Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mackensen (talk | contribs) at 04:10, 15 October 2013 (→Orthotylus flavosparsus: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2013

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 6, No. 2 — 2nd Quarter, 2013
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2013, the project has:

Content

• VG Project Main pages

  • Main project – talk
  • Project category – talk
  • Portal – talk

  VG Project Departments

  • Assessment – talk
  • Cleanup – talk
  • Peer review – talk

   

  • Reference library – talk
  • Newsletter – talk
  • Video game images – talk

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 16:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Cannot locate your response

Thank you, Salvidrim, for being easily available to respond to. I tried to find your response to the article which I wrote and submitted, but did not locate it in your listing for "July 9". This is my original work and I certainly can rewrite it from another perspective--however, I am at a loss to understand what the problem is with my submission. As a published author I am familiar with a different type of submission venue and really would appreciate feedback as to what I am missing here. Thank you--Cantiague (Helen Penner Ackerman)Cantiague (talk) 12:48, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Can you provide a bit more information about the article you were trying to submit to help me identify the situation? :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 13:59, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Bomber

Hey there! I am just letting you know that I userfied this article. I have been doing some asking around to try to locate a copy of Datormagazin; per your comment here, please let me know on my talk page if you are able to track down a copy. Thanks! :) BOZ (talk) 08:07, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

@BOZ: I just spent an hour looking and while I was able to find a site with a number of scans, it doesn't have the specific one you need. Sorry! You might get somewhere by asking on dedicated forums. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 13:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for checking that! BOZ (talk) 21:09, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Looks like that came through! Now I just need to ask him to do a proper translation for me.  :) BOZ (talk) 14:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Response to your question regarding article

Thank you for your response. The article that I wrote and tried to submit is located at http://www.isaacpenner.com I can rewrite it in any style acceptable to Wiki once I know there is any interest in it being reviewed for the "past historical person" category. Thanks again. CantiagueCantiague (talk) 16:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Have you read the advice that was offered as a reply to your Teahouse question in June? You can read it again by clicking here. Let me know if it helps. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 17:13, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Aww, come on, Sal

No one convinced me to do anything. I'm not offended, really, since I think you're a nice guy and a good admin, but I made that decision entirely on my own. (Well, I asked one editor for advice on how to proceed, but I'd pretty much made my mind up already.) — PinkAmpers& 23:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to enlighten me. It was mostly just the impression I got following the AN/I thread, sorry if it wasn't an accurate reflection of what happened. Also, please note I don't think any worse of you for having an opposite point of view. If you're gonna read Wikipediocracy, make sure to take a complete tour, there have been a number of "discussions" about you that would no doubt spark your interest. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 23:45, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I've wandered around. Some of the comments have been funny. (In some cases funny because they were just good jokes, and in others bitterly ironic, like the time Kiefer personally attacked me for something I said relating to his crusade against off-wiki personal attacks.) Although your comment (and one or two replies) were the only ones I saw from this specific incident; are there others that I've overlooked? — PublicAmpers& 03:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

"A little learning is a dang'rous thing;

Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:

There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,

And drinking largely sobers us again.

Fir'd at first sight with what the Muse imparts,

In fearless youth we tempt the heights of Arts,

While from the bounded level of our mind

Short views we take, nor see the lengths behind;

But more advanc'd, behold with strange surprise

New distant scenes of endless science rise!

So pleas'd at first the towering Alps we try,

Mount o'er the vales, and seem to tread the sky,

Th' eternal snows appear already past,

And the first clouds and mountains seem the last;

But, those attain'd, we tremble to survey

The growing labours of the lengthen'd way,

Th' increasing prospects tire our wand'ring eyes,

Hills peep o'er hills, and Alps on Alps arise!"

Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:00, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• (talk page stalker) o_O - What is all this about, Salvidrim? Sergecross73 msg me 15:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• If I say "long story", you're not gonna let it slide, will you? :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 15:56, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Haha, I kind of figured a simple dif would explain it (or lead me to reading that would explain it anyways.) Usually I'd just look up someone's contribs if I'm curious about this kind of thing, but you've done so many dab's recently that I didn't see anything relevant. It's no big deal though, its fine if you want to be done with it... Sergecross73 msg me 16:05, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• If you really want to know, check it out, but I doubt you'll have much interest. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 16:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• What, am I too much of a simpleton for that sort of thing!?  ;) Just kidding. It's true, while it was interesting to browse through, I don't usually involve myself in Arbcom stuff. Sergecross73 msg me 16:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Take it as a compliment -- I think you're above all this kerfuffle. ;) :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 16:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah, all that just seems to leave so many people angry/jaded/burned out. I prefer doing it minimally so it doesn't leave me the same way. Sergecross73 msg me 18:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

• Hey @PinkAmpersand:, just to let you know I had let myself be convinced to doubt who you claimed you were, but at this point in time I believe you've been honest (and rather very transparent) on that particular topic. I offer my apologies, should you require them. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 05:51, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

DRV

Hi mate! I just saw this after having contributed to that short discussion. Very good call and a good result too. Nicely done! Stalwart111 22:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

