Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:25, 19 November 2013

Intro

Procedure

This is my talk page. Please add new messages to the bottom of the page, Please sign all msgs with four tildes (like this ~~~~). Click here to start a new topic. DES 03:48, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

I will generally preserve all comments, positive or negative, and archive them when the page gets too large. But I may choose to delete vandalism or nonsense. I would generally prefer that other editors not remove anything from my talk page. Thank you for communicating with me. DES 03:48, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Any removals of content from my talk page may be reverted by rollback with or without notice. DES _{DESiegel Contribs} 14:11, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I may respond on your talk page, or under your comment here. If i respond here I will notify you with a {{talkback}} template, or a ping, or both, unless you have asked me not to, or have asked editors in general not to so notify you (as some editors do). DES 21:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

If I have left a comment on your talk page, or on an article talk page, you may respond where i left the comment, or here. If you respond where i left the comment, to keep the thread together, dropping me a note or placing a {{talkback}} or {{tb}} template on this page, or pinging me by including {{U|DESiegel}} in a signed talk page comment will probably mean that I see your comment and respond sooner. Please consider doing so. DES 00:23, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Please do not edit the header template (User:DESiegel/TPHdr) used to display these header sections of the talk page unless there is a problem with it -- that template is not a good place to leave messages for me. DES 21:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Archives

• Archive 1 My talk page from 10 Feb 2005 thru 6 Sept 2005.
• Archive 2 My talk page from 6 Sept 2005 thru 19 Dec 2005.
• Archive 3 My talk page from 20 Dec 2005 thru 10 Feb 2006.
• Archive 4 My talk page from 21 Feb 2006 thru 21 Apr 2007.
• Archive 5 My talk page from 22 Apr 2007 thru 31 May 2007.
• Archive 6 My Talk page, June 2007 archived while I was absent.
• Archive 7 My Talk page, July 2007 archived while I was absent.
• Archive 8 My Talk page August 2007 through 21 January 2010
• Archive 9 My Talk page 21 January 2010 through 21 March 2010
• Archive 10 My Talk page 23 March 2010 through September 2012
• Archive 11 My Talk page October 2012 through March 2015
• Archive 12 My Talk page April through June 2015
• Archive 13 My Talk page July 2015 through December 2016
• Archive 14 My Talk page February 2017 through February 2018

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello DESiegel, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  --Flockmeal 20:21, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Hi there. My wiki interest is editing food pages and you'll see I edit and improve mostly food pages in my time on wiki. I'm currently in a discussion with you and others in relation to the page foodporn. I'd like you to kindly investigate users Hogohit and Praxidicae. An investigation of Special:Contributions/Hogohit proves this is merely a vandalism account (as they just created this account 2 days ago with the sole purpose of deleting/vandalising foodporn and 'food porn'. Further, if you look at Special:Contributions/Praxidicae, this user just makes wholesale edits, speedy deletion requests, and deletes whole slabs of edits and content on multiple pages without any kind of justification or rationale. This is not helpful for new users trying to learn how to be a wiki editor. I think both users should be perma banned for vandalism. Thanks for your time. PS: apologies my 'wiki speak' still needs some work. I'm learning as I go :)

More opinions for Bob Corker requested edit

As you were involved in fulfilling an edit request in the past for the Bob Corker article, I was wondering if you had the time to leave an opinion in this talk page section, as i've trying to suss out a consensus. Silverseren 03:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

McKinsey

Hi DES. I noticed the time investment and thoroughness of your request edit reviews are substantially above average. I thought I would bring this one to your attention as a particularly challenging and complex topic where your experience would be of value.

It’s one of those issues where anything could be said depending on which sources you use and which points-of-view or facts are chosen for inclusion – and where there are a lot of bias and conflicting sources - definitely a challenge for any editor.

Your feedback, if you choose to provide it, would be welcomed. Corporate 23:54, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Just to let you know

You have been mentioned at Misplaced Pages:Missing Wikipedians Ottawahitech (talk) 16:09, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Fire sprinkler (disambiguation)

Fire sprinkler (disambiguation), a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Fire sprinkler (disambiguation) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Fire sprinkler (disambiguation) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Shadowjams (talk) 11:42, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

GA Thanks

This user helped promote Judith Krug to good article status.

