User talk:Unbroken Chain/Archive 7

Brian Evans

Hell In A Bucket: I just made a reference on the Brian Evans page, and you immediately deleted it. This is the reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U5euOQiaZE, but when I post it, it just deletes again by some "Bot." Can you assist in saying what I'm trying to, with the reference I'm providing, without breaking any rules? You must agree, it's noteworthy to mention. Andrew1000a (talk) 03:51, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not notable, and we don't allow youtube as a source because it isn't reliable. That's why the bot removed it, unfortunately we will only accept WP:RS to cite things. Now if you can find an acceptable source independent of the subject then you're in great shape but 11k or 3.5m views on youtube isn't a big ripple in the pond.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

3.5 million views on YouTube (what source is more reliable than the very site I'm reference...which lists the exact number I'm referring to in terms of views?). How is 3.5 million views...in days, not "a ripple in the pond" and what makes you the expert on that? Andrew1000a (talk) 04:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Youtube views can be a manipulated. All it takes is a changing IP to score another view, if it is truly notable it will be covered on the news somewhere. As far as bring an expert, I would just have to say that I understand the policies regarding sourcing and what is allowed on the site and not. Try to reread WP:RS and see if you can find one that helps you source the amazing amount of views that Evans is getting, if it's as notable as you claim there will be no shortage of those and then we're golden. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:29, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

AFT5 re-enabled

Hey Hell in a Bucket :). Just a note that the Article Feedback Tool, Version 5 has now been re-enabled. Let us know on the talkpage if you spot any bugs. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 00:51, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Contested deletion

Hi There Hell in a Bucket,

I'm new to article creation on Wikipedia and created the DaDaFest page. I went to great effort to create a page that simply displays information about the organisation and I accidentally deleted your deletion notice whilst trying to edit the page. I was just wondering is there a particular aspect of the article that is causing an issue that I could fix? I can't seem to see what part of the article is causing an issue. I don't think it should be deleted as I believe the organisation deserves to have a Wikipedia page and I am unsure of what area on the page is advertising them. If you or another mod could kindly point me in the right direction as to how I could rectify this problem it would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance, Tenacious J

Defamation ENGVAR

No problem. That wasn't a restore, for what it's worth, I was just search-and-replacing the words manually - it looks like the article's been drifting out into both spellings for a while. --McGeddon (talk) 13:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I was looking at this edit [[1]] and yours was the current rendition..I really feel dummb now lol. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

No need to, it looks like that wasn't a great edit summary on my part if I didn't mention that the ENGVARing was mine. All the best. --McGeddon (talk) 13:38, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Unbroken Chain. You have new messages at Bagumba's talk page.
Message added 07:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Bagumba (talk) 07:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

ANI Thread

I notified Bagumba, as I figured he probably should know. However, I think he was actually already aware of it. Anyway, just thought I'd let you know. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 03:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

If you're going to alert the people of the other conversation as well I will alert Floquenbeam. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 03:03, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. I was just alerting Bagumba because he'd been heavily involved in the situation and tried to keep it peaceful. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C • Sign AAPT) 03:17, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

AN/I

I find this a less than satisfactory explanation. While my satisfaction may not be your concern, it should concern you that your colleagues take you seriously when you employ the adverb literally. Tiderolls 04:20, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

ahhh I see the problem. I'll fix that, I had typed something else that probably would've been worse guess I just didn't reread it right. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:23, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for that consideration, HiaB. I'm from the South and, due to real life experience, react with revulsion to the use of certain terms. My aplologies if my approach was too harsh; honestly, I was attempting to moderate my reaction. Regards Tiderolls 04:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

No worries, the IP says this has been discussed he probably means this [[2]]. I am not adverse to discussions and this wasn't a problem here at all. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:41, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback 2

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

Silverseren^C 05:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

enigma

I never understood how you'd get the thumb to point back at yourself :P Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 07:04, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

That's deep lol never thought about it but that's why I point with my full palm!. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 07:15, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Help

If you are willing to help, then this is the background. I wrote it once, but it did not post. Hopefully this time it will post.

I don't know why I am a subject on wikimedia as I am hardly notable. I successfully had the page deleted once before by direct email, but it was recreated by someone else. I am not a wikimedia user and not interested in it as a project. BUT I have found the page relating to me useful and thus I did not object to it being recreated and generally speaking, it is fairly accurate. I even linked to it on Twitter, as it made sense to do so.

Last November, wikimedia posted that I was dead. This caused enormous stress and difficulty for my family, for me and for many other people. I created an ID, joined wikimedia and corrected this outrageous claim. Clearly you don't need references when naming someone living dead.

This week, it was brought to my attention that a fairly hot debate was taking place over my upcoming engagements for the Eurovision Song Contest. I simply posted a request that it be deleted and asked anyone who was unhappy with that to contact me privately. I also emailed the address named for such requests. Both were ignored. Since I couldn't edit the page myself and the changes demanded seemed to have been made, having had no response, I deleted the debate myself.

It was restored, further comments added and threats were posted on my page about being disruptive. Further slanderous comments were then made by a person called Pickette. I don't even know what they are talking about. I simply wanted a debate taking place in my name to be removed. I have sent multiple emails, I have made multiple requests and everything I do is ignored or met with slander or threats.

