Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alorkalabahi (talk | contribs) at 14:32, 2 May 2013 (→Alor Kalabahi Indonesia: new WikiLove message). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Talk Archive 1, Talk Archive 2, Talk Archive 3, Talk Archive 4, Talk Archive 5, Talk Archive 6, Talk Archive 7, Talk Archive 8, Talk Archive 9, Talk Archive 10, Talk Archive 11, Talk Archive 12, Talk Archive 13, Talk Archive 14

Silly and funny stuff can be found here

Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. I will respond here unless you request otherwise.

I prefer to keep communications on-wiki if possible, but if you need to discuss something privately, please send me an email.

Cheers

Thanks for that. Wonder who he was a sock of? Yunshui 雲‍水 09:36, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome...and in the end, they all quack the same :). Lectonar (talk) 09:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for further details on copyrighted information

Hello there,
firstly, thanks for reviewing the article I created on the Natural Resource Charter. I was told that information included in the article was copyrighted and thus deleted. Could you tell me which information was copyrighted? I can only think of it being the Precepts - but these were referenced to the natural resource charter website. You help is appreciated.
Regards,
MaxMGW NRC (talk) 14:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I did not review the article, I just deleted it for the 2nd time...and regarding your query, see WP:Copyrights. Lectonar (talk) 14:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Why did you remove the eSurv.org page

Hi there,
Today you removed our eSurv.org page. Please can you explain exactly why you did this? Did you not read the note we added regarding the speedy deletion, if so then please can you explain why our article was exceptional as we do not understand?

We are looking for a justification as we feel that you are picking on us unfairly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afriggins (talk • contribs) 12:01, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

You read the links that I provided? They include all the information you require.... and if you read them, why are you asking these questions? Lectonar (talk) 12:03, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I see no links, where are they?

In the logs I discovered the reason you gave for deleting it was "Page dependent on a deleted or nonexistent page)"

So were there broken links?

Have you looked at your talkpage? And the reason above was only the reason for deleting the articles talkpage...I would urge you to acquaint yourself with what Misplaced Pages is or especially is not. Lectonar (talk) 12:08, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

How can I access that? The page is deleted.

I am trying to find out why other websites (as mentioned) are allowed an article and we are not. Was it something we wrote or are other sites just getting lucky or corrupt admins?

Your talkpage is not deleted, see User talk: Afriggins; follow the bluelinks I provided there...and read, if you would be so kind. Lectonar (talk) 12:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that link, I will check it out.

I have been looking at other articles in a similar field to ours, for example CreateSurvey, I cant see much difference between that and our own.

You have rather obviously not read the information I provided. All the information you need is there. If you want to contest the deletion ,you may do so at deletion review. Regards. Lectonar (talk) 12:20, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

No need to threaten to ban my account, that is quite aggressive of you. As many others have, I simply wanted to create a page stating the facts about our business. I thin find that you have deleted the page that I created and was trying to find out why. As I am new to Misplaced Pages I do not know all of the ins and outs and guidelines, I am sure that you do not expect millions of users to spend hours reading all of them either.

On this occassion I will not take your threat to block me personally and will not take this any further.

Actually, I do expect users who want to contribute here to spend some time getting used to it and learn their ropes before they start to throw accusations and conspiracy theories around. And rest assured: I am so grateful that you will not take this any further, I was literally shaking in my boots....Lectonar (talk) 13:35, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for review

Hi Lectonar, I have created another page on the Natural Resource Charter and made changes according to your feedback. Would it be possible for you to take look at the sandbox version before I submit it as an article? link: http://en.wikipedia.org/User:MGW_NRC/sandbox Thanks, Max MGW NRC (talk) 17:08, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I had a short look, good work, but what seems to be lacking is: what makes this noteworthy, notable, in the first place? How it reads now is, well, ok, it does exist, but what makes it stick out, so to speak. I will have a look at the sources tomorrow, if this is alright with you. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 17:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Excellent, thank you. So the notability of the organization would be demonstrated by significant coverage in independent sources - I hope this criteria is fulfilled by the references. I could also, at the end of the page, create a 'websites' sub-heading listing instances where the organization has been mentioned. Looking forward to your comments. MGW NRC (talk) 14:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, I have moved it to mainspace now (Natural Resource Charter); mind that it still can happen that the article is challenged, because the sources, well, apart from the one (The Guardian), are only so-so, and only in part independent. Regards. Lectonar (talk) 14:27, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Point taken, some of the sources are from institutions loosely linked to the organization. Did not think of that. I'll take a look and try and to find more independent references. Appreciate the help! MGW NRC (talk) 16:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Protection of Mousetrap

