User talk:Irishguy

Feel free to leave comments at the bottom of the page.

• Please sign your comments with ~~~~.
• If you are here to complain about something I deleted please tell me the name of the specific article.

It should go without saying that trolling, vandalism, and personal attacks will be promptly removed. Thanks. IrishGuy

Casey Stengel

By one interpretation, I have clearly broken the 3-revert rule on that article, having reverted the colors 4 times today. However, the combatants in this are alleged to be sockpuppets of each other, and I have treated their "work" as vandalism. Also, the semi-protection doesn't seem to be working very well. I wonder if I should just leave that page alone, or if I myself should get blocked, or what? Baseball Bugs 20:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The semi protection appears to have expired already. Frankly, semi protection wouldn't alter anything because the accounts aren't new enough to get caught with it. You can go to WP:RPP and request page protection outlining what the problem is. You will probably need to ask for full page protection. IrishGuy ^talk 20:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Now we'll see if they take any action, or if they do, whether it's after the alleged sockpuppets have switched him back to the Mets. Thank you! P.S. I'm only watching that page because of User:Ron liebman vandalism. What a nuisance. Baseball Bugs 20:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't pay attention to them, and sometimes they go away. It's only fun when you keep reverting them and they know that it bugs you. Peace.Lsi john 20:35, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I already filed for it. What I don't get is, if these guys are sockpuppets, why aren't they blocked? Baseball Bugs 20:38, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

FYI, at least 2 or 3 other users were already combating this nonsense, I just wondered into it thanks to the Ron Liebman situation. You're probably right, that they're doing it just to be annoying. But they're Mets fans, which might figure into it. >:) Baseball Bugs 20:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Well I suppose that it is arguable that there is no such thing as a good Met's fan. Heh. Peace.Lsi john 20:51, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't quite make that argument. I'm just going on averages. >:) Baseball Bugs 21:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Now that JoeIdaho has been a user long enough, he has resumed posting Mets colors to Casey Stengel. Rather than get into another stupid revert war, I would like to know what the appropriate course of action would be here. Baseball Bugs 17:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Deletion - rocknwrestling.co.uk

Hi IrishGuy, I'd like to question the deletion of an article I wrote recently. Don't worry I'm not here for a childish tirade. The article was called rocknwrestling.co.uk and was about one of my favourite websites. I've met some of the guys behind the site so I know that my inforamtion is accurate in terms of how many visits it's had in it's four month history (several thousand) and I thik the article was concise and well written. Basically I don't understand what a person is supposed to do to emphasise the importance of the subject of an article. When I read articles on companies, organizations or indeed people, I can find nothing that sets the subject matter away form anything else as more important. I explained that rocknwrestling.co.uk has quickly become like a bible to British Wrestling fans, incredibly important to us all, and I feel that it deserves a mention. There is an article on wikipedia about US wrestling journalists Daver Meltzer and RD Reynolds, now I don't know if you are at all interested in wrestling and therefore I shall not demean by assuming you are not and don't know what your talking about in my argument, I wouldn't eb presumptuous as to do this, but even if you are a wrestling fan and just wasn't aware of the website, let me explain that rocknwrestling is as important to British Wrestling fans, as the views of Dave Meltzer and RD Reynolds are to wrestling fans in the US; and to add to this, the site also gets international visits, the coutries now include Germany, Finland, Spain, the Cocos Islands (south pacific) and more. I emplor you to allow the creation of a Wikipedia article on rocknwrestling.co.uk.

Thank you for taking the time to read this message. Please contact me via my email adress (*******@hotmail.com) if you wish to repsond to the message as I chekc that more often than I do my Wikipedia messages.