It's intolerable. The debate is pointless and I don't want it showing up in every google search everytime somebody is seeking information on me professionally. A perfectly reasonable request has been met with threats and slander and every email requesting help is ignored, while the pepertrators just carry on with their edits completely unchallenged. I find this staggering.

I would like this debate removed and I would like an apology, particularly from those who have threatened me and Pickete who has slandered me. Since nothing is being done, you perhaps now understand why legal options are all that are left to me. That's not a threat. It's simply the only channel remaining. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRealJKO (talk • contribs) 16:06, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok, yes the death is also required in sources, especially because of the number of pranks that are out there now. Everything should be sourced to neutral and reliable sources. That family and friends heard about it is no doubt a traumatizing event. The problem here is that wikipedia is vandalized regularly, it happens, unless it is grossly degrading or insulting the edits aren't removed or what we called Revision Deletion. Now any contentious material would need to be deleted immediately and we manage this using WP:BLP. One of the unfortunate side effects of this age though for anyone that has notability is that a lot is covered online. If it's covered by media once you have a page it will probably be covered here good or bad. I don't think that we always need to cover some things but others disagree and we all do a proverbial bend over to "consensus". In reading things over though I'm not seeing anything that is contentious, slander or defamation, what am I missing? Can you be specific? When I read this through I see a normal discussion about article maintenance and explaining a removal. If you look at any number of pages we routinely discuss article maintenance, it is (or ideally) not a forum for our opinions on that person. It is usually only based at improving the encyclopedia. I did look at the person who declared you dead has all of two edits to their name and they haven't been active for months. I'm sorry but I'm not seeing anything currently violating WP:BLP unless I'm completely missing the obvious which is always possible. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:26, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

These two very specific comments are what I'm referring to: "I think that the TheRealJKO account and their previous unregistered IP edits on this page are related to a banned account (TVArchivistUK) because the IP address used to add similar information to the 2012 contest article has since been blocked for sockpuppetry of this account. The tone this user employs in discussions is very similar to all of exchanges this user has had and is currently having with this account and their other unregistered IP accounts. Here is the edit from the 2012 page. Pickette (talk) 14:52, 11 May 2013 (UTC)" I don't even know what this person is talking about. To acuse me in this manner is defamatory and potentially libellous. TheRealJKO (talk) 16:18, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

"In a related issue TheRealJKO (talk · contribs) removed this entire talk page section, after claiming to actually be O'Connor. I have since warned this user and restored the text. Mr. Gerbear (talk) 03:52, 11 May 2013 (UTC)" Someone bragging about making threats. In their own words. TheRealJKO (talk) 16:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

What Pickette has written is slanderous. Mr. Gerbear threatening me and calling me a disruptive user, plus also refuting my veracity is highly insulting. If you have really read the thread and read my comment, I am quite bluntly stunned that you are condoning the reactions to it. I am not going to be called a liar by Mr. Gerbear or anyone else.

Why are these two people allowed to post these comments without a single sanction? I have been threatened repeatedly merely for asking for something to be removed and invited private contact to explain why.

The edits demanded have been made. All users (including it seems myself) are blocked from making any edits, notable or otherwise. Thus having the debate rage on separately in something where I am named is unnecessary, distressing and very, very insulting. I know what I'll be doing next weekend, in the commentary booth, on TV and on radio. I don't give a toss who else knows or what wikipedia says. But I'm not going to be the subject of wild accusation and threats. I have to reiterate once more, that I would like this debate removed and if it cannot be, then I am quite content to pursue these matters elsewhere. If you consider that a threat, then perhaps you will now begin to understand why that should be. TheRealJKO (talk) 16:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, from what I see, they may not be in the greatest faith when they accuse you in sock puppetry but that wouldn't warrant a revision delete. The only thing that is actionable in any way is if you have not admitted your id here on wikipedia. If you haven't and they can't show proof it would be considered WP:OUTING and it can lead to a short term block for the behavior or if there's a history possibly indefinitely. I wish I had better news for you but that is what I see looking at it. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:49, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

I have to ask - why am I being warned and not the other editor? Is there a special reason why he can revert as often as he desires, purely based on his own opinion of the notability of a newspaper (which has already been shown to be erroneous), but I get warned? And I have tried to speak politely to the other editor - who received a civility warning from an admin - and used the Talk page - which he has not. Very odd behaviour. StuartDouglas (talk) 11:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Also worth pointint out that someone else - not me - reverted back in between, so it seems that I am not the only one who disagrees. It is also customary when reverting to give a reaosn for doing so which you failed to do. Are oyu actually an admin? StuartDouglas (talk) 12:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The reason I see is because you have violated the 3rr, by my count four. If you stop, nothing happens you haven't been reported (by me). When looking over the article myself I do not think it warrants a stand alone at this point. Right now I think a redirect does this more favors then my preferred way of resolving which is usually through deletion. To pass the notability guidelines it has to have significant coverage or won an award (being on a list doesn't really help, unless they are the winner.)If you go to [[3]] and post on the talkpage there will be a host of other editors that can help you find more sources and they like to focus there exclusively on books. best friends you want to have if you're trying to illustrate a book that may have fringe notability. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 12:06, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually the only reason I have reverted more than the other editor is because he presumably called you in to do his reverting for him. I posted - he reverted - I reverted - he reverted - I reverted - he got you in to revert. Which might meet the strict rules but hardly the spirtit of Wikipedia. StuartDouglas (talk) 12:14, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah we don't do that here, that's not cool. It's covered under WP:CANVASSING and also a lesser extent 3rr. It's happened in the past and those people were dealt with. Remember try to try and assume good faith. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 12:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough. Just to clarify then - and this is genuienly not an accusation of any sort - it's co-incidental you happened past the page and reverted it? I have been trying to assume good faith with TheRedPenOfDoom, but it's proving increasingly difficult (see the Obverse Books where he keep putting up a notability tag in spite of several distinact notable sources being included and claiming that the Guardian etc were non-notable. Feels a little like victimisation - somehting which he seems to have been accused of before.StuartDouglas (talk) 12:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Evidently there's no point in my being courteous and giving you the benefit of the doubt - good faith only works one way with some people, it seems StuartDouglas (talk) 14:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Apparently so considering I live in China and it was getting late so I went to bed. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Yet found the time to do an AFD, even so StuartDouglas (talk) 15:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi Unbroken Chain! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 22:19, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice.

