User talk:Carlossuarez46

If I've deleted an article you created and you are here to protest, please clearly state the name of the article in the header of your note on the bottom of my talkpage so I can investigate. Remember to sign your posts with ~~~~.

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2

Re: Exchange@PAM Entry

Hi, this entry was deleted and im pretty sure it has a place in wikipedia as i've seen a lot of other entries which are very similar if not the same as it. Could you tell me how it needs editing to be a worthy entry such as Enterprise Vault The two pieces are literally identical, how can one remain and the other be deleted? Thanks --AdamSurch 16:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Sport (software)

Please explain why you removed the copyvio notice from Sport (software). The creator has yet to follow the procedure at WP:CP to verify that he is indeed the copyright holder. Until such proof is forthcoming, it's still a copyvio. Corvus cornix 21:21, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

There are procedures for a creator to prove that they're the copyright holder. I pointed the creator of the article to those procedures, but he hasn't bothered to do anything about it. Are we now supposed to just take people's word for it that they're the copyright holder and take all claims of copyright ownership to AfD? How many copyright violations will be kept based on the notability of the subject matter, despite the creator not really being the copyright holder? Corvus cornix 21:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I did tag it as a copyvio, you removed the tag. What am I missing? Corvus cornix 21:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I tagged it as db-copyvio, which is a valid tag and supported by WP:CSD. This is setting a bad precedent. Corvus cornix 21:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Copyvios —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corvus cornix (talk • contribs) 21:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Patch (emo)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Patch (emo). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Neufusion 21:23, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Request

Can you delete Image:Nopic.jpg and Image:Noimg.png? These were Images that I uploaded long ago to be used but have since been left unused for a long time. Image:Noimg.png was reuploaded by User:GHe, but that was just to get a clearer image of Image:Nopic.jpg. — Moe ε 21:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of my article on Mister Joe Black

I would like a reason for why you deleted my article.

As i'm not fond of logging on and finding someone has deleted my first article, which took me quite some time to do.

Please reply soon!

Addidom 00:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Ancestors

This is extremely unfortunate, as I have noticed various bands with articles that have only released one album. I cannot see the necessity of this when it is apparent that this is a genuine article for a band with a future. Never mind, you have successfully censored. Visions for freedom are not always equal, or at least they often do not share the same integrity - Gullaldr —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gullaldr (talk • contribs) 00:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Ancestors

This is extremely unfortunate, as I have noticed various bands with articles that have only released one album. I cannot see the necessity of this when it is apparent that this is a genuine article for a band with a future. Never mind, you have successfully censored. Visions for freedom are not always equal, or at least they often do not share the same integrity. Gullaldr

Please do not take down my criticism, you are contradicting the criterion that fill your Bio, in regards to censorship especially. Please do not censor my criticism, as it is completely valid: there are bands that have only one record, on small labels, that have Wikipedia pages. I am offended by this, and don't want to take it further. Please reply to this comment.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gullaldr (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/(X)HTML

It is clear that consensus was for this article to not be kept. However, I think that (X)HTML as a redirect to XHTML#Relationship_to_HTML, as suggested, would be a better close. I strongly believe (X)HTML would be a valid search. What are your thoughts? i ^said 04:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I did that. I just thought I'd comment, since you left it as delete and no mention of making it a redirect. Thanks. i ^said 04:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Exel Computer Systems plc and EFACS E/8

Hi Carlos

I am trying to create two articles. One is regarding a company called Exel Computer Systems plc and the other is regarding their ERP Software called EFACS E/8. Please can you confirm why these articles have been deleted??

I have looked at WIKIPEDIA for details on other ERP Vendors such as Baan, Epicor, Microsoft, Syspro - all of which go into much more detail than I have. This document is purely for people to look at if they have an interest in ERP Software? There is no advertising intentionally included but looking at other vendors; some claim to 'be the best' etc.

I have been asked to re-create the two articles and would therefore like your permission to do so. None of the work is copyright and it is purely for information purposes.

