User talk:JohnCD

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Unites (talk | contribs) at 16:01, 18 July 2008 (→‎RIG/Andrew Roberts/Stefan Roberts). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Messages before 1 Mar 08 are in Archive 1
Messages for March and April 08 are in Archive 2

May 2008

EBay hoax

I have protected your version until after the auction ends, at which point I will delete it. Thanks, Black Kite 23:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Speedy Category Proposal

I thrown in my two cents on your proposal for a new speedy category. Again, I think it's a good idea and at the very worst, you've at least put the thought into people's minds. Good luck! Tnxman307 (talk) 23:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

about poo2nty

i'm sorry that you think this is inappropriate.. but you don't know everything. it's true. please keep it on. i beg you mercy man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Collinson (talk • contribs) 14:32, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this is your life isn't it? wanna meet? ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Collinson (talk • contribs) 14:37, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • At least I have better things to do than make up nonsense articles. JohnCD (talk) 14:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undertow (webcomic)

I added the TWC and buzzcomic ranking, in both cases it is among the top 100, so this would seems notable enough.Wandalstouring (talk) 13:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK, agreed - I tagged it because, as it was, it looked just like a hundred other self-promoting entries for new web-sites. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: User talk:SpecialRightTriangle‎ (attack warning)

Question, if I look at SpecialRightTriangle‎ (talk · contribs) I don't see the edit that you are talking about in your attack warning on his user page. According to his user contributions, he as only made one edit to Tom Hanks. What is the scoop? IP4240207xx (talk) 22:23, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The attack was in the page Mr parsons which was deleted; once a page has been deleted, edits to it no longer appear in the user contribution record, though admins can still see them. JohnCD (talk) 08:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The vampric editor and Patrick Flanagin

I see Yes, two more. Did not see a block notice and confused one of the more recent socks with that one. User:The Limit Is Me and User:Lampireslayer69 appear to be socks of User:Lampireslayer666. This has been deleted 5 times now. I think I'll protect Patrick Flanagin, as blocking seems ineffectual. Thanks for your help. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 16:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Socks blocked and page protected. Thanks again. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 16:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello John CD —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marquiseyancy (talk • contribs) 16:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism

Hi JohnCD. Sorry to meddle with your talk page, but I guess you didn't quite like all these slaughtered cat pictures lying around :) Greetings, Bakabaka (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not at all, thanks, feel free to remove dead cats from my premises any time! I'm glad we've got that one blocked, even if only for 24 hrs, and his friend seems to have given up after uw-4. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi just

put only official charts!!!!

go acharts.us...you will see violet hill —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.93.170 (talk) 15:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks!

RfA: Many thanks
Many thanks for your participation in my recent request for adminship. I am impressed by the amount of thought that goes into people's contribution to the RfA process, and humbled that so many have chosen to trust me with this new responsibility. I step into this new role cautiously, but will do my very best to live up to your kind words and expectations, and to further the project of the encyclopedia. Again, thank you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 06:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

marrsball (speedy deletion)

sorry about that. Its actually got nothing to do with me at all. Someone mentioned it to me and I couldn't find i on wikipedia. So i thought i'd add a couple of lines. Didn't realise it was a problem. My bad.

But yeah, deletion is cool if its a problem.

Splooj (talk) 13:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Epicaricacy was not a content fork

Articles on distinct but related topics may well contain a significant amount of information in common with one another. This does not make either of the two articles a content fork. As an example, clearly Joséphine de Beauharnais will contain a significant amount of information also in Napoleon I of France, this does not make it a fork.

