Misplaced Pages

User talk:JzG/Archive 24

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User talk:JzG

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tony Sidaway (talk | contribs) at 15:48, 18 April 2007 (→[]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 15:48, 18 April 2007 by Tony Sidaway (talk | contribs) (→[])(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:JzG/Archive-Dec-2024. Some may be manually archived earlier than that, if no further action is required or productive debate is at an end.


Guy Chapman? He's just zis Guy, you know? More about me

Read This First

If you need urgent admin help please go to the incident noticeboard. To stop a vandal, try the vandal intervention page. For general help why not try the help desk? If you need me personally and it's urgent you may email me, I read all messages even if I do not reply. If next time I log on is soon enough, click this link to start a new conversation.

Terms of Service
By posting on this page you accept the JzG Terms of Service. I endeavour to satisfy good-faith requests to the best of my ability, but if you act like a dick, I will call you a dick. If you act like a troll, I will probably ignore you and may tell you to fuck off. If you want something from me, your best bet is not to demand it on pain of shopping me to ArbCom, because that way is pretty much guaranteed to piss me off to the extent that I will do whatever I can to thwart your plans. This page may contain trolling. Some of it might even be from me, but never assume trolling where a misplaced sense of humour might explain things. I can be provoked, it's not even terribly difficult. You may find, if you provoke me enough, that I will do something I later regret. Only remember, you may regret it more. I am a middle-aged surly bastard who spends his working day wrestling spammers and beating Windows with a stick, but I am capable of seeing good in the most improbable people if they don't go out of their way to make me do otherwise. Guy (Help!) 22:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

This user posts using a British sense of humour and does not repress those instantaneous motions of merriment.

Inspirational message:

The volume of corporate vanity/vandalism which is showing up on Misplaced Pages is overwhelming. At the office, we are receiving dozens of

phone calls *per week* about company, organization, and marketing edits which are reverted, causing the non-notable, but self-aggrandizing authors, to scream bloody murder. This is as it should be. However, I am issuing a call to arms to the community to act in a much more draconian fashion in response to corporate self-editing and vanity page creation. This is simply out of hand, and we need your help.

We are the #14 website in the world. We are a big target. If we are to remain true to our encyclopedic mission, this kind of nonsense cannot be tolerated. This means the administrators and new page patrol need to be clear when they see new usernames and page creation which are blatantly commercial - shoot on sight. There should be no question that someone who claims to have a "famous movie studio" and has exactly 2 Google hits - both their Myspace page - they get nuked. Ban users who promulgate such garbage for a significant period of time. They need to be encouraged to avoid the temptation to recreate their article, thereby raising the level of damage and wasted time they incur.

Some of you might think regular policy and VfD is the way to go. I am here to tell you it is not enough. We are losing the battle for encyclopedic content in favor of people intent on hijacking Misplaced Pages for their own memes. This scourge is a serious waste of time and energy. We must put a stop to this now.

Thank you for your help.

-Brad Patrick

Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.


Why

Why is this image unfree? How can I know that? can you explain it to me please? can we use this image in another section in the preity page???? dondoniko

Melissa Guille

I'm a bit confused by your re-deletion of the Melissa Guille page. It may have been in need of improvement, but I thought it was mostly balanced and fair toward the subject.

Aren't Nizkor, the London Free Press and the Kitchener-Waterloo Record considered reliable sources? CJCurrie 00:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

  • The reposted version was significantly worse than the deleted one. There are two organisations, the Heritage Front and the Canadian Heritage Alliance. The former appears to be a white supremacist group, but Guille asserts she was never a member and we have not seen a good source for her having been one, certainly not a leading member as is claimed. The Canadian Heritage Alliance is more or less legitimate, though somewhat distasteful. Most of what is thrown at Guille is guilt-by-association, and the sources mostly seem to boil down to one piece of investigative journalism. There are very clearly a number of people wanting to paint Guille as black as possible, and there are very few neutral sources to draw on, and those mainly in connection with the Canadian Heritage Alliance, so for now we should concentrate on rewriting that as something other than an attack piece on a number of barely-if-that notable individuals. If you are an OTRS volunteer I can give you the ticket number to review. Guy (Help!) 07:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm a bit puzzled by this response, for a number of reasons:

  • (i) The article didn't mention the Heritage Front, and I'm a bit uncertain as to why you'd bring up that organization now.
  • (ii) I'm not certain where you got the impression that the Canadian Heritage Alliance is "more or less legitimate", a view which seems to be contradicted by other reports into the matter. To judge from their website, they don't seem to be taking any great pains to conceal their far-right links.
  • (iii) Beyond this, I believe that the information in the revised Guille article was largely taken from reports in two credible, mainstream newspapers, one of which was sourced to the local police. I'm not certain where your comment about "one piece of investigative journalism" is coming from.

Could I please request that you review your decision on this matter? CJCurrie 23:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

