User talk:DanielRigal/2011

tb

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

(and again *grin*)

Regarding the page "Andrej Panic"

You may deem the page as inappropriate, but I seek to inform the world about Andrej Panic and make sure he is caught and dealt with! (22:30 06 January 2011)

Allo1010 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allo1010 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

We are trying to write a serious encyclopaedia here. Now quit messing about or you will get yourself blocked! --DanielRigal (talk) 22:34, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

asking for re-evaluation of page

Daniel,

Would you mind looking at the new entry for Jason_Schmitt. I think we have taken care of the issues that you initially raised.

Thanks!

76.226.134.60 (talk) 14:12, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

So serious...

Please, look at: The Century and the Millennium; Cardinalists vs. Ordinalists. Friendly, --WPK (talk) 18:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Unreferenced defamation

Why defend dishonest actions by Kongregate? Do you work for them? What is the source of your bias?

And, thanks for making Wikipedia less useful with your attacks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.103.145.145 (talk) 22:40, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

You are the one engaged in making attacks. You took two news articles that did not mention malware and tried to spin it into a defamatory story about a company that you seem to have a grudge against. There is no reference to support your claims of "malware" or a "back door". This is seems to be just a disagreement about T&Cs. Stop pushing your own spin now or you will get blocked. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Some attention would be needed

Hi. Since you seem pretty active at patrolling WP pages for vandalism (good on you), you might want to pay closer attention to the Mahmudali Chehregani page, which has been under constant vandalism for quite some time. If the situation doesn't get any better, I will be forced to inform someone with higher authority to deal with the matter. Thanks. 84.23.140.55 (talk) 01:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I put it on my watchlist. I can't promise to look at it actively. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Time Cube

The Church of Time Cube was one of the organizations Gene Ray created to promulgate his Time Cube theory. The rites posted were developed by him and his followers and put into practice. The explicitly reference "Dr. Gene Ray" and were written by one of his chief disciples. — Theseus1776 (talk

Yet the article doesn't mention a "church" or any "disciples". There is nothing to corroborate that this is not just a blog that uses the word "official" with reckless abandon. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

IP vandalism re:season 3 of Mr. Men and others

Vandalism perpetrated by:

80.42.229.169

80.42.224.70

80.42.236.235

80.42.224.130

80.42.236.134

80.42.235.17

80.42.227.142

Perhaps a range block is in order? --Skywatcher68 (talk) 06:39, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I am not an admin, and I don't have the tools to see if any innocent people might be affected by a range block, but it is certainly worth suggesting this it at Wikipedia:ANI. --DanielRigal (talk) 10:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

User:Willfults

I see you've dealt with this user before for his POV pushing. He's currently trying to push an SDA POV on the Waldensians article (again), and I'm at 3 reverts. There's also a discussion at WP:NPOVN about it. I'm currently heading off to my birthday dinner with my family and would appreciate the help. Thanks. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:24, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm leaving your changes Ian until admins can make a decision. So I will not revert your changes. Thanks. Willfults (talk) 23:31, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

4th Generation Data Leak Prevention

Hi, I just created one article in Wiki and you marked that it should be deleted because there is no clues about the 4th Generation of DLP, your reason.I did some research about DLP on my master project and there are 3 existing types of DLP on the market at this time and this is what I got from doing Google search: http://www.whatech.com.au/technology-releases/software/1568 http://www.securitymattersmag.com/security-matters-magazine-article-detail.php?id=453

So can you help me to get over it?

Thank you. -Vinh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heomap1983 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry but you can't hope to write an encyclopaedia article from one company's marketing material. This was discussed the last time the article was created and the decision was to delete. That decision stands.