— Wikipedia:CFORK#Related articles

Idiot.151.197.116.67 (talk) 01:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:NPP

thanks for the advice regarding speedy deletions.I'll be sure to check ou the links you gave me. Mr. GreenHit Me UpUserboxes 15:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles

Should I go ahead and nominate the articles for speedy deletion? Since I'm the original author of them and want to have the articles deleted on good faith? (Also, to protect the "reputation" of the places named in the articles) T.W. (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Normally, the way to ask for your own article to be deleted is to blank it and put {{db-author}}, but in this case, since others have edited the article and the AfD debate is under way, I'm not sure that would be right. I suggest you leave each article, and the AfD notice, as they are, but right at the top add {{db-author}} and just under that {{comment|principal author requests deletion - see AfD debate}}. Then the admin who looks at it can see what's going on and decide what to do. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I've done just as you suggested. I hope this helps and I'm trully sorry about the whole situation and the confusion of it. I'm just deeply hurt at the hoax accusations most of all, and would rather have the articles deleted completely than their truth being questioned like that. Thanks again! T.W. (talk) 18:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 20:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


West Midlands Barbershop Harmony Club

I was trying to raise people's awareness, for thousands of people in the UK would be interested in Barbershop but there are no clubs listed with their own articles on here. I was planning to do this. If you give me chance, you will see that I am writing basic knowledge on clubs in the UK, just like their are on American Clubs.

Quite ironic, that you delete mine, but let Vocal Majority spread propaganda about theirs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barberman12 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Articles have to meet Wikipedia's requirements, particularly: is the subject of enough general interest for an encyclopedia article? That is summed up in the word notability, and the requirements are explained in the guidelines Notability and Notability (music). Notice also that references are needed from independent reliable sources, and that if you are a member of the club you should be aware of the guidelines on Conflict of Interest. If you take all that into account, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to produce an acceptable article about the British barbershop scene. The guide to writing Your First Article is helpful. As regards Vocal Majority, their article seems to me to meet notability requirements, but anyway, read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Local artists

I would like to write about some local Hampton Roads artists. I'm not having any luck uploading images to these pages. Can you give me help?Donwatsonart (talk) 19:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The first thing to realise is that Wikipedia does not accept articles about anyone or anything: subjects have to be of enough general interest for an encyclopedia article. The Wikipedia term for that is notability, and the requirements are explained in the Notability guideline and in more detailed ones such as Notability (people). The next thing that many new contributors have difficulty with is that Wikipedia does not publish original work - everything must be backed up by references from independent, reliable sources. The guide to writing Your First Article is a good source of advice, and so is The Five Pillars of Wikipedia. I would also recommend looking at some existing biographies of artists, to get a feel for what other people have done; if you look at WP:FA and WP:GA, the lists of "Featured Articles" and "Good Articles", for biographies you should find something to go on. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have just now read your question again and see that it was about uploading images. I hope all the well-meant advice above will be useful, but for images see WP:IMAGE and WP:UPIMAGE. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 19:56, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Yes, I wans't quite sure how I was to do it (I saw User_talk:androo123) so I thought you had to put User_stub. Thank you for correcting my error. Androo123 (talk) 22:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

San Francisco Music Box

I am writing for more details regarding why the San Francisco music box page that was deleted. I am new to Wikipedia and as this is my first post I am not sure why it was deleted. The San Francisco Music Box company was founded in San Francisco in 1978. The water globes and music boxes the company carries are traditions and treasures that Americans still love to collect and purchase today. There is a lot of history involved in the company and many people across the United States still hold great interest in these items. If I have in some way misrepresented the information please indicate so. My attempt was to simply explain the history and story behind how the SF music box company was started and where and how the company still functions today, 30 years later.

I do not understand how this is blatant advertising and that of J.Crew and hundreds of other vendors that are shown in the encyclopedia are not?

Please advise, thank you.

Sfmusicbx (talk) 14:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • (reply on his user page)

June 2008

Seapals

Hi! I was the one who made the Seapals things(if you search seapals). I really don't understand why it should be deleted. Just like they wrote about webkinz(which are virtual pets and made by Ganz) why can't I write about Seapals? If I have done anything wrong please tell me and I'll make sure to fix it!

