User talk:Fabrictramp/Archive 04

Peter Losasso

Hi, I have no problem with the article on Peter Losasso being nominated for deletion. I corrected the spelling and moved the page and then ran the correct spelling through Google. This received more hits than the speedy delete justification mentioned, so I thought it best to remove it rather than try to amend it. - Scribble Monkey (talk) 16:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Tangi Foreman Deletion

You may delete The Alrticle in Question. Thank You from MMN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MadManNathann (talk • contribs) 17:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Lost Noise

My Page (Lost Noise) has been deleted twice now, I had put references wherever i needed to. It was a perfectly good page in m eyes. Could you please also give me the text on the page that i spent over two hours writing.As well as telling me how i can get it to stay on the website!. Thankyou Lostnoiserock (talk) 19:56, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

If you read the banner at the top of this page talking about providing copies of deleted pages, you'll see that I won't provide copies where there's a conflict of interest, which your user name and phrases in the article such as "We have lots of experience playing live" indicate you have. There is a link in the speedy deletion warning on your talk page to a category of admins who may be willing to provide a copy for you.

You might also want to read WP:FIRST, which is also linked on your talk page, especially the section Things to avoid. It specifically mentions to avoid writing articles that advertise something and articles about a band you're in. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Devon fire

Thanks for that. What we have here is an editor throwing his toys out of his pram and refusing to play any more. His edits to the original article have been removed and this is his response. I know I should assume good faith but it is hard to come to any other conclusion. Redirection seems like a reasonable solution, your help is appreciated. --TimTay (talk) 20:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I've got it watch listed, so I'll see if it gets changed back.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I "think" I am rather accustomed to Wikipedia; but after reading and discovering the ins and outs of deletion etc I feel rather unknowledgable! Can one explain the reasoning behind Devon fire being put forward for deletion? Is it still up for deletion? Does this affect Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service? I have done a lot of work on DSFRS; only for said user to make petulant changes. Thanks Samiddon (talk) 22:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not currently up for deletion. Why was it put up for deletion? You'll need to ask either of the two editors who nominated it. No, it doesn't affect Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service. HTH--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Deltascape

Thank's alot for helping me, other people would just go and delete without saying anything. :)

No problem. Hope you can make a great article.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Sarey Savy

An article that you have been involved in editing, Sarey Savy, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarey Savy. Thank you. Call me Bubba (talk) 04:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

UDR Benvolent Fund

Can you copy the deleted page contents onto a 'new page' within my area as I may wish to move it into the main UDR article. Thanks. Gavin Lisburn (talk) 12:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done. You'll find it at User:Gavin Lisburn/UDR Benevolent Fund.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:35, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

KROQ deletion

Hey Fabrictramp. I've talked to you before about that KROQ article and we decided they could be mergered, and so I did so, but now the article is completely gone, and does not even show up in deletionpedia or anywhere. So sorry for the language- I was a little perturbed. Do you know what happened to the merger article I had created? with the tables and references and everything?? JokestrMike89 (talk) 11:07, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

By the merger article do you mean 2004 KROQ New Music? Yes, it's deleted, but admins can restore it. I would suggest you take the steps I suggested on your talk page: talking to Kingturtle, and then taking it to Wikipedia:Deletion review if needed. (If you take it to DRV, let me know, because I do think the deletion was out of process and I'm willing to say so there.) HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:09, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I was fine with the 2004 KROQ New Music article deletion - because I had put all of the compilations in one article, such as you and another user suggested. I changed the location of the article ("Move"), but it was still around and everything was fine, but now it's nowhere to be found. I changed it to KROQ New Music & Calendar, but it won't even appear in the search engine...JokestrMike89 (talk) 19:08, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you might mean KROQ Calendar & New Music? At least, that's the most similar article I found in your deleted contributions. Still, all of my above advice applies.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Yep, that's the one. I'll talk to Kingturtle then. I was surprised to see it go so fast because I had not even seen a nomination for deletion sticker, so it was very odd that it just disappeared. Can you post the link for the deletion article, because I am unable to locate it myself...Thank you JokestrMike89 (talk) 05:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Kingturtle has restored it for you. The blue link in my previous reply will take you there.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the sortation

Vettaikaran

Why did you put a deletion policy on my vettaikaran article . And why did you put some stupind Raja .... names on the article.

You might want to sign talk page comments, which you can easily do by clicking on the button above the edit box that looks like a signature, or by typing --~~~~ after your comment.

I did not nominate the current version of Vettaikaran for deletion, nor have I edited that article at all. You can look at the history to see who made which edits, and you can read the deletion reason at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vettaikaran (2nd nomination) and participate in the discussion.

I did nominate it for deletion the first time, and you can read that discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vettaikaran. (Since that discussion is closed, please don't add to it. Instead, make your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vettaikaran (2nd nomination)).

You also might take a minute to read WP:OWN. HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

New Page Patrol

Hiya... I keep seeing your name come up while doing NPP. One minor problem.. I don't think that AWB is marking the pages you patrol as patrolled, which is why I keep seeing your name. // roux   07:39, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

New pages can only get marked as patrolled if you go to them directly from Special:NewPages, which AWB can't do. :( --Fabrictramp | talk to me 10:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

That's a damn shame... HG and NPW can do it, I wonder if there's some script that could be added? // roux   19:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Kuriki

An article that you have been involved in editing, Kuriki, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kuriki (2nd nomination). Thank you. Noe (talk) 12:02, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Ajay Puri

I cleaned up Ajay Puri, it's very unlikely anyone will tag it for speedy deletion now. The subject has won numerous awards not in the article, and there are probably wikiprojects that could be added. At this point, he's 12, and things that are notable for someone under 10 are probably not so notable for someone his age. I'd be more interested in an article that summarized his childhood and discussed what he's doing now that would be notable if he were an adult. I don't have the time or interest to write such an article at the moment, but you might. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 15:24, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't really have the time or interest either, I just hate to see an article that meets WP:N get deleted just because it's poorly written. Thanks for doing the cleanup!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:05, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

This cleanup should've happened during the AFD. That's part of what AFDs are for - to expose the near-fatal weaknesses and fix them so the AFD doesn't get repeated and people don't put good-faith speedy tags on articles. How that article wound up with twelve-count-'em-twelve cleanup tags and nobody fixed them I'll never know. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 16:23, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Galib is wishing you a Happy New Year. This card promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day much better. Best Wishes and Happy Editing!

Best To Reply At My Talk Page. Thanks.

Just Stopping by. Yours Truly, M.H.^{True Romance iS Dead} 15:12, 1 January 2009 (UTC) .

Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009

Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 45	24 November 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor: 200th issue
ArbCom elections: Candidate profiles	News and notes: Fundraiser, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Dispatches: Featured article writers — the inside view
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 46	1 December 2008	About the Signpost

ArbCom elections: Elections open	Wikipedia in the news
WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 5, Issue 1	3 January 2009	About the Signpost

From the editor: Getting back on track
ArbCom elections: 10 arbitrators appointed	Virgin Killer page blocked, unblocked in UK
Editing statistics show decline in participation	Wikipedia drug coverage compared to Medscape, found wanting
News and notes: Fundraising success and other developments	Dispatches: Featured list writers
Wikipedia in the news	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Ice Hockey
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Women & Songs

Hey! I saw your note pointing out that nothing is cited in the article, but I have to beg a question here. The only information possibly able to be challenged, other than the existence of the albums themselves (I've seen some of them and they're also available at places like Amazon, they definitely exist), is the release date of the first album, picked up from the sales page at Amazon. The other two comments are that it's a major seller and a chart-topper. The former...all right, maybe that's a hard one to sell. The latter; check the chart information for the albums that show it at AllMusic (2, 3, 5, and 7 so far I think) and it proves the statement; there's no other page I know of to link to to otherwise prove the statement! (Being a Canadian compilation series, there isn't as much information readily available as for many American or British releases - or Canadian artist-specific ones, too - if you can find anything, I'll be happy to add to the article using it.)

The other thing I noticed you noted is that I didn't categorize it. Whoopsie...I guess I should have done that. I'll check how another set is listed and choose from those, as I'm sure they will be similar.

CycloneGU (talk) 02:57, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

References are also needed to establish notability. But even existence should be cited.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Tagging {{notability}} on albums

I don't know why you're tagging album articles (the last few edits you made, some Anne Murray albums) with {{notability}}. Long established precedent is that is the artist is notable, so are all of their albums. These album articles are hardly top notch (in fact, almost ALL of the country music articles are crap — wanna help me remedy that?), but it might not be a good idea to slap {{notability}} on an album article if the artist is a bluelink. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 03:56, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll respectfully disagree with you about the precedent. If you read WP:MUSIC, it says that albums by a notable artist may be notable (note this does not say "is automatically notable"), and long established precedent at AfD is to merge albums that don't have individual notability into a discography article. Personally, I think putting the notability tag (and giving people a chance to improve the article) is more friendly than immediately changing it to a redirect.

I often add these articles to a list I keep to revisit several months later. If no one has established notability, and I can't find any at allmusic or metacritic, then I do change it to a redirect. Yes, sometimes editors have complained, but this has always been upheld when it's been reviewed.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:02, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Meh. I'd just stub-tag it myself if fI know the artist is very notable. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 17:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

But that presumes that the album will be shown to be notable. I don't think we can assume that on every bluelinked artist. In fact, I know we can't assume it from prior AfD discussions.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:18, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Still, I always check the artist's article when faced with an uncertain album. If their discography indicates that the album, say, produced a chart single or was certified, I'd give it the benefit of the doubt. But that's just me. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:01, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

If I may interrupt (I posted before this thread)...if the album is a collection of songs by various notable artists, and there is evidence on AllMusic, Amazon, and the like that the album exists (and in some cases, has even charted), why are they being slapped with tags? The same rule applies to both artists' albums and compilations, I believe, and I have to side with TPH on this one. If the album is sold in an online store or otherwise found on AllMusic, we shouldn't be slapping tags on them; the information in the article is the only information found, and sometimes that may be extremely little info! CycloneGU (talk) 20:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll assume you're talking about the same article, Women & Songs, that you asked about above. You'll notice that this article was not tagged with a notability tag, as the article made a claim of notability ("chart topper"), although I might note that the claim is for individual items in the series, and not for the series as a whole. However, the article still needs to be referenced (and I feel confident TPH will agree with me on this). Sure, I could reference it myself, but I don't know where you found the information. You do know, so all you need to do is add the reference.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:03, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I just meant tags in general. The only sources I have are AllMusic and Amazon, and the only details I have about the albums is the list of albums available on AllMusic and Amazon. Amazon, being an individual site selling random stuff, isn't a good source for anything aside from album details, cover art, etc., and thus cannot be sourced. AllMusic I already link to in each individual article (though one or two numbered albums ARE missing from AllMusic, I find that a little bizarre). I can't source anything beyond that as I have yet to FIND anything beyond that. If you'd be willing to help find some sources, I'd welcome the help and would be happy to add anything from said sources that I feel fits the article (of course, providing citations in each case).

Maybe I'll do a news search on the newest album or something to help look for something to write from. Other than that, not sure what I can do. CycloneGU (talk) 23:11, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I was referring to this one. A quick check of her discography would reaveal that this album produced four singles, including a #1, which I think is good enough even if the album article doesn't say it yet (like I said, most country music articles are crap because no one will help me, hint hint). As for music sources, you can always check Allmusic. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:13, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I should have made it clear above that I thought CycloneGU was refering to Women & Songs. I didn't have any reason to think you (TPH) would be refering to that article. My apologies.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:23, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

And I see the hints (*grin*). But time spent on crap country music articles would be time away from improving crap baseball articles, and I like baseball way more than country music. ;-) But that particular article is on my list to revisit this month, so I'll probably end up sourcing it anyways.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:27, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I still have an interest in helping with crap country music articles (*chuckle*) - I just want to get this Canadian series in, I've spent a ton of time adding Kenny Rogers stuff, and I recently added things by Debby Boone - the problem I'm running into is that I'm having a whale of a time finding information on all the albums I'm adding, especially rare ones, aside from tracklists and - in some cases - track times. (Mind, I have forgotten to link a couple of non-AllMusic sources; I have to find those again now. *LOL* CycloneGU (talk) 23:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Ulster Defence Regiment

Hey, you appear to be the closing admin for the following afd Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UDR Benevolent Fund. Could you give me an opinion on the debate on the talk page please. Essentially material from the deleted article was added to the UDR article and has been removed with the justification that the AFD proved that this material is non-notable. Kernel Saunters (talk) 13:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you point me to the debate? There's no talk page at the deletion discussion, and the article was deleted.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Discussion is at Talk:Ulster Defence Regiment - the argument seems to be that the AFD for the UDR Benevolent Fund article now precludes that info being added to the Ulster Defence Regiment article Kernel Saunters (talk) 15:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I would also appreciate comments as I accepted the removal of the UDR Benevolent Fund page and placed the text into the main article. Gavin Lisburn (talk) 19:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I think I've pretty much said my piece there. It looks like an editing issue to me, and isn't really connected with the AfD. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Dear Fabrictramp, First of all, I wish you a very happy 2009. Maybe you remember me. I contacted you last October because I had posted an article in the Wikipedia (“Roberto Andorno”) summarizing my research activities and publications relating to bioethics. Although these data can be confirmed by the external sources indicated in the text, immediately after I posted the article and made some corrections to it, it appeared a warning at the top of it saying that “A major contributor to this article or its creator appears to have a conflict of interest with its subject.” You responded to me that Wikipedia discourages people to write about themselves (unfortunately I did not know this). At present, the warning is still there, and I have the impression that it will remain there forever... I am troubled with this, because everyone that puts my name in Google finds this article with that awful warning as the first link. My question is: is there a means to remove that warning? If not, is there a means to ask the whole article to be removed? Thank you very much in advance. Best regards. R. Andorno —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andorno (talk • contribs) 14:28, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

The warning will remain until a party without a relationship to you (or your employer, etc) comes along and rewrites it. If you want, I can do that for you, but as my time is very limited this week it would likely be cutting out most of the article. Let me know if you want me to do this.

You could also propose the whole article for deletion, but I doubt that it would be deleted. (See Wikipedia:COI#Consequences_of_ignoring_this_guideline).

Another option would be to post at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard asking for someone to go through the article. HTH!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Response: It would be great if you could rewrite the article! Anyway, it is not urgent. You can do it once you have more time. Thank you very much in advance! R. Andorno —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andorno (talk • contribs) 21:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Remember, if you want changes in the article in the future, best to propose then on the article's talk page and let an uninvolved party do the editing. (Or go to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard). HTH!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:28, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Heads Up

I was looking through the NewPage section and stumbled upon a page for Jack Jia created by...well, Jack Jia.

I have gone ahead and applied the proper taggage for COI, as well as leaving him a friendly note on his talk page (Coren's bot found him already). Just in case he has questions I cannot answer, would you be able to also chip in on the COI subject on his talk page? I ask this as I see someone else recently spoke to you about COI issues and you seem knowledgeable on the subject. =)

Cheers. CycloneGU (talk) 04:26, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

He blanked the page after your message, with an edit summary that indicates he got the hint, so I don't think I need to pile on here. (I did speedy the page and have it watchlisted, in case he creates another one.)

If you find a page like that and think it should be speedied, Template:Welcomeauto is very useful. If you have Friendly installed, it's in the "welcome" tab. HTH!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

WelcomeAuto...I'll try to remember that.

While I do have Firefox 3, the fact my PC includes Norton (and it's a pest) means I probably won't be able to use Friendly very well. Oh well, the trial's over, but it still tries to run stuff on my laptop. I hate that it comes with it, but hey...free tracking cookie detector. =D CycloneGU (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Onaris

sorry didn't knew how to use wikipedia.

I need a favor, we will like to let know customers to publish our company which is onaris let people know about our company , and also let people know what is the difference between gold filled , and gold layered. i would really appreacity if you can guide us, and let us know which steps to follow,

since it was not our intention to cause problem

thank you

Michael pezua —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onaris25 (talk • contribs) 20:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The short answer is that Wikipedia isn't the place for you to promote your company. If you want to let people know about your company, there are plenty of inexpensive webhosts out there and lots of books on how to promote your site.