As I said, I unsalted before being aware of the DRV, but in any case I trusted the user to do something good (and obviously he did). :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 03:50, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Recent block

It gave me a good laugh. ^_^. Feel free to delete after you read if you like, but I just had to say something! ;). Sergecross73 msg me 15:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Yea, I don't remember doing it... which means it was probably a good idea. >_< :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 16:41, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations on your (comparatively) speedy recovery! Favonian (talk) 16:45, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

If there's one thing I'm grateful for in this world, it's that I never get hungover. I almost always seem to be able to "sleep it off" in 10 to 12 hours. Yesterday a friend made me discover Bootlegger (11.5% proof) and I... I kinda liked it, y'know! :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 16:52, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

• To be quite honest it gave me a chuckle. Interesting to see that you remained aware enough to do that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:13, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• I remember chatting with someone and deciding to delete some big religion article as a hoax (no comment), but it seems I realized this might not be a good idea before hitting the button. I guess I just thought if I came back drunk enough to actually go through with it, I'd be too drunk to unblock myself! And reading what I tweeted yesterday... yea. :/ It's very rare that I get drunk alone at home though, so I'm not normally at or near a computer; yesterday there were exceptional circumstances. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 06:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Oh my. Yeah, ANI would have caught fire with the number of edit conflicts. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:33, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

New content, same title

Since my previous writing was rejected and deleted, but I still think TASO deserves a page on wikipedia, I am going to write another page but with the same title. Is that acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sylvia Matovu (talk • contribs) 16:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Your submission has not been deleted. You are welcome to continue improving Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/The AIDS Support Organization (TASO) until it is meets Misplaced Pages's standards and then click on the "resubmit" button to have it reviewed again. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 17:10, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the teahouse info

Thank you for being an excellent guide on using Wiki. I had not seen this response at all and it will be helpful as I rewrite the materials in the needed form. My experience with publishing is to have one or more guiding editors throughout the whole process--Wiki is certainly different and I am learning the process. Thanks again. CantiagueCantiague (talk) 18:33, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

It's always a pleasure to help. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 18:34, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Deletion per MfD

Hi, I think it is time to delete the page discussed here . The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 02:32, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. Done, and steward help requested for the one that has too many revisions. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 03:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

FYI. There are more recent posts along the same lines. I think we did everything we could for this guy. — Scott • talk 10:48, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Hopefully. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 11:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject BSicon

Just a request for clarification, but I don't understand why you said that a cross-wiki redirect doesn't work? Useddenim (talk) 11:57, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

• I keep meaning to reply to this but I want my reply to be supported by examples and I haven't had the time yet. Apologies. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 16:55, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Request

Hello. I recently have been working on a video game series article and I was about to move the article to mainspace but I screwed up, and then screwed up again. Basically, I need an admin to move User:User:Juhachi/The Idolmaster (series) to The Idolmaster.--十八 23:50, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

• LOL! Took me two tried also (heh), but should be all fine now. Lemme know if it's not. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 00:01, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks a lot; I haven't screwed up that royally in years.--十八 00:07, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
    • I've said it a few sections up, moving pages can be surprisingly tricky, and practically impossible to undo by yourself if you mess up (unless you're an admin). And even then, sometimes we mess up so bad we need expert help. So don't worry and keep up the great work! :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 00:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

timeline

My first act was to go to INeverCry's talk page. Look at your timelines again, and please remove your false statement at RFAR.—Kww(talk) 00:22, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

With pleasure. Thanks for your vigilance. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 00:28, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Kudos!

I was one of the folks who supported your RfA, and I just wanted to stop by and thank you for doing a great job so far. Level-headed admins seem to be somewhat rare these days, and it's great to see that you are one of that group. Intothatdarkness 14:01, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

And yet, I've a feeling that recently I have been straying off-path and getting involved in shit I probably don't need to bother about (ArbCom requests, AN dramaz, you name it). :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 14:03, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

It happens sooner or later, I think. It's sadly the best way to keep track of where things are rotting in the project and (possibly) come forward as a voice of reason (even though that seems to be a good way to attract mobs with torches and the like). Those processes are dominated by folks who really need a counterbalance at times. Intothatdarkness 14:05, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

As I've said elsewhere, I think the disease is at a point where any attempt at tackling it only leads to more people becoming infected (shitty metaphor, I know). Ignoring it and working elsewhere doesn't resolve the problems but at least you're not contributing to them. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 14:14, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, I think you're doing a great job too, and contrary to my personal philosophy, on the opposite end of the spectrum, perhaps I should help with that sort of stuff more often. Sergecross73 msg me 14:18, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I would say that people trying to tackle the problems do give some of us hope that all is not lost. I understand the concern about more people becoming infected (and actually I think that's a decent metaphor). Ignoring it encourages those who are already infected and discourages the others. Just my take, of course. Intothatdarkness 14:38, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Translation!