We already have an article on DLP and that can be expanded, so long as the the material is not promotional. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:57, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

woodside juniors artical

ok, i'll delete the artical thanks, LoyaltyCard (talk) 22:23, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

ECJ asked to rule on re-sale of software licences

I've added some comments and a suggested new section to the Discount-Licensing.com webpage relating to the first case on used licences to be referred to the ECJ. I would appreciate your feedback. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Discount-licensing.com (Jonhorley (talk) 10:16, 3 March 2011 (UTC))

Simple Is Beautiful

Regarding potential conflict of interest, I created my user page that explains my current positions (I am the author of the post on my partnership, as well as Chair and Professor at Parsons Paris) and provides links to a website of articles dealing with architecture, design and urban planning I wrote from 1991 to 1997 and the blog I currently keep on communication design.

I was Assistant Editor at I.D. Magazine from 1990-1993, and I understand the importance of neutral language, references, fact checking, etc. I do not consider that I have served my personal interests over Wikipedia's. Best regards, --Dbk ubk (talk) 08:35, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, I am not sure how to proceed. Do you make the judgement call and remove the headers in the post? Do I? Does someone else? --Dbk ubk (talk) 17:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

BLP, ethnicity, gender

Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#Include "ethnicity, gender," to match all other guidelines

Wikilawyers have been trying to drive through a wording loophole in WP:BLP, saying ethnicity and gender of WP:EGRS don't apply to living persons, simply because the two words aren't in the policy. (Apparently, they think it should only apply to dead people.) I see that you have participated on this topic at the Village Pump.

They also are trying to remove the notability, relevance, and self-identification criteria at WT:EGRS, but that's another fight for another day, I'm simply too busy to watch two fronts at the same time.
--William Allen Simpson (talk) 21:25, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Usuario:LoyaltyCard

A tag has been placed on Usuario:LoyaltyCard, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your reasoning on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 18:00, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Ugh. Sorry. I forgot to tag those redirects for speedy deletion after I moved the content back to the correct namespace. --DanielRigal (talk) 19:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Yestofairervotes.png

Thanks for uploading File:Yestofairervotes.png. 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) 23:07, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

I-OOA

I've declined the A7 speedy on that article on the grounds of an ineligible topic. Whether you want to initiate an AfD is up to you. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 01:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Page Edit

Hi DanielRigal, I had made changes to the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JJ_Kavanagh_and_Sons It was not ment to be promotional, but more true and informative. I agree, I probably should not have put a phone number,now that I look at other pages like it. At the same time, there were changes such as the type of coaches we use are Setra 415 and 416 not 300 and 400. It had also listed routes that we provide, teams that we sponsor, associations we are members of and companies we have taken over. I added to these to give a truer indication of what the company is about and what it has done. Would you be happy for me to make these adjustments again, leaving out the phone number of course. Thanks JJ Kavanagh & Sons (talk) 09:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

It is best to avoid any appearance of conflict of interests that can arise from editing an article for a company you are associated with. (I never edit the article about my employer for this reason.) I recommend you put your proposed text, or a maybe list of suggestions, on the article's talk page instead and let other people see what they think. --DanielRigal (talk) 19:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The Editor's Barnstar

		The Editor's Barnstar
		Your unflagging pursuit of excellence puts the rest of us to shame! --LK (talk) 07:09, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Wow! A barnstar! Thanks! --DanielRigal (talk) 21:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Long overdue dude! --LK (talk) 06:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Page creation - Norbert Goeneutte

Hi Daniel - how's things? I worked on the Idiot Abroad page, which was originally quite self-promotional. It looks good now, good work. However i was wondering if you'd be interested in helping me create a page for the French Artist Norbert Goeneutte. He has a page on French Wiki, but not in English and is a well known and established impressionist artist with many paintings in top galleries. I have only recent discovered him, but have a reasonable amount of text on him that i have found in several auction site biographies. Questions: 1) Can we just translate the French page - though the references are lacking 2) Do these auction sites (some of them reputable such as Christies) meet the notability guidelines? Here is a snippet about the artist:

