User talk:BlinkingBlimey/Archives/2008/January

Gelare

Good call marking Gelare for deletion, but two tips:

- you typed "dp-spam" instead of "db-spam", so it didn't work. It's worth clicking "Show preview" after you make an edit, to be sure it's done what you intended, before clicking "Save page".

- after you put on a db template, what appears on the page includes another template for you to copy off onto the originator's talk page. That's useful, both to let him know and to provide a record - in this case, the user page shows a spam warning I put on earlier, showing that this page has been re-created once. That's useful information for anyone dealing with any further re-creations. JohnCD (talk) 16:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Just seen your note on the originator's page - the reason my tag was gone was that the page had actually been deleted and the originator recreated it. If you're suspicious about previous deletion, you can tell by clicking "view logs" at the top left of an article's history page.

Welcome to the Recent Changes patrol... I hope I'm not telling you things you know already. JohnCD (talk) 16:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Just a note on deletion tags

I just noticed your edits to Carey Barnes - although you were right to restore the deletion tag when the original author removed it, they'd missed part of the "hangon" tag on the version you reverted to, so it didn't show. Just to be fair to them, if they've put a "hangon" tag on, make sure that both your deletion tag and their "hangon" tag are retained in the current version. Happy editing! MorganaFiolett (talk) 17:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gaffer, also can you review the different speedy criteria at WP:SPEEDY, the db reason you left for Kojongie; No evidence that Kojongies exist, isn't a speedy deletion criteria. You may wish to propose the deletion of the page via our WP:PROD or WP:AFD procedures instead. Thanks, Marasmusine (talk) 17:41, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

January 2008

Oh sorry. That'll teach me to go so fast when I'm tagging. LOL. My apologies. Redfarmer (talk) 23:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Success University

Hi. I just wanted to notify you that your article, Success University, has been tagged for speedy deletion. If you would like to keep this article, put the hangon template on the page if you would like to. Thanks, and contact me for further help. =) Meldshal42_{Comments and Suggestions}^{My Contributions} 00:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm the one who tagged the article for speedy deletion!!! Gaffertape (talk) 00:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

It was just a test, I forgot about the sandbox...

My mistake —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barisaxophone (talk • contribs) 01:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you please stop deleting y pages? Get a life and stop getting in mine! Zantoz (talk) 02:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

FYI

I see that you noticed the misplaced comment/personal attack left by Zantoz (talk · contribs) on your user page. Since you had a empty user page before he left the comment, I have deleted your user page. If you want it back, I can undelete it for you. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Re your message: Getting your user page vandalized unfortunately goes with the territory when you revert vandals as you can see from my user page history. You might want to put something in your user page yourself so that a vandal doesn't get the first edit on your page. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 02:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Beau Riche

Hi there - just a quick note. db-bio covers online content, so adding db-web to the above page could be a bit of overkill! Regards. Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 18:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Noted. Thanks Gaffertape (talk) 18:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Adopted

You have been. :) My classroom is where I'll keep your assignments. Drop a line on my talk page and let me know what you're interested in here at WP. Lara❤Love 18:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Your assignments can be found in my adoptee classroom. The assignment you have now will help you learn about WP:RS, WP:OR, WP:V and WP:CONSENSUS. If you get an assignment that isn't of interest to you, let me know and I'll change it up. I want this to be a positive experience for you and I'm a firm believer that no one should have to participate in areas they don't care to. Lara❤Love 03:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Doofer

Hi. I play "Doofer" regularly. I think the issue might be the name - it's probably called different names in different places - Doofer is what we call it. Running through the rummy variations, I could not spot a match (8 cards and 14 rounds) so I added it. As for references, well you can ask my mother-in-law! She loves the game! --Faylawnsett (talk) 16:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Oxford wine society

Just so you know -- you left a notice on my talk page about the speedy deletion of the "Oxford University wine society", but I have had nothing to do with creating that page, as you can see from examining my contribution page. "Edfitz" was indeed my user name, but I had it changed to "Ed Fitzgerald" quite a long time ago (I'd have to look up exactly when) -- so the person who created that page and who is pushing for its retention is not me.