Thanks for your advice. I am being bullied and I simply want my account changed or terminated. I am being followed and harrassed by an admin and I have had enough of this. I really dont know what to do...

Cutajarc (talk) 13:24, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd start by going to ANI and retracting your threat as soon as possible. Legal threats are a one way ticket to a block. You can also discuss the issue there and present evidence to your claims because harrassment is not tolerated. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:26, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Done, ive retracted that comment. It seems that because this user is an "admin" everyone seems to be on his side, its quite frustrating and now I simply want this all over and the user will not leave me alone.

Cutajarc (talk) 13:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

He's not an administrator and even if he was it's a good way to get people to eye the situation and help get solutions to the problem. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:32, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Here is the direct link WP:ANI it's under Legal Threat Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:36, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Cutajarc (talk) 13:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Reverting

HIAB,

I haven't edited in a while. I do not know the process of reverting or appealing reverting of ones edits. Can you explain to me what happened.

Thanks, Eric

The additions you made were not in my opinion neutral in tone. If I had to guess, I'd guess you were in the truth. Nothing prohibits you from editing if it is but we have to make sure that the sources and phrasing we use is in a nuetral tone and something we can source. For example the reference to Acts 15 is a violation of WP:SYN Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:07, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Justine Moral

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

I just don't see the notability. I know you didn't start the page, but, I mean... every undergrad theater major is in a bunch of plays, I just don't see the notability.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Red Slash 21:27, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Marc Mysterio

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Journal

The DJ pre-approves the journalists based on prior experience. Its not a free for all as you so describe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knicksnyc (talk • contribs) 03:40, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

"A media business where everyone can contribute and engage. We set out to build a media company where anyone can play an important role, so we can break news faster, tell stories better and take an alternative and fresh view on issues of the day. We recognize the audience offers incredible authority and expertise, and people have important stories to tell." Meaning we will not accept this source, it's not reliable. Read more: [[4]] just like we wouldn't source Wikipedia, you may wish to read WP:RSHell In A Bucket (talk) 03:43, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Repeated unexplained deletion

Hi ... I reverted unexplained deletions by you. But you just reverted. Again without explanation. Was wondering why.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:21, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Because most of it is unsourced. We shouldn't be listing things like families or that people disappeared without it being sourced in a BLP. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:52, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I have no problem with the removal of unsourced information. Though I think it is widely accepted as best practice to indicate your reason. Especially when reverting a revert -- for lack of edit summary. But I still don't understand why you deleted the sourced information. Why was that?--Epeefleche (talk) 16:29, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Missed that part, I have restored that section [[5]]. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 03:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Great -- thanks for the explanation. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Welcome?

Hell, if you had checked their edits, you might not have welcome this user. It's just another troll of Mangoeater, as their contributions make clear. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 15:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Occasionally I welcome the new people from User Creation, unless it's promotional or degrading I rarely pay attention to it. I count it as my good deed of the day. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I understand--it's just that their edits were so obviously trolling and their name an obvious sneer at the user they were trolling. Guzman was chased off the project by this loser who has more socks than you can count, and a set of rangeblocks you could cross the Great Plains with. Look him up on LTV, and maybe your next good deed of the day will be to catch one of his socks. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 16:29, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Brian Evans

Hello, I don't know why you have previously deleted my contribution to Brian Evans' page. A lot of evidents prove that he portrayed Schrank in Book of Love in 1990. First, his IMDb page (often made by a talent agent or a publicist) include this film. Twice, a serious interview (the link) deals with a New Line Cinema's "Book of Love" in the 1990s. After all, Evans proves himself that he worked on this film. Of course you can still have a doubt. I think the best way is to watch the film! Frantogian (talk) 19:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately that would count as Original Research and thus not allowed. The problem with IMDB is that anyone can edit it, similar to Wikipedia and so we wouldn't allow it just as we woudn't allow wikipedia to be a sourced used here. IMDB is too often used for self promotion for non notable actors, Brian Evans has done a few things but having had some interaction with him here I also know that he self promotes a lot! He did write a good song "At Fenway" though. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 02:59, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Google books