Norbert Goeneutte was the eldest son in a family of six children. As an aspiring artist he was placed in a difficult position when his father died in 1871, leaving him to support this large family. In 1872 he nonetheless enrolled at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, joining Isidore Pils’s studio. There he admired Pils’s watercolour views of Parisian street scenes executed during the siege. After the death of Pils, Henri Lehmann became his new master. During the second half of the 1870s, Goeneutte met Marcellin Desboutin, who taught him to etch. He also befriended many of the Impressionists, including Degas and Renoir, and he often acted as a model for the latter. He never participated in the Impressionist exhibitions and instead remained loyal to the official Salon where his pictures were shown from 1876 onwards. Success at the World’s Fair exhibition of 1889 and at the ‘Salon of the Société Nationale des Beaux-Arts’ in 1890, allowed him to travel to Venice, Holland and London. His ill health forced him in 1891 to settle in the country-side town of Auvers-sur-Oise, placing himself under the care of Dr. Gachet who became a close friend. Here he died three years later, at the early age of forty. Goeneutte’s oeuvre is relatively small but extremely varied, both in subject matter and in technique. His paintings are relatively rare. Googly75 (talk) 17:00, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Normally translating an article on another Wikipedia is a fairly safe bet but any deficiencies in the other language version may attract more scrutiny once they are in English. Lack of sources would be a problem but I think it will be fine if you translate it and add in some references to support it as you go, correcting any mistakes and omitting anything that fails verification.

If he is in several well known galleries then that is a good start. If those galleries have produced biographies of him then they may be better sources than the auction houses. The auction houses are usable too but will may tend to be more promotional so I would be a bit more careful with them.

Proof of solo exhibitions would be good.

I found this: [1], which is short but comes from a very good source and was also published by Tate in a book. There is a whole page on him in this book [2]. There are also some Google Scholar hits. I haven't looked at them in detail but I am sure some will be usable. He also got a short obituary in the New York Times: [3] and some other news coverage.

It is easily enough to persuade me that that, while not in the very top tier of impressionist artists, he is notable enough for an article. There may not me enough source material for it to be very detailed but he definitely deserves a few paragraphs. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:56, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Daniel Thanks, they are very good sources. I will get on with the translation and put in the appropriate references. I think the best stuff will be mainly from the Google Books sources, and so will dig more through them. I'll keep you updated. But i think i will just get a page up then spend time working on it. Googly75 (talk) 12:12, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! -Mike Restivo (talk) 20:12, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. That was really unexpected. I don't really think of myself as particularly modest. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

RE: Spongebob Squarepants (season 8)

Hey there thanks for putting up mistake i went to spongepedia.org (or .com) I forgot. And saw those episodes. Qantasplanes (talk) 10:41, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

re PKK article

I refer to your edit summary here. You might not be shocked to learn that the ip devolves to an address supplied by TurkTelekom - which also answers the query contained in your summary. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

About PKK Terrorism Activities Link

Hi, Why did you remove the PKK Terrorism Activities link. It is not a unapprotiate link. It links the pkk activities, and it is not a blog page --Ermancetin (talk) 21:30, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Because it is just an anonymous blog. We can't link everybody's blogs to articles. Please do not put it back. (And that goes double if it is your own blog.) --DanielRigal (talk) 21:34, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

What does it mean "goes double" ?

That page is a Turkish media headlines service, no problematic writings in it. I want to know where it is written that the link is unapprotiate, I searched so far but couldn't find anythink, thanks --Ermancetin (talk) 21:52, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

It's a blog, see WP:ELNO. It says it's a blog. It also says "This blog is created to facilitate an open discussion," Please don't add it again. Dougweller (talk) 01:08, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

"Goes double" is just a way of saying something is twice as applicable or twice as powerful. I guess not everybody understands the term. In this case it means that it would be twice as bad to add the blog again if it is your own blog. This is because it would then be breaking two rules (WP:COI as well as WP:ELNO). --DanielRigal (talk) 10:07, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Page

That tag of deletion of that page ws put by me only.