Cpwkw (talk) 15:00, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • For something to have an article in Wikipedia it has to be of enough general interest to be worth an encyclopedia article. The Wikipedia term for that is notability, and it's explained in the article Notability and more detailed ones such as Notability (people) for biographies and Notability (web) for web-sites. The best test is whether other people have written about something - that gives independent sources. My opinion was that Seapals weren't notable enough, but that's only my opinion - an administrator would have to look at the article and agree before it was deleted. You did the right thing by putting a {{hangon}} tag (it should have been in curly brackets, but I've corrected that for you). Now put your reasons for keeping the page on the article's talk page. You can point to the "webkinz" article as a comparison, though I should warn you that What about that other article? isn't always accepted as a defence. The best way to improve the article would be to find some independent reference to Seapets, not just the company's web-site, and add that as a reference. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, okay.Thanks for explaining anyways! Cpwkw (talk) 16:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other SeaPal articles for reference other than the company's website:

Virtual World News: http://www.virtualworldsnews.com/2008/06/russ-berrie-q1.html Virtual Pet Insider: http://www.virtualpetinsider.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=44:seapals-games-available-at-launch&catid=11:seapals&Itemid=38 Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/feb/17/virtual-toys-online-friends-the-latest-trend/ Digg: http://digg.com/odd_stuff/Sea_Pals_by_Russ Toy Directory Monthly: http://www.toydirectory.com/monthly/newtoys/slideshow.asp?product_id=17814&company_id=0&category_id=55 Plushie Magazine / Beckett: http://www.beckett.com/plushiepalsforum/default.aspx?g=posts&t=1705312

Not to mention the number of Ebay auctions for the product, and other online stores that sell the product. I think there is enough buzz out there to make this a valid wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.152.124.116 (talk) 02:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, the Washington Times and Virtual World News ones look fine - create the article again with references and you should have no problems. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Haunts (band)

I can't decide on Haunts (band) either. They dont have a major single, but "some" feable press coverage. --Triwbe (talk) 15:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It claims major radio coverage, Not CSD. I would tag it and leave it for now. --Triwbe (talk) 16:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I agree, not speedy material. JohnCD (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My talkpage

Thanks for replying to that editor. If you'll notice, I did tag for speedy deletion another article he/she had created. That may have been the reason for the posts on my page. I still believe the articles which were created are original research, so if they somehow end up at AfD, let me know and I'll give my $.02 there as well. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 21:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I just removed the post directly above mine, as it appeared to be vandalism. Let me know if you would like it put back. TN‑X-Man 21:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

tray-hoyt-sheeler theory/durating

Thank you for your speedy responce you may delete the theory if you wish I understand that you dont publish orional work and I do want you to know that once we are published and have reputible verifiable sources we will be back ready to post our theory on the website. Also with the deletion of the page on the word durating this is a word we are trying to coin becasue we made this word to stand for somthing in our theory durating=moving across the axis of time. We do thank you thought, and understasnd the problem with the creation of the page on our theory. As I said before we will be back and with sources and verifiable references.

  • No problem. The article will disappear in five days, or sooner if you like to put {{db-author}} at the top (double curly brackets) which means "author requests deletion". You are welcome to bring it back when you have references - read the guidelines on Reliable sources and (for "durating") on Articles on neologisms. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Deletion

Done. But I don't know how to sort them together so I just put them all in AfD. Cheers! Chimeric Glider (talk) 19:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reference

I put a reference on Fire magick will you see if it is Good enough? thanks a lot. --Condalence( 16:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't really know - depends whether "www.spellsandmagic.com" is considered a reliable source. I am not Authority - just another editor who sometimes does New Page Patrol looking at incoming articles. I am rather doubtful about this series of articles you seem to be starting which are little more than dictionary definitions of different colours of magic with almost no information, and I was thinking of nominating them all for deletion with the suggestion that unless there was more to say they should be notes in a general article on magic. Do you expect to find enough sourced information to make proper encyclopedia articles of them? (See WP:STUB for the minimum standards expected). There is a WikiProject Neopaganism - why not consult them and see what they think. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes,of course i'm going to find information on these. I'm going to try to get other Wikipedians to help improve it. How long do i have to improve them. I still have researh to do. I'll see about the wikiproject neopaganism. I'll do my best. Thanks a lot. --Condalence( 16:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I was going to do is create a few articles to see how it goes. If they get deleted then i'm going to go ahead and put all of them in Wikipedia's requested articles. I'm just trying to improve. --Condalence( 16:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's generally best to wait to put an article in until you have enough material to make it clear it's going to be a worthwhile article; that reduces the risk of its getting speedily deleted, as is likely to happen if you put in a basically empty article in the hope that someone else will improve it. You can prepare the material off-line in a word-processor, or make yourself a user page (you can create one by typing "User:Condalence/workpage", or whatever title you like, in the search box) and work on the article in that until it's ready to go. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All right i'll do that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Condalence (talk • contribs) 17:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Sunshine Getaway