Yours Sincerely, Michael Chalkley

As noted on your talk page, the article didn't meet the criteria at WP:WEB or WP:NOTE. It was written in an advertisement fashion. It has only been online for a few months and the article was written very promtionally (e.g. "The site has become very popular very quickly"). IrishGuy ^talk 21:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

denzil

why did you delete my article, i was trying to make more pages link to late night talk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denzillacey (talk • contribs)

Please read the guidelines at WP:COI and WP:NOTE. IrishGuy ^talk 00:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

sorry about that Denzillacey 00:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

External_links deletion

Hi Irishguy, I saw that you've deleted a link I've inserted inside the Croatia wiki page. The problem is that my intention was not to make some advertising or so. Croatianet.org is really a nice project and maybe it's the only one where people from all around the world can speak and discuss all about Croatia. The whole project is growing fast and we're working on a daily basis. I thought that was the right place to put such a link. So, once again, there was no such an idea of eg. spam or so. The Community project portal http://www.croatianet.org/community is one of the very few croatian sites where international users may discuss using a multilanguage interface etc....

However thanx for your advice and I've read the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links

Thanx

Interwrite learning

Sorry about that . . . didn't think it was a spam article. (Wow, first time I mistook a spam article as being legit. Most of my mistakes are the other way around.) Anyway, I had moved the page so there's a redirect here: Interwrite learning. -WarthogDemon 19:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, he's been recreating that article under different usernames. Why do people think that Wikipedia will help them sell their products? Crazy.... IrishGuy ^talk 19:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You've probably seen it but a little recently someone was trying to not only recreate their non-notable band articles but attempted to "protect" them as well. And a few days ago I a vandal harassed me saying that I should be blocked for being "unfair" for tagging an nn-band article. And not to mention all the boyfriend/girlfriend articles . . . I may write an essay about boyfriend/girlfriend articles sometime. -WarthogDemon 19:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

My favorite is when they recreate the article and add a "protect" tag...but forget to remove the speedy tag. IrishGuy ^talk 19:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You mean hangon tag? Because this was the first time I saw them recreate with the protect tag. O_o -WarthogDemon 19:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

No, the actual speedy tag. Often they will simply cut and paste without realizing they left the speedy tag on the new article. It happens more often than you would think. IrishGuy ^talk 19:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh yes I've seen that too. :D Anyways, I'll stop taking up talk page space with my curiosity before you need to place a {{subst:uw-chat1}} on mine. Happy editing. :) -WarthogDemon 19:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Yanks-Sox article

I know you're pretty busy, but I was wondering whether you wanted to help a concerted effort to clean up, reference, image, and otherwise spit-shine the Yanks-Sox rivalry article. I'm hoping to get a small cabal of people together for the drive from both sides of the rivalry (and neutrals too to keep things on the up-and-up) and for a GA rating by the end of the season. Interested? I'm personally going to be away from my computer for two weeks starting at the end of this week, but I think it's something that could be within reach.

Oh, and one other thing... it's been bugging me for some time, I wanted to apologize for getting into a spat with you a month or two ago over something relatively simple. I guess it tends to happen to the best (or even, in my case, the mediocre) of us from time to time. - RPIRED 20:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I apologize from my end as well. :)

Sure, I'd be more than happy to pitch in and help shape it up. Do you have a list of ideas? Anything in particular you think needs work? IrishGuy ^talk 20:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the most important thing right now is probably making sure that things are referenced, but we should also try and pare down some of the history section where it's needlessly wordy (probably including parts of the opening two historical background paragraphs in debate now). I like the Key Moments sections but those should probably be reconfigured to some extent too.

It's hard to do since a lot of the relevant pictures aren't ones that can be considered fair use, but we should probably find some pictures somewhere of things like the Dent/Boone homeruns, the Varitek/A-Rod incident, Ortiz's homeruns from '04, the '04 ALCS celebration, and of course older stuff too where it can be found. Not too many images but definitely we need more than we have now (one picture of Babe Ruth) as an illustration of how bitter the rivalry can be. Perhaps some pictures of fans in Yankees Suck t-shirts (and/or anti-Boston shirts, maybe side by side) that can be done by users. We definitely have a lot of good information here and it seems like it's almost enough to be considered GA once we polish it up a tad. I'm gonna go look for more people to help with the project, I'll let you know who I find. - RPIRED 20:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Matthew D Lee

So I can't make that page?

Anyway...what does it take in order to be remarkable enough to have a page on Wikipedia??

