Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:36, 8 March 2010

Archives

no archives yet (create)

This page has archives. Sections older than 6 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

DYK for Congregation Beth Israel (Vancouver)

On March 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Congregation Beth Israel (Vancouver), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Ucucha 18:11, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Jayjg 02:04, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Query

Hi Jayjg; SV suggested on my talk that you might be a good set of eyes for this question. Thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:48, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure! Jayjg 02:55, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Centre stick vs side-stick

why nothing of info saved to center stick and side-stick ? (Idot (talk) 01:27, 5 March 2010 (UTC))

Because the AfD consensus was to delete it. Jayjg 03:41, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

it was not a consensus it was simple majority for deleting! even more some people explained thtat before deleting info should be move to other two artilces + you are the one who said that it should be deleted so you can't be fair when you tell the results of discussion, 'coz you are just have interwest on it (Idot (talk) 00:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC))

check voices carefully and be fair:

7 people (Jayjg, Ahunt, Reyk, MilborneOne, Nick-D, Dave, Pcap, Armbrust ) just said detele without explanation what should be done wityh content

for saving info:

5 people (Rlandmann TomStar81 BilCat Satori Son) said delete but save info

1 people (ErikHaugen) just said "it should be broken up into two articles or renamed"

1 people (Fnlayson) said "Merge any useful content to existing Side-stick and Yoke (aircraft) articles "

5 people (Colonel Warden, Idot, A Nobody, Dream Focus, Hepcat65) people said keep

so totally we have 12 people who said that the content should be saved

which is more than 7 - who didn't say anything 'bout saving (Idot (talk) 01:06, 6 March 2010 (UTC))

• will you save? (Idot (talk) 01:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC))

I was not stating my own opinion, but summarizing the consensus of the policy and guideline based arguments. That consensus of those arguments was to delete the article. Is there specific material from it that you wanted to preserve? Jayjg 01:53, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

advantages and drawbacks, as both Centre stick and side-stick articles are really small and need to be expanded (Idot (talk) 01:07, 8 March 2010 (UTC))

Were you planning to use the material to create, say, comparison sections in the articles, along the lines of "centre stick vs. side stick"? Jayjg 04:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

First Bulgarian Empire

I'm not sure if there is anymore that can be said(or done) concerning the lead for this article. I recently posted that both sides needed to find a compromise and work towards that and Athenean's response(concerning the Turkic origin of the Bulgars) was, "That is still not a compelling argument for not including it.", and the discussion devolved from there. So what is the next step? I'd imagine it is only a matter of time until the edit warring starts back up. --Kansas Bear (talk) 01:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

The edit-warring seems to have abated for the past week. I've read through the RFC on the Talk: page, and it appears that people are at least still bringing sources and making arguments. Please let me know if the edit-wars start again, and I'll take appropriate action. Jayjg 03:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Albuquerque move

I thought it was agreed that the name would not change. For reasons, see Talk:Albuquerque#Move proposal Postoak (talk) 04:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Interesting. I've responded there. This is Misplaced Pages, not the Associated Press. Jayjg 04:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Awesome (window manager)

Hi, Jayjg. You closed the deletion discussion for Awesome (window manager). Since then an additional source covering it was found in LinuxUser (it was not mentioned during the discussion). Do you think it would be enough to undelete the article? If so, please leave a note here or at the requests for undeletion page. -- MagV (talk) 13:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I think this is really the kind of thing you should take to WP:DRV. Jayjg 02:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

FAC review ?

Interested? Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Hurva Synagogue/archive1. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:56, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I guess a missed a step somewhere ? Doesn't sound good ... ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Possible problem

This individual has went through removing Constantinople along with supporting references from numerous articles. I've posted two warnings on this person's talk page, but judging from the volume of deleted sources, I would say this will mean nothing. Could you keep an eye on this person? Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I've dropped a note on his Talk: page. Jayjg 19:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Catskill synagogues

You're welcome! I have probably a couple more pics of synagogues in Sullivan County to convert into articles (there are a bunch on the Register, and they've added a few more in the last couple of months), but that won't be for a while.