Hi Salv! If you have a moment could you take a quick look at Picolaton for me? It's a mechanically-aided translation of fr:Picolaton and I want to make sure I didn't completely botch it. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 18:36, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll try tonight; otherwise poke me again tommorow. I'll just edit whatever corrections are needed. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 21:57, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Done! Not a lot of content though, but still! :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 00:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to make sure the initial translation from fr was good before i added onto it, haha. I'm going to teeter off to expand on it now! Thanks! --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 00:42, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. Well, go for it! Personally I'd leave the "nicknames" intact, unless you can find English-language usage for an English version of pique-au-mollet (which is literally prick-to-the-calf). :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 01:48, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I am awarding this barnstar as thanks for your efforts, both as a member of WP:VG and as an administrator. You do excellent work. May our paths cross again sometime! Regards, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 15:56, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	For breaking my basic functioning at 1am. I'll have you know that people die from that. Now stop being a Salvidumbass! TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 05:12, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, so...

 Self-trout Seems the batchdeletion wasn't as finetuned as I thought it would be this time around, even though the first batch worked very well a couple of weeks ago. This would all be solved if those doing G13 deletions would delete redirects to the pages they're deleting... but that would be much too easy, wouldn't it?

If I deleted something that shouldn't have been, post it here, I'll have it restored within the day. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 04:15, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Deleted sandbox

Hi there! I'm 99% sure that there was nothing in User:Justlettersandnumbers/infobox horse breed that I needed to save. But I suppose I would have appreciated a chance to be that other 1% sure before it was deleted. Could you perhaps restore it briefly, or email me the contents or something? I did a lot of work on that infobox a couple of years ago (well, it seemed like a lot because I had no idea what I was doing). If you can't do as I've asked, then NP, I'm sure we've all moved on from there anyway. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 01:38, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

• Done. Although there was no content; it was moved to User:Justlettersandnumbers/blank, which you requested CSD of yesterday; that's why it showed up in the Broken Redirects list. Sorry for the inconvenience. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 01:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you so much, sorry to have created work for nothing; the content I wanted to review before seeing it definitively consigned to the oblivion it deserves is at User:Justlettersandnumbers/Infobox horse test. My confusion, my apologies. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 01:50, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
    • No problems. I meant to delete redirects to deleted AfC submissions, this wasn't it, so I'm actually more comfortable to have it restored and redeleted upon user request. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 01:53, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

your deletions of redirects from AFC submissions

Hi, i notice multiple deletions by you of AFC locations, which were redirects, to accepted articles. For articles that I had drafted and submitted. Why? From your edit summary you imply the drafts were not accepted, but they were accepted. From your other comments on this Talk page, i think this is not what you intended. So, something you are doing seems wrong.

I guess i would prefer if you would restore these, though i can't fully explain why.

This is about the following (cut and paste, plus my adding wikilinks which proves the articles were accepted, not rejected:

• . . Salvidrim! (talk | contribs) deleted page Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Reese-Johnson-Virgin House ‎(Batchdel of broken redirects to G13'd AfC subs; feel free to undo if incorrect ·)

(Deletion log); 00:01 . . Salvidrim! (talk | contribs) deleted page Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Menehune Fishpond ‎(Batchdel of broken redirects to G13'd AfC subs; feel free to undo if incorrect ·)

• (Deletion log); 00:01 . . Salvidrim! (talk | contribs) deleted page Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Mount Rose Elementary School ‎(Batchdel of broken redirects to G13'd AfC subs; feel free to undo if incorrect ·)
• (Deletion log); 00:01 . . Salvidrim! (talk | contribs) deleted page Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Haraguchi Rice Mill ‎(Batchdel of broken redirects to G13'd AfC subs; feel free to undo if incorrect ·)
• (Deletion log); 00:01 . . Salvidrim! (talk | contribs) deleted page Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Kitzmeyer Furniture Factory ‎(Batchdel of broken redirects to G13'd AfC subs; feel free to undo if incorrect ·)
• (Deletion log); 00:01 . . Salvidrim! (talk | contribs) deleted page Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Barton Villa ‎(Batchdel of broken redirects to G13'd AfC subs; feel free to undo if incorrect ·)
• (Deletion log); 00:01 . . Salvidrim! (talk | contribs) deleted page Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Auerbacher Home ‎(Batchdel of broken redirects to G13'd AfC subs; feel free to undo if incorrect ·)

--doncram 03:12, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

• I... I frankly have no idea how these showed up in the DBR for Broken Redirects. They seem mostly unused but I'll be glad to restore these shortly. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 03:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

• Did they perhaps show up because they're redirects from the Misplaced Pages talk space into article space, and something didn't parse right? It might be worth looking into, especially if there's others like this in the dump you pulled them from. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 04:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
  • Crosswiki redirects show up as broken (so I soften them), but not crossnamespace ones... at least the previous dump was alright. But a dozen false positives on 2000 deletions is an acceptable margin I can work with. I'm still reviewing the rest to make sure everything was fine. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 04:04, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
    • What on earth do you think you're doing deleting my sandbox? That was rude, and quite frankly bizarre. bd2412 T 04:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
      • Sorry for the inconvenience. I see you've restored it yourself. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 04:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Another one

You also deleted User talk:Anomie/talklink.js and User talk:Anomie/talklink.css, which quite obviously have nothing at all to do with AfC. To get this level of incorrect deletion, I'd guess you just made a list of every redirect in certain namespaces to a nonexistent page? You really need to vet your list better. Please do ask at WP:BON or WP:BOTREQ if you want help with that. Anomie⚔ 11:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

The source list I pulled from was from the DBR of broken redirects. I guess since my first batch a few weeks ago went off without a hitch I got overconfident in this one. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉

Why did you delete this redirect?