As I suggested on your talk page, take a read through WP:FIRST, WP:COI and WP:SPAM. Those pages spell out in more detail that Wikipedia is not the right venue for this.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi from Spain

I don´t looking for investors, I´m Not for Finland.

I Create a page of Agustina The Movie in Spanish and English.

What is the Problem with it? It´s a new in Spain.

See That: http://www.heraldo.es/index.php/mod.noticias/mem.detalle/idnoticia.35409/p.1080861119 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnmonchon (talk • contribs) 17:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Repeatedly creating various articles that start with "Mil y Una Historias and Miljaus production companies are looking for the investors and sponsors from Europe" sure makes it seem like you have a connection to the film and are looking for investors. My apologies if this is not the case. In any event, this type of article, with no assertion of the importance of the film, is not allowed on Wikipedia. Before creating any more articles (and I see you already recreated Agustina the movie), please read WP:FIRST very carefully to make sure that you create articles that meet the guidelines and have a chance of sticking around. Hope that helps.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:03, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip J. Cutrone

Thanks for the note. Obviously, I had been watching.  :-) I've exchanged notes with the author--he damn near got himself blocked trying to re-re-re-post the article a few months ago, but my attempts at clue infusion this time around don't appear to have been a waste of time. Take care. --Finngall ^talk 23:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

AfDs

Good job - I don't know where you find all this stuff! Tim Vickers (talk) 21:48, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Consensus Building

As a user who responded to the straw poll regarding non-free images in sports, your further input is requested with regards to the Straw poll summary and proposed guidelines on image use — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I read through it and I don't understand what input you want there. To sum up my opinion, the team logo should only be used on the team article, where it helps the reader understand the team. It should not be used on the season or game articles -- those articles should instead have a wiki-link to the team article.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:48, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I understand your opinion, but it doesn't clearly translate to a guideline from which we can work from. If you can state it in such a manner and put it into the mix, we can get a better idea of a good guideline/policy for Wikipedians. — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll look at those sections again tomorrow -- it's the end of my day here, and I may just be too tired to figure out what info you want where. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:56, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 2	10 January 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes:Flagged Revisions and permissions proposals, hoax, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Dispatches: December themed Main Page	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 19:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Toyota Yaris ONYX Wiki Page

Can you please remove your petition to delete the Toyota Yaris ONYX page? It is a legitimate vehicle. You can Google search and see that it is at local dealerships. See Rick Hendrick Toyota in particular (http://www.rickhendricktoyota.com/blog/2009/01/new-yaris-onyx-special-edition.html) or Tampa Bay (http://toyotaoftampabay.automotive-enewsletters.com/?p=177). Thank you! 22SET (talk) 22:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

The discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toyota Yaris ONYX has already closed, and the decision was to redirect. If you disagree with the decision, you can talk to the closing admin (User talk:Black Kite), and if you are still dissatisfied, you can take it to deletion review). Just a friendly caution, though -- I doubt deletion review will get you anywhere, as there was a clear consensus to redirect, and no one, including yourself, came up with any independent, reliable sources showing this special edition has notability on its own. But that's your call to make. HTH--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

ARROGANT SONS OF BITCHES

Please, would you unblock "The Arrogant Sons of Bitches" so that it can be created/edited.

It's a good idea to sign your talk page comments. You can do it by placing --~~~~ at the end, or by clicking on the button the looks like a signature above the edit box. See WP:SIGN for more info.

As I suggested six months ago on your talk page (and before the two most recent times you recreated the article without addressing the AfD issues), if you think you can address the issues brought up at the AfD, try creating a version at a subpage of your userpage, such as User:Daneatdirt/The Arrogant Sons of Bitches. This will give you plenty of time to whip the article into shape -- when you think it's ready for prime time, drop me a note here and I'll take a look. If you've addressed the notability issues, I'll move it to mainspace myself.

Before you do, however, really take the time to read WP:FIRST, WP:Notability, and WP:MUSIC. The version you used to overwrite Asob doesn't cut it. Especially since it's a copyvio, so add WP:COPYVIO to your reading list.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

JPEG-avi

That certainly seems fair, Fabrictramp. I'll be more proper about nominations in future. And it's refreshing to know you guys are checking things before deleting them though, I regret to say, you shouldn't have to. Greggers ^{(t • c)} 10:55, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

We're all human, which is why a second set of eyes is always a good thing. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Bathtub refinishing

Dear FabricTramp,

The information that you deleted was my own words from my own blog and not a violation. You said that wikipedia is not a how-to manual but you are offering care tips anyway? I was merely adding proper techniques because just wiping with a cleaner is not enough. There is more to it than that and those techniques should be displayed.

George Piccot 76.90.183.254 (talk) 19:01, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

When you want to add work from your own blog to Wikipedia, you'll need to follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems#Copyright_owners_who_submitted_their_own_work_to_Wikipedia.

You might also read Wikipedia:NOT#HOWTO. I've removed the other how-to information from the article.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 3	17 January 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes: New board members, changes at ArbCom	Wikipedia in the news
Dispatches: Featured article writers—the 2008 leaders	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Pharmacology
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 23:33, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Well done!

Rereading your comment here I noticed your kind wisdom. Good stuff.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 05:29, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks! You might be thinking of another section, though, as I didn't comment in that one. Still, thanks are always appreciated. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

C.K. Raju

Thanks a lot for the box you put in the article. I made the changes, and removed the box. I am having some minor problems - check it out on the discussion. Thanks NittyG (talk) 04:44, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Looks like someone has already answered your question.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Quebetsom

Could you please consider bringing back to page on Quebetsom. I think the world has a right to know about the mythology founded on the South Sandwich Islands. Although Lionel Sallgene never discused his findings his grandson is finding out new information everyday, please contact him to understand more about the legitamacy of this mythology at Quebetsom@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niallgl (talk • contribs) 16:56, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Take a few minutes to read WP:V. Without independent, reliable sources, Quebetsom can't be in Wikipedia.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

It's Fine.

I honestly don't remember why I tagged it anyway. It was a while ago. Anyway, I noticed that you're tagging it for deletion. Wysprgr2005 (talk) 21:46, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Uh, it was only about half an hour ago. And I'm tagging it for deletion for a totally different reason. One that actually applies.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 4	24 January 2009	About the Signpost

Jimbo requests that developers turn on Flagged Revisions	Report on accessing Wikipedia via mobile devices
News and notes: New chapters, new jobs, new knight and more	Wikipedia in the news: Britannica, Kennedy, Byrd not dead yet
Dispatches: Reviewing featured picture candidates	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Delivered at 04:03, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)

Why did you delete Keith Carlock?

according to your proposed deletion of drummer "Keith Carlock"-

"Non-notable session musician as per WP:MUSIC. He may have played with some notable acts, but none of it has generated any third-party coverage of the sort that would establish notability

He played on Steely Dan's last album and was the touring drummer for Sting for 2 years. He is a drummer who has been featured (AS THE COVER STORY) in multiple Drum magazines. "He has played and toured with such musical luminaries as Sting, Steely Dan, The Blues Brothers Band, Leni Stern, Wayne Krantz, Harry Belafonte, and Grover Washington, Jr."

Clearly you don't have a clue and took down the page of a world famous musician.

http://www.moderndrummer.com/updatefull/200001158

http://www.regaltip.com/carlock_interview.html

http://www.drummerworld.com/drummers/Keith_Carlock.html

http://www.drummerworld.com/Videos/keithcarlockmdsolo.html

http://www.yamaha.com/publications/allaccess/summer2003/12carlock.htm

http://www.steelydan.com/2kband.html

http://www.keithcarlock.com/video.htm

http://www.drumsoloartist.com/Site/Drummers/Keith_Carlock.html

http://www.australianmusician.com.au/DisplayStory.asp?StoryID=218

Do you think you might have made a mistake? the dude is notable. Put the page back up.

"It was at the NYC's famed jazz club, The 55 Bar, backing guitar great Wayne Krantz, where Steely Dan's Donald Fagen and Walter Becker came by to see the band play. (Wayne had toured with SD in 1996) Eventually Donald sat in with the band a few times and they offered Keith a shot at playing on the title track of their [then] new record, "Two Against Nature". [The album went on to win 4 Grammy's including 2001's "Album of the Year".]"

http://www.zildjian.com/En-Us/artists/artistDetail.ad2?artistID=1056

http://www.onlinedrummer.com/drummer.php?BeatId=255

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2862716/

http://drummeracademy.com/drummers.php?id=125

http://www.westcoastdrums.com/keith-carlock.html

http://dandom.com/musicmil.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.90.1.62 (talk) 21:05, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, a correction. I did not propose the article for deletion, another editor did. There were no objections for five days, and no sources in the article that would give any indication of meeting WP:Notability. So the deletion was entirely within process, and not a mistake.

I would also ask you to refrain from using statements such as "Clearly you don't have a clue". Not a really good way to get people to do what you want, whether on Wikipedia or in real life.

Since you are objecting to the deletion, I'll restore the article. However, I would ask that you add the references to the article that you say establish notability (read WP:BIO and WP:Notability first). Otherwise the article is likely to get proposed for deletion again.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:13, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll get right on that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.90.1.62 (talk) 07:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Keith Schwab

Hi Fabricktramp! I am sorry if I am doing/approaching this all wrong. (I think what you and others are doing with wikipedia if fantastic.) I am starting to have much more involvement outside of the laboratory, especially regarding activity with the World Economic Forum, and I thought it might be good to have a short bio page on Wiki. If I am off base here, no worries, and thanks again for all your hard work with wikipedia. Best, Keith Keithschwab (talk) 22:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:ACADEMIC not satisfied

you removed my AfD for speedy deletion of Donald C. Simmons, Jr., stating that, '(decline speedy - there's a clear claim of meeting WP:ACADEMIC (dean of college))'. In point, WP:ACADEMIC specifically states, "Lesser administrative posts (Provost, Dean, Department Chair, etc) are generally not sufficient to satisfy Criterion 6, although exceptions are possible on a case-by-case basis (e.g. being a Provost of a major university may sometimes qualify)."

He is the dean of a small department with less than 50 students, one of whom anonymously brought his editing his own page to my attention. When you search for the department on google, his wiki entry shows up before actual information about his department, in part because the department is a very minor one of no little note.

This article has no reason to be on Wikipedia, and speedy was in fact appropriate. Please respond with a reason why he actually is notable, as I believe your removal of the tag was based on incomplete reading of WP:ACADEMIC. Thespian (talk) 22:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

My apologies for my misremembering of WP:ACADEMIC. Nevertheless, G7 requires no claim of importance, not no claim of notability. Claims of importance are there, so PROD or AfD would be the way to go on this.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. There are indeed 'claims' of importance, the real issue (to me) is that all the claims are actually made by him, editing under IP addresses. There's no citation, and I can't actually find anyone online who has cited *him* in their work; he's not made any real impact on academia (after the student brought it to my attention that he had edited the page himself, I went and looked, to see if I could find anything, because I actually am a pretty rabid inclusionist, and I thought maybe though he was rather self-important, he might actually be notable, but in point, there are more hits online for citing *me* as notable than there are of this gentleman's. And I'm totally not notable :-) ). Thespian (talk) 23:00, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

That's a test I use frequently, too. *grin* If I could make the same claim about myself, with the same amount of documentation, notability just ain't there.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:Question about an edit

You and me both! See my talk page :/ — Ree dy 00:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Speedy

Thanks for the note... I'm new at newpage patrol so still figuring stuff out! --Aka042 (talk) 01:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem! Hope it helped. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:08, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 5	31 January 2009	About the Signpost

Large portion of articles are orphans	News and notes: Ogg support, Wikipedia Loves Art, Jimbo honored
Wikipedia in the news: Flagged Revisions, Internet Explorer add-on	Dispatches: In the news
WikiProject Report: Motto of the Day	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 21:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Final version

As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:59, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and done.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:04, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Itex

A tag has been placed on Itex, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Too pro-USA fiscal bias!

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 86.29.245.143 (talk) 15:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Leaving this on 9 different user talk pages as well as the article talk page wins my award for the most bizarre IP edit of the month.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:19, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

RFC

Would you object to including provisions that allow for a single non-free image as a last resort if no free images exist? I think this will help bring some of those who object to the support side of the house. At the same time, it also gives a little more ammunition because it indicates it is a last resort; if a free image exists, then those images can't be used. My efforts show that almost all college football teams (which seems to be the general genre of those who oppose), if not all, have a valid free image available. In the interests of not cluttering up the talk page any further, please just respond here. — BQZip01 — ^talk 02:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I have no problem with a single non-free image as a last resort on the team articles. I don't think they add enough to season or game articles to justify their use on those pages.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hi my name is Matt. When you're creating your first article, how what and where is a good place to find and cite your sources? Cuz I can't quite figure that out. Please reply back on my talk page because I like it when people talk to me there it's better for me okay thanks. Morts623 (talk) 02:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Replied there, as requested.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Niels Brinck

In that case, if I could figure out how to add the notice that it is a stub, it could be expanded. --Rockstone35 (talk) 01:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

{{music-bio-stub}} or {{singer-stub}} would do the trick. Stub types are listed at WP:STUBS, or you can use the {{expand}} tag. HTH!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Jesse Rowe

Thanks for the heads-up. The reason I marked it for Speedy Deletion is the link pointed to is a music festival; the festival that was referenced should have probably been the Green Man Festival which really is the Utopia Film Festival; and in 2006 there was not a submission for that individual noted. I'll resubmit under AfD.. Thanks again... ttonyb1 (talk) 01:27, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

artes de la rosa

I am very confused by all of these alerts. All I am trying to do is get this info on Wikipedia and put the article divisions in boldface, but that apparently has been deemed superfluous, at least by the tone of the alerts I have been given. And why can I not take the alert off the article that is currently out there for public viewing. Nothing expressed in it is either an opinion, nor contrary to public record, but I am not even allowed to get the remainder of it up so that it can be viewed. It's basically a cut-and-paste article straight with a few highlighted links to other articles of local interest.Rosa marina (talk) 23:17, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Each of the alerts has links which will help you understand them. I'd also suggest that you read WP:FIRST.

However, you bring up a new problem, in that this article is copy/pasted from http://www.rosemarinetheater.com/ . This means it's either a copyright violation or an advert, neither of which is allowed on wikipedia. I'd suggest reading WP:COPYVIO, WP:COI and WP:SPAM.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Valencia Tool & Die

You said that it's not a band, but i'm just curious to know what it actually is? -Zeus- 00:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh sorry, now I saw that AfD. -Zeus- 00:27, 6 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by -Zeus- (talk • contribs)

No problem.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Copy-editing

Hi, I saw you tagged Pinar Ilkkaracan for copy-editing and I wondered if you had an opinion on this I posted to editor assistance. Thanks! :) Bladeofgrass (talk) 17:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done, and thanks for letting me know. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:27, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: Thanks for the smile

Heh. Thanks. I'm glad I'm not the only one tired of AfD-ing peoples' garage bands. Graymornings_(talk) 04:14, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Valencia Tool & Die, Hardcore California: A History of Punk and New Wave, StreetArt: The Punk Poster in San Francisco 1977-1981

Hello, I'm new to Wikipedia, and I'm getting a little frustrated. I hope you can help me. I found the name of the night club I ran (Valencia Tool & Die) on a page under a punk rock listing here in Wikipedia. So I decided to fill in the blank that was already there. However, I keep getting these "immediate deletion" warnings, and cannot seem to supply the magic bit of info that will make them go away.

I ran the club for several years, and afterward published three books on the subjects of Punk History, Punk Graphics and Underground "Pop" artists. All the books are in the Library of Congress which I assume is credible. All the books are also out of print, so I am not trying to sell them, I'm just trying to get the information onto Wikipedia so that someone interested in punk rock from California in the early eighties can get it.

So please, if you can, let me know what I am doing wrong, so I can correct it and not get so frustrated that I quit.

Hoping you can help.

Peter Belsito (belsipe)Belsipe (talk) 06:46, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the various templates on your talk page, it looks like the two main problems with all the articles you created is that you aren't showing why they're notable or they sound like advertising.