There's also the matter of the Human Rights Tribunal hearings concerning Ms. Guille and the Canadian Heritage Alliance from government websites: , , . I would imagine these would be accepted as legitimate sources? As for the article by Matthew Lauder I don't know why it, when presented with other legitimate sources such as the government website and newspapers would be dismissed out of hand. AnnieHall 07:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
This was discussed recently in another context. If we have reliable sources discussing the case in detail, then we can link the court data as supporting evidence, but we can't build our own case based on the court documents. I have only found one report that mentioned Guille "appearing on charges" in a reliable secondary source, the balance are all from a patently unreliable source. But if you can write a new article in your user space based on proper sources, which established that the case is considered significant other than by Guille's detractors and those who have a deep-seated hatred of CHA, please do. I am only judging the merits of the articles as posted, which were problematic per WP:BLP. Guy (Help!) 07:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not really sure how to respond to this. Government documents are only acceptable if there's a secondary source? I'm sorry, but this seems patently ridiculous. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal documents are clearly legitimate sources that stand alone and I'm not sure how it could be argued otherwise. As for other sources being unreliable, well, why would you assume Matthew Lauder's articles are not reliable? Is it because he has a vested interest in the far right movement in Canada as a researcher and activist? This sets a pretty high bar for many wikipedia articles might have trouble meeting. Finally, I wouldn't characterize editors who have worked on the Guille and CHA articles as being detractors or of having a deep-seated hatred of both; I'm sure that's not fair in most of the cases, certainly my case. I have been researching the far right in Canada for the better part of a decade. My goal in editting at wikipedia is not to libel individual and groups, but to provide a history of these individuals and groups for future research and study. Based on my knowledge, the information in both the Guille and CHA articles are accurate (although I understand why Ms. Guille, who has been brought before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal on charges of inciting hatred through the postings on her website, would argue otherwise based on her own interests). I agree that some of the information requires better sourcing, but I believe your criteria sets the bar far too high since it could be argued that any source, be it a newspaper article, expose, court documents, etc, all have an agenda. AnnieHall 18:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Consider: Mr. Smith is a marginally-notable individual. Mr. Jones has an axe to grind with Mr. Smith. Mr. Jones discovers that Mr. Smith was once made bankrupt; he then digs up the court reports and creates a Misplaced Pages article based on the court documents. This is original research by Mr. Jones. It would cease to be original research if there were numerous reports in the national press discussing the singular nature of Smith's bankruptcy, and it then becomes an editorial judgement as to whether this is a ground-breaking case, whether it makes Smith notable, whether it is fit for a short para in bankruptcy and so on. We can't really tell without independent discussion, which helps us (the non-expert editors) to assess the significance of the case.
So, if you can find articles in the Canadian national press which discuss the case, and can cite them, then we can discuss that. We can also add the court documents to allow readers to form their own view. But we may not dig up the court records, decide as editors that this is a significant case, and start naming and shaming. We must go back to secondary sources. This is one of our main defences against being abused by those pursuing an agenda. Of course you are not doing that, but the principle remains. Guy (Help!) 18:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of ZIP Codes in Oklahoma

In your comment in this discussion, you noted that this discussion should be sent elsewhere. Now that the AfD has been closed, the question now is where to hold this discussion. I encourage you and the other editors (listed below) to find a suitable spot for this discussion and carry out the necessary steps for making a decision.

Perhaps this message does not make any sense whatsoever. In which case, please respond to this message and indicate what you want me (as the closing admin of the aforementioned AfD discussion) to do to carry out the result of the AfD. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 07:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

c.c.: User:After Midnight, User:JzG, User:Elkman User:Dennisthe2, User:Arkyan, and User:Mister.Manticore.

  • I agree. I saw that it was closed yesterday and was going to create the umbrella nom for all (52) the articles in the category, until I noticed the note from the closing admin (IanManka) suggested that AFD was not the right place. So... should I just go ahead and create the umbrella nom? or do we need additional discussion? or is there some other procedure that he is expecting of us? --After Midnight 11:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • OK, well I'm starting my workday now, so I'll take a crack at it tonight. If you think that you would like to take a look at it before I post it, please just respond here and I'll put it in a sandbox for you to take a peek and give any input. --After Midnight 12:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I did see the iceberg, but to change metaphors, I was trying eat the elephant properly. We'll see how this one goes and then I'll pick another logical grouping. --After Midnight 13:23, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

ANI discussion you might find interesting

Remember User:Fact Finder? This report looks an awful lot like his MO, but nobody commenting there has pointed that out yet. I'd make a note of it myself, but as you were involved with the guy earlier, I figured I'd make sure you saw it. Cheers. Tony Fox (arf!) 16:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you take a look?

User talk:Reddi. I would like references to myself removed as I find them inappropriate and demeaning. Can you assist? ScienceApologist 17:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

JzG Editing bias

more information from http://rexresearch.com/ concerning perrigo ...

The Kansas City Public Library'sold newspapers is copied at the Rex Research ... the exact same information is at both places (with Rex Research having a few more articles) ...

I have the articles from the KCPL ... I wanted copies of the original stuff ... I went and verified them!!! They have the same information as rex-research! (you can do the same thing, goto the Library stacks and ask a references clerk to help look up the old newspapers ...)

This is suppressing facts by editor bias and abuse of ediiting. J. D. Redding

What?!?!?

So a "google books" reference of a book should not be included? Other web sources that present information from other offline sources, that is not in copyright violation, should not be included?

Hell, according to that reasoning, anything that is on the web and is a copy of any offline version shouldn't be included ... because the web copy is not an independent source! Ha! that's funny. J. D. Redding 03:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

  • You are confusing external links with sources. Sources should be reliable, independent and authoritative. External links should avoid promotion, especially of kook ideas. The rexresearch site fails abjectly any test of reliability as a source, and is also inappropriate as a supporting external link. No, a Google Books review by some unknown user would not qualify as a source. Guy (Help!) 13:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

DRV

An editor has asked for a deletion review of B-Movie Film Festival. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Guy, really. This is really starting to worry me now. While I've seen you make some really ill-advised deletions and AfD nominations, I've never seen one like this. What were you thinking, man? --badlydrawnjeff talk 21:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. Walled gardens are a plague and hard to break down, especially once they've persuaded actual editors to help do their spamming for them. You're right, I can't recall seeing a nest of vacuous self-promotion quote this bad on Misplaced Pages before, although perhaps the Rikki Lee Travolta crap is pretty close. Guy (Help!) 21:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
You really don't see a problem with your behavior right now, do you? --badlydrawnjeff talk 22:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope. I do see a problem with vanity spammers using Misplaced Pages to boost the profile of their endeavours, though. Especially when they are, like Eric Bruno Borgman, persistent about it. Guy (Help!) 13:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Guy, Mel Etitis has been voting keep on Legge's related articles since May 2005 and for the article that underwent DRV July 2005. Arbustoo 00:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