. There are a few links to it from a number of discussions. The content was simple moved to meta. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 08:36, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

• Apologies. Crosswiki redirects show up as broken and aren't automatically followed; I just softened it for you. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 13:44, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Thks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 15:16, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Please restore my talk page

I had a redirect on my local talk-page to my global talk-page on Meta-Wiki which you seem to have deleted. It was, as you say above, a "crosswiki redirect" which probably would have appeared to you to be a broken redirect. I'm trying to set up my global presence on WMF projects, and this type of indiscriminate deletion doesn't help matters. You could have at least looked at my global profile page and seen what I was up to before deciding to add my talk page to your list of pages to be deleted. Also, despite the edit summary of your deletion which included the comment "feel free to undo if incorrect", I am unable to undo your deletion of my talk page by myself. There is no (undo) link, I cannot access the (diff) from the RC, from your contribs, or from the Deletion Log, so would you mind undoing your indiscriminate deletion of my talk-page please. Thanks. AugurNZ ✐⌕ 21:15, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Restored and softened the crosswiki redirect to ensure it isn't broken anymore. Sorry for the inconvenience. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 21:21, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Why? What was wrong with the hard redirect I had there originally? I've done the same on every other WMF project that I'm registering an account on. Do I need to go to them all and make them all soft redirects now? AugurNZ ✐⌕ 21:25, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hard crosswiki redirects aren't followed automatically and need a user clickthrough anyways, and thus are classified as broken redirects. Softening them doesn't change anything for you, but prevents it from showing up in maintenance reports. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 21:28, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

So I shouldn't use the basic #REDIRECT imperative then? I thought that is what it was for? AugurNZ ✐⌕ 21:31, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

As per the guideline on using redirects, "redirects to other Wikimedia projects, other websites, or special pages do not work. These should be avoided or replaced with a {{soft redirect}} template."; see WP:SOFTRDR for more info. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 21:39, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I'll have to go and change that on all my userspaces on other WMF projects now. AugurNZ ✐⌕ 21:48, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

No problem. The deletion was a mistake but even if I had gotten everything straight the first time around, I still soften hard crosswiki redirects that show up as broken. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 21:50, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Status inquiry ?

I am inquiring on the status of my article "Neutrino mass and the universe".

If it has been rejected, please inform the reason. Anyway, I wish to know the status; I am not able to make out the outcome.

Dr. Jose C. Palathingal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Jose C Palathingal (talk • contribs) 16:56, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

• Please see Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Neutrino mass and the universe. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 17:23, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
• (edit conflict) It looks like your article was rejected for creation because it reads like an essay - you can see this in the banner at the top of the article. You may want to read this for advice on how to rewrite your article so it more closely reflects the tone and style of writing we are looking to achieve here. Once the issues have been addressed, you are welcome to resubmit your article for creation! --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 17:31, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Help me

Sir, I have given the links related to Mr. Mohan (KS) Narayanan. Please verify it and help me to improve the article which is created by me. What should I do now? Shall I Upload another article about Mr.Mohan (KS) Narayan? Or after verification the first article will be restored?

Thank you

Antopandeth (talk) 00:05, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

• Your draft is still here: Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Mohan (K S) Narayanan. You are welcome to be continue working on it and resubmitting it to become an article. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 00:14, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Please Help

I am the owner of a company/product page you deleted. I apologize for not being wiki-savvy. I did not create the page, our users did, but would like to help have it restored and improved. We have a dedicated userbase and have been working for them for 7 years to grow and improve our product, so I am not understanding why it is deleted rather than allowed to be improved if the citings were old. The page was Onverse. I would really appreciate an email regarding this, but will check back here as well. Please help me out as this is a huge deal for us as an indie studio trying to make a living. Steve Pierce - CEO - Onverse - steve@onverse.com. Thank you very much!