Let me know...thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leematthews2242 (talk • contribs)

Please read WP:COI, WP:BIO, and WP:NOTE. IrishGuy ^talk 23:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to Join WikiProject Crime

Would you like to upgrade from an honorary member to a full member of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Criminal Biography? Your work on Danny Greene was greatly appreciated. I feel you would be a great asset to our project.

user:68.88.235.138

IP is a sock of Mariam83 (talk · contribs), whose been hitting a few users hard for about 12 hours. See WP:ANI#Harassment and more disruptions from socks of User:Mariam83 for some more info. Flyguy649 ^talk _contribs 17:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

70.144.10.27 03:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)nah Irish dude, you stop. leave the editing of church history to us folks who are actually educated on the subject. You are obviously very blinded by the 1500 year old cult of Roman Catholicism and can't be objective or neutral on the matter. I'll keep doing my part to educate the public that ends up at Wikipedia searching for factual answers. Have a good day though :o)

Please read WP:CIV and WP:ATTACK. IrishGuy ^talk 03:11, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

ooooo, you scare me so much. Your ignorance is what leads you to be the real vandal. hmmmmm, who's gonna block you for reverting true and scholarly information. It is people such as yourself that makes Wikipedia a joke to the public and academic community. Go read some real history and get your nose away from your computer dude. There's a whole world of real knowledge out there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.144.10.27 (talk • contribs)

National Academic Championship

Please participate in the discussion on the talk page.

tecmo

Great job, again, on Tecmo. A shame he wastes so much of our collective time. I fear him doing it again -- as he has done it twice.

Can you, as an admin, leave a note on the Tecmo page that he has now been found to use both his prior sockpuppet, and now Longlevi as a sock? That would allow future admins to follow all of the sock activity from one spot -- his Tecmo page. Otherwise, the trail is more confusing for the uninitiated I would think.

I hope I am being clear ... long day.

tx.--Epeefleche 23:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Hey, take the weekend off. You've got my permission. I want to mention that I saw there are these auto-linked categories when a "sockpuppet" or "suspected sockpuppet" template is posted. Maybe all of his sockpuppets, including El redactor, Blacksoxfan, and the two IP addresses from way back when, could be tagged uniformly, i.e. with the one currently on Long levi's page. I also created the red-link categories, but I'm not at all sure I did that the appropriate way, but it's a start toward what you're asking for: [1] and [2] Baseball Bugs 23:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Bill Tegner/Millbanks

He is back and in my humblest of opinions trolling every talk page that he visits. Can anything be done about this?--Vintagekits 11:07, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

No, Vintagekits, because I am NOT trolling, neither have I been away. Please give me examples. I thought a troll was a diminutive supernatural being in Scandinavian mythology. Perhaps your definition is a southern Protestant member of Fine Gail who says things you disagree with. And was it you who deleted my words about Sinn Féin's performance in the 2007 elections (drawing from Mark Hennessy of the Irish Times)? Millbanks 22:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Spammer

Here's a red-link user whose only purpose appears to be to post spam links: [3] Baseball Bugs 12:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Mike Mamula

What is the problem with the entry? Do you know anything about philadelphia sports? Or the fact that "Mamula" is with out a doubt, slang that is used? Removing this slang would be like removing the "crap" reference from Thomas Crapper. You would be doing a disservice to pop culture. This is not a joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

You are making unreferenced personal attacks. Please stop. IrishGuy ^talk 20:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

You are a fool. It is actual slang in Philadelphia. You can call WIP Sports talk in Philadelphia and verify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

You need to read WP:CIV and WP:ATTACK. Wikipedia doesn't accept original research nor do we allow personal attacks in articles about people. WP:BLP. IrishGuy ^talk 21:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

How is this a personal attack? If that is the case, then the "crap" reference would be a personal attack against Thomas Crapper. See the post for Izel Jenkins. Another ex-Eagle. His nickname of "toast" is referenced. Again, another valid reference. But I guess you would not know anything about valid sports references since you spend your time as a "hall monitor" on a free website. Not allowing the Mamula reference is ridiculous. I can see your point with the reference to Bill Clinton that was added but this was done out of anger towards you. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the original post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

