User talk:Wperdue/Archive 3

Dear Administrator

It has come to my attention that you have recommended the article "Bookzek" for speedy deletion. I, as the creator of this article, have spent a good deal of my time on this, and so wouls like to prevent my work from being destroyed. I understand that it can be fixed. I would be much obliged if you could provide me with the required information I need to fix it, relating to exactly what the problem is, and what I have to do to fix it.

Thank you very much, Systemdweller —Preceding unsigned comment added by Systemdweller (talk • contribs) 20:00, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

What you will need to do is indicate in what way this website is notable. It will also need to have independent reliable sources that are verifiable. These are the key pillars of Wikipedia. You can click on any of the highlighted links to read more about them. It is also possible to "userfy" the article by moving it to your userpage where you can work on it more without fear of it being deleted. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I will try to help. Wperdue (talk) 20:04, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I would very much like to userfy my article, and I will endevour to make it notable also. ~~Systemdweller~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Systemdweller (talk • contribs) 20:07, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I have requested that the deleting admin userfy the page. This may take a bit depending on their online status. If you need further assistance, please feel free to ask. Wperdue (talk) 20:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I seem to be unable to move the article, as it has already been deleted. I find this quite infuriating, as I spent quite a lot of time on the article. Most irritating.

~~systemdweller~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Systemdweller (talk • contribs) 20:10, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

My citation is properly referenced. The reference is a You Tube clip of Tom Hanks. I am an licensed attorney practicing in southern CA and I am very familiar with libel laws and free speech rights. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.20.150 (talk) 16:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Libel laws and free-speech rights have exactly zero to do with Wikipedia policy. Please read the linked sections on biographies of living persons and reliable sources. Youtube, blogs, facebook, myspace, personal websites, etc. are not considered reliable sources. I would be happy to answer any questions about sourcing that you may have after reading the policies. Wperdue (talk) 16:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm a little confused why that last comment appeared. I haven't wrote any page son Tom Hanks, Youtube or Tom Hanks. Would anyone like to enlighten me? Systemdweller (talk) 22:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't you. Some other editor decided to post under the same section rather than start a new one. Sorry for the confusion. Wperdue (talk) 23:38, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

question

How are my links inappropriate? I posted a link that is relevant to the subject.

Have you read the section I mentioned numerous times? WP:EL and WP:ELNO item #11.

Also, it is considered polite to actually discuss the issue once another editor reverts the edit and asks for a discussion, before re-adding the material. Wperdue (talk) 18:43, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I am new to this wikipedia thing, so i am not very familiar with discussing. I just looked at this wp:elno page, and I do see the mention about blogs. The blog that I am linking to is simply a compilation of headline news articles and peer-reviewed articles that are relevant to the subject matter. I do not see the problem.

I understand that you are new. I will try to fully explain the reasoning behind this. Since all material on Wikipedia requires a reliable source and since a blog is a collection of information from other sites that cannot always be reliably sourced, it would be much better to link to the individual news sites as citations for any facts in this entry. I would be happy to provide further explanations vis-a-vis sourcing or to answer any other questions. Wperdue (talk) 01:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Announcement

I will be taking part in the Great Wikipedia Dramaout from midnight July 18th and the following five days. Please do not bring drama to my talk page, as I will be ignoring it. Thank you.

Phillsburydoughman97: Additional information needed...

Yes I did mention you having inhospitable behavior for the simple reason you guys do not give enough explination which is needed for a new person like me to understand.

I checked out the page on wikipedia about notability and I though I had seen the word interesting used in there. I don't see it there anymore so I guess I was mistaken...

Additionaly I would still like to know how I was promoting such videos and game software while other similar pages were not.

When i mentioned saving the world is was kinda joking... I tend to do that(although if you recall, I did denote that fact with another sentence.) As for the ninja bit... The videos on youtube refer to him as being a Ninja... and remember, at that time had I believed notability to be "something Interesting".