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, thanks for your editorial contributions to Judith Krug, which has recently become a WP:GA.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Misplaced Pages:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Resilient Barnstar
	Appreciate you help on Master of Homeland Security. FabianB3 (talk) 18:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reviewing and editing my page "Thomas and Mary Poynton". Thanks also from the 30 13 year olds in my class who did the research and prepared the material for this project.

Kind Regards Beth BethKub (talk) 21:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Glad to see you back

Welcome back DES. Best regards. Δρ.Κ.  22:08, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi DES There seems to be some doubt about whether or not you are actually reviewing my page. I asked the teahouse about how long the review is and they said that the reviewer (you?) had tagged the page as for review without actually reviewing. They also said they were detagging it. Can you please tell me if you were actually reviewing my page because now I have been waiting and watching for 11 days since you tagged it for review and I'm feeling really disappointed to be going backwards. Thanks BethKub (talk) 21:11, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Review or no review?

Hi DES There seems to be some doubt about whether or not you are actually reviewing my page. I asked the teahouse about how long the review is and they said that the reviewer (you?) had tagged the page as for review without actually reviewing. They also said they were detagging it. Can you please tell me if you were actually reviewing my page because now I have been waiting and watching for 11 days since you tagged it for review and I'm feeling really disappointed to be going backwards. Thanks BethKub (talk) 21:12, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

I apologize. I started a review, and was checking sources. i found it took more time than i had estimated, and got caught up on off-wink matters, always intending to return and finish the review "real soon now". I should have untagged. I hiope soemnone else review this page promptly. If it is still unreviewed when i next have time to do reviews, i will do it in a single session, unless you indicate an objection to that. DES 22:14, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, it has been taken care of. Beth — Preceding unsigned comment added by BethKub (talk • contribs) 23:42, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Suggested merge

I suggested a merge of the Signers section of the new article with Mayflower Compact article on the Mayflower Compact Talk Page. I trust that is what you meant. I do not understand this though I have read it many times! If this is not what you wish, please do not hesitate to let me know. Thanks. Mugginsx (talk) 17:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

sounds good, let's execute

If you get a page in user space, I will put some content in...you can add/modify. You can then move it. (I think plomping on top of the redirect is the best bet. Leave the dab alone as a few Halons are not technically BFCs.

article

Bromofluorocarbons (BFCs) are molecules based on carbon, bromine, and fluorine. The most common use has traditionally been in fire suppression systems. The brand name "Halon" is frequently used interchangeably for BFCs. However not all Halons are technically BFCs (some contain chlorine also).

BFCs attack the ozone layer even more aggressively than chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Nevertheless, BFCs are still used in many ships and aircraft, because replacements are not as effective.. As production of BFCs was banned by the Montreal Protocol, remaining use depends on old inventories and on recycling.

BFCs are extremely inert. In a fire, in addition to physically excluding oxygen, the molecules liberate bromine radicals which interfere with combustion reactions. BFCs tend to have higher melting and boiling points than fully comparable fully fluorinated molecules.

References

{{reflist}}

category: organic chemicals category: ozone depletion

See User:DESiegel/drafts/Bromofluorocarbons

I moved it to article space. Thanks man.71.127.137.171 (talk) 17:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

	The collaborator award
	For Help Desk work. TCO (talk)

Disambiguation link notification for October 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Convention card, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ACBL (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Resolution?