I have created http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Films_directed_by_Basu_Bhattacharya and therefore http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Films_directed_by_Basu_Bhattacharya needes to get deletedPaglakahinka (talk) 21:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Financial repression

Daniel, Thanks for your help with getting the page better organized. Is there a reason why the updating is not yet publicly displayed? I think some people clicking over from some of the other wiki pages I added it to are confused (e.g., taxation). Ghileman (talk) 15:53, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Not that I can think of. When you update an article the result is normally effective immediately. Even if there is a delay with the database it normally becomes visible within a few seconds. --DanielRigal (talk) 15:58, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

re: you deleting my posts.... please email me...if possible with an email that is not blocked

Dear Daniel,

I can see that you keep deleting my posts. I am not advertising. We are in fact the largest distributor of sinus treatments through a state of the art ultra sonic nebulizers - if you read what was written... they reference that they are unsure about who has the latest device that can deliver the medication...that is US! How would you like me to say this? WE are exclusive in this aspect...we are the only company who provides this tx with a nebulizer nationwide...to 14,000 insurance companies and it is appropriate to mention this... we are in a class by ourselves. I would love to hear how you would like me to say this. I write articles for this company...and Irealized that we need to be posted.... so please let me know what I need to do...

Sincerely,

Brooke

Nebulizer --- posting... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinusdynamics (talk • contribs) 23:40, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

You need to stop editing articles on subjects in which you have an obvious conflict of interests. If you do not then you will get permanently blocked. I really can't put it more simply than that. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:40, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Edits for Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports page

Hi hi, noticed you reverted the deletions i made on the above page. While i'm definitely not for censorship, that whole chunk needs to be referenced because it sure sounds and looks like a POV, not facts. If you can ref credible sources (not blogs, personal opinions), i'm ok for leaving it there with more neutral wording. I'm not for either side, just need to be neutral and factual. Thanks! :) Alverya (talk) 01:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

We definitely need to have some critical coverage in the article. I am aware that it needs better referencing. I have suggested to its original author that he try to find some references and he also recognises the need for this. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:42, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Featured in an exhibition of Wikipedia Art

We are currently installing an art exhibition of work by Scott Kildall and Nathaniel Stern at Furtherfield Gallery in London. It features Wikipedia Art. Your comment makes a fine contribution to the show.

Thank you: )

Marc and Ruth, Furtherfield

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruthcatlow (talk • contribs) 11:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

LOL. I can't believe that people are still interested in this. It all seems a bit, well, silly. I would have liked to have seen them use the MediaWiki software (on their own website) as a platform for collaborative art rather than focus on an aspect that seems to be little more than a provocation or a stunt, with no obvious actual artwork resulting. I know a lot of great artists have enjoyed pulling stunts but it takes more than a few stunts to be be a great artist. I guess I should be seeing this more in a performance art context, where the nature of the actual artwork can be elusive. If it is on the wall of an actual art gallery then I can hardly say it isn't art without sounding like one of the twits who complained about Carl Andre, and I wouldn't want that. ;-) It will be interesting to hear what other people make of it. No promises, but I might try to drop by the gallery myself and see it all in context. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I think you're right. It's useful to think of Wikipedia Art as artistic provocation that explores and performs the formation and use of networks in contemporary life. We would be honoured to welcome you the gallery with a cup of tea and a piece of cake. Nathaniel and Scott are here till tomorrow if you would like to meet them. They are not nearly as waggish as you might expect.

Respect : )

Marc and Ruth, Furtherfield — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruthcatlow (talk • contribs) 12:35, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: The Stress Adventure

Why don't you read the source? It's not a hoax. And if you actually looked at the history page, I moved it from this to Diary of a Wimpy Kid (book 6), and an IP recreated the page, which is now at AfD. CTJF83 16:56, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