Using someone's name to describe the act of failing is most assuredly a personal attack. IrishGuy ^talk 20:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Here are valid web references. This shows that the slang Mamula'd is not just Philadelphia slang but sports slang in general. http://galleyslaves.blogspot.com/2006/05/nfl-draft-post-mortem.html and another: http://www.igtc.com/pipermail/celtics/2004-June/001842.html and another: http://www.blackandgold.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-12458.html

I would like to escalate this matter.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

Blogs and forums aren't reliable sources. IrishGuy ^talk 20:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't done: http://www.sptimes.com/2005/04/20/Columns/Avoid_a_lousy_pick_in.shtml

I understand that blogs may not be a valid reference but combine the blogs with the use of Mamula'd on this site and I feel this is sufficient proof of this as a slang word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

Wrong. That article states: A team could get Couched. It could get Mandariched. It could get Mamulaed. It isn't using "Mamulaed" as a slang term for failure, but is instead comparing the article subject to three other players. IrishGuy ^talk 20:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

And what is the article subject, genius? Here is another. How many places do you need to see this used as a word? I didn't make all these posts. You still never said anything about Izel Jenkins.
http://www.geocities.com/philadelphiaeagles2k6/hallofobscurity-mamula.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sox21 (talk • contribs)

Read WP:CIV and WP:ATTACK before continuing. Should you continue being incivil, I will simply delete further comments by you.

One again, the article didn't in any way use "Mamula" as a word describing failure. It reported on McCants being a draft bust and then went on to name three other draft disappointments...one of which was Mamula. That is a very different thing than the personal attack you continue to add to that article. Fan sites, blogs, and forums aren't reliable sources and are therefore completely irrelevant. IrishGuy ^talk 21:05, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The Point Article

I would like to find out why my page was deleted. I neither work for the Depot or have any business relationship with the venue, yet this was you claim for deleting my post. Please respond with an appropriate answer soon or I will make a complaint to Wikipedia of your actions,

Regards, Robmark23 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

The article was an advertisement for a venue and as such was deleted. Please don't make threats. IrishGuy ^talk 23:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I wasn’t making threats, I was asking a legitimate question why my article was deleted. My post didn’t include any advertisement of up and coming shows or ticket prices or box office locations. It included a brief introduction to the venue, it's capacity, previous events and official links. What else am I supposed to provide for an encyclopedia site? I wanted to edit this page over time and while searching for information this evening I came across another page covering the Point Theatre. Aside from quantity between the pages, what was the difference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

It isn't quantity, it is quality. There must be some level of notability. IrishGuy ^talk 00:06, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

True, but you had it deleted by within a few minutes of posting. I am writing it from scratch and I wanted to add to it over the next few hours. Every page has to start somewhere. Also, as someone with no connection to the PD, apart from having attended concerts there, how could I be advertising it? Surly I am simply sharing information as I noticed there was no link for it when I accessed the Unholy Alliance Tour page? Please let me know why you didn’t give me a chance to update this page, which you must have clearly noticed I was doing when I reactivated the page just after you had deleted it and added to it. Regards, Robert — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

People constantly recreate deleted pages without adding anything new. Recreation doesn't denote improvement. Additionally, one doesn't necessarily have to be affiliated with something to advertise it. Bands play in venues. A single venue isn't notable simply because bands played there. It must have something to set it apart like CBGB for instance. IrishGuy ^talk 00:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I am afraid I completely disagree with that. I am simply interested in music. The bands, the artwork, the people and the venues. When bands i like go on tour I like to know the sort of venues they play as it gives me an insight into the popularity of the band the record sales often mislead you on. I have been attending concerts in the Point since I was eight years old and i is one of my favorites venues so I wanted to honor that love I feel for the place and give it a page. I am glad I found another more detailed page already in place as it means I have something to edit. I trust you will have no problem with me adding any information I can to that page?
I think you need to have a serious think about what you feel should be displayed on the pages of this site and what the people reading them think.
Regards,
Robert