Are this and this edits a good solution to those mirror articles? Is ok to remove the templates in place that way? Osplace 15:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, turning a duplicate article into a redirect to the previously existing article is a good idea. It also means that any additional data that may have been in the duplicates is still available in the history for merging into the main articles. Anyone except the article creator can remove speedy deletion tags if the issue has been solved or if they have good reason to think that the tag was inappropriate in the first place. Removing those tags in a case like this was fine. Good job. DES 15:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help in this case. We, the WikiVolleyball Project members are thankful for your help. Osplace 15:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Notability vb

Hey, there is not a volleyball notability guide. I have been working with volleyball and beach volleyball articles from ancient times and is urgently needed. Please check my draft and please please please tell me how can we add this content to Misplaced Pages:Notability (sports). Osplace 15:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Sports pages are not mostly my thing, so I am less experienced in that realm than other editors might be. That said, I would suggest that you move your suggested draft onto a page of its own (such as User:Osplace/Volleyball notability), and then start a discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Notability (sports), linking to your draft, and see what the response is. Try to discuss calmly for best results. DES 16:17, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

You might ask your other project members to commetn on the draft first. DES 16:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Page restore request: User:Finalius/Guitar Legends Greatest Hits

I would like to request the recreation of a user subpage. It was an innocent diversion (fictional setlist for fictional music video game) that I would like restored for my own personal reference. I want to copy the contents of it onto a Word document, for nostalgia. Is it possible to restore this page?
Thank you, regardless.
(page title: User:Finalius/Guitar Legends Greatest Hits)

Finalius (gibberings) 17:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Restored. Note that the page was actually at User:2D Backfire Master/Guitar Legends Greatest Hits but i have moved it to User:Finalius/Guitar Legends Greatest Hits. Note that it said that content had been copied. Please re-mark for deletion after you have again copied the content, as this does not appear to be a legit draft article, unless I have misunderstood. DES 17:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks a bunch!! Finalius (gibberings) 18:14, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Naqvi Orientation

I have decided to take this to WP:Articles for deletion/Naqvi Orientation because it is clear that your PROD is going to be contested, after deletion if not before - the author is arguing against deletion on the talk page, and has already posted twice at WP:REFUND. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 09:54, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, JohnCD. Frankly I expected the author to remove the prod before this. I expect a snow delete. DES 12:47, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

???

What's making you think that StarryGrandma (talk · contribs) is responsible for this edit???? Someguy1221 (talk) 22:41, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

An error in going back through the history, (SG first added the section to which the edit was incorrectly attached at first. I have self-reverted, and now apologize. DES 22:42, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Haha, no apology necessary. For a second I thought i was going insane, and wondering what you saw that I didn't. Someguy1221 (talk) 22:44, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Ramtha's School of Enlightenment

Hi there DES! I thought I'd leave you a message here because my comment on the Help desk page isn't on the main page anymore.

Yes, my draft is here: User:Calstarry/Ramtha's School draft. Did you have a chance to read it? Calstarry (talk) 20:56, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

PDIU and many others

Hi DES! I want an opinion on an issue I consider as serious. I know I should be going to the Incident Board regarding any article which needs special attention, but this is not about just an article.
I have been working mainly (actually almost) only on articles related to Albania. More than once it happened that I come in conflict with a Greek editor, Alexikoua (talk · contribs). Hi continuously changes, reverts and add material to Albanian related articles, giving references which are Greek and in Greek language. The result is that all that hows up regarding Albania in Wiki contains a pro-Greek touch in it, and try to imply the axiom that "Greek people" are being persecuted, and Albanians are the persecutors. The articles contain not only incorrect information, but even irritating.
Just query the number of "Albania" related articles, and how many he/she has edited out of those, and you get the picture. Similar behaviors from his friend Athenean (talk · contribs). My feeling is it is the same person, but I have no way to prove it.
The last incident concerns the article PDIU. The main discussion is related to a Legal Act that the party in the article proposed, as always it goes in disfavor of Greek interests and here Alexikoua comes into action. The result is that the article, instead of showing what the party stands for, did or does, talks how the Greek-Albanians have been oppressed during the Communist Era. We have opened a discussion in the article's talk page, useless, somehow he/she feels that has the right to apply the last edit.
How to deal with this?
Thanks! Mondiad (talk) 00:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