There are currently two "sources" on that article. Neither contains the word "stress" hence the title is a hoax. If I make an a copy of the article on Mein Campf and call it "Mr Happy Goes To Berlin" the fact that Mein Campf is a real book doesn't mean that my article would not be a stupid, blatant hoax liable for deletion under G3. Please just accept that you made a mistake and put the G3 back on for another admin to check. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I didn't create the article, I told you, look at the history/log. Oh, what does this and [4] mean to you? The title may be incorrect, but the book itself is not a hoax. That's why we have the AfD going. I'm not an admin, anyone but the page creator, which I'm not can remove a speedy deletion tag. CTJF83 17:50, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

It wasn't my intention to suggest that you created the article. I just wanted to illustrate the G3, blatant hoax, applies to hoax content about real subjects as well as hoax content about things that do not exist. I am not disputing your right to remove the speedy deletion tag, just trying to persuade you that it was a mistake to do so and encourage you to put it back. If you want us to go through a farcical AfD on the subject instead then I guess we will have to. I would just like to point out that if we had an AfD every time there was a Wimpy Kid blatant hoax we would waste a lot of time that could be better spent on other stuff so I would rather we kept the AfDs for stuff that is genuinely borderline and requires discussing. --DanielRigal (talk) 19:22, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Well when you say "accept that you made a mistake", it is personal. That aside, G3 says, "blatant hoaxes" and I don't think it is blatant. CTJF83 19:26, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Yara Gambirasio

I understand murder victims aren't notable, but the case of Yara is the most debeted murder case of Italy nowadays. There are about 935000 webpage with the exact phrase "Yara Gambirasio".User:Lucifero4

It would have to be pretty extreme, like the Maddeline McCann case in the UK, for that to be enough. If there is more to it, something that illuminates an encyclopaedic subject, then that might save it. If you think that is the case then take the PROD tag off and add additional references to demonstrate that this is so. --DanielRigal (talk) 19:42, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Shonen Knife changes

I am the owner of Shonen Knife's US record label, Good Charamel Records (i also play with the goo goo dolls), we also represent them as management in N. America.

why are my updates being removed from the page ?

The band has instructed me to remove their last names from wikipedia and add the new CDs released since the last update.

thanks

Robbytakac (talk) 21:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)robbytakacRobbytakac (talk) 21:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I have replied on your talk page. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:30, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Lohse-Wächtler

Dear Daniel, I read the article Degenerate Art and was a little bit upset about the formulation "no artists were put to death because of their work". This is what the nazi-regime has told. But you wouldn´t believe them, would you? There is no proof for the innocence of the regime, so we should change the formulation or give examples for possible exceptions. As every historian knows the Nazi Euthanasia Programme was used to kill people for very different reasons as officialy stated. (see Euthanasia). Elfriede Lohse-Wächtler was on the nazi-list of Degenerate Art, so there you have a possible motive for her murder. Do you know any other motive? The official one? So formulate it as you wish but please not as the article claims know. Greetings Wikinger — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikinger314 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

We need to have references in reliable sources, not conduct our own investigations. If there were a documented example of an artist being certified as mentally ill who was not, purely because of their art and that lead to their being murdered then it would certainly be well worth including it in the article. Trouble is that we don't have that example as yet. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:12, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, then let´s delete the phrase "no artists were put to death because of their work" because you can´t prove that either. At least some of them were "put to death", the motive is unknown.

Greetings Wikinger — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikinger314 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

It says "Although officially no artists were put to death because of their work," (my emphasis) and it has a reference so I don't feel comfortable removing it. I don't have access to the reference material to check it. TBH it seems OK as it is. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:14, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Bronchial Thermoplasty

why did you delete all the very relevant information on Bronchial thermoplasty from the asthma, smooth muscle and bronchial thermoplasty page? Webste29 (talk) 22:59, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

It was poorly referenced and promotional. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:58, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Steve Comisar AfD

Hello,

You argue, in effect, that we should delete the article because Steve Comisar doesn't like it and is obsessed with it. I believe that's a reason to keep it. Though now in prison, Comisar will probably be released some day. Given his past, there is a good chance he will try new con games. An accurate, well referenced Wikipedia article will be a deterrent to his efforts and a benefit to his potential victims.