user:Kevin Green342243 & user:Homeboy Tame heads up

Thanks for your recent reversion on my talk page. Just giving you a heads up that Homeboy Tame may be Kevin Green based on an edit at Rafael García - not sure yet and will report to WP:AIV in the future once we know for sure. Best wishes.--VS 02:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Ironically yesterday I was planning on putting a message on your talk page that Kevin Green might be a sock of JB196 as the current mass blankings of wrestling related articles and WP:A zealots follows one of JB196's MO's thus he could be doing it now and hide under the guise of implementing wikipedia policy. I decided against it by givimg Green another day and by the time I did he was blocked as a JB196 sock. –– Lid 03:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Hmmmm there was been a possibly uncovered sock farm here of JB196 socks. –– Lid 03:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
User:Homeboy Tame is confirmed, just hit my user page again. SirFozzie 04:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

More speedy deletion issues

Guy, you have to stop being so trigger happy on these:

You know this, and you continue to do it in defiance of people asking you not to. You love referring to clue, so here's one for you - the more you abuse something, the less likely it will be there for you to abuse in the future, and then there's a real problem. Please undelete these, or I'll take them to DRV. And please, please, PLEASE be more aware of your speedy deletions in the future, this is not a good track record as of late. --badlydrawnjeff talk 03:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Process for process' sake. A complete waste of everybody's time. Please restrict yourself to fighting for articles that rise above the level of childish nonsense. For example: Back in the Picture is one of the band's least popular songs, since it has not been released as a single or a music video. It is neither a very popular live song. If a band is speediable then a song is, and wasting time is just that: wasting time. Also, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Baseball (drinking game) - it was a G4, I just picked the wrong thing form the drop-down. All deletion processes are chronically backlogged, but do feel free to spend time untagging invalid speedy candidates at CAT:CSD, which is where these came from. Guy (Help!) 07:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Okay, no problem with baseball, still seeing a problem with the other two. It's not a waste of time, contrary to what it is, it's battling problematic speedies. you don't have to like it, but i'm going to have to keep challenging you on these, because your judgment has been unfortunate as of late, and it's worrying. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Bands are speediable. By extension, so are songs by minor bands which positively assert that they are not in the least bit notable, and where there is clear consensus established over years that it has to be a pretty remarkable song to get an entry if it's not even been released as a single. Not worth the extra time to type the AfD, and not worth your time or mine arguing over it. That is process-ism taken to a ludicrous and counterproductive extent. And now the full contents of the back jump article:
{{Infobox_Game
  | subject_name  = Back-Jump
  | image_link    = 
  | image_caption = 
  | players       = 2-6
  | setup_time    = under one minute
  | playing_time  = 10–30 minutes*
  | random_chance = None
  | skills        = Strategy
  | footnotes     = * Games do not have to end in 30 minutes and can go on until one of the players wins or there is a stalemate.
  | bggid         = 171
  | bggxrefs      = 
}}
== THIS PAGE IS NOT COMPLETE YET!!! DO NOT EDIT IT!!!!!==
Which is an A1, A3, A7, G1 and probably WP:NFT since OMPHG WTF BBQ!!1!1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has no other contributions and the Board Game Geek entry points to chess. Are you done wasting our time with this crap yet? Only, if you really do care, as I've said before, the place to go is CAT:CSD and review and untag improper speedies there, PROD them or take them to AfD if you prefer. You're not going to have any meaningful impact on the problem by challenging my deletion of crap like this, because there is no realistic chance these deleted articles would survive any process whatsoever, and the processes are already backlogged beyond sanity. Guy (Help!) 13:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Then you really need to start using proper summaries, because you're going to get more of these questions. I untag plenty of speedies, and will continue to do so, but you're not helping the issue with how you've been doing it. If you think my preservation of content is a waste of time, there's a deeper issue here, but I don't think I need to be lectured about it. --badlydrawnjeff talk 13:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Only from you. And I have repeatedly suggested a much better use for your time. You will find many more to question at CAT:CSD than in my deletion log, when the toilet is blocked it does not help to require the plumber to record the use of a different tool for each turd. Guy (Help!) 13:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Know any good CheckUsers? (re:Barber)

Yeah. Another 20 or so socks, tipped off by the fine folks who figured out the pattern over at WP:PW. Any chance we can bulldoze this particular sock farm before Barber takes up all the remaining unclaimed names? (grins). There's a request over at CheckUser that's been there for about 80 hours at this point (although it did let us find a bunch more in the meantime) SirFozzie 04:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Te recent WP:A situation really has messed things up as some people see it as proper applicant of it when in fact it's simply a vandal abusing it to the extreme by blanking entire articles and having them fully protected allowing him to continue his war with wikipedia while getting support. –– Lid 04:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
WP:RBI applies. Revert all contribs, and if people then want to re-apply them under their own names that's up to them. Guy (Help!) 13:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I think Burntsauce (talk · contribs) is another sock that has attempted to hide itself behind other edits as well as tried to drum up support for its actions - look at Barber's post here on a wrestling web forum which includes links to articles he has caused problems on by blanking info, including the actions of Burntsauce. –– Lid 13:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I've started to tag all of the ones on the checkuser who have been blocked (Including the new one who just showed up at ANI) with the Sockblock-JB196 template. You keep blockin em and I'll keep taggin em :) SirFozzie 18:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Brita Red Bulls

You deleted a page that I created with the above title. It was for 'notability guidelines'. Which, to me in layman's terms means 'it isn't important enough to have a page' - which is fine, but I don't really understand how every other team that play in the same league as the B. Red Bulls has a page and the Red Bulls aren't 'important' enough? Could you possibly clarify this for me please? Maybe respond on my talk page? Thanks, Luke-Samual E. Cullen Luke-Samual Ezekiel Cullen 15:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

List of members of the Irish Republican Army

Can you take a look at this please? User:Bastun is disrupting Misplaced Pages to make point. If you check the article's talk page and also here, here and here you can see the problems he's been causing over the last 24 hours. I didn't create the article and I'm trying to sort it out, but rather than allow that to happen he's gutting it, when he's been asked several times to either unlink the names or pipe them to include (Irish republican). He's ignoring all attempts at reason. Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 15:54, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you check in on WP:AN?