I'm sort of amused, as a Gentile, that I've been the one to do this. Interestingly enough, that picture of B'nai Israel was taken on Rosh Hashanah of that year (that's why the door's open) and I began writing Hebrew Congregation of Mountaindale Synagogue last year when I was in Jerusalem during Passover. Is there any mitzvah value to that? Daniel Case (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

If you liked those articles, take a look at the other Catskill synagogues listed on the NRHP that I've done:

• Ulster Heights Synagogue (only one whose founders were primarily farmers, not farmers-turned-hoteliers)
• Spring Glen Synagogue
• Ohave Shalom Synagogue (neat interior art that I someday hope to photograph)
• South Fallsburg Hebrew Association Synagogue (full sukkah in basement)
• Anshei Glen Wild Synagogue (has never had its own rabbi)

Daniel Case (talk) 19:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The Only Exception

Hi Jayjg,
for some reason I have The Only Exception (song) on my watchlist, and checked it on Friday following the recreation. Seeing that since the AfD, it has now been released and charted on a national chart, I found that it would require a new AfD – changed circumstances like this are usually enough of an improvement with regard to WP:NSONGS to get a song article past G4. There are also several sources covering the song itself these days (1 2 3), in my opinion even enough to get it out of the "probably notable" gray area of WP:NSONGS and make it explicitly pass that guideline.
Would you please undelete it, and revert to the 18:37, 6 March 2010 version?
Thanks, Amalthea 18:20, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The AfD closed 5 weeks ago, and the DRV closed less than a week ago. Both of the conclusions were to delete (or keep deleted). I would recommend respecting that detailed deletion process and review, letting the article rest for a few weeks, and perhaps trying again in April. Jayjg 18:58, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I am aware of that. And I quote: " with no prejudice against a recreation in the future if the WP:NSONG criteria are met."
You show considerable prejudice if you base deletion on the deletion review. For the reasons I mentioned above, I am convinced the WP:NSONGS requirements have been met. The "song must have charted" criterion may only be a litmus test, but taken together with two quite detailed MTV articles I am convinced it would pass a new AfD. In any case, the article has certainly been improved enough to get it past speedy deletion. Amalthea 19:11, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Amalthea, the DRV completed less than a week ago, and the commenters there were quite explicit in their view that it did not satisfy WP:NSONG. Elen of the Roads cited NSONG in her comment:

Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article.... Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. Given that this song has not been released yet, it would appear that the above cannot apply. No objection to recreating the article when the single gets into the Top Ten.

Exactly which national chart did it chart on, and at what position? Jayjg 19:20, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

It charted on #23 on the New Zealand chart, according to acharts.us it's been on that chart for two weeks already.
I don't see why it should matter one bit whether the last discussion was one hour or one year ago if the situation has sufficiently changed in the meantime to moot the previous concerns. If the article came to an AfD at this point, without any history, it would quite certainly be kept. Why should the baggage it has force it into a four week hiatus? I myself know neither song nor artist, and don't care about the article per se, but judging by the recreations of several editors during the last weeks, it's certainly going to be recreated another dozen times (at The Only Exception (Paramore song) or wherever else) in the next weeks.
We constantly ask folks creating song articles that the songs either need to chart on a significant chart, or that there needs to be very significant coverage in reliable sources before standalone articles can be seriously considered. Telling them now that "well, it does all that, but now you also have to wait an arbitrary time since the last discussion" only blurs that line, and doesn't help enforcing that community position. I wouldn't mind if you opened up a new AfD straight away, but I'm convinced that a G4 was wrong in this case, both from a strict policy point of view and from a pedagogical point of view. Amalthea 19:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not an expert in these matters, but 23rd on a chart in New Zealand (currently 123rd on the list of countries by population) doesn't seem to meet WP:NSONG. I recommend having this reviewed at WP:DRV, if you feel strongly about it. Jayjg 20:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Article - IronE Singleton

Hi Jayjg,
I just created IronE Singleton's page and just discovered you deleted it. I am a fan of his work and he has been getting a lot of press lately, due to the success of The Blind Side being up for an Oscar tonight for Best Picture. Could you please explain how this article can be reinstated for those of us who is fans of his work? You can view his portion in the trailer of The Blind Side at His performance begins at the 1:40 mark. Thanks! FilmnMusiCritic 23:58, 7 March 2010
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Filmnmusicritic (talk • contribs)

Hi Filmnmusicritic. The IronE Singleton article was deleted as a result of this discussion: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/IronE Singleton. If you want to contest that deletion, or request that it be overturned, you need to make an argument for that at WP:DRV, the Deletion Review page. Jayjg 05:06, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jayjg, Thank you so much for the information. I started the contest and I have provided the updated information that will prove that he was in The Blind Side, which was the main discussion on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/IronE Singleton. Thank you once again!Filmnmusicritic —Preceding undated comment added 05:45, 8 March 2010 (UTC).

On WP:RS

Hi I would like to say something about your comments on the radical website kavkaz center on the wp:rs page. Please note that nobody believes the website isn't extremist in nature. The only rule for inclusion is to publish statements from rebel leaders / commanders which is something all tabloids do. For anything other than that the website has never been regarded a reliable source on wikipedia. The persons who post about it on wp:rs have the intention to remove all references to the site, playing onto the sentiment of people like you who do not like the extremist nature of the website. Well Neither do I or anyone else who has quoted the site, we've only used it with utmost scrutiny. I hope you understand. Grey Fox (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)