StevePierceII (talk) 04:04, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The citings weren't just old, they are mostly primary. There were not enough independent, reliable resources covering the subject to establish notability. Also, restoring the article because "it's a huge deal for our company" suggests a conflict of interest and the intent to advertise, neither of which are appropriate here. On a personal note, a Misplaced Pages article isn't going to generate significant awareness of your company or products, so you shouldn't rely on that. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 04:34, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

This is not an advertising ploy. The removal of the article was brought to my attention by members of our community because it is a place they would send new users to to learn more about the origins of the game and company. It's unique and important for people who want to learn more because it was a unique feat at the time and continues to be because of the fact that we built/build it with only a few people and our own resources, which gives them a perspective on why the game is the way it is. All I am asking is to improve the article to change what you are saying is wrong with it, rather than delete it. It fits as much as any other company or product into Misplaced Pages, you're just saying the citings need to be updated. It's been years since the original citings probably and there are plenty of more recent, non-primary citings available. StevePierceII (talk) 23:36, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

• Please provide links to this recent, non-primary references; I also recommend drafting the article through our article creation review process to make be able to work on it and have it moved to an actual article once ready. Note that if you want to send users to page with information about your product, it is highly preferable to have a page on your website with information about your product, as you would then have full liberty over its content, and users would not even have to leave your website. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 15:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much for being prompt in your responses. I really appreciate it. Is the original article available so I can see for myself the original citing and content? Are you saying it would be best to submit it as an entirely new article? It would be easiest to be able to take it as a starting point to re-submit or just validate the new citing? Sorry, this is my first time using/editing Misplaced Pages. It's a pretty in-depth learning crub for an inexperienced editor.StevePierceII (talk) 20:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I've been watching this discussion with great interest, as I'm new to Misplaced Pages as well. I was drawn to this talk page through my own interaction with Salvidrim! and I've started an in-depth discussion about the "Onverse" issue in the Teahouse as a way of learning about Misplaced Pages culture and community in general. In response to the suggestion that information about this game be kept on the game's own website, should the same suggestion be made for all the other games listed in the list of Machintosh games that was linked to the "Onverse" page? AugurNZ ✐⌕ 22:33, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) The issue is more Onverse's notability: You seem to be familiar with policy, so I'm assuming you're familiar with WP:N and WP:V; the issue is not one of deletionism or even of us not wanting Onverse to have a page; the issue is that there are no independent, verifiable sources on the subject.

The list you linked is a swamp and probably something that WP:VG will want to take a peek at to address. There is a similar problem in WP:DOG with our List of dog breeds. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 23:28, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

I understand that this was originally about "notability". My question related specifically to Salvidrim's suggestion that information about Onverse should be kept off Misplaced Pages entirely, and maintained on the game's own website instead. Why would that be suggested for one game but not for all the others on that list? Wouldn't it be better, rather than going around deleting perfectly good information, to actually help improve the article? AugurNZ ✐⌕ 23:57, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

If there are no sources, there would be no way to improve the article. That, I presume, is why the article was deleted. If you feel that there are other games on that list that should be deleted, you can nominate them yourself. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 00:27, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Out of interest, I did a quick Google search myself, and came across this article which seems to have been picked up by other sources as well, such as Reuters. I've had a look at WP:IRS and it would seem to me that Reuters would be a reliable source, even if Accesswire might not be. Admittedly, the source from Reuters is dated 24-Jul-13, which is after the AfD was closed, on 1-Jul-13. I'm sure that with a bit more digging, I could find many more sources. I'm not advocating for a repeal of the AfD, I'm just trying to understand this whole process, as a new Wikipedian. It seems to me in this case that it was just easier for other editors to delete a page on Misplaced Pages than try to improve it. AugurNZ ✐⌕ 00:45, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't believe that counts as an independent source as it's a "brief announcement of a merger or sale" --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 01:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, as a new Wikipedian, it seems to me that a failure to acknowledge Reuters as an independent, verifiable source is deeply troubling. Surely setting such a high standard of verifiability is turning prospective new editors away from Misplaced Pages? AugurNZ ✐⌕ 01:18, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I didn't speak to the reliability of Reuters, the issue is that a short blurb like that would not establish any kind of notability. It would be the same if the blurb was on CNN or the BBC. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 02:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

@StevePierceII:: I have just e-mailed a the most recent version of the Onverse article.

@AugurNZ:: Don't put words in mouth. I never "suggested that information about Onverse should be kept off Misplaced Pages entirely". In fact, I even proposed that it should be drafted through our article creation review process and also proposed an off-wiki alternative that might be preferable in order to have complete editorial control over the content. I'm not particularly for or against the idea of having an article about Onverse and I haven't researched the topic nearly enough to express an opinion either way. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 02:11, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

@Tikuko:Wouldn't the fact that Reuters (who have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments) publish the claim that "Onverse has approximately 600,000 subscribers" make it notable? I'd have thought that 600,000 subscribers is a fairly notable amount!

@Salvidrim: Apologies for misinterpreting your comment that "it is highly preferable to have a page on your website" (emphasis mine). To me, that certainly sounds as though you are suggesting that Misplaced Pages is not the place for an article about this game, which seems somewhat contrary when there are plenty of other games already listed. AugurNZ ✐⌕ 03:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

It still isn't notable coverage. There are other organizations of similar membership that don't, to my knowledge, have wikipedia pages, because people haven't written enough about them; for example there is almost nothing written about the World Dog Show, so I cannot expand the article, despite the fact that I could easily triple its size; and I believe ABRA doesn't presently have a page either. --TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 04:47, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