If you develop a clear consensus on the article's talk page, and an editor edits in defiance of that consensus, and refuses to stop after you point this out to him and attempt discussion, you can go to WP:ANI for assistance. Or there are other relevant notice boards depending on the exact issues. There is also dispute resolution. But in each case the start should be clear, calm (on your part) discussion in which you abide by the WP:AGF and WP:NPA policies, and attempt to develop a WP:Consensus. Disputes over ethnic identies and culture clashes can be among the most contentious on Misplaced Pages -- I mostly steer clear of them. I hope this is of some assistance. DES 00:58, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback (from Schneile)

Hello, DES. I left you a detailed message on Oct. 11 on my User talk:schneile page regarding your question of whether the Willis Resilience Expedition is Notable and providing substantiation for same. I would very much appreciate your assessment. Thank you for your continued willingness to help. Schneile (talk) 15:13, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Schneile

Responded on User talk:schneile. DES 17:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello again, DES. Thank you for your reply on my User talk:schneile page. I have added what I believe is an appropriate disclosure to both the Parker Liautaud and Willis Resilience Expedition articles, and would like to request your assessment of these to ensure I have followed guidance and disclosed correctly. Thank you, Schneile (talk) 13:03, 23 October 2013 (UTC)schneile

Ban Appeal of AKonanykhin

Hi. Since you contributed to the discussion resulting in the ban of Wikiexperts, you may want to consider the CEO's appeal at Misplaced Pages:AN#Ban Appeal of AKonanykhin. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 17:09, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Article Name

Hello DESiegel, and thank you for your reply. What I would like to ask is the following: After some practices on my Sandbox, I'm ready to make "live" a new article regarding the trance music label Avatar Records. My problem is that a page with the same name exists, because there is another music label with same name. As I understand from the help pages, the article name has to be unique. I don't have ant idea how to use another name, because this is the real name of the label. Can you advise please how can I solve this issue. Petrols (talk) 17:00, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

This question was answered on the Help desk, you use a parenthetical term to distinguish the two such as Avatar Records (Tel Aviv firm). However as you were also told on the Help desk, your article is NOT ready to go, it might well be deleted promptly if you take it live. You would be well advised to add inline citations to reliable sources to better demonstrate Notability. There are also some formatting issues. I suggest you use the Articles for Creation mechanism. DES 17:16, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello DESiegel, can you give me please your opinion now, after the changes I made? Petrols (talk) 06:21, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

A significant improvement. I have made a few edits to fix grammar, add wiki-links, make formatting more standard for Misplaced Pages articles, and fig references a bit. About references, it is not usual to reference a section heading. Instead reference one or more items in the section, using a named reference when the same source supports multiple items as I did here.

Some of your references are probably online. if they are, a link would be helpful, but is not required. Your ref #10 (GoaHead Book 'Les annees folles') needs more details, such as the author and year, and a cleaerer indication if "GoaHead" is the publisher or what. You mihgte want to use {{cite book}} The link for your ref #5 seems not to work in its present form at least for me. Your ref #1 should be split up, giving the page number for the listing in each year, and links if available. Ref #2 should have an article or column title if possible. So should Ref #8. Ref #4 should make it clear which is the magazine name and which is the author, you might want to use {{cite news}}.

It would be very good if you could find a source or sources that actually discuss Avatar in some depth, not just list its performers or releases. I hope all this is helpful. DES 14:21, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you a lot, I will try to double-check / implement all your remarks. Petrols (talk) 15:08, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

A digression from our CSD talk, transplanted here.

I was going to post this over there, but I figured we really are digressing into deeper matters of philosophy, so I'm posting here instead.

As you said, CSD indicates pre-established consensus formulated into unambiguous criteria. It is a "safe harbor" for deletions. There is solid consensus to delete many things outside of what CSD covers that may not be able to be formulated into the sort of bright-line unambiguous test that a new CSD requires. An administrator making a deletion of such material unilaterally isn't going against consensus, if the consensus really is to delete such material, and the deletion of the content (rather than the way the deletion was done) is uncontroversial.

