,I knew LEW JR as a kid playing in the hallways of the station. Lew Dickey Jr is the President of CUMULUS,second only to CLEAR CHANNEL in radio station ownership in AMERICA. The previous article about WLQR included the name of the "news guys",,which I thought was nice,,I see they're gone on this new one. Maybe I caused an earlier problem by inserting my news guy's name about a year ago. STEVE LEWIS. I wasn't watching after I did that,,maybe you or someone thought it was vandalism then. I wasn't "into" the correct way to edit something then. I noticed his name was missing from the list,,So I inserted it. I don't look at WIKIPEDIA everyday,,just ocassionaly. TheMojoMan.com (on FB it's Sid Themojoman Grubbs) Thanks again.TheMojoMan (talk) 00:28, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome!

As you've probably noticed, I'm not the most active editor. I'm not sure there's a need for a bureaucratic backlog category (or whatever) per se, but I for one am glad that you pointed out that the usurpation page was running behind. Incidentally, you should be autoconfirmed again now (I assume that being renamed while editing caused some sort of glitch). If you aren't, please let me know and I'll confirm your account manually and get in touch with the developers. Pakaran 10:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

No, once I logged out of my old account and logged into my new account it was fine. It was strange because my watchlist was empty, and I was clearing the cache until I realized what happened. Surfer (talk) 10:29, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

That seems standard, then. I've not heard of the specific issue with semi-protected pages before, but being unable to edit while logged out makes sense. I'd be a bit more concerned if you'd continued to be unable to edit for some time. There's been some minor glitches with renaming accounts in the past (and it seems to be more likely the more edits the account has). You're now showing up for me as autoconfirmed, reviewer and rollbacker, and all your edits got moved to the new name, so I'm assuming you're all set. Pakaran 10:40, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. Surfer (talk) 10:42, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Natalus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chihuahua (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:39, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Meerkat

My action was a direct result of the end of pending changes trial. It has nothing to do with my administrative decision. Please use the appropriate channel (e.g. article talk page, WP:RFPP) for changes to the article's protection level. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 23:38, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Neurohop Page

I'm not used to writing for wiki but it means a lot to me that there is a page for Neurohop, so any help would be vastly appreciated.

As of yet there is very little hard knowledge on the subject but I'm doing research. Thank you.

51/49

You marked my page 51/49 - The smart HR for deletion. I object as the content is original and introduces a new concept in management that Salman Munir developed after his experience as an HR professional spanning 3 decades. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZehraM5 (talk • contribs) 05:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry, but Wikipedia does not accept original research. See WP:NOR. Please sign comments with four tildes like this: ~~~~. Thanks, Surfer43 (talk) 05:53, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

We didn't copy it it was written for us by Devoll.net ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishocica1948 (talk • contribs) 21:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

MY WALL HAS EXPLANATION BYE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishocica1948 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

WHY

Why did you delete my informative and essential page. Devoll.net has writen this stuff specifically for him. Do you even understand albanian ? Can you read albanian ? My page was accurate an copywrited and the infromation was aproved by Luan Kalana himself. I dont apreciate you deleting this albanian wikipedia page . Have a nice day ! WRITE ME BACKKKK Vishocica1948 (talk) 03:34, 20 July 2013 (UTC)Vishocica1948

what kind of references do you want me to put

i know i didn't cite many references for my page, list of aten asteroids by semimajor axis (0.65-0.7) but i couldnt find many other things to cite, after searching the internet. could you clarify what exactly you want more citing on so i can look specifically for that? Exoplanetaryscience (talk) 21:52, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, if there are none, its okay. Just remove the tag. Thans, Surfer43 (talk) 22:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC).

what more do i need

what more do i need to add to my article to prevent i from being deleted — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czheck (talk • contribs) 23:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Contest Keith Kenny Speedy Deletion