Lastly, could you kindly explain what the underconstruction icon is used for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by PillsburyDoughMan97 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

The "under construction" tag is used to give an editor time to add significant content to a new page. This does not include minor edits. It is generally not a candidate for proposed deletion or article for deletion discussion but is still eligible for speedy deletion. After about 8000 edits, I have a pretty good idea of what will and won't be speedily deleted if tagged. The problem with your entry is notability. Unless you or your game have featured in magazines, newspapers, etc. it simply won't be notable as defined by Wikipedia. You will find very few youtube related entries in here and the only exceptions are ones that have had significant coverage. Games are the same. Any games that have a chance of staying will have reliable sources cited. One argument to avoid for either keeping or deleting an entry is that other stuff exists. If an entry has a problem, it should be tagged and fixed or nominated for deletion. I hope this makes things clearer. Wperdue (talk) 19:13, 7 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Incline Of Insanity

Well, to use the author's speak: I tagged it before someone else could. ;) De728631 (talk) 19:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

SAW VI

Does it have any screen caps? Drjuki (talk) 19:22, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm confused by your question. Could you please clarify? Wperdue (talk) 22:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Zozo genchev

Well done on spotting the attack part of the page. I got as far as "Zozo Genchev works at Abbey College" and lost the will to live. -- role^player 23:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Lol. Thank you, and I completely understand. New page patrolling can be a headache sometimes. Wperdue (talk) 23:33, 13 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

No problem.  :)

I happened to check in regarding another matter when I got your message. To me, the article is worth a prod tag. If the islands are 100% Seventh-Day Adventist, it simply doesn't make sense. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Islam in the Pitcairn Islands

Hi, I decided to list the article at AfD because there isn't really any content that could be merged. See the AfD entry here. Jafeluv (talk) 08:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

DOA

I don't think you understand. I said the forum calls itself the biggest dance forum in the world, I then cited this by pointing you to the website stating "the biggest dance forum." Then i said this is statistically not true, I then sourced this by showing you a site which proved other dance forums have more traffic. I Sourced this correctly, i think you are being lazy and not checking yourself. So I will be re adding this back. You can't tell me these are unreliable sources as you guys use Alexa yourselves.

I have responded to your concerns at Talk:Dogs on acid#Section removal. Please respond there if you have further concerns. Wperdue (talk) 20:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

How long will it take for the afd take to remove? its been longer than 7 days —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayflux (talk • contribs) 21:46, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

It was re-listed today to gain more of a consensus. Generally, the AfD stays up for seven days unless not enough people weigh in on the situation to gain a consensus or there is a clear indication that it will be kept or deleted such as a speedy-keep or speedy-delete situation. Wperdue (talk) 21:49, 17 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Ok one more question, how do you cite the same source twice? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayflux (talk • contribs) 21:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

If you wish to use the same citation twice (assuming it already appears in the reference list) just use the standard <ref> </ref> tags. If you use the exact same citation, each one should point to the correct citation in the reference list. Wperdue (talk) 22:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

When will the debate over deletion end? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.45.64.15 (talk) 17:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

In about four days if there is a consensus reached. Wperdue (talk) 20:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

How do i go about making an article semi-protected? The second this article becomes public i am sure it will be come vandalised. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.45.64.15 (talk) 13:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

You want to go to WP:RFP to request the protection. However, very few admins will preemptively protect a page. It will probably only be protected if and when there is excessive vandalism. Wperdue (talk) 21:22, 21 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

We are not in todays log for deletion, does this mean the debate is over? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.45.64.15 (talk) 17:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

There was no consensus on the debate. Wperdue (talk) 21:50, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

and what does that mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.45.64.15 (talk) 23:52, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Please go to WP:AFD. It explains the entire process including all the procedures, rules, and all possible outcomes. Wperdue (talk) 23:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:NODRAMA reminder

Thanks for signing up for the Great Wikipedia Dramaout. Wikipedia stands to benefit from the improvements in the article space as a result of this campaign. This is a double reminder. First, the campaign begins on July 18, 2009 at 00:00 (UTC). Second, please remember to log any articles you have worked on during the campaign at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/Log. Thanks again for your participation! --Jayron32.talk.say no to drama 22:05, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Nazi concentration camps

I don't see how this is not grammatically correct, care to explain?