Wow! That was quick. Thanks! Diego (talk) 12:31, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

You are most welcome. Lectonar (talk) 12:32, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your protection

Thank you, perhaps it won't matter— but I believe that its the right thing for the moment.--Gmaxwell (talk) 09:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok, your're welcome. I can almost hear the cries of censorship.....but perhaps we can lift the full protection if the names of the person(s) become officially known...Lectonar (talk) 09:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Or officially denounced, wild.--Gmaxwell (talk) 09:31, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I added my comment at RPP but I'll second it here too. This is a completely out ofband full protection made with almost no discussion, and very little disruption. There's zero policy that would support full protection (not to mention the absurd 72 hour protect) even for a short time. Shadowjams (talk) 09:45, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I have commented there again. Lectonar (talk) 10:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

FRESHM3N III

Hey man,

I appreciate your effort to prevent will.i.am's "#willpower" page from being vandalized, but please stop changing the name "FRESHM3N III" to "Freshmen III". My name is Howard Eversley and I'm 1/3 of FRESHM3N III. Consider it a conflict of interest if you want, but I'm pretty sure I know how our name is spelled. :D

Thanks,

Heversle (talk) 07:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Howie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heversle (talk • contribs) 07:37, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I just responded to a request for page protection, but apart from that did not edit the article at all. Lectonar (talk) 07:50, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Thomas M. Melsheimer deletion

Hi: Hoping to get some clarity on why the Thomas M. Melsheimer page was deleted. The link cited below is a press release on the Susman Godfrey website. The reference link included in the Thomas M. Melsheimer article is for a news story about the same case. Your help in setting me straight is much appreciated. Elvis1957

11:35, 16 April 2013 Lectonar (talk | contribs) deleted page Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Thomas M. Melsheimer (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.susmangodfrey.com/News/News-Archive/Jury-Awards-1787-Million-Against-NL-Industries-Inc/) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elvis1957 (talk • contribs)

If you wirte an atircle in Misplaced Pages, you submit this, in essence, in the knowledge that the article may be copied to any other website or publishing medium (see here: Misplaced Pages:NFC. As the website of susmangodfrey is indeed non-free, so are the press releases which precludes its use in a Misplaced Pages article. See also WP:Plagiarism. Lectonar (talk) 06:58, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The reference link included in the original Melsheimer article was a link to Texas Lawyer newspaper, which is non-free, and I now understand why I can't use that link. Can I simply resubmit the article with a new link to a free site? If so, can you please let me know if that link was the only problem with the article? Thanks for your reply. Elvis1957 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:55, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, actually I do not think you understand what I was trying to say; to be clear: the whole article was made out of different parts of text taken out of the links you provided, sometimes verbatim, sometimes with close paraphrasing...all of which is against Wikipedias policies; it is not prohibited to have the links, it is prohibited to use the text from the links to build the article if the resulting text is so close to the sources as to be virtually be indistinguishable from the sources (even if they are multiple sources). I would advise you to create a whole new article, using the procedure at Articles for creation again. And, just as a sidethought, mind our policy about conflict of interest. The whole article read a little (or a little bit more even) like a professional praise-page, imho. Lectonar (talk) 13:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

RFPP

I posted those 3 links for any admins other than you who would come across the request. Also, can you revdel the latest version of my talk page, if it has not been done already? She had no way to give her email id, and I have no way other than privately to help her understand most of the things about enWiki, so we dont have to keep shielding her perpetually.

Thanks, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I was away for some time....as I can see, it has been taken care of. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 16:41, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Soviet Union

This edit of Ryulong and related edit comment is really misguided. The discussion on the talk page had resolved the issue. The fact that Ryulong reverted my edit without even leaving a note on the talk page but instead requested protection is most improper. Nor has it has nothing to do with Leo Komarov as you contend in your edit comment when you protected the page.