I've never seen anything about Google Books not being a valid reference. I would imagine that it would be on a case-by-case basis. In this case, the book is part of a well-known book series written by a respected film historian. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 06:28, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the explanation. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 06:32, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Precious

"here for the improvement of the project"
Thank you for articles on Colorado State parks and The Bunny Museum, for new article patrol, quality control, and for rescuing articles from deletion, for assisting new editors and encouraging others, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Wow I just want to thank you for making my night. I am by far not a perfect wikipedia but I do try to help make this place better. I was looking at the article that you made that I nominated for deletion and wow was I ever wrong about it's notability. Thank you so much again for this small messages like this make it worth being here. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, my pleasure. Did you know that I like rabbits? With my initials, I finally started a year ago to raise quality to have a few GAs, such as BWV 76 (see top of my talk), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I had no idea! I've started liking Rabbits a bit but then again I like most all animals. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:53, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

This one is a very special "animal", though - or should I say "was"? GA got a new GA yesterday, btw, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:58, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

That's great I wish I could write good enough for a GA! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 12:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps you need to miss someone enough, for inspiration ;) It was BarkingMoon for the first, Dreadstar for the last, and Br'er for the Mass in B minor (writing still in progress), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Talk page discussion about one of your reverts

Hi, could you please respond to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Isra_and_Mi%27raj#WP:SAWW, it directly concerns a recent revert made by you. 130.95.77.97 (talk) 04:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey Jake, I think you're missing the point here :)

BAM energy group is quite notable, as I explained in the speedy deletion. I have no affiliation with them, and I'm experienced editor who like you, wants to improve Wikipedia. Let's leave the article alone and improve it if possible. Appreciate it, Dandv^{(talk|contribs)} 10:29, 30 June 2013 (UTC).

Re:Deny

Yea, I think I want a bit overboard there earlier today. I will refrain from doing that with Iphone hurricane in the future. YE ^{Pacific Hurricane} 01:52, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Remote Medical International

Hello!

I'm a new user, and I'm hoping to get some guidance from you regarding the recent changes I made to the Remote Medical International page that you've cited for deletion. I do work for Remote Medical International, and I edited the site because the article has been inaccurate (and unmaintained) for several years. We are a completely different company than we were when the article was originally written, and we're just trying to make it accurate. The intent is not for self-promotion. Any suggestions for improvement would be appreciated! I would hate to see the page deleted. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Best regards, Shaehealey (talk) 19:00, 11 July 2013 (UTC)shaehealey

I would suggest finding 3rd party reliable sources. That seems to be the biggest issue I can see right now. If you can find neutral and separate sources that can pass WP:RS is your best option if you want to keep the article. You may also want to pare down the fluff in the article. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:55, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I removed all citations that referenced our website, so there are now 5 third party sources and 1 source from a press release published through PRNewswire. Would you feel comfortable removing your suggestion for deletion? If not, please let me know what further edits you would recommend. Regardless, do I need to contact anyone else specifically in order to clear WP:RS? Again, I really appreciate your help with this. Shaehealey (talk) 21:20, 12 July 2013 (UTC)Shaehealey

Right now I really don't think the coverage raises the bar to pass WP:ORG there are a few mentions here or there but nothing significant. The deletion tag is actually a forum for other editors to weigh in on this so in the end my opinion may not matter much, it did pass deletion discussion once already but I still feel like it just doesn't pass out WP:ORG requirements. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:51, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Any suggestions on ways to raise the bar to pass WP:ORG requirements? I'm really interested in making this a fair and reliable page. Please let me know. Shaehealey (talk) 20:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC)Shaehealey

Thanks!

Hello HIAB, Nice surprise. And the twinkler chosen was just perfect. I do my best as time allows, but nothing like many truly dedicated eds on this site. Speaking of which, isn't it about time you upgraded your level of editorship from a Grognard to the much more notable Ved Ed II [6]?? -- EMP (talk 17:39, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually with deleted edits counted I changed that [[7]] to V3 8). Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:51, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Message

Hello. You have a new message at Anna Frodesiak's talk page. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Marte Dalelv rape incident

Hello Hell in a Bucket,

Concerning the article Marte Dalelv rape incident, I did not see any on-going discussion to delete the article. The on-going ones concerned renaming. That is why I removed the AfD message, but my edit was reverted. Is there a deletion discussion elsewhere?

Regards E3 (talk) 12:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes there is, it looks to be a sockfest possibly but it hasn't been closed yet [[8]] Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the link, sorry for my mistake.

Regards

E3 (talk) 14:03, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

DR/N

Hello. I am Amadscientist, a regular volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. According to Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses#Opinion of Andrew Holden not a fact, the dispute you filed at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Jehovah's Witnesses has been resolved. When asked if this included the dispute at DR/N the answer from Jeffro77 was that the dispute should be closed. If you agree with that please indicate here or at the dispute filing so that we may close the case as resolved. If you disagree with this assessment please indicate as well so that the editors can be made aware of the discrepancy to continue the DR/N towards some resolution if possible.--Amadscientist (talk) 11:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes the issue has been resolved. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:39, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Unbroken Chain. You have new messages at Basalisk's talk page.
Message added 10:39, 29 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 10:39, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Reported

I have filed my petition on the WP:ANI page.

page deletion

Hi, can you please explain how this is overly promotional? Do i need to remove reference links to the website? I was just writing company information, can you give me some tips please.