"... many of their prisoners perished because of harsh conditions or were executed."

It makes perfect sense to me as: "many of their prisoners #1[perished because of harsh conditions] or #2[were executed]"

Sorry, it was late. My brain must have been shutting down for the night. Wperdue (talk) 15:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Haha, I know what you mean. But OK, it's nice that we agree then. Tchernobog (talk) 18:31, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for making WP:NODRAMA a success!

Thank you again for your support of the Great Wikipedia Dramaout. Preliminary statistics indicate that 129 new articles were created, 203 other articles were improved, and 183 images were uploaded. Additionally, 41 articles were nominated for DYK, of which at least 2 have already been promoted. There are currently also 8 articles up for GA status and 3 up for FA/FL status. Though the campaign is technically over, please continue to update the log page at WP:NODRAMA/L with any articles which you worked during the campaign, and also to note any that receive commendation, such as DYK, GA or FA status. You may find the following links helpful in nominating your work:

• T:TDYK for Did You Know nominations
• WP:GAC for Good Article nominations
• WP:FAC for Featured Article nominations
• WP:FLC for Featured List nominations
• WP:FPC for Featured Picture nominations

Again, thank you for making this event a success! --Jayron32.talk.say no to drama 02:23, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, not a BIG problem but it's a significant problem

Okay. Maybe I overreacted a bit. But it's a significant problem because (1) it's in the lead and (2) the correct spelling of HyperText Markup Language is a fact that any computer-literate person is or should be aware of, and (3) it was there for six weeks. The fact it stayed in there that long means that no one (as in an experienced Web designer like myself) is watching the article for obvious vandalism, which is why the HTML article is slowly degenerating into mush like a melting snowman. No one could seriously argue that "mark-up" is a legitimate spelling of "markup" when no one has spelled it with a hyphen for over 50 years (I should know, one of my long-stalled personal projects is my book on the history of hypertext). The spelling can be easily checked in one minute on Google. The only reasonable inference is that the anon IP who inserted the hyphen was a vandal doing it as a prank or in bad faith---or a very young child under the age of 8.

The reason I overreacted is that this is a symptom of a major problem with Wikipedia, that we keep getting hit with subtle vandalism on a daily basis, not only in minor obscure articles, but in important articles, on key facts that any person knowledgeable in that specific field should already know or can easily check. And no one does anything about it for months, which is how we end up with scandals like what happened with John Seigenthaler.

So Wikipedia is full of garbage. Which is why no one takes Wikipedia seriously. Which is why I and many other editors are scaling back our involvement out of sheer frustration because no one gives a damn and no one knows how to fix the project. That's why the only major contributions I still make nowadays are photographs, because it's just too damn time-consuming to defend my favorite articles against all these crazy vandals. --Coolcaesar (talk) 03:04, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Please remember that not everyone is an expert in the computer field. Subtle changes to the spelling of something that is not common knowledge may go unnoticed for a while. Yes, it would only take a short Google search to realize that the hyphen is incorrect, but one would have to have a reason to check this in the first place. It's probably not devastating to the project in the long run.

I spend most of my time fixing vandalism and patrolling new pages, so I understand your frustration with vandals as I deal with them on a daily basis. Unfortunately, berating the very people who fix these issues or implying that they are somehow not paying attention, negligent, stupid, etc. won't exactly motivate them to fix these issues in the future. I've got thick skin, but not everyone does, which is why there are policies on civility and such. If you could just try to tone it down a bit, I think it would be helpful to Wikipedia.

