User talk:Wperdue/Archive 2

Re: Reference

Thank you for suggestions. The link http://www.gartner.com/resources/147600/147654/introduction_to_investigativ_147654.pdf requires registration with Gartner (I believe, but I am taken directly to it... likely because I am registered and it remembers my credentials). Any recommendation on how such instances have been handled by prior submission. Also, I cannot determine how to change the page title to D3 Security Management Systems, Inc. - I did search first off and errored in my creation of the post. Thanks for being patient with newbies. kablerc (talk) 19:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Usually links that require registration are to be avoided. If you can find another reference to replace it, that would help. If not, don't worry about it at the moment. I have moved the page to D3 Security Management Systems. The old page D3 security now redirects there as well. The "Inc." isn't compatible with Wikipedia naming conventions for companies, so I did not include that. If you have any other questions, please let me know. Wperdue (talk) 19:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Hello

i want to create a page about Ceoutlaw.. Or Alec williams! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rapperderis (talk • contribs) 14:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC) Hello. Um, The sources are from 2007. IT'S 2009... (ABOUT WISCONSIN DAIRY)

As I said, feel free to add sources that support your assertions. You cannot, however, keep the same sources that are already referenced and just change the information to your 2009 source. Wperdue (talk) 18:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Speedy deletion

I would like the deletion of a very recent article reviewed asap please. Or at least a copy emailed or made available for me to edit as my last article was selected for speedy deletion please can you do this as i never created a master copy in word and wrote the article for wiki, in wiki. Please assist i wish ti adhere to wiki rules and would like to edit my last post, however i cant find it anywhere! the article was name 'property cash buyer'Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thepropertyexpert (talk • contribs) 02:24, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I notice that you tagged the page Pearl and the Puppets for speedy deletion with the reason "non-notable band". While that's a valid reason for speedy deletion in general, this page does not qualify for speedy deletion under that criterion because the article says that the band has been signed to Universal, which would pass WP:MUSIC. If you still want the page to be deleted, please consider tagging it with a speedy deletion template which does apply, redirecting it to another page, or using the WP:AFD process. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 10:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

why is the wikiapedia for josh crutchley up for deletion. Its factual and none offending! Josh Crutchley is a BBL Player! Can i have a response from some wikia pedia professional here please?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshcrutchley (talk • contribs) 20:13, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

It was mostly because of notability criteria for athletes, but it will most likely pass that. The other reasons were conflict of interest, and lack of reliable sources. It also originally read like a press release. I don't think it will be deleted, but some IP address keeps removing the AFD nomination tag which makes it harder for people to offer their opinion either way. It is in better shape now, but needs better sources and there is of course the conflict of interest problem but those are, most likely, not going to get it deleted. I hope this information was helpful. Wperdue (talk) 22:13, 15 May 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Oh well

sigh - yep, re this. Appears to be wishful thinking on my part. He just doesn't seem to get the hint. ;) — Ched :  ?  16:04, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I admire your assumption of good-faith despite the bad behavior. Keep up the good work. Wperdue (talk) 16:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)wperdue

lol ... I gotta chuckle out of that. I guess I do tend to get a bit carried away with the AGF sometimes. ;) — Ched :  ?  16:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

COI on Solarmer page

I see your point about who it was added by. I didn't notice that before. I thought the COI meant that the information had to show a COI. I read organic electronic info on wikipedia all the time, and this one didn't seem any different. On top of that, the same user removed their VPs off their key people. I started to think it was vandalism. I really just come on wikipedia to read information on Organic Electronics, so I could be wrong about the rules. Sorry! It's just that although the OPV market is growing, it's still so small and information is very limited. Please explain.

I also saw there was a cleanup option. I clicked on it but still don't understand. How do you do that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Earthmanwiki (talk • contribs) 18:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll do my best. The COI tag simply indicates that an editor that created or made significant edits to an entry may have a conflict of interest with the subject. In this case it is due to the username of the original editor. It might not mean that there will be problems with the neutrality of the article but it is there as a way to let people reading it that not everything that they read may be written from a neutral point of view.

The cleanup link just takes you to a page explaining what is entailed in cleaning up an entry. There are a wide range of issues that are covered under that heading.

I don't understand why the company officers were deleted. I have seen that kind of company information on several other entries. According to the edit summary it was a trimming of the staff listing. This may be a style issue to help it match similar entries or might be personal preference. Since it is a community project, you will sometimes run into that. If you feel they should be there, feel free to add them, but please put your reasoning on the talk page so that the you and the other editor(s) may discuss the issue if it becomes a point of contention.

Finally, there is no need to apologize for not knowing the "rules". There was obviously no bad-faith intended on your part. If you would like any further help, please feel free to ask. I hope this information was helpful. Wperdue (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Thanks!