As to notability, read WP:FIRST and WP:Notability to get an idea about what's required. The best way to get an article on Wikipedia to "stick" is to start from independent, reliable sources. While your books are published and in the Library of Congress (which only indicates they are copyrighted), it's going to be a hard sell for you to cite your own books and convince other Wikipedians that you can write an unbiased article.

Two things I'd suggest are writing a draft of any new article at a subpage of your user page (see Wikipedia:Subpages for how to do this). Starting this way will give you more (but not unlimited) time to work on your article before it needs to be ready for prime time. You also might want to enlist some help at Wikipedia:WikiProject Punk music.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:13, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Pucca episodes

An editor by the name of Lucaspet (talk · contribs) appears to have issues with your decision to redirect a number of Pucca episode articles to List of Pucca episodes. Thought I'd ask your opinion rather than turn this into an WP:AIV matter. – The Parting Glass 11:54, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Just picking a couple of articles at random (Dance, Pucca, Dance and Funny Love Eruption), it looks like he isn't leaving an edit summary with the reverts, so it's a bit hard to answer his objections. :) The reason I changed a number of those episodes to redirects was that at the time WP:EPISODE said that we should only have individual articles for outstanding episodes, and episodes that don't show real world notability should be redirected or merged to an article about the show or the season. (It still appears to me to say that, although not as explicitly as I'd like).

I'd hate to call his/her actions vandalism, but it would be really nice if s/he would communicate a bit, either on talk pages or edit summaries. (I did smile that the only talk page communication from this user since October was "Hey stop of rvert my edits on Pucca episodes", when s/he has been so busy reverting other editors.)

Let me know if you want me to drop them a detailed note pointing them to the appropriate guidelines. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Ordinarily, I'd think that a good idea, but I'm not so sure in this case. The user seems impenetrable to outside input, and the closest I got to direct communication from them was an edit to my user page[1] and a comment in the sandbox[2] ("My reason of edit al the pages of pucca epiosdes becose some The Parting Glass do Redirections by no reason"). Thanks anyway. – The Parting Glass 07:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 6	8 February 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes: Elections, licensing update, and more	Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's future, WikiDashboard, and "wiki-snobs"
Dispatches: April Fools 2009 mainpage	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Music
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up.

Alright. I probably should have Prodded it instead. There were no external links, so i went with my gut and decided CSD. I prob. should have used a "no external links" type of template. I'll be more careful next time. I still consider myself kinda new, so every time you tell me this stuff, I will improve. Thanks! Riotrocket8676 ^{You gotta problem with that?} 22:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. As it turns out, while I was looking for refs I found it's a copyvio, and I just tagged it as such. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Lol, really? thats hilarious! Well, I'll keep on patrolling. I hope to become a admin one day, just like you! Peace. Riotrocket8676 ^{You gotta problem with that?} 22:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Marysville, Victoria

I notice that you have semiprotected Marysville, Victoria due to vandalism, however as an editor of that article I haven't noticed any. There were some recent undos due to over-zealous editing, mostly by IPs, but nothing that one wouldn't expect from an article that has some prominence at the moment. In my view experienced editors were already dealing with those edits quickly and effectively. Debate 木 03:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I concur with Debate. Melburnian (talk) 03:56, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

JCI (talk · contribs) had requested semiprotection at WP:RFP, and it did seem like there was a history of IP vandalism. However, if you two think you have it under control, I have no problem removing the protection. (I'll notify JCI of this thread.)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Seems like Melburnian went ahead and removed it.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Page Protection

Hi,

I am sorry, this morning I requested a page Mohammad Khatami to be semi-protected from unknown IP users, since former president is running for re-election however, I think I did a mistake and I applied my request to the bottom of the page. Is that going to delay it and perhaps make it impossible to go through? If so, please let me know and I'll change it. Thanks. Parvazbato59 (talk) 23:50, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks like it's in the right spot now. I'll take a look at the page in a minute.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, Thank you for your attention.Parvazbato59 (talk) 23:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I need to know if I can do this

I need to know if I'm allowed to make an article in the wikipedia about an Online Game. I think it has been a page before, but it was deleted because of a reason (forgot the reason). But if you let me create it, I can assure you that it'll get whatever it lacked before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ANormalUsername1 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Without knowing the name of the deleted article, I can't tell you what issues you need to address. But the most common reason for those type of articles to get deleted is that they don't meet the requirements of WP:Notability. You might also want to read WP:FIRST, which will let you know what you need to write a successful first article. HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll read those, then decide on what I want to do (create the article or not). —Preceding unsigned comment added by ANormalUsername1 (talk • contribs) 03:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Renaissance architecture

Thank you for putting a protection on it. However, you don't seem to understand the extent of the vandalism. It has been going on day after day, week after week ever since the article was expanded.

A two week tag is appropriate on an article which is current and in the news. This article, on the other hand, is not attracting 'current interest. It is high priority generic article. It is used by school kids across the world, and therefore (along with the Leonardo da Vinci article) is a major target for ongoning vandalism. Please extend that tag to a semi-permanent tag like the one on Leonardo da Vinci. Amandajm (talk) 01:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I have the article watchlisted, and am more than happy to reapply the protection for longer periods if / when there are future problems. However, this is only the second time the article has been protected (the first time was over a year ago, and only for a week), so I'm uncomfortable with immediately jumping to indef. Rest assured I'll be watching it closely, though.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that the people who watch this page have been very patient and have just gone on day after day rvereting vandalism. The protection should have been extended a year ago. I'm sick of it. It wastes my time. I've got a lot of pages that I watch, but this is one of the most important. Amandajm (talk) 13:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Faber EP

Ok, thanks for telling me. Drazorback123 (talk) 10:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009

From the editor — A new leaf

Commons Picture of the Year
Picture of the Year 2008 begins voting

News and notes
Flagged Revisions, historical image discovery, and more

In the news
Political tiff, error repeated in press, predictions of doom

Dispatches
How busy was 2008?

WikiProject report
WikiProject Gaelic games

Discussion report
Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations

Features and admins
Approved this week

Technology report
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Arbitration report
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist.
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 06:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Jair reynoso

[3] Phil Bridger (talk) 23:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me here. Looks like this is saying he meets WP:ATHLETE -- am I interpreting this correctly? In any case, I see a claim of importance, so I've declined the speedy.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I meant - I was so terse because I wanted to get to you quickly before any possible deletion. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem -- glad to have confirmation I was going in the right direction. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Snorzo

Hello. I don't recall posting any offences comments? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snorzo (talk • contribs) 17:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't warn you about offensive comments, I warned you about inappropriate pages. However, your memory must be a bit off, as this could easily offend people.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe that the pages I posted weren't offensive either? And the get lives was to just illustrate my point that this is a free encyclopedia, and surely shouldn't be censored to such extreme lengths. One assumes you are American? Good day, Snorzo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snorzo (talk • contribs) 18:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Please read the warning and my above reply again. I did not say that the pages you created were offensive, simply inappropriate for Wikipedia. Take a minute to read the links that Whpq left in his/her welcome message to you, especially WP:FIRST. Pay particular attention to Wikipedia:Your_first_article#Things_to_avoid. Just because anyone can edit Wikipedia does not mean that every article is appropriate. For example, your article Hannah Mortlock consisted of the text "one awesome girl." While this may or may not be true, the article does not show how she meets the WP:Notability guideline through independent, reliable sources. Spend a bit more time reading the instructions, and you'll have a much better experience on Wikipedia.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Notability isn't the issue.

Hi, FT. The total sum of the text was:

Kayla Hyatt is a tall, blonde, active girl. She holds a national record for her age. Her recored is 2nd in javeline in the nation! Her favorite team is Carolina Tarheels. Her best friends are Kealey W. Anna R. Mallory S. Gabby V. Lila G. and Kinley W. And she hates people who think they are better than they are, and people who get in her way!

That's why I deleted it. It was nonsense. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

You deleted it under A7, not G1, but it didn't meet the definition of patent nonsense, either. It never occurred to me I needed to delete the first and last three sentences while I researched the claims of importance, especially after I just declined an A7 speedy.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I see that now. I just Googled "Kayla Hyatt javelin" and I got nothing. I didn't check the edit history and I didn't realize that you'd declined the speedy. I certainly have no issue with keeping an article on the subject, but it's just unverifiable "kiddie-wiki." If you can find anything on this subject, feel free to restore it. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

PS: Check out the original username and some of this account's other edits. It's some kid writing about herself and tossing in a bit of vandalism to boot. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

The third google hit in your search gives the confirmation of the 2nd in the nation (2005 Junior Olympics) in javelin. If the editor is the problem, deal with the editor. Process is important. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Good catch. I agree process is important, so I'll create an article myself. Thanks for the good work. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I found the reference, but I can't find a lick of biographical info on this kid. I've found a couple of other ranking charts for "Kayla Hyatt" on javelin somewhere in North Carolina, but again, no bios. I'll leave word with the editor. If we're dealing with the subject herself, no better place to start. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

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

GW… 17:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

How is stating a clear fact that Multiply.Com now have Announced Multiply Premium Groups as of 13-02-2009, Incorrect?.

How is stating a clear fact that Multiply.Com now have Announced Multiply Premium Groups as of 13-02-2009, Incorrect?.

Today we're proud to announce Multiply Premium Groups.

Here's what you get when you upgrade your group:

   * No ads. All banner ads will be removed from your group.
   * Right rail. Group admins: In place of the banner ad, the 'right rail' area is yours for the customizing. Add links to the group rules, momentous posts, a special message... or anything else you like.
   * Top listing. To give your group better visibility so people can more easily find it, all public Premium groups appear at the top of each group category (like "Games" or "Places & Travel").
   * Premium category. All public premium groups will also be listed in a new, exclusive "Premium" category, in addition to their current category.

How much does this cost?

   * If your group has 100 or fewer members, a year of Multiply Premium will cost $39.95 $29.95 (for a limited time, through 3/15).
   * Groups with over 100 members, $79.95 $59.95 (again, through 3/15) per year.

Who can upgrade a group?

   * Any group administrator will be able to upgrade a group.
   * Assistant admins will be able to upgrade groups as well.
   * Non-admins, too, will also be able to upgrade a group.

Just let me upgrade my group already! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrist Instability (talk • contribs) 00:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

No idea whether it's correct or not, but if you'll actually read the warning you got, you've been asked multiple times to stop adding advertising material such as the above to the article.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I am stating facts & updates to Multiply.Com & I am NOT Advertising

How Am I Advertising???...

When I am clearly stating facts & showing that since: 13-02-2009 Multiply.Com now offers its 12 Million Users & vistors Multiply Premium Groups & This is a fact & therefor needs to be put as an update,

As MSN Group Transfers is not the same, As Multiply Premium Groups.

http://multiply.multiply.com/journal/item/292/Announcing_Multiply_Premium_Groups & http://multiply.com/search

Why can't I message the other person who sent me the message twice, Even tough She's wrong, As I am NOT Advertising I am stating 100% fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrist Instability (talk • contribs) 01:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Her talk page isn't protected from editing in any way. Click on the word "talk" in her signature.

I would hope that what you write is 100% fact. But facts and advertising are not mutually exclusive (ignoring any smart aleck remarks about the advertising industry). --Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Also Multiply.Com Has Over 12 Million Users, So Why Has It Been Put Back To 11 Million Users???...

Also Multiply.Com Has Over 12 Million Users, So Why Has It Been Put Back To 11 Million Users???...

Also its not fair if you can't talk back to the other person who warned me for stating facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrist Instability (talk • contribs) 01:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

As I said above, there is nothing stopping you from talking to FisherQueen. (But please sign your talk page posts by clicking the signature icon above this edit page. And there's no need to start a completely new section every time you post here.)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Gramsci Melodic

Hello, There are other print copies of articles and coverage that are going to be included. Furthermore, the information provided was taken from legitimate articles. The articles were written by objective journalists. The article was not composed by someone with vested interest. There are no claims made that are overstated or fictitious.

Also, the information is encyclopedic in nature. Granted, the Pittsburgh City Paper Rankings may not be of utmost importance, but it is a legitimate list compiled by a Wikipedia-recognized, independent media type in a fairly large metropolitan area.

I hope that I correctly followed your guidelines for posting on your talk page. Given that time is a factor in this dispute, I only had time to skim your requirements and may have been guilty of oversight. I sincerely apologize if this is the case. Abtmcm (talk) 01:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)Abtmcm

I only categorized the discussion and don't (yet) have any opinion on the deletion. The place to make any arguments for the preservation of the article is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gramsci melodic, which I see you've now done.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the heads up. I ended up learning on the fly. I have added a good bit to the debate I hope. Any guidance would be appreciated. Abtmcm (talk) 18:26, 18 February 2009 (UTC)Abtmcm

Hello. I am sorry to bother you, but I was wondering how the AfD for my article on Gramsci Melodic is going. I noticed that I could not find the discussion in the AfD logs for 2/19, so I figured I would ask here. Thanks. Abtmcm (talk) 20:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Abtmcm

There's a link to the AfD discussion in my reply above. The reason you don't find it in the 2/19 logs is that it was nominated for deletion on 2/18. HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

sock of a user you blocked yesterday

User:Dominator194 pretty obvious. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• Well, he's been indef blocked already. I guess SSP isn't as backlogged anymore... Beeblebrox (talk) 23:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

He's popped up another sock as well. I wish his parents would just ground him. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

The sock claims he's a meat puppet now.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

It's happening again. He's just not getting the hint to stop recreating the page. A few days ago we got at least 4 or 5 variants of the same page at the same time. Once one was A7ed then on or two popped up. I thought I was fighting a hydra. When you cut off one head two pop up in its placeValley2city^‽ 00:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I just blocked another sock/meat puppet. (The ones that have said anything have claimed they're meatpuppets.)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Talking to myself here... Rune dominator194 is one of the deleted articles, so I can use the text to search for moles to whack.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I Can't Find How To Write &/Or Talk To Her, Where As Your Page Is Easier To Find The Talk Area.

I Can't Find How To Write &/Or Talk To Her, Where As Your Page Is Easier To Find The Talk Area.

I was only updating the multiply.com page stating they have well over 12 million users now,

I was also stating that as of 13-02-2009 Multiply.Com Announced Multiply Premium Groups & showing the information & website.

That's NOT Advertising, That's keeping The Wiki Page about Multiply.Com 100% up to date.

I only found accidently that Multiply.Com were doing Multiply Premium Groups, & If it had been up on Wiki, I might have found 6 days earlyer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrist Instability (talk • contribs) 01:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

If you want to update the number of users, you need to include a source. If you want to state that Premium Groups are available, you can do that in one or two sentences, and add a source -- interested readers can click through for more information. Adding a whole screenful of details, including minutia of pricing, is advertising. And copying large chunks of text directly from their website is a copyright violation. Please don't add stuff like that.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Wiki Isn't Very Moderate - Severe Clinical Depression & Mental Health Friendly

Sorry Wiki Isn't Very Moderate - Severe Clinical Depression & Mental Health Friendly,

So its not easy for me to know how or what to do when replying or attempting to talk to this other Wiki user, Who doesn't make it easy or clear how to talk to her, Like your page does.

Wiki's also doesn't appear to be very user friendly for people with eyesight problems, When it comes to the Security Code Thing, Even I have trouble reading the words/letters were meant to type & My eyesights perfect,

So how's someone with bad eyesight meant to be able to know what letters/words to type into the Security Code Thing???... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrist Instability (talk • contribs) 01:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Just like on my talk page, FisherQueen's talk page (and every editors talk page and every article) has a tab at the very top that says "edit". Click that tab and you can ask her a question.

I can't address your mental health issues, except to say that if your depression makes tasks like editing Wikipedia too difficult, you might want to take a break from it and discuss this with your doctor.

You might also try Wikipedia:Help desk for issues you have with the CAPTCHA signon. I have no power to do anything about it.

Again, please sign your comments. Please stop making a new section every time. And please don't continue to fill up my talk page unless you have a question I can answer and haven't already answered for you. Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

hi from busydude

can i write about a game i created??????? a lot of people is playing it. i have to ask, because the next minute they destroy my page. thank you for reading this stupid annoying question from--Busydude (talk) 02:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)Busydude

Take a minute to read WP:FIRST, WP:Notability and WP:COI. To summarize, you're going to have a hard time getting an article about a game you created to stick, because it will be just about impossible for you to write about it in a neutral, unbiased way. After reading WP:Notability, if you still think there should be an article about it, the best way would be to request someone else write one at Wikipedia:Requested articles. No guarantee it will happen, but if it does happen whoever writes it will probably get it to stick. HTH!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:40, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Ross Macfadyen II

Not sure how this works!