Barber's at it again. *sighs* SirFozzie 21:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

List of members of the Irish Republican Army

Hi Guy. On the above article's talk page, you said "If the individuals do not have an article, and it's unlikely that they ever would, then they should not be on the article. Misplaced Pages lists are navigational aids, not directories. A few redlinks are OK as long as the individuals are genuinely important (e.g. a chapter in a reputably-published book on the republican movement) and we just don't have an article yet." - which seems fine to me. However, User:Vintagekits has now added approx. 150 redlinks back in. Most now at least have "(Irish republican)" appended to the name, but some at least are still incorrect - e.g., Frederick Leonard are still incorrect links. A single reference has been added to all of the restored entries: "Tírghrá, National Commemoration Centre, 2002. PB) ISBN 0-9542946-0-2" The referenced book does not appear to exist, at least with that ISBN. Googling demonstrates the book does indeed appear to exist - but at 368 pages you're talking what, a page and a bit per person? Note also that the Guardian article states "The book, meant to be seen only by the relatives of the IRA dead, claims that the 1993 Shankill bomb, which killed nine Protestants, including two children, was not a sectarian act." (my emphasis added). This, if true, would surely also mean it cannot be used as a reputable, neutral, reliable reference? So - what to do? I do not want to get into an edit war. I have outlined to Vintagekits the way articles should be created (which, coincidentally, appears close enough to the method suggested in WP:IRA, but apparently he does not feel the need to do that. Any suggestions? Bastun 23:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Cute plushy award

File:Stuffed tiger wearing a sombrero.jpg
I, Durova award JzG the Whack-a-mole Stuffed Tiger Prize for bopping many sockpuppets at Carnival Misplaced Pages. Durova 01:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Bob Cornuke

Truthteller86 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) first ever edit was to revert material. Second edit was to insert it again. Third ever, was on the talk asking why I called the edit vandalism. The funny thing, I never said anything about vandalism. Arbustoo 03:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Its not SYSIS or Gastrich. I have evidence that it is another banned user. We'll see if he wants to be honest. Arbustoo 01:23, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Its Kdbuffalo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who is blocked. See Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Truthteller86 for details. Arbustoo 17:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I haven't confirmed they are the same. Though their edits are the same. Sorry, about my careless wording. Arbustoo 17:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
CheckUser is worth having, but this is a job for the duck test. Quack, quack. Guy (Help!) 18:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The user is asking for an unblock. Arbustoo 02:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

In popular culture...

Hi,

I agree that almost all of these need to die; but, I'm undecided about "transcendent figures not normally associated with popular culture", like Isaac Newton or Einstein. I suppose my reasoning is that entire books have been written about the impact these figures have had on "transforming" popular culture. I assume you'd agree that any topic that has received such scholarly interest does merit an article. Maybe that could be the criterion for a guideline disfavoring these things. Best wishes, Xoloz 15:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Hmmm. If the article is large, and the influence on popular culture profound, this might be defensible - in the form of "Influence of foo on popular culture" - but to a good first approximation, all "in popular culture" entries are "uhuh, uhuh, I heard of this, uhuh" inna Beavis and Butthead stylee. Guy (Help!) 18:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Democrazy (film)

Please keep to WP:CIVIL. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 16:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

  • When accused of running a hate campaign, it is perfectly reasonable to reply that it is bullshit. Dwain and Billions are doing a fine job of building up Legge and Borgman, but that does not actually replace sourcing as a basis for articles. Guy (Help!) 16:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
You mean that you think that incivility is justified by another editor's saying something with which you disagree? Where do you find that in WP:CIVIL? --Mel Etitis (Talk) 16:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
No, I mean that his claim was bullshit. Guy (Help!) 16:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Strictly speaking, Guy, "bullshit" is the brown stuff that comes out of a bull's hind end; therefore, it is hard to imagine any "claim" (outside of agricultural trading) actually consisting of bullshit. ;) Seriously, though, such epithets are almost universally unhelpful. Xoloz 18:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Where I come from, bullshit is just a slang term for nonsense. Merriam-Webster seems to indicate the usage is the same both sides of the pond. {shrug} Guy (Help!) 18:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, be as facetious as you like, but if you continue this sort of incivility, I'm perfectly prepared to block you for it. It's unpleasant, it unnecessarily raises the temperature of the debate, and it's against Misplaced Pages policy. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 17:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Guy, I think your being played with. See my comments on the afd. Arbustoo 17:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The Canadian Heritage Alliance

The article is now listed at AFD. Since you were the one who did the original deletion, and since you were strongly for keeping the deletion, you should probably comment in the AFD. -Royalguard11(Talk·Review Me!) 17:20, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I thought about deleting some of the speculation immediately, but felt it best for AfD to do the work of verifying (or pruning) the article's claims. I don't think the AfD's duration is long enough for any false claims to circulate in the search engines. Anyway, I'm glad you did the editing. Best wishes, Xoloz 18:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I know - forgive me for being a bit short, I am really not happy about the undeletion of an article where the salvageable content was so minimal. I think the only original content in there is the first sentence. I think DRV failed to note that where we have a seriously crap article on a possibly worthwhile subject, sometimes it's best to just start over. Sometimes we get that right, this time I think we didn't. Never mind. I struggle to care too much, since Guille is clearly one of those people who spends much of her life trying to persuade herself and others that she isn't really a racist, she just doesn't like people from other ethnic backgrounds. Feh. Guy (Help!) 18:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Sigh