Ben — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben Poulton (talk • contribs) 05:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

It should be able to pass WP:ORG which requires 3rd party sources that can pass the bar found at WP:RS. It is very similar to the Century 21 page and will likely be either merged with that article or deleted. The Century 21 article is in pretty poor shape too. We don't need things like a list of every country it is in, remember it's an encyclopedia article not a business dossier. If this comes across rudely I apologize it is not intended that way. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Awesome thanks for that. Yeh i'll take that list out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben Poulton (talk • contribs) 06:15, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit to Thomas & Friends (U.S. Series)

	Edit to Thomas & Friends (U.S. Series)
	Excuse me but why did you remove the list of episodes that I found and I cited the sources for them? Do you just delete stuff for no apparent reason? Plong26 (talk) 16:20, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

The only thing that was meant to be removed was the copyright violations. The articlce itself will be deleted within the next few days as it duplicates the Thomas and Friends page not so much content but the lack thereof. I am heading off to bed now, was trying to half an hour ago and I really need to now. It's 12:30 in HK. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:33, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Pentimento Music Company

Just a quick head's up, I undid your WP:CSD#A7 nomination of this, as a quick search for sources revealed some hits in NME and small tidbits in the local press, plus it makes a claim of being founded by a member of a notable band. I have tagged it for notability, though, as there doesn't look like much coverage is out there, albeit enough to clear CSD. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:23, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

No big deal. I don't think it passes org will probably be merged but who knows. I'll take a look later. Thanks for the heads up. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 11:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

A merge / redirect would work, though whether it would be to Streetlight Manifesto or Tomas Kalnoky I've no idea. Still, this was far from the worst CSD call I saw today - this has an ironic twist. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

User talk:99.251.120.60

I see you reverted me. That IP is blocked for 3 months for disruption. Taeyebaar reverted himself. I reverted myself. I removed all of the disruptive edits from the IP from the talk page which is fully allowed under WP:TPO.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:06, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't matter. The Responses were made, the IP made the move to revert them to the talkpage. You should ask an admin for page protection if you are concerned what's on the page. Blocked pages receive notices and warnings and all sort of things even when blocked this doesn't give you carte blanche to remove it. You seem to be forgetting the part of the TPO that specifically states "Posts that may be considered disruptive in various ways are another borderline case and are usually best left as-is or archived." and "Editing—or even removing—others' comments is sometimes allowed. But you should exercise caution in doing so, and normally stop if there is any objection. Some examples of appropriately editing others' comments" Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:25, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

IP users don't get the same level of leeway in their talk page control. And all of the comments made were disruptive and unnecessary.—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:30, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tag for Econsult Solutions

I saw you removed a speedy deletion tag from Econsult Solutions with the edit summary "claims notability". That would mean it doesn't satisfy criterion A7; what it was tagged for, however, wasn't that but G11 (spam), which arguably applies. I've sent it to AfD at WP:Articles for deletion/Econsult Solutions. Huon (talk) 19:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Jeffrey Allen Sinclair Page

The page was factual and non-judgmental. It laid out the investigation, his removal from his position, and the charges against him (the charge sheet was even provided as a reference). Sinclair is not a private person in the way most of us are. He holds a position of great trust and is a general officer under court martial proceedings. How is one to not discuss that without actually mentioning the charges against him? Even the edit you reverted to mentions forcible sodomy? To hide the same in a reference but not mention it in the bio is to not discuss the very reason there is a page for Sinclair at all. There are over 100 one star generals in the Army alone and very few of them have Wikipedia pages about them. In all reasonableness the charge sheet should at least be specifically referred to in the post.

Arieleaxelrod (talk) 01:13, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

You may wish to review the information I left on your page. Even a public figure is still covered under BLP. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Loooking over the article I don't see forcible sodomy. I see sexual assault. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:35, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Unbroken Chain. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kicking Zombie Ass for Jesus.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

• I think a redirect to the director is fine for now as I aded sourced information to that article. We can always undelete if this thing begins filming. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 07:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Popularity

What is the reason for u r deleting or editing the content Popularity from N. T. Rama Rao Jr article.Is it wrong to u..? why to do so...I mentioned all with reliable sources --Kasi mulpuri (talk) 16:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Mainly because the section isn't adding anything to the article and rings more as a promotional plug giving undue weight to the article where it was already covered. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Brackets

I've changed the quotation at Winds of Winter to avoid brackets because there was no reason not to mention the year in introducing the quote rather than manipulating the text. However, when you change the text of a quotation, you mark the change with brackets. It is done because it is important to show that what is printed is not exactly what the person said. Doing otherwise is misleading, especially when you preface the quotation by saying it is the person's "own words". There are places where it is not important to be as careful, but Wikipedia isn't one of those places. And it doesn't matter whether it is a high profile biography of a living person or an article about a Pokemon character.