Please could you also tell me how I can mae it easier to locate my articles, as I have noticed that the whole article name must be entered before the search/go will find it??

Thanks

KirstyBirch 13:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

fring

Hi Carlossuarez46,

Please reconsider your deletion of the fring article.

The deletion of this article seems very biased, seeing that skype, pidgin IM etc all have articles and this is exactly the same type of article. fring is a new mvoip system but it is in over 150 countries already making it very notable. The references are valid and there is no difference between references in the fring article and the skype article.

I beg you to reconsider.

regards simon Goplett 19:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Decisional analysis of complex systems

Notice: You are re-creating a page that was previously deleted.

You should consider whether it is appropriate to continue editing this page. Information is available on what to do if a page you created is deleted. The deletion log for this page is provided here for convenience:

00:27, 6 September 2007 Carlossuarez46 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Decisional analysis of complex systems" ‎ (CSD G12: Blatant Copyright infringement)

Following Wikipedia policy regarding Copyright infringement, there is a notice on the web page releasing the work under the GFDL : see the notice at the bottom of the page at: http://iegd.institut.online.fr

00:20 , 7 september 2007 Robertatum Robertatum 22:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

RE:Copyright status of Decisional analysis of complex systems

Buen punto :-) --Boricuæddie 00:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

• What means "Buen punto" = "Good point" regarding Copyright status of Decisional analysis ?

Is it a funny joke for you, a delete prosess ? Robertatum 18:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry, what I wrote on sept 8 was not adressed to Carlossuarez but to Boricuaeddie. Anyway I don't speak spanish yet even if I go sometimes to Barelona as I like Catalogna.
  

Robertatum 11:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Revisiting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sport (software)

PLEASE REVIEW I am leaving you this message because you have participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sport (software) I have reduced the Sport (software) article to a stub with one valid assertion of notability which can be verified by a reliable source and is properly cited. From digging through the sources that Mr. Badger provided, I have concluded that the software has just made it under the wire to qualify as notable because it was the subject of a lecture at an international symposium of SmallTalk programmers about a week ago. I have tagged the article for Wikipedia:WikiProject_Free_Software and I have posted a note about the article on their TO-DO list. The article is not what Mr. Badger envisioned, but it might be worth keeping now. Mr. Badger has had many Wikipedians drill into his head warnings about the problems with his conflict of interest and unfamiliarity with Wikipedia standards and practices, and from direct email correspondence with him I am sure he will comply. Please let me know what you think of these changes. Thanks very much. OfficeGirl 00:23, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've done as much as I can to help with this article, since I am not in the software field. I feel that there's a fair amount of prejudice lingering over this article because of the article's originator and his frustration level trying to participate as new user (including the frustration level that we were experiencing from him while he was reeling from the culture shock. WP:BITE.

Mr. Badger is in fact the founder and leader of a non-profit group of Free Open Source Software developers (OpenSkills) which has been determined to be notable enough to have its own article on Wikipedia well before Mr. Badger ever signed on to Wikipedia. The European association brought him from Australia to Switzerland to give his lecture, and he is an annual lecturer with them. Mr. Badger is telling the truth when he says that Sport is well known among SmallTalk users, and it is widely discussed on user forums-- in fact it is mentioned in a ho-hum "everyone knows that software" tone. Those are not sources we can use in a Wikipedia article, but their existence was persuasive to me that the software actually is well-known and has a somewhat wide usage in the field. In addition, this is free software-- not a for profit sales venture. I am still inclined to think that a stub is perfectly appropriate in this case.

Anyhow, thanks for taking a look! OfficeGirl 01:05, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I am looking forward to joining in with the editing work on the Wikipedia article on your thesis. Lemme know when it comes out! ;-)

OfficeGirl 03:07, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

		My RFA
		I thank you for participating in my successful request for adminship, which ended with 60 supports, no opposes, no neutrals, and one abstain. Edison 16:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Prof Lynn

Hallo! I'd started building up an article on the late Professor Martin Lynn, a leading historian of West Africa and an active Quaker in Belfast. You'll note that he rated an obituary in ''The Times'' - an assurance of notability in itself.. I've still got a notion of putting up stuff about him, but of course if it's going to get zapped then there's obviously no point. Before I do anything, could you let me know what, in your view, would qualify Lynn for not being zapped? Thanks. Aluredian 21:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Roughly how many other sources would make the article safe? Aluredian 20:03, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Why the speedy deletion?