Not Advised are a similar band and have a wikipedia site, could you tell me why they have not been "speedily deleted" and we have been tagged. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Camster5000 (talk • contribs) 09:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SellingCR

Hi, I'm troubled by the speedy deletion tag added to the SellingCR article i'm in the process of creating at the moment. I'm working on a company profile about a company that my cousine started to help promote costa rica and provide real estate information. I don't understand why this is different then the NuComm International article I started before or articles on business such as eBay. Granted eBay is much larger it should be allowed on the same basis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lhalbert (talk • contribs) 20:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a business listing directory or a vehicle for any kind of promotion. Articles have to be of enough general interest for an encyclopedia article: the Wikipedia term for that is notability, and the requirements are explained in the guideline on Notability and in more detail in Notability (organizations and companies). Articles need to be verifiable from independent, reliable sources - a company's own website does not count as independent - and such independent references are the best way to demonstrate notability. There is also the point that articles must be written from a neutral point of view, and so people are strongly discouraged from writing about themselves or their own companies, because of the conflict of interest involved. For more advice, read carefully the Business' FAQ, in particular the sections headed:

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob mccauley

Hi, I removed the speedy tag from Jacob mccauley because it did assert some notability (won an award in 2008). You might want to prod this or send it to AfD. Karanacs (talk) 20:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Double A

Hi. You recently deleted a page that I had posted about a company called Double A Kebab. While I am unsure of the reasons for the deletion of this page, I am even more intrigued as to why wiki pages about companies such as 'Pukka Pies' are allowed?

I hope that you can be of some assistance in helping me understand the reasons for the deletion of this page.

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldsnodden (talk • contribs) 10:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • See my answer to a similar question under "Selling CR", two items up in this talk page. The Pukka Pies article cites a number of independent references; but see also the guideline What about article x?. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:50, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Jol tyler elizalde

A tag has been placed on Jol tyler elizalde requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. -Toon05 11:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I didn't actually create that - I userfied it to his user page with a note explaining about notability, and tagged the resulting redirect db-r2; then he came back and restored it. It should go, anyway. JohnCD (talk) 11:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, well that message was generates automatically by twinkle... I haven't really followed what has gone on here, but I apologise if this was sent to the wrong talk page! -Toon05 17:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

why?

Thats my name! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sthuf (talk • contribs) 18:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Riviera Nayarit

I was posting some information about Riviera Maya, but in a confusion, I created an article called Riviera Nayarit (both are mexican traditional beaches). That's why I erased the erroneus information that I've posted earlier for Riviera Nayarit! --MBO2008 (talk) 19:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the understanding. Bitdefuser (talk) 15:58, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

July 2008

Symphony Membership Page

Whoever you are, your comments do not reflect the opinions of the Omaha Symphony Musicians or the Omaha Symphony Association. You do not have the privilege to represent this magnificent orchestra in any capacity that I know of. While your inflamatory statements may be corroborated by published reports, the only sentence relevant to our beloved musicians is the first one. The balance of your "facts" have nothing to do with membership.

Your negative comments are a disservice to the hardworking musicians and staff. Take your personal opinions and grind that axe somewhere more relevant. Remember, the world can see your personal opnions and comments and that is the opinion they will form about our orchestra. I am reporting your disrespectful comments to the Symphony staff all the musicians that I know and will urge them to do whatever necessary to stop your negative representation of our musicians. Shame on you.--Phnole86 (talk) 19:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The comments you are trying to remove from the article are not mine, they are those of the Omaha World-Herald, here, correctly cited. Further reply and warning on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 19:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • These are reflections of your personal opinion and have no place here. Think of what you are doing to our musicians!!--Phnole86 (talk) 20:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • They are not my opinions, they are statements quoted, accurately, from the Omaha World-Herald. I have no opinions about the Omaha Symphony Orchestra, and had nothing to do with the article, as you can see from the edit history, until I saw you start to delete bits of it with no explanation. If you have valid reasons for wanting to change the article, I suggest you explain them, with your sources, on the article's talk page and try to reach agreement with other editors, because if you continue the sort of edits you have been making - unexplained deletions and alteration of figures - you will be blocked from editing. JohnCD (talk) 20:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Omaha Symphony