I've deleted the redirects that I put in place back when I changed my user name, so that the User page and the User talk page for "Edfitz" no longer redirect to my page. You might want to repost your notice to that page. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk/cont) 17:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I've apologised on your user talk page. I should have noticed the redirect. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 17:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:OUTCOMES

Actually, OUTCOMES does also say that councillors of major metropolitan cities tend to survive AFD; you missed the part before the (a). Of course, precedent isn't invariably binding, meaning that they can still be deleted — which is why I didn't !vote. Bearcat (talk) 18:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Colum O'Shea

Sorry about that I actually thought that was the sandbox area. i.e. it wasn't permanent.

Only just set up an account.

Feel free to delete, and i apologise again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dublaw (talk • contribs) 21:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Userfy

I userfied this page, User:Qgf2591. It's much nicer, and does no harm. Bearian (talk) 23:48, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

London Meetup - January 12, 2008

Hi! There's going to be a London Wikipedia Meetup coming Saturday January 12, 2008. If you are interested in coming along take part in the discussion over a Wikipedia:Meetup/London7. The discussion is going on until tomorrow evening and the official location and time will be published at the same page late Thursday or early Friday. Hope to see you Saturday, Poeloq (talk) 01:33, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Rossi

Please restrain from editing this entry further. If you have a constructive criticism, please email me. Laz6789 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laz6789 (talk • contribs) 18:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I will if you stop vandalising it! Gaffertape (talk) 18:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

By what right do you feel you can term my edits as "meaningless" and then delete them? These are valid secondary and primary sources referring to the name Rossi. Have you taken the time to read any of these posts? If you disagree with the format, that is one thing, and I am willing to edit the information in a format we both agree on. But at least take the time to read the information and then make a decision. I am sending the edits to Sandbox --19:06, 6 January 2008 (UTC)Laz6789 (talk)

There are no primary sources, you are copying excerpts from secondary sources that do not add value to the article. Just because a text contains the phrase 'Rossi' does not mean it should be on Wikipedia. Gaffertape (talk) 19:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your response and please excuse my ignorance of the rules, which I should have taken time to learn. I was quick to temper as I have been working on this new interpretation of the history of the surname for many years. The research has been painstaking until recently when Google began digitizing and giving access to many older books. More original Latin and Greek translations will be coming soon but this is problematic for me as I do not speak either language. I will do my best to adhere to the rules and please feel free to offer constructive criticism. This is new knowledge and I must make sure the supporting data is without reproach.--Laz6789 (talk) 20:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I would assume I could entitle a main entry as say "Varangian Rossi" under the appropriate category with text and proper citations and so forth. I could also then place same under the See Also: category under Rossi and or make an internal link to the new entry.

--Laz6789 (talk) 19:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Wilf Lunn

Vitaminsinpease: You seen to have just deleted some editing I had done with reference to my father - I'm not sure why. Everything in the revision was true, none of it salacious and he would really appreciate it as he has likes a laugh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitaminsinpeas (talk • contribs) 16:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Scott Stenzel

Skrogysten says: I am reworking Scott Stenzel page to be less spam and more wikipedia friendly it is my first time writing and i just want to make it sound good. I did not know copy and pasting information from his press kit would get him removed. How does he get back online and approved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skrogysten (talk • contribs) 03:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Valgold

jstuart says: Give me a second, I am trying to work through and edit it down to make it sutiable, but your intantatenous objections caused wiki to kill all my work. surely you could at least give me the chance to finish and let me edit it. Please let me get through this, I have been trying to edit and save on an ongoing basis and all of my hard wrought work for a few hours was wiped out. Just let it be for e few days, I have to re-do everythign and don't have time.