By that logic, there shouldn't be any pages at all on Misplaced Pages that pertain to New Zealand, as our total population is so small compared to America's population. Any product having 600,000 subscribers down here would definitely be notable by New Zealand's standards. If your argument is accurate, TKK, then notability seems to be VERY subjective, and a very weak method of determining whether or not an article should have a place on Misplaced Pages. Also, I didn't understand your comment about the World Dog Show, sorry, as it seems to have plenty of references listed already, and has a page on Misplaced Pages, and is not under threat of deletion. How does that compare to Onverse? AugurNZ ✐⌕ 05:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

This is what I have put together so far as far as sources. I can verify that none of these were created by us (except the one press release specified as by us below). I'd be happy to narrow them down to only the most important that gives the article the sources needed to make it a legitimate contribution to WP. There has got to be enough information here to at least put it on par with other similar products. As mentioned at WP:VG/S finding good references for video games is a difficult process. Virtual worlds are even harder because it is a niche industry that doesn't have things like print media, or long-established sites dedicated to the subject and "verified as reliable by WP editors and admins.

So what is my next step? I really appreciate the discussion and help so far.

Macworld Article "considered to meet reliability requirements" at WP:VG/S http://www.macworld.com/article/1145974/onverse.html

MMORPG.com "not been discussed at sufficient length to achieve consensus" at WP:VG/S http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/466/Onverse.html http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/466/feature/3583

Review and Game page - Softpedia "not been discussed at sufficient length to achieve consensus" at WP:VG/S http://www.softpedia.com/reviews/mac/Onverse-Review-129606.shtml http://games.softpedia.com/get/Online-Games-Clients/Onverse.shtml

Inside Mac Games - "considered to meet reliability requirements" at WP:VG/S - Also platform specific http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/story.php?ArticleID=18061 http://www.insidemacgames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=38728

A well known virtual world writer with her review on Onverse. http://arianeb.wordpress.com/2010/03/24/a-quick-peek-at-onverse/

CNET - "considered to meet reliability requirements" at WP:VG/S http://download.cnet.com/Onverse-PC/3000-2115_4-75065912.html

PC World - "not been discussed at sufficient length to achieve consensus" at WP:VG/S http://www.pcworld.com/article/188165/article.html

More Independent Reviews www.squidoo(dot)com/onverse-review (I guess Squidoo is a blacklisted site for some reason. so took out the link) http://www.dryesha.com/2010/06/video-review-onverse-trailer.html

Association of Virtual Worlds: http://network.associationofvirtualworlds.com/profiles/blogs/onverse-1

Better Business Bureau Business Page http://www.bbb.org/central-northern-western-arizona/Business-Reviews/internet-gaming/onverse-in-tempe-az-1000014084

Interview with Garage Games, makers of the engine we used. http://www.garagegames.com/community/blogs/view/18217

Independent source writing their own take on Onverse, plus an interview I did specifically for their site. http://onversefanz.wordpress.com/onverse-help/ http://onversefanz.wordpress.com/category/interviews/

Press release from another company: http://www.safecom.net/press-41/ - not our release

Press Release from us: http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/10/14/idUS194721+14-Oct-2010+MW20101014

Do video blogs and or gameplay videos count as viable sources? We have lots of those out there. StevePierceII (talk) 21:50, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Anyone that can help continue this conversation and point me in the right direction? StevePierceII (talk) 20:08, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

• As mentionned before, your best bet is to go through our article creation review process, where you can draft and improve the article with your sources and it will be reviewed. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 20:12, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't the easiest thing be to improve the article that was already in place, review that, and un-delete it? StevePierceII (talk) 16:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

That's what I'm suggesting. I e-mailed you a copy of the article that was in place, you are welcome to improve on it, have it reviewed, and then become an article again once/if suitable. :) · Salvidrim! · ✉ 17:13, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Happy 2nd Wiki-birthday!

	Happy birthday!
	Hope you have a great day! TKK! bark with me if you're my dog! 00:31, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

You've only been here 2 years?! Wow, thought it was longer. Anyways, congrats! Sergecross73 msg me 00:43, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

• The account is older. I've only started editing on September 19th, 2011. I've yet to really consider myself as "editing actively", though... hehe. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 02:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

IP at it again

Hello Salvidrim! I just warned an IP vandal (121.96.10.5 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)), and I noticed you had warned and blocked them several times before. They keep resuming as soon as their block ends, so I just wanted to let you know they have continued again right after your one month block expired. Thanks, DarkToonLink 10:28, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks. Escalating... :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 11:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Your thanks

I found it rather humorous you thanked me for this. Wasn't sure if you really enjoy my antics, or if you were being sarcastic, but either way, I laughed. Hope all is well. Sergecross73 msg me 02:39, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

• I love randomly abusing the "thank" function. Don't search for meaning. ^_^ :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 02:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

• Haha, even better! Sergecross73 msg me 12:59, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Upcoming newsletter