You will be one of the reasons why the Omaha Symphony fails. --Phnole86 (talk) 00:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey JohnCD, quick note to say "thanks" for taking this on. I will interject with more citations and material late today, and attempt to address the various issues this anon IP has presented. • Freechild'sup? 14:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be glad to let someone with local knowledge and interest get involved - I know absolutely nothing about it, I just saw an unexplained deletion flash by on Recent Changes and followed that up. JohnCD (talk) 21:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial Communications Centre

Hello there,

I have got a message for my article that it would be speedly deleted from wikipedia.

First of all, I am not promoting anything and I only want to inform people of the next generation of Internet.

Second of all, my company is CCC UK LIMITED and the title that I choosed for my article is not the company name neither a product name.

Therefore, I would highly appreciate if you could leave my article to be on wikipedia.

Best Regards,

Arash —Preceding unsigned comment added by CCCUKLTD (talk • contribs) 16:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What you can do if you object to speedy deletion is to put {{hangon}} on the article just below the db tag, and put your reasons on the article's talk page. To help you, I have done that for you - now an administrator will read what you have written before he decides. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notification tag

I removed the notification because I added the tag on the article and had already added the notification on the user's talk page. --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (Talk!/Cont.) 21:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - there were edit conflicts going on and she was past final warning anyway - I reported her to AIV and she's been blocked 31 hours and both article titles salted. JohnCD (talk) 22:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good job! --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (Talk!/Cont.) 22:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken.

I do think I can get my point across with help. I am a first time submitter, and to Wikki's guidelines I am sure the arcticle was poorly written, no sources cited, and out of step as far as how I layed it out.

Clinton Strange --ClintonStrange (talk) 19:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The problem is that what you have is an original idea, and encyclopedias aren't in the business of publishing original ideas. No Original Research is one of Wikipedia's three key content policies. (The other two are Verifiability and Neutral Point of View). So I'm afraid Wikipedia is not the place for what you are trying to do.
A tip about layout - don't leave leading spaces at the beginning of a line, that's what makes it go all funny. It's worth using the "Show Preview" button to see if you've got an edit right, then you can change it if need be before finally clicking "Save page". Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never been accused of that before :)

I had an original thought. Thanks. Perhaps a dictionary is where I need to take this...

--ClintonStrange (talk) 20:11, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, you have another problem - there isn't any English "language authority" who could change the language for you - unlike the Spanish "Royal Academy" who purport to control that language, though I think they are generally fighting a rearguard action against Spanglish rather than proposing changes. In English somebody, I forget who, said "any noun can be verbed", and I think if you say to your clients "you're over-detergenting" they would know exactly what you mean. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kinross services

I notice you have marked the Kinross services page for deletion. I would encourage you to investigate the pages of a number of other UK motorway service areas as shown in the Moto Hospitality template at the bottom of the Kinross services page. Others have added pages about other Moto service areas in the UK and for the sake of completeness I believe that the handful of missing services areas should also be included. If you feel that Kinross is not notable then neither are any of the other service areas already present on Wikipedia.

I strongly feel that if a list of motorway services is on Wikipedia in the first place then it should be a comprehensive list. For this reason I would encourage you to undo whatever actions you have taken to delete this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nau03144 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You ask me to "undo whatever actions you have taken to delete this article"; if you look at the PROD template you'll see that anyone, including you, can remove it if you "object to its deletion for any reason". So you are fully entitled to remove the PROD. I would then probably take the article to AfD, and we could see what the community thinks. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see where you are coming from on this. I have read the articles you have linked to previously. Thank you for bringing these things to my attention - as you know I'm pretty new to this. It does strike me that under these guidelines there must be vast quantities of non-notable pages on Wikipedia.