The irony in your position is that by rejecting tags on a deletion that is sure to be uncontroversial that many admins would just unilaterally delete means you've actually taken power away from non-admin users and given special privilege to administrators, which seems to be the opposite of your goal. Non-admins are the only ones that absolutely have to use tags.

All that said, judging by the discussion at WT:CSD, maybe there isn't actually solid consensus to delete the type of page that we were discussing, so this philosophical conversation is moot regarding the case at hand. Anyway thanks for the discussion. Gigs (talk) 16:47, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

you wrote " An administrator making a deletion of such material unilaterally isn't going against consensus, if the consensus really is to delete such material, and the deletion of the content (rather than the way the deletion was done) is uncontroversial." I strongly disagree. My view is that outside of the CSD, there is NO consensus to delete without going through an xFD discussion or PROD, and that an admin who does should be reverted and warned, and that an admins who does so repeatedly should be desysopped. On one case several years ago where an admin had such a pattern, I took the matter to DRV, got many articles restored, and the admin warned. See my talk archives if you really want to get the details. If admins are NOT allowed to delete except via CSD or as the result of a process open to all, all are equal, admins have no special status in deciding what should be deleted, as they should not. DES 16:54, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, many admins and arbcom disagree with you. I think we will have to leave it at that and agree to disagree. Gigs (talk) 17:05, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

If there has been an arbcom case that squarely involves this issue i am not aware of it. But even if there were it would probably not change my view. I think the deletion policy is clear on the matter. DES 17:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

A7

I am sorry, but just releasing a not notable album on a not notable indie record label does not indicate notability and passing of A7. Do you know how many two-bit artists would have their articles taken to AfD if that was true? If I really wanted to, I could release an album on iTunes or Amazon right now and then a week later someone else could create a short article on me, and that said article should then pass A7 deletion right? The exact same article was speedy deleted multiple times under the titles Chunk (rapper), Chunk (musical artist) just earlier this week, but the article creator just moves it to a different name to avoid salting im guessing. There is literally no difference between the current article, and those previous articles, so there is no reason for this one to slip by. I would like you to reconsider your judgement. STATic message me! 20:24, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, STATic no. A7 does not require notability, any credible statement, referenced or not, that might possibly indicate notability is enough. This lists multiple albums with allmusic cites. I have seen worse than that survive an AfD. Not likely, but possible. If other admins failed to see the claim, that is not my fault. They shouldn't have speedy deleted this either, in my view. DES 20:31, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Anyone can release an "album", and AllMusic has alot of that general stuff for older acts, no bio though unsurprisingly. Not to mention, the creator blanked the article, saying he was going to work on it more and recreate it. But his blanking was reverted for some reason, probably because it was thought to be vandalism. STATic message me! 20:46, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I missed the blanking, STATic. I will look into that, later today. I am curious, would you think this was a valid speedy? it was also tagged for A7 and declined, and I and others then worked on it. Take a look at its current state, but only after checking how it looked when it was tagged for A7, please. DES 20:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Maybe at the time being, it all depends on the expertise of the article writer. Articles I have created such as Chevy Woods, Dizzy Wright, Chris Webby, Gudda Gudda and Rucka Rucka Ali had been speedy deleted and deleted over the years, until I created them with the proper references that should be required in all BLPs. Coverage can always be there for newer artists, but some rush to create illformatted promotional-toned articles, without taking the time to expand it and correctly reference it. The major difference here is this an artist from the 80s-90s were no new coverage is going to exist.

Luckily I just found this, compare it to Chunk (musician) and looks like a very obvious copy violation to me. STATic message me! 21:12, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I have deleted as a copyvio, actually it is marginal, as lists of facts are not copyrightable, and if they are arranged in a natural order such as chronological or alphabetical, neither is the arrangement. But enough ogf the text was copied or closely paraphrased to count, in my view. Thanks. Mind you there might be enough from this and the other sites to do a proper article, but there might well not be either. DES 21:18, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USS Phenakite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wilmington (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:28, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Brightside