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The International Society for Professional Innovation Management. I am a little annoyed as I documented the history and purpose of an international association that has been in existence since 1973 and is one of the first associations dedicated to innovation. I do not understand why this has been speedily deleted as there is no copyright violation - I know because I write the ISPIM materials! Who does the actual reviewing of what is and is not appropriate and what qualifications do they have? I was very excited by Wikipedia and it has left me very frustrated...please advise what I can do. Thanks.

ibitran 02:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Eleventyseven

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Eleventyseven. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Chubbles 04:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

SkiersBot

The Bot is just picking up a stub template on the article page. If the article is a redirect, it shouldn't have any stub templates on it. Sort of a "catch 22" situation here - bot is doing the right thing, but the wrong thing is on the article page. My guess is that the majority of these were redirected because of name changes, but the person/bot that did it didn't remove the stubs and other non-essentials for a redirect page. IF you can give me a concrete example of when/where this happened, it might give a clue to the problem. What I'd like to do is to have the bot either recognize the stub & redirect together on the article and flag it for further attention, but have been stymied on how to get it to do this. Any suggestions on how to get this done would be greatly appreciated! SkierRMH 20:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I think I see the problem with that one - I did the database "scrape" on September 1 for all of the biography stubs and started the bot on that day. That article was still marked "stub" on that day, changed on 9/4, and the bot was going off of old data. When I get back to the computer that's running it, I'll do a comparison of the articles that are still in queue to verify they're still article stubs. (I didn't think it was going to take this long to go through them - but there have been a few thousand that were caught by the bot so far!) Theoretically that will 'fix' this part, but still leaves the problem of mis-marked redirect pages. I'm thinking a quick scan of the redirect pages to see if any of them have any non-essential markings would be beneficial, not just for this, but to catch any other stragglers :)

I've caught multiple instances of this with film and album articles that were turned into redirects - and have put a "caution" flag on them to keep the discussion/tags away - as here Talk:Girls Girls Girls!

--— Preceding unsigned comment added by SkierRMH (talk • contribs)

Entegris

Thanks for letting me know that you'd deleted the speedy delete tag, and if I'd given it a bit more thought I probably would have deleted it myself (I was doing new page patrol during a blizzard of spam, that's my lame excuse). I'm content to leave the page in your capable hands for improvement, although if I can be of any assistance, let me know. Accounting4Taste 22:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Henry L. Stimson Center

Hi, I started this article as a stub because I've worked for this group and since they do a lot of research, congressional testimony, host events, and regularly appear in the news, it would be useful to have it referenced in Wikipedia explaining what exactly this group is. While think tanks have been in the news for influencing policy, perhaps negatively, they run the gamut from ultra-liberal to libertarian. I just think it would be useful for people. I think it was a good stub, I hope it can expand. Thank you for putting time into wikipedia, I write and edit articles as a hobby and its people like you that help maintain it as a good community source of info.

--User:Huskybear 11:15, 11 September 2007 (EST)

Hey!

Why aren't you responding! --Elven6 17:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course I can, the game is notable for a variety of reasons,

1. Mentioned on sites such as IGN, Gamespot,

2. The game is a Xbox 360 tile, if you want something on Live Arcade it can't be a game from a company now one has heard of, to be eliegable it has to pass certain tests.

3. Blazing Lizard was formed by Veteran game developers from various companys, who have coded Commercial games on a variety of consoles.