You stated that using brackets doesn't make sense at the article, but that assertion itself doesn't make sense. There is nothing in the way brackets are used there that somehow goes against the meaning or style of the article. Finally, that you don't like it isn't an adequate reason to go against MOS or the underlying rationale for using brackets. -Rrius (talk) 09:54, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

I believe the justification was that it looked shitty..would you prefer I just said WP:IAR cause it looks better? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 09:56, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't make even the slightest bit of sense. That you think it looks shitty is not a justification for ignoring rules, so of course I wouldn't prefer it. You are flat wrong on this. It is more important the the text of quotations not be misleading than that Hell in a Bucket like the way something looks. It's weird enough that you refuse to understand the rather obvious reason why the brackets were there, but that you edit warred over it is incomprehensible. It's understandable when someone edit wars to try to enforce a guideline, but to consciously do so for no more reason than you don't like the guideline is hard to understand. -Rrius (talk) 10:05, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on your user page, User talk:United Sports Emporium, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be blatant advertising which only promotes or publicises a company, product, group or service, and which is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages; user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you can indicate why the page is not blatant advertising, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: Click here to contest this speedy deletion which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy deletion candidate). Doing so will take you to your user talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also edit this page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would help make it encyclopedic. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 12:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

IP

Do you have any idea who this IP [9] might be? They seem to be trying to impersonate you or get you blocked - it's hard to tell - from Hong Kong. Acroterion (talk) 12:39, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the confusion. I was editing from my phone on my way to a class. I am currently in Hong Kong, I'm not sure why it changed my Ip within like five minutes but there was a total of 4 editors that were creating spam pages [[10]] and [[11]] and they were working in concert removing the CSD tags from the other pages. I suspected sock puppets and at the very least meatpuppets [[12]]. I misread the deletion times and hit you instead of Jimbleak with the message. They have since been blocked and I just got home so I could reply to this and check my watchlist. Sorry again for the confusion and thanks for confirming with me it was me. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:13, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

It certainly looked fishy, since I knew you didn't live in HK, and I've seen put-up jobs that looked like this before. I expect you'll be needing a nap if you just got back from China. Hope it was a good trip. Acroterion (talk) 13:21, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Lol I've actually been in Hk a while now, I moved here to teach English as a second language and have an adventure but I head back to the States next month. If you haven't been and you ever have the opportunity to visit it's amazing here and super easy for English speakers to get around. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:25, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

I had no idea, obviously I'm not paying enough attention. It sounds like fun - Hong Kong's always been on the list, and I've always had the notion of us going to visit my wife's relatives in Australia via HK. All I need to do is to be able to get enough time away from work! Acroterion (talk) 13:39, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Ujjwal234goel. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Moses Racho, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Ujjwal234goel (talk) 09:16, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

that makes zero sense..why? Hell in a Bucket from my phone 14.0.143.211 (talk) 10:12, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Pulling back the layers on the Niall Sheehy (singer, actor) article

Greetings! I see you tagged Niall Sheehy (singer, actor) for speedy deletion under CSD A7. Looking further, it looks like that page is a cut-and-paste move from Niall Sheehy (entertainer). Rather than history merge for an A7 tag, I've tagged that article on your behalf. I wanted to let you know what was going on and why the article you tagged for speedy deletion is, at the moment, a redirect. —C.Fred (talk) 13:37, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

help

I screwed up a move for Frank ra to Frank Ra and instead moved it to Frank rRa. Can you please help Hell In A Bucket (talk) 02:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

That's something I've been known to do too with fat fingers. Acroterion (talk) 03:04, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you sir much appreciated. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 03:11, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Frank Ra entry

Hello Jake! How are you?

Thanks for your message. I noticed you initially changed the name of the entry, then another editor reverted back to the original.

You marked the article for deletion, but another editor provided clear references you can see online, and I added to that. I clicked on the links which WP automatically provides to check the "authority" of the entry, and there are plenty of matches.

Can you please let me know if there is any specific reason for coming back with a deletion suggestion etc. even if the requirements for the page to stay are there? My impression is that editors agree the page should stay, or at least have nothing against you, your edits are the only ones suggesting deletion. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.180.157.184 (talk) 03:41, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

There is only one person that has actually edited the article. The author is the only one that has edited the article. The other people you see there User:Acroterion was there at my request to fix a mistake of mine. I originally moved Frank ra to Frank rRa and I had him fix the redirect, the only other editor to change the page was Jinkinson and he was removing a dishonest tag in the article saying it was a good article [[13]]. I actually believe that you are User Metta88 [[14]] or closely related to that editor in someway. The sources you provided do not actually meet the guidelines that are provided at WP:RS the only two possible exceptions are [[15]] and [[16]]. The rest are connected to Ra or are from his website. I don't dispute he has written books but google books or Amazon do not count toward that bar as WP:RS or help him pass WP:AUTHOR and WP:GNG. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 06:14, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! Neither of us has time to make this an ongoing conversation, but just for your information I added new external links. The IMDB entry plus what you see on the Wikipedia entry plus what you see on http://www.amareway.com/about-our-bloggers/media-coverage/ shows that there are many references (online and in print) on third party sites which are not connected to the author in any way. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.180.157.184 (talk) 15:40, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Notability tag in the Empire Mates Entertainment article