Hi Salvidrim, we've got a WP:VG newsletter coming due in less than a week and we're still missing a featured editor. This comes very much at the last minute, but would you be willing to give an interview for the newsletter this quarter? The newsletter is due October 3 so we'd have to rush. I'd probably set it up by tonight and then drop you a note and you'd have Oct 1-3 to respond. I'd have Oct 2 to ask any follow-up questions, and I guess you'd have the 3rd to respond to those. It might be kind of hectic so if you don't have the time right now then that's completely understandable. If you don't have the time for this quarter, would you be interested in an interview next quarter or later? Again, sorry to spring this on you so late. -Thibbs (talk) 11:22, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I would be honoured; I might not have time for anything "live", but if it's by e-mail or something similar I'd be able to find the time to do it. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 12:43, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Great! I'll post the questions in the draft right now. You can just edit the interview section to answer the questions directly. Thanks again for doing this on such short notice. -Thibbs (talk) 20:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh and feel free to change and edit around any of my questions if they don't apply or if I've accidentally mischaracterized anything. -Thibbs (talk) 20:28, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey I got the note and your additions look great! I've given Torchiest word that you're finished with it so he's going to go over it to copy edit and then it's ready for publication. Thanks again for your help! -Thibbs (talk) 17:53, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I should be the one thanking for the honor. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 17:55, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q3 2013

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 6, No. 3 — 3rd Quarter, 2013
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q3 2013, the project has:

Content

• VG Project Main pages

  • Main project – talk
  • Project category – talk
  • Portal – talk

  VG Project Departments

  • Assessment – talk
  • Cleanup – talk
  • Peer review – talk

   

  • Reference library – talk
  • Newsletter – talk
  • Video game images – talk

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 11:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• HAHAHAHAHA! My mom just sent me a message saying "I'm proud of you... Salvidrim. ;)" :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 21:35, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

• Good read. ^_^ Sergecross73 msg me 22:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Silver Lake Village (Michigan)

Hi. You closed WP:Articles for deletion/Silver Lake Village (Michigan) (2nd nomination) to fulfill this request at WP:Administrators' noticeboard. May I ask why you determined redirect (no deletion) and full protection to be the consensus outcome?

• The count was 8 delete to 3 merge (the AfD count is missing Technical 13). I am interested in how you chose to weight them.
• The sources are obviously terrible. Floquenbeam pointed out that they were worse than before, and I evaluated the three best sources as barely usable.
  • Since the sources were uniformly poor, I chose to skip writing a detailed analysis at the AfD. Of the 17 sources in the version at AfD:
    • 7 are business/corporate websites confirming that their locations exist
    • 3 are LoopNet listings or search results; 1 more is on the similar "online commercial real estate network", Cityfeet
    • WaterWinterWonderland.com is a Michigan tourism fan site
    • Lake Effect Car Wash business listing on Patch, which seems to be a local news/blog/social media startup
    • Silver Lining Rewards Program on Fenton Be Closer.com, run by Fenton City Hall
• None of the merge supporters specified what should be merged. I challenged Candleabracadabra with the WP:Merge what? essay, and he did a merge, but I did not respond due to Kww's revision deletion. The merged text was reduced but still relied on the inappropriate sources.
• Thincat referred to WP:PRESERVE, but WT:Articles for deletion/Archive 61#RfC: Merge, redirect (January–February 2011) determined that WP:PRESERVE does not confer extra weight to a merge recommendation.

Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 04:16, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• Deletion, merging and redirecting have the same effect on end-users: the AfD'ed title is no longer an article, which is something everyone can agree was the needed result. In cases where there is consensus to delete with suggestions to merge and redirect (or userfy), and there is no copyvio or other violation concerns that would support a supression of the former article's revisions, I find it preferable to implement the consensus by redirecting (or userfying) and letting users merge what they feel should be merged, if anything. If you don't think anything should be merged, don't merge any content from the AfD'ed article. If you object to edits from others to the target page, discuss them on the target page. And as noted, I would've salted the deleted title as requested in the AfD, and only applied the same principle to the redirected title. I think this is really a non-issue with little impact; whether the revisions are supressed through deletion or hidden through redirection only changes whether a non-administrator can view the revisions in question, and perhaps make use of them. :) · Salvidrim! · ✉ 04:26, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• Actually, merging and redirecting are forms of "keep", which are substantially different from delete. I have a hard time seeing any consensus other than "delete" in that AFD myself, especially given that the material is essentially identical to the previously deleted article.—Kww(talk) 04:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• *shrugs* I don't necessarily agree with that perspective but if that's the current consensus, I'll work that way for the time being. Closure changed and implemented. :) · Salvidrim! · ✉ 04:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for amending your close. By the way, if you decide that you prefer WP:Deletion review over extended discussion here, please let us know. Flatscan (talk) 04:41, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