Thanks for redirecting that page for me! I really appreciate it! Dima110 (talk) 02:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Gas Safe Register

Since Gas Safe Register is the name of an organisation the capitalisation used was correct. For example the Child Support Agency has all capitals as does United Nations and Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. Fraggle81 (talk) 02:24, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

So instead of just using the original article's content which had better sourcing it was necessary to create an entirely new article with different content and completely self-sourced to correct the capitalization? Wperdue (talk) 02:47, 25 May 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Since the CORGI page and several others were linking to Gas Safe Register and it was showing as a red link at the time I did not find the other page until you redirected my version there. If you're unhappy with the links in the article I wrote by all means change them, however I cant see a great deal of difference between the two. Fraggle81 (talk) 02:55, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I will defer to your knowledge on the topic as you seem to have an interest in the subject and I, quite honestly, do not. Sorry if I seemed unhappy. Happy editing. Wperdue (talk) 03:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Rug manager pro

A speedy deletion, db-spam, was proposed after you tagged this for proposed deletion; what do you think? (Watchlisting) - Dank (push to talk) 00:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm perfectly ok with that. I almost hit it with a CSD tag myself. Wperdue (talk) 00:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Poof. (The article, not you.) - Dank (push to talk) 00:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Woot. Thanks for the update. Wperdue (talk) 00:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Psychedelic

Please don't delete my link to Psychedelic Art Gallery it's a specialized PSY Art collection Gallery with unic Psychedelic Arts, not a randomly generated fractals. Its collect only hands made artist paintings and UV backdrops only related to psychedelic, and painted with UV reactive acrylic fluorescent paints.

Psychedelic art related to term of psychedelic because most psychedelic knowledge based on visuals and hallucinations, and Psychedelic art represent it in art form so its make people know what it looks like without taking a drugs, or can increase visuals for house who take them. Psychedelic and Psychedelic art its totally relative.

Its a quite valuable collection and represent psychedelic art not only from side of computer generated fractals, its a hand painted works of artists.

Please add a link to it

Psychedelic Art Gallery - http://www.club-t-shirts.com/en/psychedelic-art.html

Kind regards. Liromo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liromo (talk • contribs) 14:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure your art is lovely. Unfortunately, Wikipedia has a policy on what can and can't be added as a link. Please read the policies here and here. I think you can appreciate that if everyone who had a product to sell related to each subject that there would be thousands of links per article. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Wperdue (talk) 15:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Are phones "people?"

Per [1]: Does this speedy criterion apply to phones, or just to people? Thanks. Edison (talk) 21:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

"as it serves no purpose but to disparage or threaten its subject or some other entity." It doesn't apply only to people by my understanding. Otherwise, what is to keep people from creating a page disparaging every product in existence? I do like "people phone" as a category, however.Wperdue (talk) 22:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Ooh, good question.

To be honest, I've never created a template, but it shouldn't be too hard. I think it's high time we started warning about gross misspellings, even if they are from vandals. I think I'll look into this when I have a moment to do so. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Please let me know if I can be of assistance. I'd be interested in seeing the results if nothing else. Wperdue (talk) 04:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

warning Ltranger25 (talk · contribs)

FWIW, creation of attack pages is one of the few reasons to issue a uw-4im, specifically, {{uw-defamatory4im}}. I've gone ahead and blocked the user since that was a repeat instance of attempted cyberbullying. Toddst1 (talk) 19:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Roger. I'll kick it up a notch next time. Thanks for the information. Wperdue (talk) 19:46, 6 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

You seem to do good work here. I've gone ahead and issued you rollback rights. Please be careful with the privilege - it can be easily lost. I recommend you read practice here before using it. I'm confident you'll use it wisely. If for some reason you don't want it, let me know and I'll revert. Happy editing. Toddst1 (talk) 19:49, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the vote of confidence. I will practice and read up on it before using it, and try not to nuke a city or anything. Wperdue (talk) 19:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Speedy Deletion Request for Armorize Technologies Inc

Hi I just saw a speedy deletion request for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armorize_Technologies_Inc. I recently added a product by Armorize called Codesecure to the following page which lists commercial products in a particular industry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tools_for_static_code_analysis#Multi-language_2

The editor on that page requested that I prove notability of the product by creating an article for it which I did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codesecure

I am now trying to create a simple page which simply provides information on the company that provides this technology. I do not mean to make it a marketing document. I will change the tone accordingly.Linehanjt (talk) 04:56, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the tone was promotional. The reason it was marked is that it doesn't indicate why the company is notable. The notability criteria for companies is listed at WP:CORP. If you could indicate why it is notable and then add reliable, third-party sources to backup that claim, I'm sure there will be no problem with the entry. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Wperdue (talk) 05:00, 10 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

OK I will add 3rd party press coverage and industry analysis right now. Thanks a lot. Linehanjt (talk) 05:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

WVFD

Hey, thanks! I am new to editing and I have never had one of my new articles flagged for deletion before. I did not know about the disscusion page and I posted on it in favor of keeping it, per your advice. I also added some sections and things to the WVFD article. Here's to hoping! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodtoinform (talk • contribs) 00:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm happy to help. I've only been editing for about 9 months now, and there is lot to learn. Even if the AFD doesn't go your way, I'm sure you'll continue to make valuable contributions to Wikipedia. If I can answer any questions, please let me know. Happy editing. Wperdue (talk) 03:43, 12 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Sperezlaw (talk) 21:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Dunno if I am doing this correctly... But I am having major problems (in good faith) with an administrator who insists on keeping a misleading LEAD (pardon the pun) in Phil Spector page... How can I address this in a civil fashion? I stand by my edits, the users (Rodhullandem and Realist2) seem to have a limited view of the subject which is erroneous. How to address this? Thanks!