Hey I noticed you had moved the brightside band page to the author's userspace for him to presumably improve. Wanted to also point your attention to EP_(BrightSide_EP) which you may want to move as well. Thanks. Sulfurboy (talk) 20:50, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Sulfurboy, I belive that I will. Since he contested asking for time to get sources, I gave it to him. {{userspace draft}} is very useful IMO. DES 20:52, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

EP_(BrightSide_EP) seems to have sources -- in Greek, but sources -- so i didn't move it. DES 21:03, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Please help me Sir

Sir,

user loveoffood007 nominated my article about V Star Creations for deletion.I didn't understand what is the reason for this nomination. I checked the wikipedia guidelines and all those things, I didn't feel my article violated the rules of wikipedia. Article doesn't have any promotional or advertisement element. V Star Creations is quite famous in India especially South India. And its subsidiaries are V Guard, Veegaland,Wonderla.Sir I kindly request you to help me for solving this issue.

Thank You! Neena Vineeth — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neenavineeth (talk • contribs) 06:12, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Basically the deletion has been proposed on the grounds that the company is not "notable", a word which is used in a special way on Misplaced Pages. A topic is notable if reliable sources have written about it in a substantial way. Read our general notability guideline and our guideline for notability of companies for more information. The best way you can help is to find published reliable sources that are independent of the company and add them to the article or at least mention them in the deletion discussion. Note that such sources should not be self-published, no blogs or the like, and should had a reputation for accuracy. Major newspapers, books published by major publishers, and academic studies are very good. Each such source should discuss the company in some detail, more than a passing mention. Several paragraphs about the company or more, if possible. DES 13:42, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Cogora Page

Hello Sir,

I am trying to do my best with the page. Currently it has 6 different external sources which I thought will be enough.

I will try and add a few more asap.

Many thanks

Neel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neel Vyas (talk • contribs) 16:37, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey there!

I just used the page, so it's not historical as a matter of fact. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 15:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Since a consensus discussion markd it as historical, you shouldn't have used it, and you surely shouldn't have removed the tag. If you think the discussion was closed improperly, deletion review is available. DES 15:58, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Also, I have now undone your edit to the page, with a proper summery. DES 16:02, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

(ec) What about truth, WP:BOLD, and WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY? When would I know when to be bold or be anti-Misplaced Pages (bureaucratic), anyways? Is there a time limit? Do you favor bureaucracy over truth? I hope not, to be honest. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 16:04, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Biosthmors, I do favor WP:Consensus and you are, as far as I can tell, editing against it. I also support Process is Important and you are acting out of process, for no good reason that I can see. In fact it looks like Disrupting Misplaced Pages to make a point to me. If you have a reason for thinking that the Bounty Board should NOT be marked as historical, or should be edited in spite of the MfD so marking it, you haven't told me what it is. This isn't Yes, Minister where your actions can be self-validating ("Say that the findings have been questioned." / "What if they haven't been questioned?" / "Question them! Then they have"). A consensus discussion is not a form of bureaucracy . DES 16:12, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Is DRV? Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 16:14, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Not in my opinion, Biosthmors. It is a useful part of the process, to help determine when the closing of a deletion discussion, or other deletion-related action, was not proper under the Deletion policy. Disclosure, i was one of the group that drafted the initial version of the DRV page out of the previous VfU (Votes for Undeletion) page, and argued for adoption of it as policy.) Note that a page is marked as historical when it would otherwise be deleted, but people want its former content to remain available, but cease to be used. By the way you are also ignoring the Bold, revert, discuss procedure. You made an edit that you described as bold, you were reverted (twice in fact) and you are continuing to revert back. That is approiching an edit war which is not a good thing. Please cease editing the Bounty Board and reverting its mark as historical unless you obtain consensus to reverse the MfD discussion DES 16:22, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages:Policies and guidelines#historical, Biosthmors, for a relevant policy page. DES 16:29, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Good to know DES. Will you be at Wikimania 2014 in London? I think I'll be there. Thank you for all the information, links, and for disclosing the backstory. I appreciate it. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 16:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I am glad to have been helpful, Biosthmors. No hard feelings, I trust. As to Wikimania, it is unlikely. I am located in the US, and a trip to London, pleasant as it would be, is probably not in my cash or time budgets next year. DES 16:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Look into scholarships, if you have the time. =) Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 17:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Responding to your offer