I get the joke, thanks. --badlydrawnjeff talk 21:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Yeah, OK, I am a Bad Man and I run a Bad Railway. And actually I am sorry, it was an unworthy thing to do, plus I spoiled the joke by mis-typing it. I saved an A7 just to salve my conscience. I wasn't kidding, though - if you go through CAT:CSD and untag the salvageable and {{prod2}} the self-evident crap you will be doing the project a real favour and people might actually appreciate you. Guy (Help!) 21:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I was going to point out the typo, but thought better of it. Hey, I troll CAT:CSD too, don't get me wrong. I'm just focused on fixing the problems with CSD right now, and the recent films got you in my sights. --badlydrawnjeff talk 21:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
      • You are not going to "fix" anything by looking at my reaction to vanity spammers. My reaction to vanity spammers is mine alone, and I take my lead from Brad's comments quoted above. There are fewer than 250 unique Google hits for Eric Bruno Borgman, which is under a tenth of the hits I get. I was recently asked by Chris Boardman to help prepare an article for a magazine. I neither deserve nor want to be covered by Misplaced Pages. Borgman deserves it less, but wants it more. Much more. To the point where he seems to have recruited some hangers on and some genuine editors to his cause. That makes him an effective vanity spammer - the worst kind. I am not one of the more trigger-happy deleters at CAT:CSD, but even if I were the problem is not the admins, it's the firehose of crap and the RC patrollers. Educate them to include better evidence in speedy nominations, restrict themselves to unambiguous cases, use WP:PROD and WP:AFD - that might make a difference. Pissing me off probably will not. I don't think I am one of the more active deleters. Guy (Help!) 21:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
        • Well, I think Brad really created a problem rather than a solution, so I think our goals, while similar, are diametrically opposed in execution. You're thankfully not normally the problem, which is why I'm not normally up your ass, but I don't discriminate amongst friends. --badlydrawnjeff talk 22:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Your message

I don't know if this helps, but it's how I understand what's happening. There was (I'll take your word for this) a genuine attempt by one or more people to promote themselves and their films through Misplaced Pages. Most of the articles they created (again, I'm happy to take your word for this) were clearly unsuitable, and you and others responded, rightly, by removing them. But even a self-publicist adding lots of crap articles can add one that as a matter of fact is just about OK. My impression is that you'd become so enraged by the whole circus that you were unable or unwilling even to consider the possibility that this was so. When neutrals (like me) became involved, and looked at those one or two articles (the cream of the bunch) that should just about scrape in, they couldn't understand your position, and you couldn't understand theirs. You reacted to them as if they were either part of the plot or stupid dupes taken in by the self-publicists (neither was designed to endear you to them, of course). Their irritable response wound you up further, which irritated them more.

Am I close? --Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Hard to say. Possibly, I suppose. There is a Borgman film, "The Deserter", that was added and deleted more times than I can remember, that certainly annoyed me a bit. But actually I really do think that Democrazy is non-notable. It is a zero-budget film starring actors who do not appear to have been paid, and it went straight to video. I am a gret fan of so-bad-they-rock films; we used to rate films at Southampton from five stars (mega-movie, kill to see) to one star (mega-dud, kill to see). I admire the work of Ed Wood. Back in the 50s there was a real bar to making a film, and to turn out endless films of truly epic badness required persistence and charm. Now, to make a straight-to-video Z-movie requires a budget of maybe a thousand bucks. It is not very hard ot recoup that through sales to the unwitting. There is, in effect, no bar. So I fall back on the Uncle G formula: has this beenthe primary subjec of multiple non-trivial treatments in reliable secondary sources? Answer: no. The award? Maybe it means something, maybe it was just another bit of astoturfing. Who was the jury? Was Roger Ebert on the panel? Or Barry Norman? Or anyone else I would trust to tell a good-bad film from a simply crap film? Not recorded. I patiently reassembled a terminally souvenired print of Kelly's Heroes. I ploughed through all nine or ten reels of The Color Purple. I am not a bystander here, it's a subject that I am interested in, and of course I always have either a strong opinon or none at all. I am a typical geek in that respect. So I have no idea whether this is perosnal bias against the past spamming, or personal bias against simply crap films masquerading as awesomely terrible films. Maybe the stress level is just too high right now - I seem to have spent about $1.5m of the firm's money on toys and the kit is arriving now, so we're about to find out if I got it right or not. Who knows. Guy (Help!) 22:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Addendum: right now I can bear no man any ill-will. I am listening to Tony Halstead playing the Weber concertino, a piece of truly breathtaking virtuosity on the natural horn. I am really trying not to hope my son Michael turn out to have that much talent, because it is a precarious life, but there are wrse things in the world than to be Tony Halstead. I know nobody who has a bad word to say about him, he is a gentleman. And of course the signature on the sleeve makes it sound all the better :-) Factiod: Tony's mentor Charles Mackerras was partly responsible for Barry Tuckwell taking up the horn aged 15. I have horns on the brain :o) Guy (Help!) 22:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
I've just finished listening to a recital by Elizabeth Batiashvili and Milana Chernyavska (Brahms, Bach, and Schubert), so I'm feeling fairly mellow myself. My nephew plays the horn (in the Essex Youth Orchestra at the moment, though he's getting a bit long in the tooth for that I think, being a fresher at University). Have you come across Tim Jackson? Young horn-player with Ensemble 360 — very good. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 09:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't recognise the name, but I might well know the face, if he's a member of the British Horn Society. And if he's not, he should be :-) Seriously, the BHS is wonderful. Tricky instrument, the horn - and all my fault, for singing Flanders and Swann to the lad when he was in the bath as a tot. Pete plays the cello, which is not quite as beastly. Ever since he saw Steven Isserlis, Pete has refused to let us cut his hair. Guy (Help!) 09:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, what did you sing to Pete in his bath? (It's a pity they didn't do a vocalese version of one of the Bach sonatas.) Horn and 'cello are two of my favourite orchestral instruments (though I have a sneaking preference for bass viol). --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:19, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

last time I enjoyed myself...