I would also like to point out that I have no affiliation with any band currently (much to my own regret, I work in an office :(— Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, as such the article must be notable and illustrate importance. This isn't a fan site. IrishGuy ^talk 00:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

But this is a site dedicated to information. Are you saying that you cant write about something factually that you are passionate about. I am also very passionate about Greek and Roman studies. If I edit an article of Plato or Rome’s fall will you delete that because I am a 'fan' of it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

Actually, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. As for the rest of your comment, I feel no need to respond to straw men. IrishGuy ^talk 00:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well if that’s how you argue then what can I say. I think you'll find you haven’t given proper evidence for deleting my article, the most obvious being 'there was already a page for the subject'. I’m afraid with people like you in the world it is hard to be passionate about anything, because it gets in the way of protocol.
Have a good night, I'm sure this site is alot poorer for your actions over the years
Robert — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

Possibly it makes you feel important and superior to make petty personal attacks...possibly you simply refuse to read what I have written. Your article illustrated no level of notability. None. It was an advertisement for a venue that didn't outline any degree of importance. The other article you allude to, Point Theatre, does in fact illustrate importance. Therein lies the difference. IrishGuy ^talk 00:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, but if you had given me five minutes chance to update the page before deleting it maybe it could have grown into a page that contained importance, what else but a general overview do you expect from an INTRODUCTION. With regards to your comment "Possibly it makes you feel important and superior to make petty personal attacks", the 'attack' in question is merely an observation I have made to the way you carry out your duties on this site. Lets not forget, I’m not the one deleting peoples pages within minutes of them being created. Do you think these pages are written up straight go? I wanted to put something up straight away as I could not see a dedicated page, my mistake I'll admit but you could have given that as a reason in the first place instead of this advertising rubbish you keep harping on about.
I created this site to add to its information, instead I get deleted and my points mocked (Straw Man Argument)by one of its administrators within minutes of starting. User Friendly yes— Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

So the comment I'm sure this site is alot poorer for your actions over the years isn't rude or mocking? The article met the speedy deletion criteria. You simply recreated it identically each time with nothing new added. Why should I assume that given time it would magically illustrate importance? You were immediately rude to me (Please respond with an appropriate answer soon or I will make a complaint to Wikipedia of your actions) and now have the temerity to claim I wasn't patient enough with you? Nice. IrishGuy ^talk 01:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I did not intend to sound rude (for the complaint comment), I simply wanted to understand your decision. In your first comment you made no mention to an identical site, you simply dismissed it as advertising (Blatant if I recall). If you had said deleted due to Duplicate work then that would have been reasonable.
I still disagree with the manner you dealt with this complaint but there’s not a lot I can do about it. I'm just glad you didn’t dealt my other posts of the evening.
As for the comment about the site being poorer, well, for my own benefit, I’ll wait and see how your judgment goes on other posts.
Rob — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmark23 (talk • contribs)

Sonim Technologies Article

I am inquiring about your deletion of the Sonim Technologies article. This company is one of the few producers of VoIP, Push to talk mobile phones. A wikipedia page about a mobile phone manufacturer is not advertising. If it is advertising, you need to delete the pages for Nokia, LG, blackberry, etc. Please correct your mistake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arponline (talk • contribs)

There was no mistake. The article was a blatant advertisment. IrishGuy ^talk 00:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Timmy on Tires

Actually, he was a vandal so I think he should have been {{Vandalblock}}ed. Cheers, JetLover ^(talk) 22:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

He was impersonating WoW in name and actions. As such, either way he would get a hardblock. :) IrishGuy ^talk 22:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

62.195.104.135

Well done blocking User:62.195.104.135. I've got another vandal IP that should get blocked, which I reported on WP:AIV. NHRHS2010 ^Talk 23:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: User:XAndreWx

User:XAndreWx, to whom you placed a 3RR block on, subsequently had it removed by User:Evilclown93 (also known as User:Maxim) who removed the block on User:Giggy's request has gone on to follow the exact same pattarn of behaviour - at least six times since he was unblocked.