I have supported deletion of BLPs on certain occasions when requested by the subjects. Two examples that come to mind were articles about former porn performers of borderline notability who wanted to move on and leave the porn world behind. In those cases, it seemed a kindness to delete articles that used their real names. I have no interest in being unusually kind to Steve Comisar because I think he is a sociopath incapable of true kindness to others. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:07, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I see your points. He has passed the point of notability where we could have an article about him but the question is whether he has passed the point where we should definitely have an article about him. I think that is where we differ.

I am not interested in being kind to him, in the sense of doing what he wants (What he wants is a vanity article and no way is he having that!), but I do feel that his involvement with the article is unhealthy, and by "unhealthy" I mean detrimental to his rehabilitation.

I have seen other people write vanity articles only for them to be made more neutral at which point they cut up rough. Deletion, based on their objections, has served to draw a line under the matter and send them away knowing not to mess with Wikipedia again while avoiding us having to guard an unnecessary article on an ongoing basis. I was hoping this might end along those lines.

Clearly consensus is against me on this. I note that Orange Mike is voting keep, even after all the crap he has been subjected to. One of the reasons I was voting delete was that I felt he had been subjected to enough trouble for such a low importance article so his disagreement with that view carries a lot of weight. I'm not changing my vote but I am reconciled to the article being kept.

I do think it will require permanent semi-protection and that a very tough line will need to be taken with people who cause trouble on the talk page in future. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:28, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Your help needed at RFC/U for Willfults

Since you've dealt with Willfults in the past, I'd really appreciate your help over at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Willfults. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:51, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

SO SORRY

At waffle I was actually looking at another users contribs and I had no idea of what I was doing all I know is that an edit box for something with Waffle on it popped up. I'm so sorry and it won't happen again. :( --Kangaroopowah (talk) 00:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry. It is easy to make a mistake like that. I realised afterwards that it was not intentional. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:07, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Patrick Star/Lexington Steele

Please dont revert my edits. --95.114.245.254 (talk) 17:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Please stop making improper edits and I won't have to. Seriously, this is not a fan site. You must stop adding fancruft. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:18, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Dajjal

Thankyou for your edit, I understand where you are coming from. However if you view history carefully you will come to realize that initially the content was removed by an ip 217.33.42.134 and then due to inexperience of the user Beautimatic, he/she reverted it but improperly, lacking inline citatations which was reverted by you. Notice that earlier on user Dougweller reverted the edit of user Beautimatic, not of what I just re-added but of extra unsourced material added by Beautimatic. I would offcourse have shown you links to what I'm trying to say but because I'm replying via phone, its a little bit tedious. Thankyou.--Peaceworld 18:15, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Hello DanielRigal! I hope you enjoy this cookie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 19:18, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

ashford castle

How dare you revert the edit of the Ashford Castle page. Do you have a vested interest in the Castle? I will have you reported. You have no right to do this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peopleofireland (talk • contribs) 21:19, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

If you want to draw attention to your own misdeeds by making a big fuss then please be my guest. Just don't come crying to me when it doesn't go in your favour. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:31, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

ashford castle

Daniel,

I am a journalist from the Irish Examiner reporting on an issue and meeting attended by over 400 residents of the village of Cong and local politicians. There is no personal analysis in there, just facts as established at the meeting. Re your use of the word "mis-deed"; you are bang out of order there. I think Mr Barrett is the perp when it comes to mis deeds, I am just the messenger. If i was to include a personal analysis, trust me I could report several of Mr Barretts dealings including owing the Irish taxpayer nigh on 30 million euro. A child almost died as a result of this issue, it most certainly warrants it's place here.

So I ask you again, to let Irish journalists like me report on Irish affairs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peopleofireland (talk • contribs) 22:10, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Regarding " Mukkulathor" page in WIKI

Dear Daniel Rigal, I Got your message on Copyrgihts and vandalism... Actually that is not my intention, I really wanted to contribute to that page as I come from that coomunity. Sorry for inconvenience, I tried without going through WIKI TUTORIAL.