Trying to think.....trying to think....What was my last edit to Freedom of movement? BDAbramson showed me the article, and it's the latest article that I've significantly researched and tried to improve, and had fun doing. I'm pretty sure everything since then, with a few exceptions has been AFD, CSD, copyediting, warning vandals etc. You know, April 1st would be a good admin day....cascading full protection on every page of the project for 24 hours: bingo! no april fools vandalism, and we actually get to let go and enjoy ourselves for 24 hours! God wikipedia is like crack: you hate yourself for continuing to edit, but you can't stop and you have to get your fix. ⇒ SWATJester 00:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

While reading your note from Brad on the top of the page, I'm reminded of last week when I received a false threat from an alleged American Bar Association Media Committee member, yelling at me for deleting the ABA president's wikipedia page as copyvio. Take 30 seconds to think about that. Why would someone from the largest voluntary professional association in the world, consisting of over 400,000 lawyers, not even have the slightest concept of why we cannot host copyrighted material? Le sigh. ⇒ SWATJester 00:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

You know what I was just thinking? Part of the reason that Misplaced Pages has so many vandals lately, is because there's not as much interest in mentoring new editors as there seemed to be a year or two ago. When I joined, admins like Killer Chihuahua, No September, yourself, BDAbramson, SlimVirgin, etc. were presented to me as "role models" and I should look to them for questions, and advice, and if I don't know, think about how they would edit before I brashly go off and do stuff. I think I pretty much turned out alright from that. Seems to me that new editors aren't given any role models anymore. I'm not smart enough to know how to fix that, but it's just a thought that occured to me. ⇒ SWATJester 00:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

  • That's an insightful remark. We're all so busy playing whack-a-mole these days that there is no time for much else, I think. I have an alternate account, but I hardly ever get to use it - I must uncheck "remember me" I think and spend more time without the little yellow bar lighting up. Guy (Help!) 06:43, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Guille deletion review

. CJCurrie 06:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Delille Cellars

I am contesting the speedy tag that User:Rkitko put on the article.Agne/ 19:22, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Billy Ego and a similar issue with El C

Hi. Now that the case has closed, I would like to thank you for your support in the arbitration, which (although lenghty and bothersome) has at least closed with the ban of a disruptive editor along with an army of his socks.

If you could spare the time, I would be grateful if you could try and assist me with resolving a somewhat similar dispute. It concerns El C (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA), whose user page, I believe, is inappropriate for much the same reasons Billy Ego's was. However, El C has flatly refused to discuss the issue. He has simply deleted all my comments on his talk page (, , ; see also my similar request to Seraphimblade).

At this point, I think it would be helpful if you could ask El C to talk to me about it, and possibly if you would add your own thoughts about the appropriateness of this sort of user page content. As with Seraphimblade, I am also making this request because I am thinking about opening an RfC on this issue, which requires that two users have unsuccessfully tried to resolve the dispute bilaterally. Best, Sandstein 23:03, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

  • It's a quote from Lenin. Billy Ego's page was full of quotes from Billy Ego. Seriously, it is no big deal, the quote in context is highly unlikely to bring the project into disrepute, except amongst hardline anti-Communist zealots, and I don't actually care if they decide never to darken our doors again as that would make my life easier. Guy (Help!) 10:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Disruption by Sandstein: a sad account

Hi, Guy. Any thoughts about the manner in which Sandstein chose to deliver his ... comparison? To save you time, let me present the timeline:

  1. Sandstein, in effect, compares my userpage to Billy Ego's, writing: "I feel obliged to point out that your user page suffers of much the same defects that his did" — Billy Ego and your user page
  2. I remove the comment — I am deeply offended by the purported parallels and am not interested in discussing the matter further; please refrain from commenting on my talk page in the future
  3. Far from showing a great regard, or acknowledgment, to "deeply offended," Sandstein merely restores the comment(!) — restoring deleted comment, reply will follow
  4. I rollback the seemingly uncaring and cold-hearted replication. — Reverted edits by Sandstein (talk) to last version by El C
  5. Sandstein then add another comment about how I do not own my talk page — Your user page, again
  6. I remove the comment again, telling him it was impolite of him, in light of my aforementioned feelings — restoring the comment after it was removed was impolite; please read up on WP:WQT
  7. Not willing to take the ""hint,"" he adds yet another comment (about how he really wishes to discuss my userpage with me before involving the community at large) — Your user page, yet again
  8. I remove it, yet again, hoping he somehow would be able to understand I.do.not.wish.to.speak.to.him — please do not place further comments on my talk page; I am not interested in speaking to you at this time
  9. He finally leaves my talk page alone and goes to make the same highly offesive comparisons elsewhere.
  10. None of the individuals he contacts agree to be signatory in the RfC he wished to launch about my userpage.