I have raised another WP:3RR over here User:XAndreWx reported by User:Sprigot

Furthermore I believe that he has also resorted to sock puppeteering - and have raised a sock puppet notification over here Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/XAndreWx‎

I look forward to your response regarding the flagrant attitude to your original block for 3RR on XAndreWx's part.

Sprigot 10:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Reggie Jackson color dispute

Irish guy, there is a huge dispute over colors on Reggie Jackson's page. Two users, Pascak and Joeidaho (who is suspected as a sockpuppet) have been changing the colors on Reggie Jackson's and Casey Stengel's pages off the Yankee colors (they appear to hate the Yankees). On July 19th, during a huge edit war, they both reverted the colors twice, hinting that they were doing that to avoid the 3RR rule [4]. If you can discipline them or warn them you will discipline them, then, by all means do so. They need to be stopped. Thanks for your time Soxrock 17:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Is This Vandalism?

So I found a non-notable independent record company on here: Open Mind Productions and I start putting it up for afd. I prepare to warn the user and stop. Acting on a sudden hunch I checked the user's contributions and then at the history and realized that a music artist trying to promote himself changed the article from this: [5] to this [6]. Is this considered vandalism? -WarthogDemon 20:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, blanking an existing article and rewriting it with non-notable promotional material is vandalism. IrishGuy ^talk 20:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I gave the person an appropriate warning. Thanks! -WarthogDemon 21:04, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Liberalform.org

I'll thank you to stop deleting my page. I did everything I could to bring the entry into compliance with Wikipedia's terms, if you're not happy with that then kindly tell me what information I can include that would allow me to fulfill your terms. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Archangel M (talk • contribs).

Again, please be specific about what it is you want in the entry. I included a link to the former owner's web site, which if you bother to click the link would tell you what you need to know about the man, as well as the fact that the site was until very recently at or near the top of Google's ranking list. Surely that is a significant piece of information. This is ridiculous. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Archangel M (talk • contribs).

Please read WP:CIV and WP:ATTACK before making any more edits like this. Your talk page is filled with links to the criteria for notability and inclusion. Please read them. IrishGuy ^talk 20:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Minstral article deletion

Hi Irishguy,

I just spent two hours putting together a page on the band Minstral, only to have it deleted a second later. Please explain why you deleted it.

Thank you

Revirvlodlaku — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revirvlkodlaku (talk • contribs)

It was an article about a band that outlined no level of importance or notability. Please read WP:BAND for inclusion criteria. IrishGuy ^talk 22:16, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Yankees/Red sox

That doesn't even makes sense. You could said that to anyone who disagrees with contoversial topics. You obviously have a vested interest in this bias. This article is clearly biased, there is no ifs and or buts about it. It's not just me, several people have brought up objections. And thats what makes it a POV issue! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xxdrkthreatxx (talk • contribs)

Actually, you complained then you simply logged out and posted again as an IP to make it appear there were more people angered. Again, the article is referenced. IrishGuy ^talk 22:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

That's not true at all! So on top of biased editing you hurl selacious accusations my way. First I complained, then I decided to log in and add the POV banner. And so what if it's referenced; there are all kinds of false information from biased sources on the internet. That quote uses weasel words to denigrate the great city of New York. Who cares Im not even gonna fight this anymore who cares about Boston. They're yesterdays news. John Kerry and Ben Affleck that's all I have to say. You can have Wikipedia. Good Day Sir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xxdrkthreatxx (talk • contribs)

So you claim the article is biased against New York...and then you write a tirade about how much you hate Boston and it's natives? Ironic... IrishGuy ^talk 00:20, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Muscling in on this one... the complaining user did not cite any specific items on the talk page. Posting a "this article is biased" and then disappearing is, in my opinion, deserving of reversion. As far as "yesterday's news", apparently he hasn't checked the standings lately. The Yankees are as far back of the Red Sox as the Twins are behind the Tigers. And the Twins are definitely "yesterday's news" as far as this season is concerned. Baseball Bugs 00:24, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of The Game (the game)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Game (the game). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. – drw25 (talk) 22:48, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I've seen articles about The Catch, The Shot, etc. I'm wondering what one game in all the history of sports could possibly be singled out as The Game. Baseball Bugs 23:20, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

This one. It's rather silly, to be honest. IrishGuy ^talk 23:21, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

"Silly" covers it, yep. Baseball Bugs 23:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Socks?