I will do my part, and try to find these things sooner, but I usually have 1500+ pages on my watchlist, which is sometimes overwhelming. I appreciate your reply, and hope that you have a less frustrating editing experience. Thank you. Wperdue (talk) 03:23, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...

for repairing the vandalism on my talk page. ttonyb1 (talk) 18:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Always happy to help. Sorry you've been getting picked on today. Wperdue (talk) 18:20, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

MS Productions

I just wanted to note your good work in trying to help the creator of this article; you definitely assumed good faith and tried to help, but I came across the article in the course of assessing another article for speedy deletion and I have to say that I cannot imagine that the article will ever be able to provide any reliable sources that demonstrate any notability. I did a brief search and found nothing whatever that gave me any confidence that the individuals have anything other than a YouTube account and a desire for self-promotion. Nevertheless, you were doing things the way that I would like to do them myself on my better days, and I thought it deserved to be recognized. Accounting4Taste:talk 21:04, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate the kind words. The editor who created that entry had several iterations of another entry relating to this company deleted, so I didn't hold out a lot of hope for this one. In any case, I thought the editor needed some help and was at least attempting to fix the problems and communicating. Unfortunately, that is a quality that seems to be lacking with a lot of new editors I come across while doing new page patrolling. Happy editing. Wperdue (talk) 23:45, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Please view Wiki article on Crayon

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crayon) History section. Contains Grafitti, cannot edit out —Preceding unsigned comment added by Msisshinryu (talk • contribs) 14:17, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kitami Woome

Hello Wperdue, we haven't worked together before. I am ikip, an editor of 4 years here.

Would you considering userfying the article which you put up for deletion? The will delete it from main space completely and move it to a subpage of the creators.

The editor is a new editor, and this will give the new user a chance to rework this article and maybe Wikipedia will get a long term dedicated editor

Please let me know as soon as possible, because as soon as someone else comments on the AfD, they must agree also before I can userfy the article. Thanks for your time.Ikip (talk) 06:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

That is perfectly acceptable to me. There is a high probability that this is a vanity page or a complete hoax. However, I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Thank you. Wperdue (talk) 06:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

That is always a risk, I appreciate your efforts trying to root out these hoaxes. I will BRB. Ikip (talk) 07:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I am watching the userfied page. I could find no sources for this article either. I made a stern warning for the editor that if no sources are forthcoming, I will nominate it as a hoax myself. Thank you.

The road to hell

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kitami Woome (2nd nomination) FYI. Sigh, I really wanted to give the editor the benefit of the doubt. I had this nagging feeling that I shouldn't userfy, and I should have listened. Ikip (talk) 10:38, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar, and I'm sorry things didn't work out the way you hoped. Still, it's always a nice feeling when you do help out a new editor and it turns out that they really do want to contribute something useful and are appreciative when you help them. Happy editing. Wperdue (talk) 16:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

2009 flu pandemic

Thankyou for letting me know.--Thisisthebestusernameever! (talk) 22:04, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing it. Wperdue (talk) 22:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

How dare you!

I cannot imagine you giving me the unprecidented short term of ten years to apologize. I am therefore blocking the offending account and will recoinsider its unblocking sometime in 2019. So there.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:33, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

That sounds fair. If I'm still coherent in 2019, we can revisit the issue. Wperdue (talk) 22:45, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Too soon for deletion?

I don't see much improvement happening anytime soon at Luis Durani. Any thoughts? Drmies (talk) 01:11, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I was hoping to give this editor the benefit of the doubt, but it looks like a vanity page for a non-notable person. Wperdue (talk) 01:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Off to AfD we go--certainly after a Google News and Books search revealed only a letter to the Sacramento Bee. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luis Durani. Drmies (talk) 19:12, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

German Shepherds

My argument is on the talk page. Hope it make sense I really can't believe you guys/gals have a problem with me removing a *contradiction* in the text where there aren't even *citations* to back up one of the viewpoints in that paragraph. It's this kind of nonsense that drove me into retirement from this place. Cheers, Neale —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.210.149 (talk) 18:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Tejon Mountain Village