My advice is to read about dispute resolution. There are several options there with recommendations as to which steps to take first and escalating to the final step of requesting arbitration. The most obvious and simplest thing to do is attempt to gain a consensus on the talk page. I hope this was helpful. Wperdue (talk) 21:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Sperezlaw (talk) 03:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC) Thank you.. Will do a little more reading to get this done properly pursuant to your advice.

Talkback

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

- Dank (push to talk) 15:22, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Urinary bladder

Hi, you removed my entry because there was no source given. The source were just my own bladder and the bladders of some friends of mine. Some of my friends can hold 2 litres, while I can hold ca. 1,5 litres. You could try it with your own bladder and the bladders of some friends and find out that it ist true although some books say it isn´t. --79.220.84.175 (talk) 20:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Please read what constitutes a reliable source. It will require more than personal observation. As for myself and my friends, I think we'll skip bladder experimentation. Wperdue (talk) 20:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)wperdue

rapidshare

Sorry, wIthout this third party app it is simply impossible to make multiple-uploads from a macintosh. I have no shares of speed download, but I have a Mac and I want to spare other Mac-users the time to find this out. Please reconsider your deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.219.213.155 (talk) 20:59, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I found at least one third-party reference to the software regarding some controversy over an update pay requirement. This is enough to establish at least some notability. Therefore, I have restored the information. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Wperdue (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Thanks, no questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.219.213.155 (talk) 09:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Altered Speedy Deletion rationale: Mekeninzo

Hello Wperdue, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have deleted a page you tagged (Mekeninzo) under a criterion different from the one your provided, which was inappropriate or incorrect. CSD criteria are narrow and specific to protect the encyclopedia, and the process is more effective if the correct deletion rationale is supplied. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Thanks again! Ale_Jrb^talk 18:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. However, if you read the entire page, it was designed to promote not only his youtube videos but also the card game which he designed. I stand by my tagging. Wperdue (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

PillsburyDoughMan97: Don't you guys ever read...

1. Under construction...
2. I was trying to abide by your rules
3. I was stating facts and not promoting anything, if so... the vgcats page is definatly promoting vg cats and should also be removed... likewise the pokemon/digimon page, along with any other page that is like that...
4. And If you cared to notice, I did change the article every time i resubmitted it trying to explain notability, and my talks ended up deleted without explination...

I'm sorry if I'm misunderstanding something; however, your lack of hospitable behavour is somewhat appalling. Expecially since most of your material comes from new members such as myself. So instead of deleting my hard work in the matter of seconds and quoting line A7, I would appreciate it if you could calmly tell me what I am doing wrong. A7 means anything interesting, and I implore you to tell me what is so uninteresting about this person and why this person is not as interesting as a person who creates web comics... —Preceding unsigned comment added by PillsburyDoughMan97 (talk • contribs) 23:42, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you took at as inhospitable, however I explained on the talk page of your entry exactly what the problems were and how to address them. I would be happy to reiterate what I said there as the page no longer exists.

Please feel free to click on any of the blue links in this explanation for more detailed information.

What you need to do is establish notability. This requires non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable sources. These can be anything from magazines, websites, television, radio, etc. This does not include blogs, facebook, twitter, or generally local news sources. The information has to be verifiable and written from a neutral point of view. It seems that you are directly affiliated with the subject and therefore have a conflict of interest. This is generally discouraged. Also, some of the text referring to ninjas and saving the world someday was clearly not fit for Wikipedia.

Don't take the A7 criteria as meaning something is uninteresting. It simply means that their was no assertion of notability. In other words, the entry says nothing about why this person is notable. Keep in mind that this has to be something reasonable and not something like saving the world someday to which I referred earlier.

If you need further information, I will be happy to try to answer your questions. Wperdue (talk) 03:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Methinks we have a COI here.

Looks to me as if the individual in question may be doing a bit of self-overindulgence. I'm going to delete those redirects; they simply aren't feasible. I've left a COI notice on the user's talk page as well. Thanks for letting me know! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of that for me. I didn't know if it was appropriate to tag the redirects. I tagged the main entry for COI and as being like an advertisement. Again, I appreciate the help. Wperdue (talk) 20:25, 5 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

And thank you for the nice wishes.  :) Glad you caught me as I was just about to log off and hit the hay. See you soon! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 05:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure

Although I should probably thank whoever it was that marked my edits autopatrolled - I'm sure that makes it much easier. --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 02:12, 7 July 2009 (UTC)