Well in near future I will get in touch with on further development on this page. Anbu79 (talk) 02:12, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed major re-org at Mukkulathor

Greetings, based on your recent participation in the article, I'd like to invite you to: Talk:Mukkulathor#Suggest_major_reorganisation_of_the_article. Thanks for your input! MatthewVanitas (talk) 13:45, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Willy Will Discography

I declined your speedy as I felt this article asserted notability by reference to the main article, Willy Will. I suggest nominating Willy Will for deletion via the AfD process if you feel that is appropriate. Thanks, --John (talk) 04:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Actually, I am pretty sure there wasn't a main article at the time I put the speedy on (unless I got the search wrong) but if there was one by the time you looked at it then it makes sense to give it a chance. I don't think a separate "discography" makes any sense at all so I intend to merge that myself. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:45, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How It Feels to Be Run Over

I invite you back to the AFD where multiple sources toward this film's historical notability to the birth of the film industry have been found and offered, and a couple even added to the article. Though the nominator's search abilities might be found wanting, notability is not dependent upon sources being IN the article, only that they be available. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:49, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

re Enrique Caballero Peraza

Hullo: I seen you wrote (some time ago) in Enrique Caballero Peraza. I've left a new post there which might interest you. Sorry, I do not know who else to tell.

Cheers... Lnegro (talk) 13:04, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

I had a quick look. I don't really know anything about the subject and I don't speak Spanish so it is very hard for me to try to find out more. I only came across the article by accident. I don't think the article can be deleted unless is is untrue that he was a member of the national legislature. What I am going to do is tag it as a an autobiography and COI. What I would hope other people will do is remove the suspicious content and leave only a small amount of verifiable content. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

recaptcha

1 it isn't defamatory 2 it relates to a computer system not a living person

ReCAPTCHA forces users to solve the Captcha to access whatever the service in question is. Forced labor is the definition slave labor, i am going to revert your reversion, please do not do it again or i will report you for vandalism also please don't send me threatening messages tia 94.168.204.89 (talk) 19:07, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Defamatory comments about organisations and companies are almost as inappropriate as those against people. The warning template you got was a generic one covering all types of defamation, not just that of people. It was not threatening. It merely told you to stop. Something you have declined to do.

Feel free to report me if you really want to. It won't do you any good because you are blatantly in the wrong here, but you are perfectly entitled to give it a try. Just remember that the more attention you draw to yourself the more likely your own behaviour is to be scrutinised. --DanielRigal (talk) 22:14, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh dear. It seems my advice came too late. He just got blocked for abusing somebody else. Sad but not entirely unexpected... --DanielRigal (talk) 22:37, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello DanielRigal/2011! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Arithon

Hi there,

I have no issue with the current page being deleted, but I would instead suggest reverting back to this. Chances are, after it's deleted and if I remember to do so, I'll probably just make it a redirect again. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:^simple/_complex 01:55, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't spot its former life as a redirect. No point in waiting for the thing to be deleted. I'll just revert it now. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:51, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

CopSSh

well, the CopSSH author release the web pages as Creative commons. I'm recreating the Wiki page identical as before deletion. Did you delete it again?--Efa (talk) 13:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I only tagged it for deletion once and it only seems to have been deleted once recently.

I assumed that it was copyright violation and that is why I tagged it for speedy deletion. I did not see the CC note on the site when I checked it. Assuming this was not newly added since then, I must have missed it. If so then I apologise. That said, I don't know whether the particular CC licence used is Wikipedia compatible (as it requires attribution) and I don't remember seeing an attribution on the article, so maybe it is a copyright violation after all. You can ask for the deletion to be overturned on the grounds that it is not copyright violation and I am sure somebody who understands the details of these licensing issues will be able to check it and decide accordingly.