User:Incnis Mrsi reported the problem of IP disruption at this thread. I subsequently report the issue here and the page was semi-protected. I then reverted this disruptive IP. The book State Succession to International Responsibility by Patrick Dumberry published in 2007 summarises the current mainstream view on page 151:

"The question whether the break-up of the U.S.S.R. should be regarded as a case of State dissolution or rather a series of secessions is also controversial. The only non-controversial point is that the three Baltic States are regarded not as new States (and not as successor States of the U.S.S.R.) but as identical to the three Baltic States that existed before their 1940 illegal annexation by the U.S.S.R."

I think with that definitive summary we can conclude that the mainstream view is that the Baltic states were not successor states, since the author clearly states there is no controversy in that view, i.e. it is not contested in scholarly literature. Therefore, the Baltic states, which left the Soviet Union three months before it was dissolved, is improperly included as successor states in the inbox. Note that only four republics are listed as predecessors and 12 should be listed as successors, as any RS will show. --Nug (talk) 11:07, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I just commented on the impression it left me with, and I will not engage in a discussion on the topic (which would make me involved), because that is what the articles talk-page is for. After reading through the talk-page, I deemed full protection necessary. Get concensus on the talk-page (for me there is no obvious consensus visible), and me or another admin wil lift the full protection. Lectonar (talk) 11:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

The discussion has been dormant for nearly two weeks, the disruptive IP was not contributing to the discussion, User:Incnis Mrsi who initially opposed the edit in discussions finally implicitly agreed when he also reverted the IP, thereby showing that consensus has been achieved. My concern is that the original partial protection will also be lifted thereby allowing more IP disruption. --Nug (talk) 11:24, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

No worries, I watchlisted it :). Lectonar (talk) 11:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

PP for Incheon International Airport

Hi. I saw that you declined the semi-protection request for Incheon International Airport, which is OK. But at AIV, they say the IP vandal(s) is/are stale, but they continue to actively edit. I'm not an admin, but should I at least leave a level 4-im vandalism warning on the unblocked IPs talk pages? Thanks. WorldTraveller101 11:18, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Yep, it is stale because the IP did not edit since April 27...so the next time they edit (and it is disruptive, of course), leave a final warning, and that should be that. Thanks for you work, btw. Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar (talk) 11:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Hm. OK. I will look into it, for they may have been blocked between now and when I checked. Good luck and continue the good work. WorldTraveller101 22:24, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Hobsons

Hello,

I see you are the deleting administrator for an article I plan on writing - Hobsons. You deleted this for WP:G11 and WP:A7. I will not write the article like a promotion, so I am not concerned about G11. Regarding notability, Hobsons owns Naviance and College Confidential, both of which are very widely used (see, for example, ). Do you have concerns about me writing the article?

ModelUN (talk) 00:16, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I have almost never concerns about an article being wirtten, if it is written within policy. So let me point you to our fabulous WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE, or perhaps just use the process described at articles for creation. It would perhaps not be a good idea to put this into article space at first. Cheers, and let me know if I can help. Lectonar (talk) 07:14, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou

• Lectonar, thank you for the welcome. I'll be sure to ask you for some pointers. (Solution55 (talk) 08:57, 30 April 2013 (UTC))

You're most welcome. Lectonar (talk) 08:58, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Jackie Mason

Thank you for protecting this article via pending changes. May I enlist some additional help? One IP is very persistently forcing the same change back into the article again and again (without a word) and keeping three editors busy all day rejecting the change and calling for discussion, sourcing, etc. We do not want to be accused of edit warring in doing so. Would you consider outright semi-protection? Hertz1888 (talk) 18:23, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

As it is the same IP at the moment (and has been for this day), tag him with increasing vandalism-warnings concerning his edits (his talk-page is a disturbing red), and report to AIV afterwards. Semi-protection for one IP is a somewhat heavy-handed approch, like a cannon shooting at sparrows. Cheers. Lectonar (talk) 18:26, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Advice understood and heeded. A good analogy. Thank you! Hertz1888 (talk) 19:04, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Literal translation from German. Lectonar (talk) 19:12, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

OBERLINER

I have now added several third party references to OBERLINER article. Please review them, its a new project working on local journalism and is appreciated very much in local community here in Berlin at this moment as the magazine is not too old we may not be able to provide many links. Its a non-profit project and promotion is not our focus we like to be on Misplaced Pages so that people can know more about our practical approach on local journalism. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.5.215.147 (talk) 21:17, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

That is exactly the point; we will have to let the AfD run it's course. Lectonar (talk) 05:03, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Alor Kalabahi Indonesia