This is in reference to your proposed deletion of the above page, which was begun by a user now going by the monicker of kendwallace. This user has been starting or adding to many different pages concerning planned mullti-use developments in several parts of the U.S. for the past several months now. Check his log at Special:Contributions/Kendwallace. His edits are almost always incoherent and are based, for the most part on the Web sites of the developers. If you will check the history of Centennial, California, you will see how many times I have reverted his material and how many times he or she has put it back with no explanation. I frankly do not know what to do with Mr. or Ms. kendwallace. As for Tejon Mountain Village (which is in the immediate area where I live), I am developing my own article on that subject, which I will work on in User:GeorgeLouis/Sandbox and then provide it as a substitute for Tejon Mountain Village when the new version is ready. I have a dozen articles from the Bakersfield Californian which I will use as my source, as well as any good material I can find from the Tejon Ranch site and the Web pages of the Mountain Enterprise, our local weekly newspaper. I invite you to keep an eye on this article if you are interested in following up. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:37, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the update. I would much prefer a well sourced and less speculative version of the current article. I look forward to your contribution. Wperdue (talk) 08:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you hate the Jews?

I am a proud jewish soldier in the IDF. Starbucks has been helping with the War on Terror. I ask you to please return my work to it's rightfully state. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.222.82 (talk) 02:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't hate anyone, but please keep your opinions out of Wikipedia. The changes you made did not better the entry in any way. Please also do not make accusation as it is not considered to be assuming good faith. If you would like to contribute something useful, please add reliably sourced information and keep it neutral in tone. Thank you. Wperdue (talk) 02:08, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

You are a good guy. Why don't I buy you a plane ticket so you can have a trip to Israel on the house?

Thanks for the offer, but it looks like you are in Michigan. That wouldn't be nearly as interesting. Wperdue (talk) 02:12, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I am staying in Michigan. I am on vaction from the Israeli Embassy. Where are you from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.222.82 (talk) 02:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Indianapolis. Have a good vacation, and stay safe defending your country. Wperdue (talk) 02:20, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and have a great time living in this great country. Thanks for the Fort Wayne Connect. Have a great day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.226.222.82 (talk) 02:22, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Conjure Cognac

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Conjure Cognac. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conjure Cognac. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:27, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Diabetes and testosterone replacement therapy

Hi, there are 3 citations (22, 53, 54) about testosterone/cortisol issues on diabetes, therefore I really think it is enough. Say me if you want more citations even if there are already 3 citations. Do not do edit war please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.194.199.13 (talk) 09:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

You might want to familiarize yourself with the edit-warring policies before making accusations. I will continue to revert unsourced and poorly sourced material especially that which is added against consensus. Wperdue (talk) 17:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

You are vandal! The article are free, you told an evident lie. they are strongly sourced! You should read a book of endocrinolgy instead of making vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.194.199.13 (talk) 17:44, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I've had it with your accusations and not assuming good faith. I'll turn this over to the admin board and let them decide what to do. Have a wonderful day. Wperdue (talk) 17:54, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Your accusations have not good faith!!! Because you invent accusations and you remove citations! Before deleting scientific article increase your preparation instead than making vandalism. read books! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.194.199.13 (talk) 03:33, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Now you know I'm not vandal and my edits were not wrong. I would suggest you to revert an edited page just when you well know the topic and just when you are sure that the edits are blatantly wrong. Best regards--Testosterone vs diabetes (talk) 20:55, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I stand by my edits. I never accused you of vandalism. My problem was with your sources,and personal attacks. I'm happy you are working with the community on a compromise. Wperdue (talk) 23:25, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I've removed your personal offence to me in diabetes talk because I was bored to log me, moreover very often (even from my computer) I'm log out and I even do not know why--Testosterone vs diabetes (talk) 17:35, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Bully for you. Wperdue (talk) 18:52, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: edit warring report

Just an FYI re: your submission at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. I was looking over the page, and just realized that you were the third person to report User:Testosterone vs diabetes (I was the second person ... User:Nutriveg was the first). I'm going to merge my report into Nutriveg's report ... thought I would let you know, in case you wanted to do the same. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I should have looked over the reports better. I'll go take a look. Wperdue (talk) 19:43, 30 October 2009 (UTC)