4. IGN, Gamespot, etc don't put unknown non-commercial games on their lists.

So has you can see this game is know to the community, it is also mentioned on some of IGN's podcasts, I belive I was wrongly penalized, and I am hoping to get that strike removed. --Elven6 00:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

The delete propsal claims it is not in development, however their are renders/in game screenshots on the companies website, you don't call respected review sites 3rd party coverage? --Elven6 02:12, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

"Safer Access" page deletion

I see that the page was deleted for "blatant advertising", even though Safer Access (as an organisation) is a source of a number of the references in various wikipedia articles and there would seem to be value in allowing readers to understand who that source is. I am new to wikipedia - is it that Safer Access is not "notable" or some other reason that this is blatant advertising? What can I do to fix this? Thanks for your help.Bigtree99 21:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

speedy delete templates

Please do not be unconstructive and a vandal and remove template for deletion please follow the proper procedure.--84.67.181.45 21:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

To add the {{hangon}} tag.--84.67.181.45 22:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Mad varnish

Why delete the page on Mad varnish? It needed time to be improved not deleted straight away just because you've never heard of him. The H-Man2 21:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've just searched Yahoo and nothing on him there but he is no doubt a popular figure in the area. However I accept these guidelines so I'll be more careful in future. But maybe you should give a haflhour before deleting pages. The H-Man2 21:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

OK thanks for the help. The H-Man2 21:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

The Hunger Project

Hunger Project Please don't request speedy deletion of notable, long-standing articles. If you think that it is spam, re-write the offensive bits. Carlossuarez46 19:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of that section as it has no citationS. I'm not re-writing an advert, btw. That's the article author's (and oddly, COO's) problem. I see a conflict of interest and a decidedly non-NPOV in the article. What do you think? Arcana imperii Ascendo tuum 01:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Runestone categories

Dear Carlossuarez46, another editor has averted me of your and Wimstead's category changes, and I want to talk to you about it because your changes have led to a certain mess. Scholars don't categorize runestones according to modern country borders, but according to those that Sweden and Denmark had historically. All the runestones in Denmark, Blekinge, Scania and Halland are categorized as DR, e.g. "DR 360" which means literally the "360th catalogued runestone of Denmark. However, this runestone is located in south-eastern Sweden, in a region that only historically belonged to Denmark. In the same manner, there are several Denmark runestones in Schleswig-Holstein which today belong to Germany. An easy way of avoiding conficting views of what constitute "a runestone in Denmark" or a "runestone in Sweden" is to simply divide Denmark into a Jutland category, a Danish isles category and a Skåneland category, where the Jutland category is categorized both as Danish and German and the Skåneland category is both Swedish and Danish. Moreoever, a name such as "Runestones, Denmark" has the advantage of not pretending that a "Denmark runestone" needs to be in Denmark, but only makes a connection between the two. If you insist on keeping the system you created, you need to present a solution for making the runestones of Scania, Halland and Blekinge both Danish and Swedish and the runestones of Schleswig-Holstein both German and Danish. I wait a few days for you and Carlossuarez46 to propose a working solution. If you don't, I will have to try to revert your changes. Regards,--Berig 18:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I have certainly never intended anything but an overturn of the moves and WP:DRV as to the appropriateness of the consensus decisions which only included two or three voters, IIRC.--Berig 19:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for supporting my recent successful RfA. I have been testing my new mop a bit and Wikipedia hasn't crashed yet! See you around. Cheers! -- Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 04:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Zeitgeist the Movie

I'm trying to work out why this film has been barred from having an entry on Wikipedia. I noticed that you were involved in some of the debate and so I thought to check in and ask you for your opinion.

It doesn't seem to me that it can realistically be considered "not notable" any longer as it is achieving 35,000+ views daily on Google Video and is causing a massive stir all around the place. Please check the movie's page on Google Video and google the search string "Zeitgeist the Movie" for verification here. Virtually all the material used for the film is sourced on the creator's website. There have been articles in mainstream media about it - see The Globe and Mail (Toronto Newspaper). In addition, I would suggest, that, given one of the principle contentions of the movie itself - namely that the mass media is under a degree of control vastly greater than that recognised by the public - there should sensibly be some form of case made here regarding mass media recognition. Particularly bearing in mind that there have been articles written in mainstreatm media now. So I'm at a bit of a loss to understand the position that Wikipedia has created for itself. Can you enlighten me at all? I very much appreciate any time you could take to explain this to me.