I have posted a biog on the above page. There are indeed two ross Macfadyen's on the wireless in Glasgow, Scotland.

I have also included my work for the National Autistic Society with relevant links.

Can you specify what i need to do to make the item "notable"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.204.177 (talk) 16:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:Notability has information on what is needed for a subject to be notable. WP:BIO might be a good read, too. And since you seem to be Ross Macfadyen, reading Wikipedia:Autobiography would be a really good idea.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Designer as thinker and/or translator.

Designer as thinker and/or translator. Do our design universities teach translating the languages or provide visual thinker in base? To clarify my meaning in this article i mention visual language as a language. In makes me able comparison between visual and literacy way of thinking and

is done in visual language grammar and characteristic so I 

As we cannot translate whole the meaning of a language to other language . due to meanings of the words are based on the word and context and shape and culture. The problem is stronger when we try to translate a poem to other language as poet is used the characteristics of words and relation between of them and how they appears and how they sounds beside meaning. It play same role in visual language provided that designer use visual characteristics of language so it cannot be translate to literacy only if we loose the value and meanings of the source image and idea. This point is challenging point when comes to communication. Do designer translate the visual aspects to literacy to achieves communication? Hoe much of meaning is sacrificed in tis way. And if not is his design only for visual language speaking audiences? in this area speaking means designing an hearing means looking. In modern era specially in bouhous school many of designers try to specify and write grammar of the visual language. As Kandinsky did. Obey or not depends on designers as in poem ,poet breaks the rules . In my point of view one single circle in corner of the composition. Two circle besides each other or one circle beside a triangle has specific visual meaning and problem areas when try to translate this meaning to non-visual audience That we call communication. In this case by translating the meaning of two circle to literacy we change the area of understanding to common understanding area. How we explain sense of a blue square on a red background ? poster designer usually face to these kind of problems then tries to think literal to solve the issue concluded to decreasing the meaning instead of expanding the visual language. This point in academic world is difference between Design and visual art. Designer should solve the problems and try to help the communication but artist can focus on his feeling.

If we want concentrate on communication, thinking in a way that not change in communicating is unavoidable, it would leads us to decrease the opportunities of image. I recognize communicational and visual thinking tin two different side that destroy each other that in first way we are decreasing the message to literacy area and in second way we expect viewer think visually.

m.zand (talk) 22:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

What on earth are you trying to tell me here? Communication certainly hasn't happened.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

And continues not happening, regarding his repeated attempts to create an autobiography which is speedied time and time again. I see the page he tries to create has now been salted. I can see some advice regarding WP:BIO, WP:N, WP:AB and possibly WP:BLOCK happening if he doesn't engage in some dialogue soon. Tonywalton ^Talk 00:04, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm mystified on this one. Is it a language issue? Clue level issue? Or are we being punked?--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Macmillan Cancer Trust

Hi, I have various notes on my page saying that there are issues regarding my page. I thought I had abided by all the instructions. For example it says I need sources or references to third party pages, but I have put three of these on my page - so I don't understand this. It says very few or no articles link to this. I don't know how I can do this, or influence this. Is this something that visitors to my page are being invited to do - or is there something I should be doing? Please can you help, as I don't want my page to be deleted as it took me hours to do.

Thanks so much, Neal Macmillantrust (talk) 11:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

There are links on the issues that will help you. For example, the references you added are not independent of the trust, or are simply directory listings, such as the charitiesdirect.com link.

One page you definitely need to read is WP:COI, since you make it clear from your signature that you are connected with the trust. Even if you manage to write a completely unbiased article, many Wikipedia editors will still be suspicious because of your connection. Also remember that the article is not your page, and calling it your page will also increase suspicion of bias.

Also take a look at WP:FIRST. Many of your questions are answered there, better than I could do. HTH!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

• Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
• An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
• News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
• Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
• Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
• Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Inscapes

Hi,

I see you have deleted the wiki page for Inscapes twice. The first instance I fully understand, but the second instance I do not. Can you please explain what I need to change to create and keep this page on Wikipedia. The company Inscapes is one of the largest landscaping companies in the UK and this was demonstrated with the customer list inscluing the Millennium Stadium, Wembley, Celtic Manor, Parc Y Scarlets ect.

Many Thanks, Lee —Preceding unsigned comment added by Inscapes (talk • contribs) 10:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Just listing customers doesn't tell anyone that Inscapes is one of the largest landscaping companies in the UK -- the article needs to come out and say it, preferably with independent, reliable sources.

Another problem you're having with this article is that it was still pretty promotional. I know from your edit summary that you think it wasn't -- this is exactly why WP:COI strongly advises against writing about your own company, because as humans we all have a very hard time seeing our biases in things we care deeply about. Probably the best thing to do is not recreate this article again, but instead request that some neutral party do it at Wikipedia:Requested articles. HTH--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Sahand & Sabalan Tower

Thanks for letting me know, Fabrictramp - you're right about no context and it should go to AfD, my mistake. Also, hello from the past, future-people voting on my RfA! Hope everything is going smoothly and the economy has not tanked too hard. Living in the past is going fairly well. Derigibles are still not our main method of transportation, but I'm holding out hope. FlyingToaster 17:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

If I can't have a jet pack, I think a dirigible would be the next best thing. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:40, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, I think jetpacks would be how you access your dirigible while it's airborne and travel between dirigibles. It's fairly inconvenient to land something that size every time you're out of milk. FlyingToaster 17:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Works for me! LOL --Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Redirect of Dave olson

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Dave olson, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Dave olson is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Dave olson, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 12:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

David Alvarez

I just made a page for David Alvarez, one of the boys who play Billy in Billy Elliot the musical. The problem is that there is another person with the exact same name already on wikipedia. My page is now called "David Alvarez (actor)". Is there a way to make a redirect page, where people can choose whether they want to look at the actor's page or the other guy's page? And in other wikipedia pages where the actor is mentioned, is there a way to make the page redirect to the page that I created, not the other guy? Broadwaylover (talk) 23:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Short answer is "yes". :)

If there were just two David Alvarez' on Wikipedia, the correct way would be to put a hatnote on David Álvarez directing people to David Alvarez (actor). However, my search showed there are also a couple of footballers, so in this case a disambiguation page is called for.

I've taken the liberty of moving David Álvarez to David Álvarez (artist). David Álvarez is now a disambiguation page leading to the four I found with articles. Wikipedia:Disambiguation gives details on how to do this. HTH!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Broadwaylover (talk • contribs) 02:22, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

• Books extension enabled
• News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
• Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Hobbycraft

What do you think of it now? :) Sticky Parkin 22:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Awesome work! I'll pop over the withdraw the AfD.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons

I have redone the page in hopes that the copyright infringement issue is resolved. Does this meet the criteria or do I have to change it further? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Footdoc (talk • contribs) 17:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Most of the article is still a word-for-word copy of http://www.acfas.org/about/acfas/. You need to write the article in your own words to avoid a copyright violation. See Wikipedia:Copyright violations for more info. HTH!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok....let me change some things around further. thanks. --Footdoc (talk) 18:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Can you look at the site and let me know if this passes the test? --Footdoc (talk) 18:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a copyright expert, but it still seems a bit too close to me. Also, the mission statement section uses the word "our", which tends to set of advertising alarm bells for Wikipedia editors.

My advice would be to jot down the main bullet points from your source. Close the source page, and write the information completely in your own words. That's often a good way to avoid copyright issues. HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Ponzi Scheme Entry

Your concern is appreciated. Please refrain from interfering with actual article improvement.

Unless you can provide an independent, reliable source showing that Social Security is widely viewed as a Ponzi scheme, you're inserting your own views and not improving the article.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:21, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Appreciate the semi-protection of Peter Lamborn Wilson. Cheers, Skomorokh 23:46, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem. If you have problems after it expires, drop me a line or put it back on WP:RFPP.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Zoo Tycoon 2

Thanks for the protection, but I'm afraid it's happened again. The instance it was unblocked, the vandals are at it again. Sorry. CBFan (talk) 09:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ann Beach

I was evaluating this AFD for possible close and decided that while it's likely a keep it's probably best to let a mopster handle it. However, I noticed a possible violation of WP:BITE and WP:AGF in the AFD. User:DreamGuy had struck out the !vote of User:Unionsoap as an SPA. While looking at his contributions and his userpage, I think it's likely that he's a new editor with previous contributions as an IP. Even if he was an SPA, it's still improper for another editor to strike their !vote.

I would have warned DreamGuy myself but he has a habit of removing comments from his talk page that he doesn't like. I think "admin authority" (TINAA) is needed here.

BTW, thanks for the support in that ANI relist mess. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:41, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Looks like he's grudgingly unstruck the !vote. Normally I'd have no problem leaving him a note (yeah, that whole admin authority thing cracks me up -- what authority do I have? Make an improper block that would lose me the mop? Yeah, like I'm going to do that. *grin*), but seeing as how I nominated the article for AfD, I'm conflicted over whether it would be right. On the one hand, I'm involved. On the other, I am arguing for delete, and the !vote that was struck was a keep. Ultimately, I don't think I've had enough caffeine yet this morning to know. :)

No problem on the relist/ANI support. You do good work at AfD, and it seemed like you were getting hammered on for no good reason. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Richard Langton

An article that you have been involved in editing, Richard Langton, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Langton. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. --Crusio (talk) 23:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll assume you meant Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Langton.

Talkback

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

Cerejota (talk) 19:18, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

noted--Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:21, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Cerejota (talk) 19:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Cerejota (talk) 20:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

No...

...what I am telling you is that the user had posted a slew of these contentless stubs and this was just one of them. Of course I could tell it was a town in Argentina, but that was all. My unshakable belief is that it's up to the original author to follow the basics when posting a stub article. I always have; I would never in my wildest dreams post something so devoid of content. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:17, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't have posted anything that short, either. But you and I have a bit more experience than the average editor. It's my unshakable believe that when someone makes a good faith attempt to write a real article, that we shouldn't bite them by immediate deletion, but instead we should offer them a hand and point them towards assistance.

But belief aside, I'd direct you to A1, which says "Articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article". This wasn't the case. I could guess from your argument above that you were really thinking of A3. But that's problematic as well, as A3 says "However, a very short article may be a valid stub if it has context, in which case it is not eligible for deletion under this criterion."

Wikipedia:SPEEDY#Non-criteria also specifically says "Very short articles. Short articles with sufficient content and context to qualify as stubs may not be speedily deleted under criteria A1 and A3"

And, of course, when another admin has just declined a speedy request that had the very same rationale as the one you want to use, consensus has been that this automatically places it in the category of controversial deletions, which makes in ineligible for speedy deletion.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Believe me, I know where you're coming from and I absolutely agree that a new user should be mentored if possible. Heaven knows I've mentored new users and I've had good-faith articles of my own either speedied or AfD'd, so I try to be sympathetic toward someone wading into the water. And you're right; I tagged it under the wrong criterion. I just dropped you an off-wiki e-mail which you can disregard. I basically stated that I don't intentionally do end runs around admins, but it seems that's what exactly what I did to you and I apologize for the error. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:42, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem -- at least this is an easy issue to fix. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:44, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and about your email, I won't take it the wrong way if you delete our conversation off your talk page. That's why I have my archive set to just 10 days. *grin* --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:46, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Might be time to reset my own archive (wink wink snap snap grin grin say no more).  :) Not to worry; I think this conversation nulls any concern I may have had. Gotta cut. Thanks again for screwing my head on straight. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: TTA3

Actually, A7 applies to "web content" too, and consensus has indicated online games count as "web content." ViperSnake151 00:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

My apologies if I misread the article -- I didn't (and still don't) see where it's a web-based game.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

By which I mean where in the article -- gsearch shows it probably is web based.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Flogg Gellhog

I never even thought of simply prodding it, cheers for the friendly message

-- Cabe6403 ^{(Talk•Sign!)} 17:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Bangor Area High School

it appears you accidentally reverted my reversion so I reverted it... if that makes sense, it's now back to what it was before 70.15.41.69 edited it Christopher Pritchard (talk) 20:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that -- it's a bug in Huggle. When two people are reverting at the same split second, it reverts the reversion. Thanks for catching it!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Question

I was wondering why you deleted my page? I feel that as a member of the band "Infinite Paragon," i have the rights to create a page about my band. I want for my friends and family around the world to know me and my friends.

If you could please re-add my page, i would be very grateful. Thank-you for your patience.

As you were typing this, I left a message about this very subject on your talk page. If you want your friends and family to know about your band, Myspace, Facebook, or one of the many free web hosts is the way to go.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Brendan Waller

Hi - thanks for the note. There's no ambiguity as far as I can tell. Waller has never played first grade or at a fully-professional level and is not-notable in any other way. I've added a prod or does it need to go straight to WP:AFD? Cheers,  florrie  22:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Prod's fine with me.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:21, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Matinee

Ok, sorry about that. Didn't seem like enough content to me. --Riotrocket8676 ^{You gotta problem with that?} 00:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the semi protection

Thanks for the semi protection of Xbox 360 technical problems, it really went out of control, and just yesterday some user managed to remove several paragraphs by replacing them with inflammatory context, which was removed (instead of reverting to get the old paragraph back). A "trick" that has been used for some time. I think we need a more permanent semi protection. With best regards. Mahjongg (talk) 00:11, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll watchlist it and extend if needed. HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:21, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Great thanks, I now see the first useful edit in weeks, its certainly helping. Mahjongg (talk) 23:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

the semi protection expired, and unfortunately the anonymous vandals have returned. Sorry to be a bother... Mahjongg (talk) 23:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks a lot. Mahjongg (talk) 00:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Spyro02

Thanks for your note. That will teach me to offer advice the next day, rather than straight away. I was perhaps assuming too much good faith in guessing they didn't understand what was wrong with editing other people's comments, but better too much than too little. I should however have checked whether the AfD had closed before posting again on their talk page. Euryalus (talk) 01:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I just didn't want you to get blind sided if they asked you a question about DRV.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

• News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
• Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Perth Glory

The name of the club is not in dispute. If that is the case, then given Wikipedia naming conventions, the article can only be at one place. I was hoping you could respect that just like Arsenal F.C., Chelsea F.C., and Manchester United F.C., not to mention literally thousands of others, we abbreviate "Football Club" in article titles as "F.C." Since there is no argument over whether or not the club's name is "Perth Glory F.C." I figured there would be no problem with moving. -- Grant.Alpaugh 00:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Replied at User_talk:Grant.Alpaugh#Perth_Glory_F.C.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:13, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

There's nothing to disagree with. We have naming conventions across football articles to prevent exactly this kind of fight. If the club's name is "Perth Glory Football Club," which is not being disputed, then there is only one place the article can go, "Perth Glory F.C." Please, take a few minutes and go to the articles I liked to above. You'll see what I'm talking about. There's really nothing to debate hear, as this is a clear naming conventions violation. -- Grant.Alpaugh 00:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

You are missing my point entirely. The speedy deletion request you made was for an "uncontroversial page move". If another editor is deleting that request, especially if they delete it more than once, the move is controversial. It may (or may not) be correct, but it's controversial. Any controversial move like that should go to WP:RFD for discussion first.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Quebetsom

Can I have the article on quebetsom that you removed.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Niallgl (talk • contribs) 16:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

So you can repost the hoax?--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:15, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

"If you need access to a Wikipedia article that has been deleted, ask me. If it's not a copyright violation, libel, autobiography, COI, or personal information, and has not been deleted as a suspected WP:BLP violation, I will provide the text for you."

I promise not to upload it to wikipedia. Send me a copy of my article please. Niallgl (talk) 16:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder that I had intended to add the word "probably" to the wording above, which I've now done.