Hi there, you mentioned to me in a very helpful post last week on the Help page that you would be interested in editing the page Studley, Inc. I really appreciate that offer and I've included several primary and secondary sources on Talk:Studley,_Inc. as you requested. I'd like to know if you are still willing to help. Thank you in advance. RyLaughlin (talk) 19:19, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes I will look at it as soon as I can (probably within 24 hrs), and see whether the sources seem to permit an article to be created. DES 19:26, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I am very appreciative. RyLaughlin (talk) 19:38, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure you're busy but I was curious if you've had time to review Studley, Inc. and make a decision whether you'd like to create an article. Thanks. RyLaughlin (talk) 16:55, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

your AFD comment has been quoted in a discussion. please respond

An editor has quoted your comment in AFD is proof that some only wanted to keep the article provided it had "multiple" sources, instead of just one. Since throughout Misplaced Pages, one reliable source is seen as enough for anything at all, is there any reason to have multiple ones for this? Would you still have said the article should be kept if the inclusion criteria did not have the word "multiple" in it? Dream Focus 17:25, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Reward_board#As_we_are_going_to_keep_this.2C_do_we_need_to_tighten_the_criteria_a_bit.3F

Given it's been kept at MfD, I've reposted a proposal to tighten it. See header. Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:49, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

User talk:NationalRegisterBot

Please see Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/NationalRegisterBot; this is a new bot being prepared for trial. Nyttend (talk) 23:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Shah Jalal Mosque, Chester (November 11)

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Shah Jalal Mosque, Chester.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
• You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages! Green Cardamom (talk) 18:42, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

thank you

for your (practically divine) intervention at Eli Harvey. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 17:27, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Ps there will be other images of the same statue in different places that will show it better - I have at least 2 or 3 myself and they will be added later. One means finding a b/w negative shot 25 (who is counting any more?) years ago. I rather like that first one because there is a sort of unworldliness about it that is (opinion) appropriate for cemeteries. Also, it was already on wikipedia or perhaps Commons. And so it goes. Thanks again for your insights, input and more. Carptrash (talk) 17:35, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

It is indeed a striking image, Carptrash, but it is rather hard to see the elk as an elk at a small image size, with the sun behind it. But there is no rush on that. DES 17:48, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Thank you

DES, thank you very much for your input on the kerfuffle that has erupted regarding my username. I appreciate your reasonable comments and your willingness to assume good faith. I will be sure take your suggestions into consideration. Regards, Corpse-ManoftheObamaclypse (talk) 20:53, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Before giving more AGF, DES you may want to see and User:Barack Obama DA PREZ which this editor previously created claiming to be the President on the user page and then on the talk page made the comments-

I DON't HAVE TO LISTEN TO YOU!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA! Barack Obama DA PREZ (talk) 00:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I will return. And then I shall plague you eternally. >=D

I find that quite disturbing, don't you?Camelbinky (talk) 21:52, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that seems disturbing, Camelbinky. I haven't had time to review this editor's contributions, but I promise not to support or advocate an unblock until i have done so thoroughly. If that is at all typical, Then the matter is rather different than i had suspected. 22:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

It's probably just a kid having some fun. There are much more fun places on the Internet than Misplaced Pages. Jehochman 02:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the efficient help!

Ajsmirnov (talk) 21:18, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

modified you comment

I modified your comment. I hope this was obvious enough to presume your agreement. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Thank you for voting to unblock me. Yes, I should not have made an inappropriate edit summary. I should simply have cited policy and not added any "spicy" extra commentary that could worsen the problem. MarshalN20 | 14:25, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

1. Committee on Assessment of Fire Suppression Substitutes and Alternatives to Halon (Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications, National Research Council) (1997). "Executive summary". Fire suppression substitutes and alternatives to Halon for U.S. Navy applications. National Academies Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-309-07492-6.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)