That one account definitely bears watching. I just think it's risky to openly accuse someone, as SoxRocks did, without compelling evidence. It is kind of funny that he was only on for a day, like maybe "testing the waters". But there was an obvious sockpuppet that turned up the next day, a 75... subnet that belongs to Verizon Wireless and whose edit pattern and comments were definitely Tecmo, and I posted just such a notice on that page. We'll see. One thing to be aware of is one comment by Mondegreen on the notice page that hinted that she was in an e-mail discussion with Tecmo. She needs to be aware of the risks of "editing by proxy". However, she does so little actual editing that she doesn't get in the way. Baseball Bugs 00:08, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: deletion of Green Cars Now

Hi. I created an article about a company that addresses the green cars movement. The article describes a brief synopsis of what the company does, the uniqueness of their strategy (a broad approach, rather than narrow and specific), refers to current prominent highlights about the green cars (US Legislation) movement with full references.

I thought this article would meet CSD G11 as it deals with the subject of the green cars cause, the company Green Cars Now and provides information on current prominent issues. If you could elaborate on how CSD G11 is violated I would appreciate it.

I looked over WP:SPAM#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles which mentions the need for a neurtal point of view. The article is about a company and more than half the article is about the green car movement it seeks to advocate. Was the last paragraph of the article the most offensive? Should I empasize the subject it advocates rather than specific services it provides?

Thanks,

Paul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pfezziwig (talk • contribs)

The article was written with sentences like: Green Cars Now counters this traditional arguement by promoting a broader solution to cleaner more efficient running cars and oil independence by advocating many smaller components as a solution and Green Cars Now provides resources in the form of articles, latest news headlines and a discussion forum on the increasingly numerous and complex components of the green car movement. which are clearly promotional in nature. Even the three references were about the enviromental cause and not the organization itself. Nothing in the article outlines any level of importance or notability. IrishGuy ^talk 01:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible to write an article on a company and it not be promotional? The statement alone is a contridiction, writing about a company is promotion. Can you provide me with edititorial guidlines on how to write an article on a company without promoting it? Thanks.

Would you suggest I write about the green car movement based on proponents for and against it? Rather than focusing on a company devoted to it's advocacy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pfezziwig (talk • contribs)

Writing about your own websites is promotional. It is a clear conflict of interest. IrishGuy ^talk 18:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest

I suspected that might come up. It depends if you believe that the fact I'm aware of the speedy deletion because I am related to the author is a conflict of interest. It's not really the deletion I have issue with, rather the mechanism. I wouldn't vote on an AfD, as I believe there would be conflict of interest there, but I do believe that the article deserves undeletion and an immediate nomination to AfD rather than the speedy deletion that it got. I would, of course, accept any community consensus on the article but it seems to me that, despite the closing comment, the result of the last AfD discussion was not a clear consensus. – drw25 (talk) 08:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

When an article has undergone multiple AfDs and it deleted as failing WP:OR, WP:RS, etc. it shouldn't be recreated without having some substantial improvements. This article didn't. At all. There is no valid reason for a deletion review. As you haven't edited in days, why was your first edit to contest the deletion? IrishGuy ^talk 10:21, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

re: Deletion of Healthcare Reviews

Hi. I have been reviewing Wiki guidelines and editing formats in an attempt to make a correct entry like Healthcare Reviews , can you supply some details why this article doesn't conform to wiki policies and differs from standard company entries that are not multimillion dollar companies. Does Wiki primarily want large business entries and no small business entries?