I'm still not understanding why you need a copy of the article. In your last request for it, you said you had documentation for everything in the article. I don't see any problem recreating the three paragraphs that were deleted from your documentation.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

No offense but you said yourself that as long as it is not copyright violation, libel, autobiography, COI, or personal information you will provide the text. That is all I am simply asking, I've no idea what the problem is Niallgl (talk) 16:18, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Well can I have my article or not?? Niallgl (talk) 17:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Baseball Bugs

Generally speaking, aren't 'anonymous posts' overlooked/deleted anyway? HalfShadow 19:56, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but it's easier to do when you know it's an IP than if you have to figure out that it wasn't a forgetful signed-in editor. I was waivering over to just delete them like the others, but I was only over there to track down posts by someone who's been harassing Bugs and violating WP:CIVIL, so I signed them and split. Feel free to delete away, if you so choose.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:00, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to be sure. Being as you're an admin; I thought maybe it had changed. I don't see why, but... HalfShadow 20:03, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Nah, just trying not to get distracted by too many cleanups at once. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Kirk

Then please help!

There is an edit war going on in the Captain Kirk page. I have made one change and EEMIV has re-edited it several times. Looking at the page, it appears that EEMIV, Arcayne, and Erikeltic have been arguing over the page all day. Erikeltic is now banned from making changes for 24 hours, but EEMIV and Arcayne are not. Somebody please block them for 24 hours as well because they have actually edited the page more than Erikeltic did. FWIW, I agree with Erikeltic's edit and there needs to be a balanced and fair discussion about the Cawley issue. Despite what both of these people may believe, they do not own the Captain Kirk character. Paramount owns Kirk and Cawley is not canon or significant enough to warrant being included in Kirk's main bio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.152.150.16 (talk) 17:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You aren't going to get far asking for other editors to be blocked when you are making just as many changes. Make your argument for your version at Talk:James T. Kirk. Get some independent, reliable sources to back up your position.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your quick response to my request for semi-protection of Negro league baseball. BRMo (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

De nada. As soon as I saw the request, I did a face palm, knowing that would be a vandal magnet.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:24, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Gymnasium Querfurt Official Web site

In January, 2009 the school home page official moved to the GQBC project site to be accesable by the general public. What is still run at gymnasium-querfurt.de never satisfied the needs of the students community of the Gymnasium Querfurt and so it was overturned by the Gymnasium Querfurt Network Amdinistration. And whatever the official Network Administration considers official is offical. If you want any kind of formal proof, just contact the Network Administration through email: admin@gqbc-online.com.

"Gymnasium Querfurt Online" within the de domain doesn't match world wide industry standards and was created in 1998 based on these year's standards. Although the design of the page was changed in early February by a teacher that has obsolutely no idea about Web sites, it is not official anymore.

So we are going to change the link back to gqbc-online.com/path/section_school/page_about

C. Rady Administrator Gymnasium Querfurt Broadcasting Channel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.234.82.44 (talk) 17:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I've gone back and looked at both sites after reading your message, and here's how it appears. http://www.gymnasium-querfurt.de/ is, in fact, the official school site. http://gqbc-online.com/ is a site you and some other students at the school made as an alternate to it. I have no problem with both sites being in the article, with accurate descriptions of what they are.

I'm finding it hard to believe your claims that the GQBC project site is the official site. Besides the fact that it's very odd that an official German school site would be hosted on American servers, the deleted article Bluemoon Games (written by the same editor who started the Gymnasium Querfurt article) claims that the Gymnasium Querfurt Broadcasting Channel and http://gqbc-online.com sites were developed by Bluemoon. And you haven't explained why, if the school administration really asked you to make a new site, why it wasn't made at the existing url.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:28, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

We did it this way because the school wasn't able to get the credentials for the old website. The teacher didn't agree to give them out. We are not same with Bluemoon Games but just working together with them. Our principal declared our project Web site official like two months ago. And it is hosted on US servers because German school law restricts a school from having a Web site with a board. So an American server shared with Bluemoon Games was the only way. Bluemoon Games was already started at out school some years agoan s we asked them for some help. I don't know whether there is an official headquarter of Wikipedia where we can send a letter by our school leadership team to you. But I can send an email with a digital signaturey to anyone, if this is sufficient. Look at this Web site of this shit Mr. Boehme, he is teacher and has asolutely no idea how to make a Web site(just look at the source code of the site, it's just made with frames and one frame has a source at "Untitled Frame 2" or so). Our principal accepted our request because this old Web site harms the reputation of our school. But another reason for the new domain also was that we wanted to be accessabe from world wide, and and since German servers are often badly configured(most times intent because of the remaining racist views in Germany) they aren't able to sent the files or even the dns records to computers in another country. Regards, C. Rady, Administrator of the Gymnasium Querfurt Broadcasting Channel

You seriously expect anyone to believe that a teacher, who is employed by a school, will not cooperate with the school administration when it comes to the school web site?--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

This teacher is not employed by the school but tenured by the state of Sachsen-Anhalt - means that he can't be fired if he does anything that is not desired by the school administration. Since he denied corporation, a lot students left his class and decided to become taught by another teacher in information technology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.234.98.186 (talk) 15:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Help with Allison Fischer page

You seem to be an expert at wikipedia stuff, so I'll give you a try on this question. The page for Allison Fischer seems to be very messed up. It was great about six months ago, but someone seems to have changed it and put information for either a fake person or a person that's not the Broadway musical actress onto her page. I tried undoing the edits of the previous people who made the most recent changes, but one of the changes said that it could not be removed because of previous changes. Is there any way to make the page go back to what it was before? Thanks! Broadwaylover 01:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't know about expert, but I can at least answer this question. :) The long answer is found at Help:Page history and Help:Reverting.

The short answer is to go back through the page history until you find the last good version. (I'm guessing that this diff shows where the page got hijacked. Hit "previous edit" one more time, so that the last good version is on the right hand side of your screen. Click on the "edit" tab at the top of the page. You should now see that last good version in your edit box. Make a trivial edit (such as adding a space at the end) so the wiki software thinks you did something, and click save. Be sure to leave an edit summary that will tell a casual observer what you did. "Revert" is often abbreviated "rv", so you might leave a summary like "rv page hijacking to last good version by User:JNW".

Hope that helped -- feel free to ask about anything I didn't make clear.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much! It turned out to be very outdated, so I just re-did the whole thing. I'm a little confused about putting the references in the Reference headline though. Thanks! Broadwaylover 03:08, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

You just need to enclose the external web links in the body of the article in the <ref> </ref> tag. Highlight the entire link, then click on the button at the top of the edit box that says <ref> </ref>. The references will automatically appear at the bottom where you put reflist.

When you reuse the same reference, it's a good idea to name it and use the name the second time. This diff shows the first one enclosed and named in the tags, and the second instance of it reused. The reason to name the references is that Wikipedia will reuse the same footnote number, which helps the reader -- everything with a footnote number of 1 is the same reference. HTH! --Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Yet another thank you

For this and your corresponding comment about reading my vain little page on ANI. While I'm violating my own guideline by saying so (i.e. being indifferent to praise as well as blame) I'm truly happy to see people enjoying the page. (Every once in a while I click "what links to" to see if anyone has noticed it.) All the best, Antandrus (talk) 01:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess you can add that it's easier to get noticed for an essay than for a major contribution to an article. ;-)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 13:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009

Unsubscribe · Single-page · Full edition »

  — 16 March 2009

• News and notes: License update, Commons cartoons, films milestone, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Manufactured scandal, Wikipedia assignments, and more
• Dispatches: New FAC and FAR appointments
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Arrogant Sons of Bitches

a user came to me with a new draft, you were one of three deleting admins (including myself). Please see DRV here. Thanks StarM 01:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

re: T.F.

Heh, thanks for letting me know. It's good to let a couple of pages through every now and then I guess ;). Thanks - Kingpin13 (talk)

Adding a random reply with a date in the signature just to let the archive-bot know it's cool to file this.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Fishy Fillets

Good choice on the redirect, but given the pointless history that bit was best gone. Thanks for watching my back :) !!! Pedro :  Chat  22:54, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Fragmentet hermeneutics

How add small contributions to existing articles within music theory, a discipline belonging to the interpretational / hermeneutical sciences? - Difficult I find. A lot of what is written out there is very useful and practical, but at the same time it is kept quite detached from any uniting framework of understanding. So there are many bits and pieces of information that need to be connected for more "efficient" insight and learning for the reader. I attempted to show that the term "common practice" and the (German) term "functional" basically have the same roots. But even this small task I find difficult to do briefly and without leaving loose ends. So maybe it is better to stay clear of the softer sciences, unless one is prepare to write volumes ... (?) Geir Hauge (talk) 19:21, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

protection of Po (Teletubbies)

You are of course absolutely right, this will end up at RPP again, probably right after the current protection expires. I have asked everywhere I know to ask to try and find some sort of more permanent and effective solution to this problem, which is much bigger than just this page, and have been shot down and told to just keep reporting the IPs and named socks as they pop up. I don't know if you are familiar with this particular pain in the ass, but this [4] will give you some idea of the scope of the problem. I've asked for a rangeblock, but it seems most admins either don't know how or are afraid it would end up blocking half of Atlanta (which is where the problem seems to be coming from). If you have any ideas of how to make a more lasting solution please, go for it, and if there is anything I can do to assist, don't hesitate to ask. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:57, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Dang it, I sure do wish I had a magic wand for this one. Seems like I see that name pop up at AN/I way too often. I can't wrap my mind around someone who puts that much effort into being disruptive, except that I do pity them for being so starved for attention. (I pity them, but I still want to slap them silly. *grin*)

Put me in the category of admins who don't know squat about rangeblocks. :( I'll put the article on my watch list, so I can help with the mop up and reblock as needed after the current block expires.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:15, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

It's a perplexing situation, and apparently he's making the same kind of trouble over at the Simple Wikipedia too. It is difficult to understand why a person would spend so much time trying to sneak back in, and yet be so obvious about it, going back to the exact same articles again and again. I've had to kick people out of places I have worked over the years, and sometimes they try to come back later, but I've never seen anyone try to come back a couple times a week for months on end... Beeblebrox (talk) 16:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

re:Coladeira

Hi! Maybe you would be interested in seeing my answer in the talk page. See you! Ten Islands (talk) 14:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't really have any involvement in that article. But it looks like you and Dj iET have some issues to work out -- best of luck in that.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

• From the editor: Reviewing books for the Signpost
• Special report: Abuse Filter is enabled
• News and notes: Flaggedrevs, copyright project, fundraising reports, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Alternatives, IWF threats, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 03:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Commercial links...

The discussion we had eons ago was about establishing a company page was entirely different subject, and if I recall, some editors agreed with me. This is different. You cannot deny that the page contains relevant information, and aside from the fact that it happens to have a nav menu on the top that reverts to services, that is the only thread you can find to support the accusation of it being advertising. If that is the issue, those can be removed. The article itself does not sell an individual service. A homeowners Association website is a real thing that is provided by many companies. To suggest that simply becuase it is hosted on a page by a company that happens to sell them, would be like suggesting that if coca cola had a webpage within their site called, COLA CENTRAL...the facts about COLAS... and went on to list ingredients, % of sugar content, countries where colas are consumed etc was invalid. The page is strictly informational, and is well within the framework of related topics. I welcome yet another debate with other wiki editors....but for you and Mr. Poutin in particular, if what you are saying is that you would feel more comfortable without in menu links to our company, that is fine. I encourgae you to read the full content of the page, and recognize it's informational value, and then make an informed decision on whether you feel the menu links should be elimintaed, which I am more than willing to compromise on.Edenrage (talk) 20:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

And additionally, your snide remarks are unnecessary. Noone is trying to disrespect you, and we are all just trying to put relevante information out there...so please, at least make a marginal attempt to communicate your opinions respectfully and without self glorification at others' expense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenrage (talk • contribs) 20:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I apologize if you think I made any snide remarks. That certainly wasn't my intent. (And, FWIW, yours are coming off fairly snide. Perhaps a do-over is in order.)

We have had a discussion on WP:COI, which you'll find here. Yes, the main part of our discussion was on the difference between notability and verifiability, but we also had a discussion about WP:COI, which you indicated at the time that you had read. WP:COI says "COI editing is strongly discouraged."

I would also encourage you to read Wikipedia:SPAM#How_not_to_be_a_spammer, which says "Some people spam Wikipedia without meaning to. That is, they do things which Wikipedians consider to be spamming, without realizing that their actions are not in line with building an encyclopedia. A new editor who owns a business may see that there are articles about other businesses on Wikipedia, and conclude that it would be appropriate to create his own such article. A Web site operator may see many places in Wikipedia where his or her site would be relevant, and quickly add several dozen links to it." You work for AtHomeNet, you saw many places in Wikipedia where you thought your site was relevant, and you quickly added a number of links to it. This gives the appearance of spamming, and it would be a good idea to avoid it.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

My apologies as well if I did the same. My affiliation with the company is loose at best, however, the policy does not say that contributions as such are always irrelevant and should never be done. that being said, I believe people find the page as highly informative, and while it can be argued that it's inclusion in virtual website may be not as clear, on homeowners association, it is quite clear. I have suggested to the site admin as well as to Mr. Poutine that if the links to request services on the hoa central page are removed, then there will be no promotions of any particular hoa website service. that being said, the issue of commercial advertisement should become a moot point. If that is still a conflict to you after that has been done, then please indicate why. Thank you for your time.Edenrage (talk) 20:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Taking the articles one at a time, I just reviewed the entire external links section of Homeowners' association. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that the entire external links section could go, and I have to agree. (And I've removed it.) The relevant guideline here would be Wikipedia:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided, #1.

By "virtual website" do you mean Virtual community? I'm having a hard time justifying the inclusion of the sentence "Many communities that are operated by Homeowner Associations utilize Homeowners Association websites to facilitate all communications, business transactions, and social endeavors of any kind." or the inclusion of www.athomenet.com in the external links section. While www.athomenet.com is certainly a virtual community, does the inclusion of every virtual community out there really help the average reader's understanding of the subject?--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I was referring to the external links section on the actual page "Homeowners Association websites central" that was being linked to, as it has some menu links along the top of the page under the name athomenet that lead to pages that are of a more commercial sales nature. As for the wikipedia page, the homeowners association topic is huge, and I think some of those links were helpful, such as CAI, and the one of homeowners association websites. There are so many subtopics under homeowners associations such as legal resrouces, websites, national non-profit agencies (like CAI) that have tons of info on the subject on their sites. To include all of it in the wikipedia page would probably be too much. To me it's kind of like having a page on soda (which would be relative to virtual communities) then having links to different kinds of soda, such as grape soda, cherry soda, and colas but not necessarily having a link to Pepsii. Since a homeowners association website is a type of virtual community, I think the inclusion of the information has some degree of value that the reader shuld have the option of deciding whether to pursue or not.

AS for the virtual communities thing. The article talks about different types everything from myspace to a simple community website. An HOA website is common type of virtual community, so I dn't think it's too far of a stretch to include that....Edenrage (talk) 21:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm still not seeing the logic of the inclusion in Virtual community where you put it. It breaks the flow of the sentence and jumps out a bit. How about if I just put a copyedit tag on the section and let an uninvolved editor take a look?--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:17, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I actually thought that it was only included under references and external links section as Homeowners Association Central- a guide to homeowners association websites in online communitites Are we talking about the same page? I remember putting a paragraph like that under the websites page....Edenrage (talk) 21:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm talking about the 4th paragraph in Virtual_community#Introduction, where you added "Many communities that are operated by Homeowner Associations utilize Homeowners Association websites to facilitate all communications, business transactions, and social endeavors of any kind."--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I see where you are referencing. I think that section would make more sense if there were a lead in talking about more examples of different types of virtual communities, and even then, perhaps a link to the wikipedia pages on those topics such as a new thorough page on Homeowner Association websites would make more sense....so yes, I agree with you on this edit. My apologies.Edenrage (talk) 21:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

On the other page though, I do think the external links section should be reinstated and is helpful on the Homeowners ASsociation page, if for nothing else, the COmmunity Associations institute link...as those two terms are virtually interchangeable.Edenrage (talk) 21:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

So here's what I've done -- hopefully it will work for both of us. On Homeowners' association, I still disagree with you about the external links section. However, I've restored it, and added a maintenance template that will get an uninvolved editor who works with external links sections frequently to review the section.