Amira227 10:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Terri hollowell

I was not helping edit the article Terri hollowell. I placed a speedy deletion tag on it, which I assume the creator of the article removed. --EndlessDan 12:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I misread your post, I have added my 2 cents to the nomination pages. Sorry! --EndlessDan 12:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The School of Computing (RGU)

I must admit that I do not log in a lot but I was surprised to find the entry for the School of Computing at RGU to have been deleted. As this has not happened to the other schools that also have sub-entries from the University page, I ask you to reconsider this and recover the page.

Regards

Colin Beagrie Systems Manager School of Computing RGU

Rgu computing 15:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I got a notice about this because I did a small amount of editing on the article. The article was originally called "The School of Computing": all I did was change the name and add some context and categories. I agree that the article doesn't deserve to survive in its present state, and it doesn't look as if anyone from RGU understands there is a problem. --RichardVeryard 17:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Primavera Systems Inc.

I am trying to creat this article to explain the company and history. I reinserted the information. COuld you explain to me what I need to remove to keep this article up?

~~~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdh0930 (talk • contribs)

You're right

You're correct, I got carried away with being sarcastic. It really irked me that the guy nominated every article he could find about America's diverse heritage and argued that these should be deleted because he doesn't like that type of article, no matter how well written. It's clear that he didn't read any of the articles, and was not judging them by "the content of their character", but the words in the title, to paraphrase Dr. King. Still, my weak Archie Bunker imitation of an ignorant bigot was something I should have avoided. I apologize. Mandsford 15:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

HeinekenTheClock protests against deletion

My literary piece of art was recently deleted by your destructive hands. My words, though reproducable, will never take the exact form as they had on the article "the Spoony Bard".

The reason it was labeled for speedy deletion was "patented nonsense" e.g. "Content that, while apparently meaningful after a fashion, is so completely and irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever."

I think that although my piece was not totally conform the habits of you wikipedists, I think that in no case whatsoever it would be "irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever".

Quite the contrary, my piece was grammatically well-structured with little to no misspellings, had quite a bunch of links to supply viewers that were oblivious to the subject with the information they needed.

Pardon me, but if you didn't understand that article, I'm afraid the tables are turned, that I am the reasonable person and you irredeemably confused.

Yours sincerely, Heinecis Nostradamus of Schweizenbrauer.

You may call me HeinekenClock because it sounds nice.

Update: I don't know what the fuck these symbols are all about but I'll go along with you lunatics. HeinekenTheClock 22:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest Carlossuarez46,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 96 supports, 1 oppose, and 3 neutrals. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm a new admin remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them. I would like to give a special shout out to Hirohisat, Wizardman, and Husond, for there original co-nominations. Thank you once again and good day.

Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor

Credits

This RFA thanks was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunatly this is not entirely my own design.

RfA thanks

Thank you very much for your support at my RfA. Regards, Jogers (talk) 09:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Basically, I agree with you. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, right? Jogers (talk) 09:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD's

Hi there. Got a question about some of your AfD's and wanted to direct you to the discussion I started. Thanks — Timotab ^{Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!)} 17:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion: Undead Parasite (Castlevaia: Lament of Innocence)

My article was deleted, a (i think very new) user moved it and it was deleted. castlevaniamaster1 12:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice about 2 articles of the same name, i created the new one hoping it wouldn't be deleted. you dont need to undelete the other one thanks anyway castlevaniamaster1 11:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion: Nationalism studies

Could you please explain why you deleted the page 'Nationalism studies'? It was very brief - I just started it recently - but that means it needed to be expanded, not deleted. – SJLARIN 14:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Who sets the threshold for what's ready to be made public and what's not? – SJLARIN 20:02, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Nationalism studies is a significant academic field that you are just not aware of. I have been working on an expanded draft of the article in my spare time. The public article listed several universities that offer graduate degrees in this field, which should have been enough to establish the notability of the subject. – SJLARIN 20:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Links to the web sites of graduate programs at major universities that provide degrees in the field do not establish its notability? I think that you are applying your own standard, not Wikipedia's. The article is obviously not finished and needs to be referenced, but there's no reason to be so zealous in deleting other people's work. – SJLARIN 21:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