I argue that Sandstein has been highly provocational, and that if he truly wished to speak to me about my userpage (at some point), he would have left my talk page alone after the first time I removed his comment (telling him I found his note "deeply offensive," which he didn't even bother to address). It's really unfortunate, since right now, I'd rather leave the project a thousand times over than to ever speak to him again. El_C 13:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, on the advice of Guy I'll leave the matter alone for now. I'm just really puzzled that a long-established contributor and competent admin like El C would react with such high drama ("Oooh! He said it again!") to my polite suggestion that we discuss my contention that his user page content is in violation of Misplaced Pages policies. For instance, how else but through his talk page was I supposed to speak to him, and what exactly was offensive about my remarks? Anyway, I guess we all have a bad day from time to time (I sure do). I'll just forget about it. Sandstein 15:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Um, guys? Can we just assume good faith here? Sandstein saw what he perceived as a polemical user page. I don't see it as such, but I can see how it might look that way. But drawing a comparison with a user whose uncontrollable biases and rudeness (more than his user page) led to his banning, is really unhelpful and I can sympathise with El_C finding that very offensive. I believe an apology would not go amiss. Guy (Help!) 16:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, JzG. I do apologize for the length of this exchange. But I'm compelled to note my deep regret in seeing that Sandstein still continues to act in what I percieve to be a provocational manner, with "high drama" innunedo, and so on. I really wish he'd exercize greater restraint and aim at utmost moderation. There was, indeed, better ways to take issue with my userpage than comparing it to the userpage of a fascist, and it is profoundly puzzling that Sandstein lacked the basic intuition to realize this; not to mention forcing comments on my talk page when I made it clear I had no intention of speaking to him. The entire incident reflects very poorly on him. El_C 16:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I certainly did not mean to imply any similarities in the conduct of Billy Ego (the disruptive sockmaster) and El C, who by all accounts is a distinguished member of our community. I apologise if my comments were taken that way. However, I do contend that with regards to the content of the user pages, there are parallels, and I regret that we have not been able to engage in a calm discussion about it. Both user page approvingly feature quotes by dictators (i.e., Lenin and Hitler/Mussolini), both pages also feature the appropriate large-scale propaganda photographs, and both pages are generally made up as a shrine to the respective totalitarian ideology. I agree that reasonable people may disagree about this assessment, but I did hope we could at least talk about it. Sandstein 16:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
JzG, I should not be forced to engage in polemics with and respond to the dubious ideological comparisons of Sandstein (or anyone). If he wishes for his userpage to reflect Swiss neutrality with all that that entails, or whatever, that's his prerogative. El_C 19:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree. The images of Guevara and Lenin adorned enough student walls when I was growing up that I find it hard to consider them offensive. And the quote from Lenin is pretty understated. What would Sandstein think of me quoting Churchill, I wonder? Or any other of the interesting views on democracy and government expressed by significant historical figures?
  • Government is an evil; it is only the thoughtlessness and vices of men that make it a necessary evil. When all men are good and wise, government will of itself decay. (Shelley)
  • An oppressive government is more to be feared than a tiger. (Confucius)
  • The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would steal them away. (Ronald Reagan)
  • Government of the busy by the bossy for the bully. (Arthur Seldon on capitalism)
  • Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried. (Winston Churchill)
I could go on. There is a difference between a person living in a democratic country but noting the problems with the democratic system, through the words of a historical figure, and openly advocating the economics of some of the most despised totalitarian states in history. I don't think quoting Stalin advocates the overthrow of democracy. And let's not forget than when asked what he thought of Western civilisation, Gandhi said "I think it would be a very good idea". So, let's draw a distinction between a single quote from a respected editor and outright polemic from an unrepentently tendentious editor. Guy (Help!) 20:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
All right. We'll have to agree to disagree on that account. I think any of the above quotes would not be prone to bring Misplaced Pages into disrepute, but I guess experience will have to tell us whether or not El C's user page is. As I said, I'll drop the issue for now. Sandstein 20:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Again, with the for now; how ominous... El_C 20:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Fizzleoneseven sock?

Curious, who is Fizzleoneseven (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) a sock of? I'm in the mood for applying a {{sockpuppet|UserName|blocked}} to the user page. --Iamunknown 01:24, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Ticket for you...

Hay Guy. Ticket#: 2007041010008042 makes mention of you several times... It's a very difficult ticket to dissect, but it contains big heavy words like "libel" and "slander" so I thought you should know. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 05:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah... I think I addressed what the concern was about... we'll see I guess. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 14:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Gastrich

Further proof Gastrich has no life. Wikidash (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) This new user seems to know about WP:BITE, and Gastrich's posts. That new user wants critical material removed regarding a religious school. You are mentioned on that page as well. Arbustoo 17:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

The Cool Wall

In case you missed it. One Night In Hackney303 21:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Wild Law (book)

Thank you for your comments. You were right, I had not sourced the book adequately (I'm new to this and appreciate the guidance). I hope you find the article now suitably improved with the names of respected scholars and thinkers (three of whom are notable enough to have Misplaced Pages articles written about them, including a Nobel Peace Laureate) who have written about the book; the details of several major conferences based on the actual book itself (with speakers who are members of the British parliament, professors and heads of legal departments at universities, and other distinguished and renowned individuals); and the non-trivial mention in several legal publications and national newspapers. --Lesley Fairbairn 09:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


VEGF Trap

Hello JzG

I was very disappointed to discover that my page on VEGF Trap had been deleted by you on April 15, under the criterion "advertisement". It was not an advertisement, but an updated scientific article on a molecule that is not even yet commercialized. I spent hours writing it. It is more updated than the article on this molecule produced by the firm that develops it. To consider this as "advertisement" would lead to delete all the articles in Misplaced Pages dealing with specific molecules, and there are thousands, and very useful. It is even less "blatant advertisement" : Blatant advertising : Pages which exclusively promote a company, product, group, service, or person and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company, product, group, service, or person as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion; an article that is blatant advertising should have inappropriate content as well. If a page has previously gone through a deletion process and was not deleted, it should not be speedily deleted under this criterion,

as there is no, in my opinion, inappropriate content, I would be very honored if you would reconsider my article. It is my wish to go on providing Misplaced Pages with many articles on biotech medicines, as that is what I am specialized in. I don't mind submitting them to you or other administrators. I understand that your role is to protect the encyclopedic mission of Misplaced Pages. Please understand I am not part of the scourges, and eventually able to lend you a helping hand in my field of expertise. May I add that I am a newcomer to Misplaced Pages, and plead indulgence.