On Virtual_community#Introduction, I've added a copyedit template for the section, with a comment that it's the 4th paragraph that needs attention. Again, this will attract an uninvolved editor who frequently copyedits articles to look at the flow and content of the paragraph.

I'm happy with leaving the articles alone and letting uninvolved parties review it if you are willing to do the same. Deal?--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

A fair compromise, although the Poutin person is still trying to strike the links to homeowners association central on the homeowners association page. I have submitted for the site to remove all menu links that lead to the direct sale of services involved with hoa websites, so hopefully that will keep others from removing it for commercial website reference reasons. I also brought that up to that editor but haven't gotten a response yet. thanks for your help —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenrage (talk • contribs) 21:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

hello again Fabric, I would ask that you and other editors, revisit the links to Homeowners Association Central that user Wangi) decided to remove. I cannot seem to get a reply to any of my direct questions from this particular editor. The page does not even bare a company name or logo on it, it is straight information at this point, and clearly related directly to the topic of homeowners associations. I brought to the attention of this editor and others, that within references, there are clearly links that contain bold and direct advertising, that are left standing. I don't believe my argument is unsound here. I saw the logic and adhered to your assessment of the links on the other pages being inappropriate, but the page itself is not spam, and I resent an editor labeling it that without even reading it and considering the content in its current state.

If a website has pertinent information to a topic, yet still acts as a hub for commercial advertisements of products or services is the end all criteria for judging whether a site is spam or a commercial link, then 1/2 the sites contained within wikipedia for references and external links should be removed. On the homeowners association page we are discussing, the reference article Educating Homeowners, Orange County Register, Nov. 12, 2006 that is included under the references section, is a for profit newspaper, with dozens of links to various commerical enterprise, everything from car dealerships to website builders to banks. I don't make the argument that it should not be in there, because the information in the article may prove valuable, although it is one man's opinion based on his assessment of factual information (as most newspaper articles are). THis whole concept of what is relevant information, and how much creedence the media should get simply becuase they have the money to get better exposure, is what stands at the very foundation of commercialism vs. true information and where the lines should be drawn. Like in many cases, there are arguments to be made on both sides....but if the websites or articles contain good information that is not centered on forcing someone to buy a product...why not let the reader decide on whether or not the link for a low a.p.r rate on a new toyota is compelling enough to click on. Obviously many editors have already concurred with this decision.

A newspaper article whether it be from Time magazine or the kalamazoo daily times still contains 2 things, 1. Information on the topic which is generally a mixture of fact and opinion 2. most importantly, a link home, along with other advertisement links, because at the end of the day, an article in the new york times regardless of topics, is bait for someone to buy the new york times.

thanks-Edenrage (talk) 14:30, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Looks like User:Wangi has replied to you.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:54, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you review the link one more time in it's current state. The user wangi threatened to block me if I made any changes to the link he undid, but consented that if a concencus of people agreed that the link was a valid source that it could be reinstated. Well two other editors have stated they thought the link was fine, but user wangi removed it both times, and I fear that the other editors (one of them according to their talk page is fairly new to wikipedia) may feel somewhat bullied as it's unlikely they will challenge someone removing one of their edits due to inexperience with how wikipedia works. The page as it stands now, solely being in the external links section cetainly doesn't breach COI or Spam, but I dno't want to touch it anymore as I will leave it in the hands of the people, and if Wangi has nothing better to do than police my edits, I wish him happiness in his quest for daily affirmation. Thanks--Edenrage (talk) 14:04, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

There's a whole lot of issues here that I don't have the time or inclination to get into right now, but after reading your message(s) to wangi, I'd strongly suggest you read WP:CIVIL. I certainly understand you might feel others haven't been as civil to you as you'd like, but that's no reason to fire back with both barrels. You'll get a lot more help and respect around here with a little honey instead of vinegar.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:14, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I understand your position Fabric, I want to thank you for allowing us to have a civil discussion. When I first said there was no reason for you to be snide, you said you didn't mean to be, and highlighted the fact that I was a little snide too. We both apologized, and we had a very nice debate in which you helped me...and we were both cordual. Wangi is the opposite. I never said anything personally insulting to him, but when someone accuses you, not even accuses, but basically says that you are not only a liar, but a fraud, where do you go from there? I'm sure these civility guidelines apply to both editors and administrators. If wangi wants to apologize for his unfounded accusations, then we can start over...but at no point did I ever say anything of that nature to him. In the meantime, I have to play the hand I'm dealt... thanks for your helpEdenrage (talk) 16:06, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

You have a chance to take the high road here. If you continue to respond to him/her with aggression, you'll only get the same in return -- that's human nature. The choice is yours. Whatever choice you make, I hope it's one you're happy with.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:11, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

While I admit, many of the things I said were a bit sarcastic in our past exchanges, I never outright insulted him or called him any names, accused him of being a liar & a fraud. It would seem to me, that a wikipedia editor, who is in a greater position of power than just a user/editor like myself, should be the one taking the slightly higher road. If this is in fact a job, I know at my job, you can't just call a customer a liar and a fraud even if you think they are. There are truly a lot of issues at play in this debate. I think what bothers me the most is the massive number of commercial links that are in wikipedia that go unchecked, and certain admin/editors have the attitude of, it's not my job or my problem to address those...I'm only going to make an example of you with yours. All I asked for from anybody was to answer some of the questions I directly posed to resolve the issue, which Wangi never even attempted to do. I look at the wikipedia pages for Comcast, Coca Cola, IBM, Craigslist to name a few...many of them go so far as to have an external link to the sign up pages for their services. Many people turn a blind eye because these corporations have money and power. This debate sits at the very core of what wikipedia is supposed to be about...information or advertisement, and how the same set of rules should apply to everyone. More-over, when an editor suggests a page where the website owners have made changes to adhere to wikipedia's policies, at what point do they stop being penalized for the past? I know you don't want to get involved here, but I ask for you advice on how to go to the next level with this, above Wangi perhaps, as it seems obvious that he will only respond to edits made by users he feels are on his same level. Edenrage (talk) 16:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Dispute resolution has a variety of ways to resolve disputes with another editor. I'd suggest trying something like Wikipedia:Editor assistance first rather than heading off straight to Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts (because you're rejecting taking the high road) or Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard (because no admin powers have been used here).

Also, just as a friendly piece of advice, which you're free to ignore; while it's tempting to compare your own edits to what you see on other pages. However, Wikipedia has more than 2,000,000 pages, and only a few dedicated volunteers to spend time trying to ensure each of these pages conform to policy. There are many, many more editors who spend their time vandalizing, promoting their businesses, or inserting their own non-neutral point of view. And then there's the vast majority of editors who quietly make a few good edits and then move on. So when you see another page, you really have no idea (unless you spend a LOT of time digging through edits) whether any particular piece was inserted by someone who is conforming to policy or not. The best thing is to read the policies for yourself, with a view to making sure that your edits conform to policy, not trying to make the policy conform to your edits. Again, free advice, and we all know what that's worth.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:07, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Fabric, I have long since conceded to you, and to every other editor that inspite of the massive amount of commercial links that dwell in varous articles in wikipedia, that the links on the homeowners association page should not have been replaced. The problem is, now this gang of editors is suggesting that a totally seperate link to a totally different non-commercial website, should be excluded from the community association page, based on the facts that they don't like my attempt to edit the homeonwer page, they don't believe that any website even remotely related to athomenet could possible not be commercial, they don't beleive cidgab.com is its own company, and they don't believe that I don't work for both companies. That is all I am arguing at this point. I have accepted the outcome of our initial argument...the problem is, these editors don't want to move on from it...even after I said I was done with this page and the debate should shift to the community association page. the problem is every editor wants to join this debate mid stream and rail into me over something I have already conceded pages ago.... I ask that we keep the debate focused on the issue at hand...that's all. Edenrage (talk) 14:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Also, I didn't realize you guys were volunteers. All admins at wikipedia are volunteers? Now I understand why things go down the way they do, and how massive a job it must be to police so many pages....Edenrage (talk) 14:02, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, everyone here is a volunteer.

I'd suggest you read the discussion at Talk:Homeowners' association again to see why there appears to be a connection between the two websites. No one has argued that you work for both companies, only that the appearance of a link between the companies is there.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Are you suggesting that it is impossible for the owners of Athomenet to be affiliated with buy ads on a seperate, non-commercial-website simply becuase they are a company that is for profit? Google owns wikipedia. Google is for profit, wikipedia is not....you see where the logic doesn't make sense here? A website's linking capability and it's merit should be judged by what is on the site. Yes, since athomenet sells websites, cidgab operates on its server, and obviosuly they (along with 4 other companies) have paid cidgab for banner ads just as almost ALL websites sell sponsorship banner ads to pay for hosting etc.) but what does that have to do with anything? the content of the site is what matters is it not? because if that is not the case, then EVERY website that sells sponsorhips and ads to a commercial site would be a violation of wikipedias link spamming and non commercial advertising sites policy. Why is the logic of this argument escaping so many people...it seems pretty elementary to me.Edenrage (talk) 19:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

First, can you cite a source showing that Google owns Wikipedia? It would certainly be news to me, and very surprising, considering that Google has their own competing website, Knol. Wikipedia is operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, and a quick search isn't showing that Google "owns" the non-profit foundation.

But that's neither here nor there. The point that was made is that there is a connection between cidgab and athomenet. You are saying it's one of customer and vendor -- fine. It's still a connection, and that's all that was said. Is it an important connection? I don't know, and I don't really care, since I'm staying out of that argument.

Why is the logic escaping everyone? Perhaps you need to slow down a bit, take more time to read what people are saying, and then write a clear, concise reply. When everyone can't understand an elementary argument, perhaps it's a sign that you need to clarify what you're saying.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

The main point here, is that all of these editors basically are only seeing one train of thought.... athomenet is a for profit company...therefore any website affiliated with, owned by, or hosted by athomenet = a commercial website....regardless of what the site has to offer, or the purpose of the site.Edenrage (talk) 13:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC) And oh yeah...thanks for your advice and your help in navigating this situation....Edenrage (talk) 18:06, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Notability and references boxes question

Hi, I've recently been updating an article (this one: Mendeley) that you marked as requiring further references. I've proceeded by adding more content and also a few third-party references. I would like to know if the boxes regarding notability stay on the page until someone verifies the article or if they can be removed by any user? Thank you for your time. - rvidal (talk) 17:40, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Great job on adding the references. I'd say both the unref and notability tags can go.

In general, if you think you've added what the maintenance tag is asking for, go ahead and remove it. The worst that can happen is someone objects, you ask nicely what else is needed, everyone discusses it, and the article gets improved. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick reply. Much appreciated. - rvidal (talk) 18:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Brad Ludden

No problem, since there's no reason to speedy it, I won't nominate it for deletion, since I don't know much about kayaking and who would be considered notable in that world. It's just that when new users make articles about real people with no references, you automatically think it's a candidate for speedy deletion. --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 20:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:ATHLETE says fully professional athletes are notable. The article specifically said he's professional, so that's a claim of importance. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Colours

Given what you wrote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zinnwaldite (color), you might like to contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Desert sand (color). Uncle G (talk) 10:05, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

CSD / PROD for Giambracy

Points taken, I've seconded the PROD. Cheers, MLauba (talk) 17:57, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I have to admit that articles like that make me wish there was a CSD criteria for "complete load of crap". :)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:59, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

We could expand the definition of "patent nonsense" :) MLauba (talk) 18:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Why is Giambracy a complete load of crap? It was created with good intentions and does not offend or attack any other ideologies.

Care to document the number of members? Care to document its existence with independent, reliable sources? Make a reasonable argument at the AfD that this isn't a load of crap, and I'll withdrawn the deletion nomination.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

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

MLauba (talk) 21:51, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Animas-La Plata Water Project

Hmm. Well, let's put it this way: you sure removed all of the bias from the article! I'm quite busy on Wikinews right now, but I'll look over the article when I get a chance. Thanks for the heads-up. ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 22:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, there wasn't much left after the POV stuff was removed. :) Thanks for looking at it when you can.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Xbox 360 technical problems

Now the semi protection of Xbox 360 technical problems has expired the waves of vandalism have immediately returned! Mahjongg (talk) 14:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Docupace

I posted "docupace" and you delete it. I need to understand how this articule got deleted when similar articles are in place all over wikipedia. some examples: "Laserfiche", IBM, Dell, Etc. Please help me to understand so I can try again. thanks in advance —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariel golarte (talk • contribs) 17:17, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Did you read the links KuroiShiroi and WilyD left of your talk page? WP:FAQ/Business, WP:FIRST, and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) pretty much cover it all.

After reading those links, if you'd like to take another stab at writing the article, WilyD made a great suggestion: write it at User:Ariel golarte/Docupace. When you think it meets the above guidelines, put a {{helpme}} tag (note the curly brackets) on your talk page and ask an experienced editor to look it over. HTH!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:32, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

speedy deletion of PINE RIDGE JOB CORPS

in regards to the speedy deletion of PINE RIDGE JOB CORPS i have no problem wiht it being deleted the only problem i have is with the reason it was deleted. I was not advertising it. I hate the place i wouldnt send someone i hete there let alnong someone i liked. There was too much drama to much idiocy the staff were corrupte *&$!#& yes u can learn usefull skills thier and earn money while doing it but if i had a choice to go back there i wouldnt take it and I went there the of my own free will i wasnt sent because of court or other things like some of the students were no i went thire of my own stupidy going on my own free will cuz i thought it be cool. Plz answer me on my talk page im not on very often to check on stuff so by the time i get back on ud have probily started a new talkpage and deleted the one this post is on. thnks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neon5162 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I prefer to have conversations all in one place, so I'll answer here. You can find this in the archives when you show up again.

Looking at the deleted versions, the version you wrote was definitely not an advertisement. It also made no claim that the organization in any way meets the Wikipedia standard of notability, so it still would have been eligible for speedy deletion as non-notable. Someone came along after you and rewrote the article into an advertisement. Since there was no version to revert back to that met Wikipedia's standards, the article was nominated for deletion. HTH--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:26, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Neon5162 (talk) 05:18, 3 April 2009 (UTC) thnks ya i knew it was going to be deleted i was just hoping someone would come along and improve on it

Wikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

• From the editor: Follow the Signpost with RSS and Twitter
• Special report: Community weighs license update
• News and notes: End of Encarta, flagged revisions poll, new image donation, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Censorship, social media in schools, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:00, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

user:gjr_rodriguez

I appreciate the concern, and the good words. However, I'm not part of the wiki-community. I'm just a baseball fan that found it attrocious that in the whole wiki-universe, these baseball players, that could get called up to the major within one day, are getting NO love. I'm the one having to update roster templates just to get a deserving athletes name on Wiki-universe SOMEWHERE! I saw WP:ATHLETE and I understand it, and its twisted and archaic (in technology terms), is it that Wikipedia doesn't have the store space? Theres no reason minor league athletes shouldn't have at least a stub, apparently it hasn't even been considered since it just takes someone to do it, ME. To go through the red tape of wikipedia, creating discussions and all that mess, ain't gonna get anyone any smarter or more aware of a notable baseball player that takes the field for a salary, in AMERICA, no less! I'm only doing the AA and AAA class players, and thats where I plan on stopping, and from there I'll just be the dude that updates the minor league baseball rosters. Don't plan on stopping me, rather go to bat for me, and help em understand what I'm trying to do, not to be a dick, but to update rosters in peace. Its a pain when someone tries to throw ink on your artwork, know what I mean? Gjr rodriguez (talk) 17:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Any time you make any contribution here on Wikipedia, you are part of the wiki-community. Sorry you don't feel the rules apply to you, especially when it comes to consensus. I hope you'll at least take what I said about civility to heart -- it will serve you well both on and off-wiki. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Resubmission of Gregory Griffin Autobiography

Below is a new edited version of Mr. Griffin's bio, which I am resubmitting for consideration:

Gregory O. Griffin Sr.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gregory O. Griffin Sr. (born July 11, 1958) is the current Chief Legal Counsel for the Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, serving since November 1995 when he was selected by the Board as the first African American for that position. He was the second African American in Alabama History to attain the highest Merit System rank of Attorney IV. In 1994 he became the first African American to become the Republican Party Nominee for the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals. He received over a half million votes being narrowly defeated by Sue Bell Cobb the current Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court. He served as the Chairman of the Republican Council the African American arm of the State Republican Party. He also served on the Party’s 20-member steering Committee.