However, even after reading the relevant information, I would still be disappointed to see Kinross services removed from Wikipedia in this manner. Letting this one article slip away without further discussion would not achieve a great deal. I feel that the question of the notability of individual motorway service stations is wider than just this one article and consideration should be given to their notability as a whole. In your eyes they are not notable, in mine I would consider them to be notable enough to merit inclusion. I know it's the All or Nothing argument that we are advised to avoid, but it certainly appears to this Wiki-newbie that unless you are willing to challenge the notability of this entire category then you would be achieving very little by removing a single article.

As a slight aside, I feel that it would be essential that someone judging the merits or otherwise of this article should be from the UK. I have no idea what nationality you are as your user page gives little away, but since the English language is widely used elsewhere in the world there is a distinct likelihood that you are not British. If that were true, then I would suggest that perhaps you may not be a suitable person to judge the notability of individual motorway service areas. If you are British, then this point is utterly irrelevant! Nau03144 (talk) 04:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your very reasonable response. I had already decided that, although you had not removed my PROD from the article, I would remove it myself because PRODs are meant to be for uncontroversial deletions, and you had raised an objection. So I have done that; I am undecided whether to take it to AfD, and will think about it while I am away for a couple of days and let you know. PS - I am indeed a Brit, all too familiar with motorway services, have used Kinross, and before I retired was a regular for breakfast at Membury Welcome Break. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome messages etc.

Hi. I've recently become more involved in new page patrolling, which has meant a dramatic increase in the number of (hopefully correct) prods and CSD's I'm flagging. I've come across a fair few situations where my "I've flagged something as yours to be deleted" message is the first thing on their talk page and, thinking about it, this seems a bit harsh for new editors. Are there any standard welcome message templates I should be putting there first before dropping the bombshell ? CultureDrone (talk) 09:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) CultureDrone (talk) 10:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THEN CAN U TAKE THE EDIT PART OFF —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.140.212.195 (talk) 16:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Ritter

10th time is a charm. Salted. Thanks for the heads up. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 19:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Perfect Apathy

Hey...why is my music project "My Perfect Apathy" not wikipedia worthy? -michael sandefer --message originally place on user page by Apexigod (talk · contribs) 17:17, 9 July 2008

My Perfect Apathy

Well, it has notability now. I'll be adding more to it in a little while...and honestly, you are telling me that since I made my own my perfect apathy page and not say....a buddy of mine..you are going to delete it?

That is absolutely ridiculous. I may not be famous, or have a record on a national chart YET...but I've made history, appeared on national radio broadcasts and had articles written about my music.

so technically, I belong here. Mike-C (talk) 00:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)apexigod[reply]

Welcome Break

John,

I wondered if you would mind having a look at the Welcome Break article and giving me a little feedback on it. I have substantially modified it over the last few days and as I'm new to this game I hoped maybe you could let me know how I'm doing. It was a very poor article before, I hope I've brought the standard up a little bit.

Thanks. Nau03144 (talk) 03:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RIG/Andrew Roberts/Stefan Roberts

Hi JohnCD, thank you for your feedback and your offer to take the articles to AFD. While I am regularly contributing to Wikipedia, I have very little experience with the deletion and AFD processes. Therefore, if the articles gets contested before tomorrow's deadline, I will take you up on your offer.

If this is going to be a confirmed hoax, it was a rather good one. I am still not sure myself if someone put a lot of effort into it, or if it is just poor citations.

Again - thank you for your offer. HagenUK (talk) 07:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for moving this on to AFD for me. I was looking through the policy, but it read like a japanese manual to the uninitiated ;-)
HagenUK (talk) 20:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your help! It is greatly appreciated! HagenUK (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL!!!!

OOOPS, i forgot signiture.... @@@@, ooops! Unites 15:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC) (Unites 15:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)) not @@@@!!! LOL!

I can't be arsed (oops, asked) reading all them professional articles about rules of Wikipedia!! too long, make it nice and simple, not 6 billion words!!! oops that's the population of the world!!

Unites 16:01, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JohnCD&oldid=226467101"