• Oh, I am not sure that was the best way to avoid DRV! Firstly, concerning the criticism of my selective "merge", the close of WT:Articles for deletion/Archive 61#RfC: Merge, redirect makes no mention (even implied mention) of WP:PRESERVE. It says "the underlying strength of the argument for the position is what matters most". Kww said not much weight should be given to merge without a statement of what to merge and S Marshall thought extra weight could be derived from WP:PRESERVE. Most people ignored this aspect. I argued "as Candleabracadabra suggests" who said merge "the key bits to the Fenton, Michigan article. Leave out all the directoryesque details such as store listings and such." Not terribly specific, I agree. And he presumably made (improperly) a highly specific proposal but it was deleted and so was not available for review. Flatscan was broad-minded enough to suggest what might be merged "The Flint Journal piece on Fenton from the old article is the best source. The Silver Lake Park page on the City of Fenton website might support a sentence about the park." And, while we are addressing weak arguments, how about Flatscan's "According to WP:Places of local interest (essay), the relevant guideline is WP:Notability (organizations and companies). The sourcing is completely insufficient to support this article." Everyone agreed an article wasn't justified. However, the argument about lack of notability does nothing at all to argue against redirect or merge. In an article on a non-notable topic, there may be material entirely suitable for merge. Kww's delete argument was strong (but support from policy is dubious) but the close did not seem to address the G4 argument in any way at all.

I think you were wrong to give way to this special pleading without giving others a chance to have their say. I suggest you revert the close completely and leave it to someone else to do. Alternatively relist or DRV. Thincat (talk) 15:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• Regarding the RfC, the numbered choices in the prompt were selected to span the spectrum of expected responses. S Marshall wrote at User talk:Flatscan/RfC draft: Merge, redirect at AfD, "I would put myself at about 2.5". Option 4 is "same weight". Options 2 and 3, which explicitly reference WP:PRESERVE, were not found to reflect consensus.
• I'll grant that my delete argument was based on notability (and weak against merge), but I replied to Candleabracadabra's merge recommendation in the same edit. I should have written more criticism of the sources at the AfD.
• My request only asked Salvidrim! to explain his reasoning, although a reader could reasonably infer that I would be willing to go to DRV from its length. Flatscan (talk) 04:41, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

The pre-first-AfD diff and the post-recreation-diff are IMO sufficiently similar to raise G4 concerns, and yet sufficiently different to reasonably oppose to a G4 deletion. And as mentioned in my close -- you want the contents of the deleted article to potentially merge it somewhere else? Fine by me, I can send them to you and you can do whatever you want with them. :) · Salvidrim! · ✉ 16:12, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I'll think what to do which will also give a chance for other people to chime in here. I would be pretty sure a G4 deletion would have been overturned at DRV but certainly there would have be a body of support for G4 deletion. See I personally would have been happy with your original protected redirect retaining history. I can see no valid reason for blocking access to the material. I agree that nobody thought an article was justified. If I decide not raise the principle then I will ask you for the deleted content. However, if the wording were to be used we would need to maintain attribution in some way. Many thanks. Thincat (talk) 16:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I am here because I believe that the consensus was delete and that the merge arguments were insufficient to move it to redirect. Rather than merging inappropriate tone and sources from the AfD'd article, I would write fresh from the 2–3 passable refs, allowed by WP:Copying within Misplaced Pages#Where attribution is not needed, Bare references. Flatscan (talk) 04:41, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Naqvi Orientation

Nannadeem (talk) 23:18, 10 October 2013 (UTC) Would you be kind enough to tell me why the Article Naqvi Orientation deleted. If you find observations/reservations can be pointed out for further improvement. Please remember Science does not have language or religion/region. And nothing in this universe is new nor can be new whether matter/words or pictures - things we say new are things which already existed.Nannadeem (talk) 23:18, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

• Please ask your questions in the current discussion of this issue: you can do so by clicking here. :) · Salvidrim! · ✉ 23:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Nannadeem (talk) 23:49, 10 October 2013 (UTC) I have read the observations/noting of admins. Thanks for all. It is my surprise to say word Community used in terms of Biosphere sense. see value of Ist Naqvi family (i.e. Imam Naqi & his sons). With ref to my religious accountability ok its fact. This is my first Article. I would contribute three more Articles (i) POLE an energy base article (ii) Big Bang and its values in the 04 religions (iii) Religions is/are for us. So, being a human, I need encouragement by pointing out mistakes or misunderstanding, if I persist then deletion option is justifiable.

re: wikiRaese412 deletion

Salvidrim, hi, thanks for requested help in deleting wikiRaese412 (for potential 'confusion' with using 'wiki' in name) and moving content to user: Freeryde007. I was trying to consolidate with Freeryde007 user name, yet I am unable to login as it says 'no email is associated with it.' Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiRaese412 (talk • contribs) 13:32, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I only deleted the broken link User:WikiRaese412/sandbox because it was redirecting to your former article submission at Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Theodore H. Schwartz (2), which was deleted after you blanked it. And I see that you've logged in your new User:Freeryde007 account after posting this, so I assume you were able to login after all. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 20:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Orthotylus flavosparsus

FYI, I reversed your speedy deletion of Orthotylus flavosparsus. Mishae put it up for deletion (and he wasn't really sole editor, so G7 probably shouldn't have applied, but whatever), and then re-created it under the belief that this would save space on the server somehow. See and for discussion. I ran across it while dealing with yet another speedy nomination from him (which I declined) and I apologize for not discussing with you first. Best, Mackensen (talk) 04:10, 15 October 2013 (UTC)