Biography Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles Gregory Oswald Griffin, Sr. Greg Griffin is the Chief Legal Counsel, Attorney IV for the Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles, Montgomery, Alabama. The chief legal counsel provides oversight, guidance and direction for legal advice provided throughout the department as well as providing advice on any legal subject and on other matters as directed by the Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles. Prior to being employed as chief legal counsel, Griffin was an assistant attorney general in the Attorney General Office, where he specialized in civil litigation and criminal appellate practice. He has represented Judges and other public officials. He was also general counsel to the Alabama Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners. Gregory Oswald Griffin, Sr. is also an adjunct instructor at Alabama State University teaching courses in Real Estate Finance, Business Law I and Federal Income Taxation. He has served in that position since 1989. Education 1980 - Bachelor of arts degree in political science, Morehouse College, Atlanta, GA (Student Body President). 1983 - Juris doctorate degree, University of Pittsburgh School of Law, Pittsburgh, PA. 1984 - Master of law (taxation), Boston University School of Law, Boston, MA (member of the Tax Law Review) Career Chronology: 1. 1984 - 1985 A.G. Gatson Enterprises, Inc., associate general counsel 2. 1985 - 1986 associate, Pennick, Williams and Jones, Birmingham, AL 3. 1986 - 1987 staff attorney, Legal Services Corporation of Alabama, Inc. 4. 1989 - present adjunct / instructor, Alabama State University, Montgomery, Alabama 5. 1987 - 1995 assistant attorney general, office of the Attorney General, Montgomery, AL 6. 1995 - present chief legal counsel / Attorney IV, Alabama Board of Pardons and Paroles. Awards and Honors: Recipient of Law SchooL Scholastic Scholarship; Winner of first year oral argument ; received honors in oral advocacy; Selected to be Judge of first year arguments. Professional Memberships and Affiliations: Alabama State Bar Pennsylvania State Bar District of Columbia Bar U.S. District Court, Southern District of Alabama U.S. District Court, Middle District of Alabama U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals United States Tax Court (current as of May 1999)

Griffin was Chief Counsel for the Parole Board during the time the Board granted a Pardon to former Governor Harold Guy Hunt. The United States Attorney for the Middle District Redding Pitt called for a Federal investigation of Griffin and the Parole Board. Griffin and the Parole Board were never investigated and the former Governor kept his Pardon and later ran for Governor for a third time but was defeated by Don Seigelman who would later be convicted of a Bribery and Obstruction of Justice Charge and sent to Federal Prison.

Griffin’s name was mentioned as a possible appointee to succeed U S Senator- elect Jeff Sessions as Attorney General of Alabama, William Holcombe “Bill” Pryor Jr. eventually received the appointment. Griffin, a friend of Pryor’s was an early and strong supporter of Pryor’s confirmation to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals when Pryor’s nomination ran into Democratic opposition. Many Democrats criticized Pryor for his comments regarding homosexuality and abortion, as well as for what he described as his extreme right-wing views and reputation as a conservative. Griffin a Republican with many Democratic friends at every opportunity dispelled the criticisms about Pryor and claims credit for encouraging many prominent African Americans to support Pryor’s confirmation. Griffin upon the request of Pryor was one of the persons interviewed by the FBI concerning his nomination to the Court. Pryor was the first and only judge appointed to the Eleventh Circuit by Bush and confirmed by the United States Senate. On June 09, 2005 he was confirmed to the Eleventh Circuit by a vote of (53-45). Griffin is also a close political friend and financial supporter of Alabama Attorney General Troy King.

Griffin a college friend and classmate of Emmy Award-winning and Academy Award-nominated American film director, producer, writer, and actor Shelton Jackson “Spike” Lee was one of the first persons that Lee contacted to help with financing of his first major movie, “She's Gotta have it!” Griffin at the time was the attorney for Birmingham Millionaire A.G. Gaston who was once the wealthiest black man in America. Lee asked Griffin to ask A.G. Gaston for a fifteen thousand-dollar investment. When Griffin approached Gaston about investing in his College friend’s movie, “She’s Gotta Have It”, the 92 year old Gaston asked, “She’s Gotta Have What?” Gaston refused to invest in Lee’s movie.

Griffin had the good fortune to have as one of his political mentors the late Governor George Wallace. For many years the two had offices close to each other in the Lurlene Wallace State Office Building. Griffin would visit Wallace in his Office and at his home. He credits the late Governor with teaching him about Alabama Politics.

While at Morehouse College, Griffin served as Student government Association President for the 1978-79 academic year. He was the first ever “independent” (non- fraternity member) and Junior Class Member to be elected to that position. As President of the Student Government Association Griffin had several friends and political allies who are notable figures today. They include: Martin Luther King III, Dexter King, Sheldon “Spike” Lee, Jeh Charles Johnson, David Haley, Edwin Moses, C. Howie Hodges II, David J. Dent, and Emmett Carson.

Griffin was elected in 2000 as the first African American Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Prestigious Capital City Club of Montgomery, Alabama. He served in that position for one year. Prior to his election as Chairman, Griffin had served on the Board Of Governors for more than 12 years.

Griffin represented the State of Alabama in the landmark Alabama Supreme Court case Ex parte State of Alabama (Re William Maxwell CURREN v. STATE (620 So.2d 739. In Ex parte Curren the Alabama Supreme Court stated that Section 32-5A-191(a)(1) makes driving a vehicle with blood alcohol content of 0.10% a crime without reference to the effect that alcohol has on the driver and that therefore, intoxication is not an element of the offense. In addition, the Alabama Supreme Court held that while a defendant “can offer evidence to rebut the State’s evidence that his blood alcohol content was 0.10% when he was found driving, or in actual physical control of a vehicle,” he can not introduce evidence to rebut the fact that he was intoxicated, because as the Alabama Supreme court stated, whether the defendant was intoxicated “ is not relevant to the charge of driving or being in actual physical control of a vehicle with a blood alcohol content of 0.10% or greater.

On July 1st, 2008 Griffin received a citation from the City of Montgomery and was acknowledged for heroism in recognition for his bravery and citizenship, while assisting the Montgomery Police Department in the apprehension of a thief who stole valuable City property.

Griffin was born in Rocky Mount, North Carolina in 1958. He grew up in Rocky Mount with and directly across the street from Thurbert Baker, the current Georgia Attorney General; Mike Easley, the current Governor and former Attorney General of North Carolina, and Roy Cooper, who is the current Attorney General of North Carolina.

Griffin is married, and he and his wife Debra have three children. Griffin resides in Montgomery, Alabama and is an active member of Community Congregational Church of Christ. He and his wife Debra are engaged in rental property development. In 2009 they established the Greg and Debra Griffin Foundation to share their blessings with those in need.

SOURCES

Montgomery Advertiser, Thursday September 22, 1994, Outcome of Appellate Court Race to Make History.

Montgomery Advertiser, Saturday, November 16, 1996, Two Join Hopefuls for AG Appointment.

Montgomery Advertiser, Saturday June 14, 1997, Grimes defends Hunt Pardon.

Montgomery Advertiser Wednesday April 1st, 1997, Hunt Pardoned.

Morehouse Alumnus Magazine Fall 1998

Montgomery Advertiser, Monday, March 4, 2002, Black Club Leader’s Accent Puts Past In Perspective.

Montgomery Advertiser Thursday, August 15, 1996, Spike Lee visits Wallace for Church Bombing Film.

In Search of Black America, David J. Dent (2000) pp.283-285

www.greggriffin.com “Griffin Speaks”

CNN Court TV (Nancy Grace) reporting live “Guy Hunt Pardoned “June 11, 1997 Syholmes (talk) 06:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

First, please don't post articles on my talk page. Talk pages are for talk, not articles. Also, don't post it in the deletion debate again. That debate is closed, and it specifically says not to modify it.

Second, other than listing the debate on a couple of notice boards, I had absolutely no involvement in the deletion. If you want to take another stab at writing an article, try it at User:Syholmes/Gregory Oswald Griffin. When you think your version is ready for article space, place a {{helpme}} tag on your talk page (note the curly brackets) and ask an experienced editor to look it over. HTH.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. Syholmes (talk) 21:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

AWB

Hey, you probably already know this, but just in case - you can have it add the deadend template for you by selecting the More... tab and enabling Append/Prepend text. I prepend, use {{deadend|date={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}} as my template, and use one newline character. --JaGa^talk 21:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, I knew that. I'm also a big fan of "paste special" -- I throw unref, importance, and a few other common problem tags in there.

Thanks again for the list!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:37, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Baba Shanti Giri

An article that you have been involved in editing, Baba Shanti Giri, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baba Shanti Giri. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. A Nobody^{My talk} 18:59, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

• Special report: Interactive OpenStreetMap features in development
• News and notes: Statistics, Wikipedia research and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikia Search abandoned, university plagiarism, and more
• Dispatches: New FAC and FAR nomination process
• WikiProject report: WikiProject China
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

ARChive of Contemporary Music

I think I have found out why the entry on ARChive of Contemporary Music was incorrectly deleted. The UofM interns used OUR wording in their entry. Our wording is standardized. This seems to be a major defect in the Wiki scheme of things and should be addressed. ie the source vs the user. Please reinstate our page! B.bunchy (talk) 15:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

This has already been addressed at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Be sure to read the entire page, and then if you are the copyright holder and wish to allow use of the material, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating_copyrighted_materials#Granting_us_permission_to_copy_material_already_online. The page cannot be reinstated until permission has been formally granted through the steps listed. HTH--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, since you work at the ARChive of Contemporary Music, take a minute to read through WP:COI.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:26, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Notability of Minor League Players

Being in an all-star game was a threshold for notability up until this edit:[5]. I worked very long and hard to get those concessions into the guidelines. When those guidelines were written, consensus had been reached and nobody was objecting to their inclusion. Now apparently, they are gone due to the overriding bias of Wikiproject Baseball against minor league baseball. How this wikiproject can routinely override WP:ATHLETE is beyond me. All it takes is for someone to nominate a minor league article and the wikiproject members gang up in the AfD until it snowballs the page off wikipedia. These practices have driven many good baseball contributors off Wikipedia. It is very frustrating to be told that something is notable - to work many long hours on research and writing articles based on those assurances - and then to have the rug pulled out from under them a few months later when someone decides to change the rules midstream. You wake up one morning and find that many of the articles that were notable yesterday are not notable today. It is very frustrating to say the least. Kinston eagle (talk) 16:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I absolutely understand your frustration about the need for a guideline. I even understand your frustration about WP:ATHLETE, even though I don't agree with it. (WP:ATHLETE's "fully professional" wording is very vague, and I've never seen anything close to consensus on what it really means. To quote from what I wrote at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball/Notability guidelines last year; "I really hope we can come to a consensus on the guideline, because we'll continue to have contentious AfDs otherwise. And even if there is a consensus, we may still have contentious AfDs because WP:ATHLETE is so irritatingly vague. (What exactly is a "fully professional league"? Is it a league where you get paid $1? Where you get paid at least minimum wage for the time you put in? Where you get paid what you'd make at a full-time year 'round minimum wage job? Where you could buy a house, raise a family, and not depend on a spouse's income? Where at least one player, but not every player, meets the wage standard chosen? Yikes.)")

The change was made because of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball/Notability guidelines. IIRC, the discussion was announced at WP:MLB, although it would have been nice if there had been more than 8 days between the time it was started and the time the change was made. I have to say that while we didn't have great luck then sourcing a couple of the AAA players, I also didn't see a groundswell of support for removing that language either. If you or Hit bull, win steak want to bring up that issue for general discussion, I'd be glad to revisit it. I still stand by what I said in that discussion -- I see the notability guideline as a shortcut for determining who is presumed to have enough independent, reliable sources to meet WP:BIO. If that's MLB only, fine. If that's rookie league, fine. If it's somewhere in between, fine. Let's just decide where that is.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:42, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

We did decide where that is. Then it got changed. That's the problem. Why should I spend days or weeks arguing for all-stars to be included as I did last time, if it can be changed at the drop of a hat a few months later? Kinston eagle (talk) 17:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia:CONSENSUS#Consensus_can_change? Otherwise, you need to go with whatever guideline was in effect the day Wikipedia started. Or whatever the very first guideline was, which may not be what you like or what current consensus is.

So, would you like the community to talk about the MiLB guidelines or do you prefer to have things stay the way they are? It's up to you.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

deleting ARChive's page

Wiki people

This is getting absurd. You are asking me to verify / seek permission to use exact language that I have written and used for over 24 years to describe my business, The ARChive of Contemporary Music.

All it would take is a human, using one click to go to our website, then another to see the UofM site written by intern using OUR language, to see that they are quoting us, not vice versa. And we have never copywritten our material, anyone can use our texts and metadata we collect on popular music.

That some pedant, with no sense or interest in the truth would pull our info offline is amazing.

So much for knowledge!

Please return our text and footnotes and I will re-write in baby talk so that you can understand.

(B.bunchy (talk) 03:33, 8 April 2009 (UTC)) B. George, Director

I understand exactly what you are saying. Please take a minute to understand what I am saying. Whether the text originated on your website or theirs, permission needs to be given to use copyrighted material here. In the US, if you publish material, including on the internet, it is presumed to be copyrighted unless you specifically say that it's not (such as the agreement to release contributions under the GFDL when you post here).

The method for giving permission is above. If you don't want to or can't give permission in the required way, then the article can be written from scratch without using copyrighted text. But before doing so, please take the time to read WP:COI as I suggested above. Otherwise you run the risk of the article being deleted as advertising. I hope that helps.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 13:31, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

RE: The minor leaguer articles

I prodded a good number of them; if you had to send to AfD, then perhaps the others have been deprodded as well. I might have to add to the Afd; only because I'd rather not do each individually. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 23:04, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

We might just wait and see if anyone objects to the prods and send to AfD at that time. I'm willing to watchlist them and help send them over, if that will help you out. I hesitate to bundle them all only because there will be a hue and cry to unbundle.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I see you already added them. We'll see what transpires there. I'm checking the other prods for notability. (Some do seems to pass WP:BIO.)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:18, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

As predicted, there's some rumbling about the bundling, so I'm boldly unbundling. Here's what I did:

• Neftali Feliz has some buzz (top ten for Baseball America, article in Baseball Prospectus behind a paywall, SI says he may get to the majors this year), so I'm leaving him alone.
• Jose Diaz is a disamb page

• Jose Diaz (baseball player) is not. That's the original one, anyway. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:44, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

• And it's already nom'd, so no worries there.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

• Alfredo Gonzalez (baseball player) has significant time at AAA, but no WP:RS to show notability. Did a procedural nom at AfD.
• Tommy Everidge has only one RS. Procedural nom.
• J.B. Diaz sent to AfD
• Kendy Batista has pitched 1 game at AAA, but has been released. Sent to AfD.
• Myron Leslie has a couple of seasons at AA, no RS showing notability. Sent to AfD.
• John D. Banister is misspelled, redirected to existing article at John Bannister (baseball). Bannister is on the 40-man roster for the MLB club, so I'm not going to nom this.