Hi Surfer 43, Thank you for reviewing the Keith Kenny article. I still have a lot more biographical work to do on the piece but was just trying to get started to make sure my references were suitable. Please advise on the best way to move forward. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephancypants (talk • contribs) 03:59, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I removed the deletion template because you fixed it. I would add any sources you can find and put in the article why he is significant. Welcome to Wikipedia! Surfer43 (talk) 04:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Surfer43, just to clarify, you do see an assertion of significance in the article? —C.Fred (talk) 04:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

No, I would like to, and it will be deleted if it isn't asserted. Surfer43 (talk) 04:26, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Surfer, Thanks again for your involvement with the article. The article is a work in progress but I have included sources that identify Keith as a notable figure in the Asbury Park Music scene. following the wiki musician criteria, note 7 states that the candidate "Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability" Keith has had multiple award nominations in Asbury Park and in 2008 he won an asbury music award which is cited in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephancypants (talk • contribs) 17:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

for your review! -Darouet (talk) 11:32, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Problem with your User page

Hi! I visited your user page (User:Surfer43) and noticed a problem. At the top of the page, there is one sentence ("Hi, I'm Surfer..."). In that sentence words "STiki", "Huggle" and "creating articles about mammals" are linked. But, I cannot click on those links. It seams like this sentence is actually in the background. It sits behind the <div> that contains userboxes. I thought maybe you'd like to fix that. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. Surfer43 (talk) 23:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Could you fix it? On my computer it works fine. My userpage varies from computer to computer. And I don't know much html. Surfer43 (talk) 01:30, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I fixed it. I think it would work fine now. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Dzierzynski Bitz speady deletion tag

Hi. Please, clarify why the text "doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough". This band plays definitely unique style, not similar to the western bands but having a lot of feedbacks in the western press. This article gives overview of their history, music and releases. I really believe the encyclopedia should have the information about that fact. Greets, Eugene PS You can find some citations in the references paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whatadayday (talk • contribs) 07:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I removed the deletion tag because it does assert significance. Please find more sources so it will be considered notable. Sign your posts on talk pages with four tildes like this: ~~~~. Surfer43 (talk) 14:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Whatadayday (talk) 23:10, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Added 3 more references. Let me know is it alright now.

Janusz Rębielak ‎

The article asserted he had written many books and designed important buildings. Depending upon the sourcing, he may or may not be considered notable , but it certainly represents some degree of importance, and does not qualify for speedy deletion as A7.

I notice a good number of your speedy deletion nominations have been declined by other editors. Please review WP:CSD, and remember thecriteria are applied narrowly as written. When they do not quite fit, use PROD or AfD. DGG ( talk ) 03:30, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

My new page

Hey surfer,

Thnks for reviewing. Do you mean the inclusion of the antivirus website in the references? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge junkie india (talk • contribs) 20:06, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I didn't understand what you meant by "Remove the primary source(from their website) and information based upon it.".

Thanks

Knowledge junkie india (talk) 20:12, 16 August 2013 (UTC)Knowledge_junkie_india

Hi, the website [1] is the company's website, correct? Information, especially key points, should be (mostly) from sources independent from product or company articles so the information is WP:Verifiable. More information is at WP:Independent sources. A related WP policy is WP:No Original Research. Besides that the article is great. Welcome to Wikipedia! Surfer43 00:27, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Bárbara Seixas

Hi, I appreciate your effort in "flagging/tagging" articles, but since when is a bronze medal at a World Championship not notable? FvSBG (talk) 03:13, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Since the article did not have rederences to multiple published reliable secondary sources about the individual (making it fail WP:GNG) and WP:Notability (sports) does not gauruntee notability for winning anything in volleyball or beach volleyball. If the person is notable, they should have multiple published reliable sources. The notice only says may not be notable and gives how to prove notability. Surfer43 03:33, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Not specifically on beach volleyball, but is states: The guidelines on this page are intended to reflect the fact that sports figures are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have, for example, participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level (such as the Olympics). Which the World Championships obviously are, so even participating would be notable enough, however this athlete was even winning a medal. FvSBG (talk) 10:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published[2] non-trivial[3] secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent,[4] and independent of the subject.[5] The guidelines on this page are intended to reflect the fact that sports figures are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have, for example, participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level (such as the Olympics).

Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; conversely, the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. WP:Notability (sports) si intended to show if it is likely to be notable. The reason beach volleyball is not included is the following.

Q5: I want to create a new sports-specific notability guideline or revise an existing one. What approach should I take?[hide] A5: Consider what criteria that, if met, nearly 100% guarantees the sports figure will have significant, independent, non-routine, non-promotional secondary coverage from reliable sources. Test your proposed criteria by trying to find persons who meet them but do not have appropriate secondary coverage. It's best to keep your criteria fairly conservative, since for most contemporary persons, establishing notability via the general notability guideline is straightforward enough and the additional buffer time provided by a sports-specific notability guideline isn't needed, so trying to draw a more liberal line isn't worth the effort. Many discussions on rules of thumb start with, "This league/championship is important," or "This sport is popular in country X." While these arguments provide indirect evidence, a much better way to reach an agreement is to double-check if everyone meeting the proposed criteria has appropriate sources meeting the general notability guideline. For example, for an individual championship, you can list everyone who has won the championship and, for each person, the corresponding sources that show he/she meets Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. Surfer43 16:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Article "Epilepsy surgery and art"

I noticed that in the paragraph when I mention Juan Bravo, the encyclopedia linked the name with another person, I think the Peruvian painter Juan Bravo does not have Wikipedia profile

Thanks

Jose Tellez

SriHost

Hello Surfer43 Srihost is exactly what the website does,Its an online tool to help webdesigners. Iam not promoting any website here,If a visitors wants to know is their any tool that can make his/her work easy by creating css code/html code ,then its good for them to know about srihost,It would be great if you let me know what type of promotion did you find?srihost.com do not put any ads on their website/its compleately free tool then how can it be promoting?Please elaborate what you have in mind..if you think its a promotion then you will not find any website in wekipedia like stat counter or other,check it by your self and tell me how other websites are different from srihost ,and whats that i have to make to it keep it posted ,

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriducati (talk • contribs) 07:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

The article was generally promotional, I cannot remember specifics or see them because the article was deleted. If you wish to have the article, you must make it nuetral and cite multiple reliable secondary sources. Surfer43 07:40, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Zbečník stream

What should be done with the infobox, not to show expression error.--Toмa646 (talk) 09:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know more than you. Just try different things. Don't worry if you can't fix it. Surfer43 14:24, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Your signature

Please review WP:Signature, which says (in WP:SIGLINK) "Signatures must include at least one direct internal link to your user page, user talk page, or contributions page; this allows other editors easy access to your talk page and contributions log. The lack of such a link is widely viewed as obstructive." Your signature has none of those. Could you please add a link? Thanks, Ansh666 19:26, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

I didn't touch my preferences for this. Let's see if it works: Surfer43 19:43, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Surfer43 19:45, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Surfer43 19:54, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Surfer43 19:55, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

That's odd, prefs should default to having a link. Anyways, thanks for getting it so fast (guess I was lucky to post when you were on!). Ansh666 20:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Praveenkumarchrg

Hi there,

I have come across Praveenkumarchrg during my additions to the Gandhidham Bg Railway Station page & well i dont quite know what he has been doing but he has logged over a hundred edits inside of 48 hours.

My question - (1) Does this number of edits on a page not trigger a automatic review of his actions by an admin or someone with review status. (2) I believe he needs some guidance on what he is doing regarding his edits. How can he be helped? Superfast1111 (talk) 18:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, first of all I am not aware of any trigger caused by hundreds of hours in 48 hours. Second, the biggest problem with his articles are that they don't even state what the subject is and what it is, making there be no context. He also seems quite persistent in removing speedy deletion templates (which he was blocked for). I suspect he can barely speak English. He may not have WP:COMPETENCE. My advice would be to guide him as he goes, and let him learn. Surfer43_¿qué_pasa? 19:21, 20 August 2013 (UTC)