Karun Workers' Organization

You seem to be obsessed with deleting articles that you deem to be unworthy of your editing greatness. The article gained notability (albeit arguably) when I linked the article to a KWO webpage. I asked on the talk page to have a little more time to add "credibility". I guess I should have edited the "speedy deletion" box. However, you seem bent on deleting the article. I guess I shouldn't have expected too much from a londoner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kwousa (talk • contribs) 23:42, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not obsessed with deleting your article, it just happens that I've noticed it being created and have tagged it. It's an admin who reviews the article and makes the decision. Could I suggest you read WP:N? You might also like to put together an article in your user space before putting it on to the main site. I'm more than happy to help with formatting and reference advice. I'm afraid I don't understand your comment about me being a Londoner, could you explain? BlinkingBlimey (talk) 23:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I've decided to not have a Wikipedia page on this organization, as I have created a webpage for it. It was just getting a little annoying that editors wouldn't leave the article alone for even one day to give me a chance to add to it. That's all. As for you being a Londoner, it was just a reference to the sterotype of Londoners as being obsessive and perfectionistic with regard to literary pursuits.

Kwousa (talk) 21:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Scott Stenzel

Regarding Scott Stenzel you have removed the content from wikipedia even though there is clearly national news coverage for this particular entry. This is the second attempt and all content was written to wiki's specs as well as another member approved of the content and did not have is speedy deleted. What needs to be done for this I am becoming impatient. Here is the national news source link to prove the article's validity: http://www.arcaracing.com/content/view/5999/2/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skrogysten (talk • contribs) 06:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Scott stenzel has also competed in a fully professional league (arca re/max series) thus giving him notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skrogysten (talk • contribs) 07:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, for what are you impatient? If I nominated the article for deletion before it would have been because it did not prove notability of the subject, it would have been an admin who reviewed the nomination and performed the actual deletion. This would have been because the article was some way from achieving the required standards and references to verify any assertions in there could not be easily found. I apologise if I offended you in doing that, I can only ask that you assume good faith and hope that any offence I have caused has not put you off contributing to Wikipedia. As far as I can see the article is on now Wikipedia. It certainly seems to prove notability. Congratuations! BlinkingBlimey (talk) 10:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Saffron Walden Conservatives

Thanks for tagging, but I'm afraid this is not even close to speediable (maybe it was when you placed the tag). If you're still unconvinced, AfD is thattaway if you like :-) . --Dweller (talk) 14:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD is the way I will go, though I'm not sure how it fails speedy. There are no verified claims, I've not been able to find sources in Google (search, news or books). It's just political spam. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 14:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you're confusing Speedy issues with AfD ones. There are different bars. In the documentation at WP:SPEEDY, you'll find the following under criterion A7: "No indication of importance/significance. An article about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from questions of notability, verifiability and reliability of sources." So, the important thing is assertion of importance, not verifiability. --Dweller (talk) 14:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Its not actually, we are going to put our history on here ect. The current article is a shell, it has information attached to it that relates to our local area. Political spam would be us taking pot0shots at other partys ect. We are explaining who we are, the current political makeups of the area ect.

http://www.google.com/search?q=saffron+walden+conservatives&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8

We are all over google if you cared to look.

Our history will contain a lot of relevant information in terms of political history and our example of a straong local political association.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Saffronwaldenconservatives (talk • contribs)

Exclude URLs like saffronwaldenconservatives.com and conservatives.com and then tell me you are all over Google. I did look, I did try and establish notability. I couldn't and that's why I went to AfD. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 14:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

But those are our websites!

You cannot refer to your own publications (of any type) to establish notability. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 16:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Hello,

I wonder why you identified my message as per the pronunciation of surname Sharapova as vandalism?

I don't agree with your correction. What is "normally"? The norm is what is correct.--Atitarev (talk) 22:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are on about. I did revert some vandalism see here, but that reverted to your version. I think you've got the wrong guy - I've not touched any of your edits. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 22:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

My sincere apologies for the confusion! --Atitarev (talk) 23:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Cristina Eustace

BlinkingBlimey,

Don't fully understand why you tagged this page as having no references or sources. I referenced the only statement that could realistically be referenced. Could you please provide some insight on what you think should be additionally referenced. As for the source, what would you like me to source?

Thanks.

Mawuacito(talk)

Then that is a problem. If you read WP:N, WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC you will see that to meet Wikipedia's notability standards you need to be able to point to significant coverage in secondary sources, for example, you should be able to point to coverage in the subject in national media. References should be used to back up the claims that are in the article - as it stands anyone reading the article cannot verify anything in it. WP:V will give you more information on this. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 18:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)