Technically, he hasn't yet played, and since I can't find anything else notable about him, he really should go to AfD. I've gone through debates like this before, and consensus usually favors a stricter interpretation of WP:ATHLETE. He could get struck by a car tomorrow before he ever played in a pro game and that would mean that he was not notable enough. (Is he scheduled to play really soon? That might make it not worth our time to take to AfD.) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:34, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I went back and forth quite a bit on this one. I've seen several editors who hold that AAA doesn't meet WP:ATHLETE while the 40 man roster does, possibly because the 40-man means the club thinks enough of him to protect him from the Rule-5 draft. (Guessing on that -- I don't agree personally.) If someone else nom'd him, I'd probably be in the delete category, but I can't say I feel strongly enough about his lack of notability to do it myself.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and for the season start -- the MLB club starts on Monday, AAA games start a couple of days later. So we might wait a couple of weeks to see where he's at and re-evaluate then.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:43, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm in the wait and see category since it's that close to opening day. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 19:47, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan. I'll make a note on my calendar to revisit this one. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:45, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

• Adrian Cardenas sent to AfD.
• Brennan Garr sent to AfD.
• Todd Donovan has had a couple of stints at AAA, and besides the article I added as a ref has several more behind paywalls. I'm not going to nom this.
• Derek Holland (baseball) is rated a top prospect by Baseball America, and will probably be in the starting rotation at AAA this year. I'm not going to nom this one.
• Jared Hyatt sent to AfD
• Clayton Hamilton (baseball) sent to AfD

• Recommend a withdrawal of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clayton Hamilton (baseball). - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:05, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

• I thought I'd done that with this edit, but I'll bold it to make it clearer.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Do what you like with the ones I didn't send to AfD.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I created a sorted list of what has gone to AfD and what hasn't, User:Kelapstick/Sandbox, I was having trouble keeping it all straight in my head, especially what I had commented on and what I hadn't. Feel free to use/edit it if you find it helpful. I am also adding any new pages of players that Gjr creates to see if they should be nominated along the same criteria. (he just added 2 more). Cheers. --kelapstick (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Great idea! A much more organized version of what I did here. :)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:18, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't going to say anything but<snicker>...I also went through edit history and added more, it got to be a pretty substantial list.--kelapstick (talk) 23:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

You may want to look at the Adrian Cardenas nom. He's a notable prospect with a bunch of media coverage, some of which I provided at the AFD. Please try to be more careful in your research next time, or consult with someone more familiar with minor league baseball. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 13:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Feeling a bit snarky today? --Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:03, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

? -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 18:37, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I was on my way out the door to a dentist appt, and didn't have time to write a calm, rational response to your comment, which had struck me as being fairly snarky. Especially because your comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrian Cardenas sounded like you were blaming me for others not doing their own research in the AfD.) I can see now that you weren't, but putting good faith in quotes didn't help the general impression your comment made. But I'd like to put that aside. I'm going to assume that this was a case of miscommunication based on the trouble we humans seem to have fully reading the intentions in written communication. (And, I hope if any thing I write strikes you the wrong way that you'll give me the same benefit of any doubt.)

FWIW, I am familiar with minor league baseball, and in the bell curve of Wikipedians, I'd put my google-fu as better than average. I passed over the Miami Herald source because I don't do the pay sites or "free with registration" (bad experience being spammed incessantly by a newspaper after registering). The Baseball America profile fooled me, because the headline in the gsearch says "BaseballAmerica.com: 2007 Player Statistics: Adrian Cardenas" -- didn't sound promising. Now I know to check that particular heading. I admit I missed the Phillies.com site, probably because it was at the end of the 5th page of ghits, and I'd already checked a half-dozen pages of gnews hits without luck before that. Not to mention 8 other players before him. Which is one of the great things about AfD. Yes, I try to be very thorough in my noms, and I have a very high success rate because of that. But I'm human, I don't know everything, and I can miss stuff. Luckily other people at AfD can point out what I've missed and can educate me. When they do it in a nice way, I appreciate it, I learn something and the encyclopedia benefits.

Speaking of learning something, I have two questions for you at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clayton Hamilton (baseball). If you could help with either or both of them, I'd be much obliged. Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I probably should've been a bit more diplomatic, but I wasn't sure how a reasonably thorough good-faith search could've missed establishing notability on Cardenas, since I pulled the sources in the article in about 5 minutes, and it really bugged me that all the commenters were just blindly trusting it rather than taking 30 seconds to check for themselves. If it was an honest error, then so be it - we all make those from time to time. And of course, you aren't responsible for other people's failings. I answered your questions in the Hamilton thread. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 13:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

And now the Cardenas article was just deleted by MBisanz, despite the sources I provided in the AFD. Sigh. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 19:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Jeez, I nominated it and even I wouldn't have closed it that way. If real life doesn't interfere this afternoon, I might see what I can do with your sources to recreate it as a decent stub. Feel free to beat me to it. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Feel free to add to it.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:08, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I've tried contacting people here involved with the baseball articles and none of them have seen fit to reply to me in any form. Bull, just help. Anyone can miss good sources; that's why there are more than one of us! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 15:17, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Context

If you think SES cognitive processing and public policy media has context, perhaps you could convert the link to the SES dab page into the appropriate meaning of SES for the context of this article. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 07:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Micro-script

Dear Fabrictramp--

Thanks for your note. Being new to the wiki protocol, didn't realize the rule on inventors submitting their own stuff. Although the word is legit and becoming more so. Is there a difference between submitting to Wiktionary which what I originally was trying to do but couldn't figure out how? Wasn't intending Micro-script to be an "article." Just a definition. Thanks R —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocket501 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I rarely edit at Wiktionary, but the rules may well vary a bit over there. This link at Wiktionary sounds promising, especially the part about "Criteria for inclusion". HTH--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:54, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

• License update: Licensing vote begins
• News and notes: WMF petitions Obama, longer AFDs, UK meeting, and more
• Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Color
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Help!

We just had an edit conflict on the ANI board; I'm glad you're here. Did you happen to notice the message I left above the one you just answered? I am very suspicious of a returning vandal, but I can't for the life of me remember who this character is. Take a look at the new user log to see what I mean. If you think I should be blocking any suspect accounts, now might be a good time to start.  :) Thanks. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, real life called for about 15 minutes. (Damn this whole making a living thing!) The editor you mentioned does sound strangely familiar, but my "Danger Will Robinson" alarm isn't going off. I'll look around for a few and see if any bells chime.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

LOL! You too, eh? Gotta head over to that place of emplyment m'self in a few moments. It wasn't exactly alarm bells for me, but rather a sense of deja vu. Take care and thanks for the help. It's a great relief. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:24, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll spend a few minutes snooping around and adding things to my watchlist. Cheers!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

And the light just came on when I saw User:Baseball Beetles. It's a bunch of Ron Liebman socks, I'd wager. No edits yet, but it's his MO. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:43, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

It does seem odd that someone would create an account and not edit with it right away. Most users create an account in order to edit. Unless they're getting them established early for autoconfirmation... --Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'll be a monkey's uncle (aunt?) Now that I've snooped through the user creation log a bit, I see a lot of accounts created in this same time frame that haven't editing yet. Must ponder this over another cup of tea.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

yeah

there are like 2 atomic facts at nicole steinwedell. <correct spelling> what is disputable? HeadsCanBeLargelyAkin2Wholes 23:55, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

ok, also- can you tell me more about this commitment to your real-life identity thing? I looked at the SHA-512 link and the commitment scheme. but I'm still wondering- how's it work? 00:00, 16 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Headlikeawhole (talk • contribs)

just giving you a heads up cuz you placed the tag.

As to the committed identity, Template:User committed identity has a good explanation. Basically it gives you a way to prove you are the real owner of the account if someone ever hacks into your Wikipedia account.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:08, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

ok cool. has anyone ever had thier reputation badly burned by someone hacking thier 'paedia acct? have you had any hacker problems? do you like the phrase real-life to exclude online interactions/online "life"? k, later. HeadsCanBeLargelyAkin2Wholes 00:14, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Chris. Hayes

Wow, that was fast! Thanks for getting in touch and the clarification is appreciated. While I'm here, you seem to have taken some interest in this row over these minor league player articles (I daren't speculate how many there are, but quite a few!) and I was wondering what on Earth is going on? A good number of them seem to have been deleted and while I, quite frankly, have better things to do than weigh into such a heated debate, some of them- as you've pointed out to others- are salvageable and notable, but the author seems unwilling to cooperate with people who want to help him. I know nothing about minor league baseball, but I hate to see a potentially decent article scrapped so I'd be willing to help with the better ones where I can. Let me know if I can be of assistance. Regards HJ Mitchell (talk) 19:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I think you hit the problem squarely on the head -- our friend isn't much into cooperating or change. I and others have tried explaining to him the value of sourcing the articles with reliable sources that show notability, but he insists that all minor leaguers are inherently notable no matter what the consensus is. I had thought about making a list of all his articles and working through them one by one, sourcing and improving where I can, but I got discouraged when he was creating dozens of new pages every day. He hasn't edited since his block, so when I might get back to slogging through the list. Any of the articles you want to add reliable sources to, be my guest! :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:22, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I still have the list that I was working on (updated last on 07 April, or maybe on 03 April) that was all of the articles that he had created up until that day (got side tracked with other things, ooh look something shiny...), feel free to use that space if (either of) you want/need.--kelapstick (talk) 20:25, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not the only one who gets distracted by shiny objects! LOL

I just made a list of all the articles he worked on (through today) at User:Fabrictramp/MiLB. Should I integrate my list into yours?--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Either/or, I don't mind hosting it, but you appear to have more of an interest in baseball than I do (being a member of WP:baseball) so you may want to keep it on yours. Also you have more players on your list. I can work on it on either page (whatever work needs to be done), so it is your call, also don't worry about the {{tb}} template, I have your talk page on my watch list.--kelapstick (talk) 20:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

You may want to section them off like I have them too

1. Passing GNG
2. Passed AfD
3. Unchecked etc.

--kelapstick (talk) 20:36, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

edit conflict -- great minds think alike -- see my last paragraph. :)

No problem with the talkback - I'm not used to having my very own talk page stalker. *grin*

I like the format of your list better than mine. (I'm good at acquiring data, not so good at presenting it). I can integrate mine into yours pretty quickly, so I'll work on that next, subject to real world interruptions.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:40, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good to me.--kelapstick (talk) 20:44, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

 Done Probably needs some formatting work, but see my comments above about acquiring data vs. presenting it. :)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:51, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

(outdent)What is with the : before the name, what does that do? I know what it does for categories. I can take a look and sort through some of it later, or tomorrow.--kelapstick (talk) 20:53, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

And what is the deal with the stats tables (showing the stats each year), I am sure that a statistics site is something Wikipedia is not.--kelapstick (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't actually do anything here, it's just an artifact from how AWB makes the list. I don't bother removing it, since it doesn't hurt anything, either.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

As to the stat tables, I also have some concerns about copyvio issues, since they are pretty much a cut and paste job. I've been removing them and just adding a link to the source.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:58, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

That's a good idea, especially since realistically every table would have to be edited every year, and that, times how many players have articles (or would have articles under Gjr's interpretation) would be a lot of updating.

Now that I think about it, I have a bad feeling about redirecting players to their team though, since they move around a lot, and what team would you redirect a retired player to? The last one? The one he played the longest for? The one he is most remembered for? Plus all think about the upkeep with that, every time there was a (minor league) trade you have to change the redirect (assuming the decision was to redirect to the current team), keeping tabs on minor league players will/would require a whole slew of dedicated editors (not dedicated in their principles, but dedicated to those jobs) to maintain it, think about what happens at the trade deadline :O (I'm not saying WP:Baseball doesn't have a whole slew of dedicated editors, but those resources could be put to better use elsewhere).

Also Wilmington Blue Rocks was on your list, there is a section called "not to be forgotten" under players of note, that just seems like an odd section name to me, more fitting for a war memorial than a list of MiLB baseball players. Anyway I have sectioned it off, I think that covers most basis, I will go through and do some sorting when I get a minute. Cheers --kelapstick (talk) 21:27, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm also conflicted on the redirects. While I love to help the reader who is searching for that non-notable player, I'm not comfortable with the idea of updating all those redirects one or more times per year. But I can't think of a logical place to redirect. (I certainly hope no one gets it in their head to start an article titled Every MiLB player evah. *snort*)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

That is why I liked (and suggested at WP:BB) the idea of creating pages like 2008 Corpus Christi Hooks season (as they do for MLB), that would include the roster for that year, so if someone were doing a search for Brad James (baseball) he would come up on

• 2008 Corpus Christi Hooks season
• 2007 Corpus Christi Hooks season
• 2007 Salem Avalanche season
• 2006 Lexington Legends season

It's not total exclusion, but it's not total inclusion either. And the detailed stats can be left to the baseball-specific wikis. IMO the teams season is more notable than the individual players.--kelapstick (talk) 21:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, MiLB, while they do an incredible number of things right, hasn't gotten into their heads that baseball fans adore history. Trying to dredge up info on MiLB seasons will be a monumental task. I hope someone takes it on, but it sure won't be me. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Just FYI, I've had a response at User talk:Gjr rodriguez. I think he's willing to cooperate, which is certainly progress. Perhaps if he's cut some slack, we might be able to recruit his help in doing what we can (I say we, though I've not done much but a little diplomacy!) for the articles. If I may, respectfully, suggest that you extend (another) olive branch to our friend, maybe this will resolve itself? Regards, HJ Mitchell (talk) 11:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Good idea, although I'll probably wait a couple of days because I'm in a bit of a bad mood about the whole thing right now. He's made over 200 articles, and each of the first half dozen I've worked on cleaning up and sourcing has had factual errors (wrong year of birth, wrong draft info, bad external links, etc.) The olive branch will be much better if I wait until I can do it with a genuine smile on my face. :)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

There are also spelling errors on some of the names too (see Matt Kniginyzky). I think he would be a great resource to WP:Baseball, however one of his key arguments was wanting the statistics tables (Quote:"I am a baseball stats fan"), which could be (as you pointed out) a copyvio, and is not a common practice for inclusion on Wikipedia (plus the updating issues). A standardized template for the pages would be necessary, and he would have to be on board with it (both the process and the lack of statistics). I don't think it's impossible, just something that would have to be done.--kelapstick (talk) 16:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

TWO HUNDRED?!?! I didn't realise there were that many! I gathered there were a good few but that's just insane! Have you made any progress sorting the good from the bad? Do you have a list of them that still need attention? If you'd provide me with it, I'll see what I can do. I don't have much knowledge of the subject, but, of the ones I've seen, most look as if a trawl through google would dredge up enough for a few citations. Regards, HJ Mitchell (talk) 07:39, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

kelapstick and I have a list at User:Kelapstick/Sandbox, sorted by whether it passes WP:GNG, if it's at AfD, or if it still needs clean up and review. --Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:44, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Check-Double-Check-Triple-Check

This is starting to make my brain hurt. There are a lot of articles left to go (99 in unsorted, which I guess is half done), any thoughts on what the next move forward should be? Seems like a waste of time/effort taking everything to AfD individually and getting the same responses from the same people. Since some players are coming up with RSs, and some aren't here is my thought:

1. Check for sources for all unchecked articles and merge/redirect those that don't have them into the team they play for (a decent compromise for those who don't want the articles all together and those who do)
2. Add found sources to the talk page for integration into the article
3. Once all articles are checked revisit the articles with sources and integrate them

Seems like a quick way to get through a lot of articles, a lot of them were already redirected but Gjr reverted the change. Not sure if this is the best course of action but it is a course of action. Thoughts? Anyway on the bright side I got some tickets to a Reno Aces game in May so at least that shows I am not anti-MiLB :D. Cheers --kelapstick (talk) 17:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Today (and possible tomorrow, depending on how long it takes) I was planning on working through all the currently AfD'd articles and adding what sources I can find. After that, I was planning on working though the rest of the list. I like your idea of redirecting the ones that aren't passing notability. If the redirect gets reverted, they can always go to AfD at that time.

Enjoy the Aces game! Despite what some editors call a MLB bias at WP:Baseball, I go to way more triple-A games than MLB games. The price is right, the park is closer (and cleaner!), and the play is very high level. I'm hoping to make the 51s at River Cats game next Saturday.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:26, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I didn't realize this was their first year, and a new stadium to boot. Looks like the Aces are doing alright this year (although .500, and first in the division...all relative I suppose). I used to see a lot of Jays games when I lived in Toronto, and Sky Dome had just been built. Filed level on the third base line tickets were $14.50 (compared to $44 now), but the minor league games are just as good of action and at a much better price, also since the stadiums hold less capacity you get a much better view of the game (ditto goes with minor hockey vs. NHL, although I have never seen a game outside Toronto either). I'm 14 rows up behind the catcher, so that should be a good spot.

If it's anything like the River Cats park, it will be a great spot. I either try to get there or right behind first base (because I can often get tickets in the first couple of rows, next to the visitor's dug out.)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) I've finished with the ones at AfD (including the new one), but I need a break before moving to the rest. My eyes are crossing and the real world needs some of my attention. :) --Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)