Would you recommend I write about patient safety concerns and the problem with healthcare providors policing themselves rather than a company advocating patient feedback and safety? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pfezziwig (talk • contribs)

In this edit you admit that it is your own website you are writing about. That is a clear conflict of interest. The article itself was a blatant advertisement with lines like: Fortunetely it’s now very easy for patients to submit online feedback through HealthcareReviews.com. Your only other edits have been to add your websites to other articles ([7] [8]). Wikipedia is not a venue to advertise your websites. IrishGuy ^talk 18:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Braindead

Yeah sorry about the copy vio -I forgot to rewrite it! I have rewritten it anyway - I guess I was braindead for a few seconds there! it should be ok now ♦ Dr. Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 19:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

shadow oak magic

is it illegal to write about the basketball team i play for?WeAreMagicWiki 23:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Illegal, no. :)

You shouldn't write about something you are associated with as that is a conflict of interest. Additionally, the article made no claims of notability or importance. IrishGuy ^talk 23:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Lemon (Game)

It was not patent nonsense in any sense of the way explainexd on Wikipedia:Patent nonsense, it was just an article about a game played with pen and paper, fine, delete it, but give me a viable reason as to why, please? As well, it should be noted that if you delete someone's article, it should be moved to that person's "talk" page KitsuneDragonRA 00:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there are no guidelines at all that state I should move a deleted article to a talk page. The article was nonsense with no meaningful content. IrishGuy ^talk 00:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Right, what do you mean in 'meaningful content'? As long as the subject behind the article exists, does that not give the article meaning, the game is real, therefore the article had perfect meaning.KitsuneDragonRA 00:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Meaningful doesn't mean "takes place in reality". I ate some cookies earlier...that fact doesn't deserve an article. Subjects must have notability and importance. IrishGuy ^talk 01:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the clarification, and for admitting that it was not "Patent nonsense", you can delete it if you so wish, but it was not "made up in school one day" just to clarify...KitsuneDragonRA 01:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

At what point did I say it wasn't patent nonsense? It was and remains so. IrishGuy ^talk 02:22, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I assume that you are finding it as the second definition of PN: "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 do not believe it is so irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever... I mean... if you read my article straight through you can understand the game, so it is, therefore, not Patent Nonsense

Deletion of BigBand Networks article

Hi Irishguy,

I just started working on the BigBand Networks article and got the notice that it was previously deleted due to lack of significance. Would you please elaborate why? The company is a $1B company traded in NASDAQ under the BBND ticker, not to mention being innovators of several technologies that revolutionized video delivery (that last sentence sounds like some marketing promotion, yet the company did revolutionize video delivery for Verizon, Time Warner Cable, Cox, CableVision, Comcast etc...). I have worked on several articles for companies in the same space, most being a tenth of the size of BBND yet they did not get deleted.

Thanks in advance.

Tal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MajorT (talk • contribs)

The article was a single sentence. It didn't assert importance or notability. IrishGuy ^talk 22:11, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Irishguy,

I just pressed save in the middle (ok, beginning) of my work (and I do understand that a single sentence does not an article make). I just want to make sure that if I invest in this article a few days it will not be deleted again (providing the article itself is any good).

Thanks,

Tal.

MajorT 11:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Minstral article deletion

Ok, that's fair enough. I wonder, do you still have that article somewhere in your database, or is it lost forever? If you still have it, would you mind emailing it to me at xxxxxxxxx@hotmail.com ? Thanks. Revirvlkodlaku — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revirvlkodlaku (talk • contribs)

Link problems

I am trying to install a valid link to the Gomery Commission of inquiry. The original links are now invalid. The link I am trying to install is: http://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/206/301/pco-bcp/commissions/sponsorship-ef/06-02-10/www.gomery.ca/en/phase1report/default.htm Upon completion and after testing, the link is redirected to: http://www.collectionscanada.ca/000/007/000007-404-003008.html This redirection does not link to the document. What Is wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncaron.ca (talk • contribs)

Apparently they redesigned the website and moved all the documents to new URLs. Were you looking for this and this? IrishGuy ^talk 22:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Please ban this guy

You gave this dude: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/209.121.69.16 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:209.121.69.16 a final warning, yet he totally continues to vandalize pages. I am just a casual user, yet every single day I see pages that are vandalized. This fucking idiot thinks he is being cute, but that shows what an antisocial person he really is. Ban this dude please! Leondegrance