I Hope This Is Not A Stupid Question

Is this vandalism? It looked like it to me and now I'm not sure . . . either that or POV-pushing? Or am I just seeing evil where none exists? -WarthogDemon 18:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I had my doubts. Looking on it now, I think I misread the whole thing. :P Oops. Well at any rate there was an edit before it that was vandalism so I was only half wrong. Anyways, thanks. :) -WarthogDemon 18:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Football players in war

Hello! I noticed you closed that discussion as "delete". I wouldn't say it was "keep", but it looked a lot more like "no consensus". Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 23:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Missingno390 RfA

Actually, the part you referenced in my RfA is my signature -- it comes from the credits of Spam. In 2007, Wikipedia lay in ruins, and the words on the screen said: "Missingno. was here." 01:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

List of patent trolls

May I request a reconsideration of your conclusion on this debate: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of patent trolls. To me, there was no consensus. Lack of neutrality is a weak reason for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to discuss an AfD). The article can be salvaged. --Edcolins 19:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I do not share your view, there was no consensus. I strongly disagree with the process of closing a debate when there is no consensus. Polling is not a substitute for discussion. The expression "Patent troll" is more than a pejorative term. The list is very interesting and the specific economic strategy of the patent trolls is an interesting way of managing and enforcing patents (search "patent trolls" on Google Books and Google Scholar - the study of patent trolls is even becoming an academic field as such - that's why the list is encyclopedic). The fact that the media view some companies as acting as patent trolls is a very interesting evolution of patents both from an economic and legal perspective. Please restore the article. The term is notable and the citations were verifiable: see Patent Terrorism – Terror of the Intangibles. There is a List of designated terrorist organizations. A list of designated patent trolls has certainly a place here. --Edcolins 20:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

The now-traditional RFA thank-spam

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dear Carlossuarez46,

Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 83 supports, 1 oppose, and 0 neutrals. No matter if you voted (I mean, "!voted") support or oppose, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm new, remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them, and if I do anything wrong, feel free to add to the permanent chorus of disapproval on my talk page. Special thanks to Walton^One and Dihydrogen Monoxide for nominating me.

iridescent (talk to me!) 21:09, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Credits

This design was brazenly stolen from inspired by Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor's RFA Thanks, which in turn was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.

Deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bend Over Boyfriend. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. F Mita 23:25, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

RFA Thanks!

Thanks for your participation for my RFA bid and for your support.--JForget 23:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

What The?

Ages ago i created a article Meshel, Ash and Kip with Luttsy. This article was deleted immediately meanwhile a show on a LESS popular station Labrat, Camilla and Stav - same city, only been on air for six months, and with 2/3 the ratings of this article. So how could this be allowed and not my article, please reconsider!

This is a link to prove the ratings - http://www.nielsenmedia.com.au/files/brisbane607.pdf M, A & K w/ L are on Nova 106.9 and L, C & S are on B105 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt0793 (talk • contribs) 07:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

SRL: SCAR Recource Library?

₩Why in the world was it deleted?? Because of unimportance? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.131.39.53 (talk) 15:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, lack of notability, see WP:N. I also note that your IP has been blocked several times, if you wish to contribute constuctively to Wikipedia, create an account so that we won't attribute the past bad behavior to you. Carlossuarez46 16:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Stephan Johnson

hi, I know my page was not very good, it was my first one. I was just wondering what I could do to make a bio page for myself that would stay on. If you could tell me what I would need I would really appreciate it. Thanks. by the way, I am really new to posting anything on the net, so if I totaly did this wrong I'm so sorry. --Sirsteve777 23:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)