Why did you insert the notability tag into the Empire Mates Entertainment article after I removed it? I've provided 18 sources, mostly third party sources independent of the subject. How many more sources do I need to provide in order for you to consider the article notable? What parts of the article are questionable? versace1608 (talk) 14:53, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I think the article focuses quite a bit on artists on board which strikes me as more promotional, resources such as Itunes, Youtube make the article lack substance in my opinion. I removed the notability tag although I think the article has issues, I'm sure you will fix them in due time. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:00, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the feedback. I will see if I can link some information from the Pueblo Chieftain's website and also from CHSAA (Colorado High School Athletic Association). The wrestling brackets are in PDF form. I am Efrain Tapia and am one of the coaches at Pueblo Central. I will spend some time trying to make it work, but I do appreciate the feedback. Thanks. -Mr. Tapia§ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapia81004 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a brother named Alex Tapia? Red headed cat? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:46, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

No, but he is a good friend of mine and a former teammate...LOL. Alex is from Santa Fe and was my workout partner in college; a great guy and tough. His brother Jason was also a great wrestler. We used to choke people out, and were champions so we had that in common. Thanks for your help again. I am trying to find a way to cite PDF's and stuff, but am having trouble. The kids I added were kids I coached and three are in college right now. The information is legitimate, but I just need to find a link to the brackets online somehow. Our local newspaper got rid of the links and the resources for current information end at online brackets and facebook more or less, so it's a challenge of sorts. My name is Efrain Tapia and I'm on facebook if you ever want to B.S. You seem like a tech person, and that's cool. Take care, and thanks again. I'm working on it. -E — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapia81004 (talk • contribs) 05:08, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Try this [[17]] it's the only one I could find. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:57, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Omer Eshel

Hi, I see that you have voted to delete the Omer Eshel page, may I ask why? is there somthing wrong with it?

Thanks

Colombus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colombus1492 (talk • contribs) 03:31, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure he meets the requirements of WP:POLITICIAN or WP:CREATIVE. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:36, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

HI, I think he should not be treated as a Politician rather than be recognized for his actions, I was really impressed by his TV series and also by the Travel Pulse award...

What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colombus1492 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I honestly have no opinion one way or the other. I just know he's being mentioned for his work for the consulate and his creation of the bible series. If there are signifcant sources that show he is notable, that meets the WP:GNG that is great. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I see you point, I think that the fact he was nominated as one of the rising stars by Travel Pulse and he is the first Israeli ever to do so makes him qualify. what do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colombus1492 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

CSD tagging

Hi, I have noticed you have made many invalid speedy deletion request. I would like to address this, especially your A7 claims. Here are some diffs I found and why they are invalid.

• [18] (tagged for A7) - you tagged the article just 3 minutes after the article was created. Sure, it may not have any claim of importance then, but the editor is still working on the article.
• [19] (tagged for A7) - same problem as last time, tagged only 5 minutes after creation, the article does have a credible claim of importance.
• [20] (tagged for A7) - tagged only 3 minutes after article's creation.
• [21] - tagged within seconds of creation.

In short: Never tag an article created in good faith for speedy deletion within just a few minutes or seconds(!) of creation. (I bolded good faith because it is ok to tag a page for G1 or G3 or spam. G2 and G12 is ok too.) Advice on Special:NewPages suggest waiting at least 15 minutes. If you would like to request deletion of a seemingly non-notable subject that does have a claim of notability, please PROD or use AfD instead.

It seems like your requests for speedy deletion are very hastily done. Please be careful of such actions as they are very discouraging to newbies and can be considered a form of biting them. Such newbies can leave the site altogether. Thank you. Darylgolden^(talk) 07:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't care that you personally consider that to be biting, If it is not ready for mainspaxe it shouldn't be there. What qualifies as credible varies from admin to admin so with respect to that I agree to disagree. Share Data was and still is a shitty article with no credible claim to importance, I retagged it as non-notable after reviewing and seeing that the tag was removed by the article creator, Mauda Super Thermal Power Station is based completely off of primary sources, again without any credible claim to notability, that was denied because instead of a7 for companies I hit a7 for persons. The only one that shouldn't have been tagged possibly is Campa Cola Compound. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 08:24, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

(WP:3O) I'd like to offer a third opinion on this matter. The way I see it, if the article is only a few seconds/minutes out of the grinder (so to speak) then the article creator may be putting in sources that fit the criteria but be edit conflicted by the CSD Tag. Sources are everything in Wikipedia articles that are starting out, so here's my suggestion, if an article already has sources (I saw primary sources mentioned above) in it then the sources quota has been attempted and failed and it is okay to slap a CSD Tag on it. Otherwise stick to 10 minutes (I was taught 10) and then try tagging it. Happy compromise?

Oh and HiaB, it's probably better to ask more admins than just Yunshui for handling a block with regards to that Aqua page that was going down under G11, Yun isn't that active nowadays. If I wish to ping an admin for quick attention I check Special:Log as almost every action there will be by an admin and chances are the one(s) that logged the last few actions are still on.