Best regards,


Tony Marcel, MD, PhD marcel.tony@orange.fr

  • "VEGF Trap is a therapeutic fusion protein manufactured by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. It is a potent inhibitor of VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor)and as such is ongoing clinical trials in cancer and in ARMD(adult retinal macular degeneration)." And so on. Come back when the trials are done and we can validate the claims from reliable independent sources. Guy (Help!) 15:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Query

Hi there! I would like to ask your advice on something... WP:PNSD has been protected for two weeks now, and based on the talk page most people seem agreed on how to move ahead. But I fear that if I were to request unprotection this would simply lead to another tag war with the people who want the page gone, resulting in yet another protection. Any suggestions on how to handle this would be most welcome; perhaps we simply should employ {{editprotected}} a lot? Thanks, >Radiant< 15:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


Back to VEGF Trap

Your comment is very important. My article crearly states that clinical trials are ongoing. If you decide that Misplaced Pages can only mention drugs whose claims are validated, you will have to suppress a few thousand entries: all those concerning drugs that are not EMEA/FDA approved. But describing only approved drugs considerably reduces the scope of Misplaced Pages, and would reduce it medically speaking to a PDR. The issue is not making false allegations (I have made none). Your "come back when we can validate the claims" is contradictory with my text that specifies that the drug is in phase II. Therefore no claim can be "validated" for years. If patients asked whether or not they wish to enter a trial could consult Misplaced Pages, it might not be so bad. If there is a pharmacologist or person from FDA or EMEA among your administrators, it might be interesting to ask him his opinion. Please give this a thought.

All the best,

Tony

  • Misplaced Pages articles must be neutral, attributable to reputable sources and demonstrate notability. At this stage of development I don't see how a brand-name drug will fit these policies; the sole source of information at this stage is the manufacturer. Drugs can fail during clinical trials. Overall, we need to wait, I think, until we have a wider base of more neutral material on which to draw. Guy (Help!) 17:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Guy,

Thanks for helping me around. I do understand your reservations and will not persist on this specific article. The problem with VEGF Trap is that it has not been given an INN (international non proprietary name) like most drugs in clinical trials, so it looks like a brand name drug although it is not yet ! I will try to avoid such situations in the future. I will concentrate more on pharmacological families (like anti EGFRs, where you have 5 or 6 different drugs, if not more), and if drugs are still in trials, I will add something like "claims have not been validated by regulatory authorities". This latter intention holds mainly for stubs, because on one hand Misplaced Pages is calling for help, and on the other I do not want to induce unnecessary hopes.

Have a nice evening,


Tony

Template:pnc

Mangojuice nominated it for deletion. I don't know how closely you're paying attention to the guideline pages at this point, so I figured I'd let you know since you created it. --badlydrawnjeff talk 19:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I hate...

Virginia Tech shootings. Perp: unknown. Weapons: unknown. Number of victims: unknown. Motive: unknown. Why we have an article when nothing is know: unknown. Why someone has once again mistaken Misplaced Pages for Wikinews: unknown. Guy (Help!) 22:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Because at least this way we have an article on it, before the WikiVandals come in and do it for us? I agree though, I wish there was a 48 hour cool off period after an event before an article can be written about it, just to avoid this kind of thing. SirFozzie 22:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Soft redirect: "Wikinews has an article on this subject". Protected. Job done. Guy (Help!) 22:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
And how many pages will you have to create that to cover everything? Look at the move history of that page, that was on five/six titles. And I'm sure that 10-20 more could have been created easily. Eh. After the reaming I just took on WT:BLP about Burntsauce, don't expect me to do anything controversial if following the policies as written gets you told "to get off your ass" and do something. SirFozzie 22:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Australian Forces Mod - Speedly Deleted?

I see that you decided that Australian Forces Mod needed to be deleted, and that it wasn't up for debate. You have stated A7 (no assertion of notability) as appropriate grounds for speedy deletion, so would you care to be specific so we can work towards the page being restored? How many sources would be required for the article to be restored? (it has been in at least 1 reputable publication, PC PowerPlay)

For the record, I am a part of the development team for the project, and it was one of my colleagues that put the page up in the first place. I was intending to edit the page to be more of a neutral POV than the, frankly, bias page that was there.(he's not that savvy with wikipedia so he just copied text from the readme file for the mod and thought that'd be ok)

That said, it seemed a bit premature to have the article deleted on the spot without even giving anyone a chance to post up some sources rather than just putting it up for deletion. I'm not going to pretend to know all the ins and outs of the wikipedia system, but I do think the page was hard done by...

I look forward to hearing from you, and hope this can be resolved in a civil manner.

Cheers, BrotherEstapol 10:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

  • You will probably be wasting your time. Individual mods are rarely significant enough to be discussed outside the main article on the game. Guy (Help!) 11:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Your delete of No Reservations (film) is under DRV

Looks like the filer forgot to notify you (pgk noted this a while ago, but I didn't parse it out properly).

An editor has asked for a deletion review of No Reservations (film). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. MalcolmGin Talk / Conts 21:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


ZIP Drugs company profile delete - Speedily Deleted?

Just trying to understand why you deleted it and how this article is different from the ones about Walgreens, Eckerd etc. I specifically put it into company profile section not as a news article. There was no advertising in it other than basic information about the company similiar to all other company profiles.

Your response is appreciated.

  • No assertion of notability, created by single purpose account ], and we don't have "company profiles" we have encyclopaedia articles about notable companies. Guy (Help!) 06:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Tobias Conradi

Hi, as you've been involved in blocking or unblocking Tobias Conradi during the past six months or so, I'm making this courtesy edit on your talk page to notify you that there has recently been an inconclusive community sanction discussion, and I have taken this to arbitration. --Tony Sidaway 15:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Aluka

Could you please take a look back at the deletion discussion about Aluka? I am not sure if I am writing to the right place and what is the next step... Olyashok 15:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)