I certainly have no objection to the page being restored, if my speedy deletion rationale was either mistaken or now moot, but I do feel that the article is almost certainly deletable on other grounds. The fact that the article was pretty much a verbatim quote of the product's marketing material and the fact that most of the reference material was pretty minor coverage means that it would probably not survive an AfD process. We can't have articles that are essentially marketing material. It is not just a copyright issue.

I have left a note for Fastily explaining the situation. He may be more willing to undelete the article now but it is up to him. If not you could try WP:deletion review.

My feeling is that the article would eventually be redeleted one way or another. It is up to you whether you want to bother with the deletion review but you are certainly within your rights to have a go. It was never my intention to inappropriately or unfairly use of the speedy deletion process as a short cut.

--DanielRigal (talk) 19:28, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I contacted the CopSSH author, and he say the web site reported the "All right reserved" license, but the author does not understood what mean, as he always want the program and web site sources be available to everyone (infact, as Win32 platform miss the SSH server, CopSSH is simply the OpenSSH compiled for Windows, packaged with a simple installer and an interface to configure the users accounts). The reason for speedy deletion, the copyright violation, was an error. Is it available somewhere the article, the talk page and history of modifications at time of deletion? With that I can restore the page exactly as before. About the deletion for marketing material, if I remember well, the article survived to 2 tags in the past. The article was modified to be encyclopaedic, was added the history of the product, and the list of hardware and software products that use CopSSH on Windows. --Efa (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't have access to the deleted material but it can be got back either from deletion review or from Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. Try the later option first, as that seems to be the easier process to follow. I think that will work. Explain that the Copyvio deletion was a mistake and maybe provide a link back to here so that they can see that we have discussed it. I still feel that there were other serious, probably fatal, problems with the article but I don't object to undeletion. Once the article is back we can look at it again and see if it has a future. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:15, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I see that it didn't work out the way you hoped. In the end this is probably for the best. It saves you the effort of trying to rescue an article that was probably unrescuable. If a subject fails to meet the notability criteria then no amount of improvement to its article any use. It is an issue with the subject not the article. None the less, I am sorry that it went down this way rather than through the AfD process, which would have been more appropriate. I hope this won't put you off Wikipedia. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC).

About copyright infringement everything was already sayd. About notability, the article was tagged two times in its history, and after users discussion it survived, as it is used in ten hardware and software products, some very notorious, links was in the article notes. This show this admin neither looked at the deleted article itself. Anyway this admin preferred impose him personal vision versus public discussion, moving the point from copyright to notability. I do not want give the impression I have interest in the product, apart I used once on Windows on a work PC and was easy. On my Home Linux obviously SSH is prepackaged, but on Windows no other SSH server ports is easy to use like the Linux one, so I thinked Windows users need an article linked (now orphan) from SSH lists articles: Comparison_of_SSH_clients, Comparison_of_SSH_servers, List_of_SFTP_server_software, I think this deletion is a damage for Windows users, anyway I cannot spend time any more on this--Efa (talk) 00:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Wimpy Kid

Thank you for your advice. I would correct them as soon as possible and I hope that you can continue checking my essay to make it better. Best.--Nnu-12-22100538 (talk) 15:28, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Greg Heffley 17:43, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

La goutte de pluie

I tried discussing the matter directly twice before. (diff) (diff). User La goutte de pluie simply deleted both comments. Please be aware that this user is trying to add a someone's old Wikipedia username to a disambiguation page. — ThePowerofX 22:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

This user refuses to acknowledge the problem and has now deleted the discussion you contributed to. How do you suggest I proceed? — ThePowerofX 22:44, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Do the discussion on the talk pages of the articles. That way it will attract more people to contribute and stop it just being between the two of you. She is entitled to delete almost anything she likes, apart from block messages, from her talk page. That is not so on the article talk pages. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:32, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion

Hello, sorry to disturb you. I have made some changes on my essay "Taicang senior high school" （http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taicang_senior_high_school）. Can you help me to check it and give me more suggestions about it. I also want to know what else I can do so that these warnings on the top can be removed. Thank you! Best.--Nnu-12-22100538 (talk) 15:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)