You take care now. MM (Report findings) ^{(Past espionage)} 10:13, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I honestly don't believe in set time frames, I rarely look at the time it's created but I do understand that sometimes the article is being developed and sources are being added. I try and make sure that I only tag those I think that are blatant csd worthy candidates and yes I can be wrong. I will try and be more cognizant of it in the future. I agree also that just tagging one admin, in this case Yunshui, i only did in this case cause he was the last active admin on my list ;), I've never used Special Log I will definitely check it out. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 10:22, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Just because the article might be csd worthy at its first/second edit doesn't mean it will be after a few more. Even if you take away the "biting" bit, I don't feel that your actions are appropriate; I know this is not policy but please view this. Darylgolden^(talk)

We are on total ends of the spectrum, I am a deletionist, by your user page you are not. I don't expect you to agree with my view. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 10:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

New Citizen Program

Hi. We just had an edit conflict when tagging this. As undoing an AfD is horribly complicated, perhaps we should remove your PROD - and I'll tell you for why: The user has been mass creating dozens of stubs about Chinese NGOs, which IMO do not assert significance or importance. I had started to CSD many of them, but I think it might be better to ask the user what they are doing before continuing to tag, and perhaps taking the issue to AN. What's your take on it? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm good with what you suggest, I don't think that they are claiming any sort of significance either. Basically just that they are a NGO. Do what you think is best, I trust your judgement seen you on the newpage patrol often so remove the prod if you think is best. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 09:13, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: BN Vocational School

Hello Hell in a Bucket. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of BN Vocational School, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:27, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

USER:Eastmain normally you are right but it isn't actually a school, at least not one in the traditional sense, it's also a series of questionable articles about NGO's. I didn't feel that it fell within the purview of schools and the notability guidelines for Schools does say they still have to pass the WP:GNG. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 09:30, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Dolor antiquitas romae, Hell in a Bucket.

Unfortunately MrX has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

I'm unreviewing this so others can have a look at it. It looks like vandalism or copy-pasta.

To reply, leave a comment on MrX's talk page.

World Bioenergy Association Speedy Deletion Contested

Hi! Thank you for your message offering to help me. I am very new to Wikipedia and I have just contributed my first article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bioenergy_Association) which has been flagged for deletion. The WBA is a member of the 'REN Alliance' and every member has a Wiki page except the WBA. I do work for the WBA but there is no conflict of interest as we are a non profit NGO (we recently attended the COP19 in Warsaw) and the work we do needs to be highlighted on Wikipedia. Is there anything you could do to ensure the article is not deleted? Best {AndrewEPotter (talk) 23:11, 20 November 2013 (UTC)}

The biggest thing to do is to find 3rd party reliable sources in teh news that shows it as a notable corp. Check out WP:RS and WP:CORP if you post a few links to my page I can see about helping you insert them into the article but there needs to be 3rd party and seperate sourcing. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 23:13, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Here is a link to the United Nations Press Briefing at the COP19 a couple of days ago with the other members of the REN Alliance http://unfccc4.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/cop19/templ/play.php?id_kongresssession=6986&format=hls Here is the link to the REN Alliance website which gives some background on the WBA. http://ren-alliance.invotech.se/ Here is a link to the UN NGO Liason Service http://www.un-ngls.org/spip.php?page=agsp&id_article=3326 I hope this helps! {AndrewEPotter (talk) 17:57, 21 November 2013 (UTC)}

This might be of interest...

Hi HiaB, this might be of interest. No need for you to do anything, just thought you should know I had filed it. Cheers, Stalwart111 09:33, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Musicruchira

Hey there, thanks for the AIV reports. I saw that one for the above-named editor... I can't quite take action on it. Yes the name does look promotional or role-based, but I saw they did cite a source and there were no warnings either at the User Talk or at the article Talk. I didn't think it was enough to block as submitted... mind follow up on that? Thanks... Zad68 04:01, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

User:Zad68They are named for a website [[22]] that is for promoting the subject of the article. This is a direct quote from the blocking template for this sort of thing..."Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy." How on god's green earth does this not meet the requirements for a block? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:39, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to reinforce your discussion on their talk page and keep watching. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 09:16, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

HiaB you might be right, but I decided to give the editor the benefit of the doubt, or WP:ROPE, depending on your perspective. I am new to this kind of report, which you probably should have filed at UAA instead of AIV where I picked it up. I looked at the sources in the article and there was (just barely) enough there in the sourcing to make me think there could be sufficient sourcing out there (possibly in non-English language sources) to develop an article. I guess I just had my inclusionist hat on last night... I will follow up with George and get his opinion on how he might have handled it had he handled that report instead of me. I'm always learning and not afraid to admit a mistake, but if I'm going to make a mistake I'd rather err on the side of caution. Thanks for your reports, you do good work here. Zad68 18:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Notice

Hello! I'd like to respond to your message about User talk:Samwonhousegroup being deleted. The user page itself wasn't mine - I might have been listed as the creator since I probably left a message (thus creating the talk page) there to notify the user about me having placed a speedy deletion template on a page they created. Morningcrow (talk) 09:23, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Dual control

Your tagging of Dual control as lacking sources was correct, thanks for encouraging me find sources. I found this marxists.org source, now added to the article (scroll to the 'dual control' section). The tagging regarding original research was wrong, the dual control explanation was also present in the Egypt article on Wikipedia, findable through 'what links here', which was how the dual control article was created (noticed there isn't an article and added it). Problem is, there is also another concept called dual control which refers to airplanes, perhaps we should somehow explain this in the article too or turn it into a disambiguation article and move it to dual control (politics). Do you think the original research tag should be removed now? Do you also think the same about the sources tag? Cogiati (talk) 12:58, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I removed the two tags and replaced it asking for additional references. Thank you for addressing the concerns and bringing them up here. All in all it seems to be an interesting subject good job. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:01, 22 November 2013 (UTC)