UGG edit
Dear Ripley, I don’t feel I’ve done anything to merit being blocked. This is only about getting the facts right – not about advancing a point of view. Every time that I have edited the Ugg Boots entry I have stated the reason for the change in the discussion section. Moreover, my changes and comments have been backed up by references from reliable sources. Some of my edits were accepted by the other editors – such as the fact that the boots are “twin-faced” sheepskin and that the registrations for UGG Australia were not removed from the Australian and New Zealand registries. Hoary correctly pointed out that I was invited to provide good arguments and this is precisely what I have done. I hope that we can continue to discuss this issue with civility and come to a consensus.--Factchk (talk) 15:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Nationality seems to be an issue for this article Nelly Furtado etal I follow edit
You can read her talkpage and all the comments made by the anon IPs who are pushing placing a dual citizenship tag on her article. This is very rarely done with notable exceptions as per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Opening_paragraph. Basically that section is followed to prevent the edit wars that ensue on articles like this, Alexis Bledel, George Lopez,French, English, Catalan, Arabian etal. Lots of countries extend dual citizenships which complicates the mix. Someone even on Carlos Slim's talkpage tried to reason he was American because he was born in North America.
MOS bio leads as interpreted by other editors and Admins need nice tight sentences. Begin to fill them up with some of the European countries who extend tri and quad citizenships and you begin to see the problem.
This is a very slippy slope which you could open a ton of worms into other articles. That is why as per one of the sentences in the paragraph cited, consistency is sought. Hope this helps. --Morenooso (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- As best we could, the regular editors have tried to quell this edit war which led one to seek semi-protection which was granted. Each step along the way, I tried to document what was taking place with the article. I just read what someone wrote about me on the board you are part of. I have to stay WP:COOL about this but calling me a Nazi seals the deal how inflamed the Portugese community is about tagging this article like someone trying to put graffiti on a wall. --Morenooso (talk) 23:09, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- If you have any input into the MOS Bio lead, I'd recommend it be changed back to:
If at the time of nationality, a person had X, Y and Z nationality; if born in Z country - that is the only nationality listed unless they demonstrated strong ties to a dual part of their citizenship.
- About your statement supporting KWW's position, he has made several error statements that have fanned the fire. On his talkpage several days ago, I tried to get him to see what the main errors concerning getting a statement from the Canadian government and proof of her dual citizenship. The anon IPs seized on both these issues and you can see how the rant has gone on. Additionally, he accused me of complicating the issue which the anon IPs also seized on. That's where the nazi report came from and why they think I am an admin. Heck, they think KWW and Wikiscribe are admins too. The OTRS addition slightly complicated the issue too but OTRS is official and would the final answer if they entered the debate. The OTRS agent declined. --Morenooso (talk) 18:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Additionally, KWW saw somewhat the error of posting on the talkpage and created a new section which in a nutshell advocating letting the anon IPs rant on. I was surprised that that did not gather wrath. I have stayed off the talkpage so as to let the issue die down and remain WP:COOL. --Morenooso (talk) 18:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I see what you're saying, but I think trying to steer the discussion to producing reliable sources isn't a bad exercise. At this point, for the most part we seem to have reached an agreement among a consensus of editors on the talk page not to include the reference in the lead paragraph, so what's left is just to enforce that consensus unless someone comes forward with some more compelling information. If the anons want to revert, they can, but they'll end up violating 3RR against as large a consensus as we have at the moment. — e. ripley\talk 18:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, there still is no consensus amongst us three regular editors. Each of us has a different POV. But, I agree that our overall intent is to have a great article. Furtado's article was a WP:GA nominee. That implies that it was stable and free of such issues. Normally when a page gets to that nomination, edits like this are almost automatically reversed unless they materially improve the article (if they cannot be copyeditted). --Morenooso (talk) 18:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I see what you're saying, but I think trying to steer the discussion to producing reliable sources isn't a bad exercise. At this point, for the most part we seem to have reached an agreement among a consensus of editors on the talk page not to include the reference in the lead paragraph, so what's left is just to enforce that consensus unless someone comes forward with some more compelling information. If the anons want to revert, they can, but they'll end up violating 3RR against as large a consensus as we have at the moment. — e. ripley\talk 18:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Additionally, KWW saw somewhat the error of posting on the talkpage and created a new section which in a nutshell advocating letting the anon IPs rant on. I was surprised that that did not gather wrath. I have stayed off the talkpage so as to let the issue die down and remain WP:COOL. --Morenooso (talk) 18:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Initially KWW supported nationality reverts, now he is somewhat neutral and seems ambivalent because according to his post on the talkpage, I am pushing the issue in stringent manner. Combined with his statements about other documents/statements that do not appear in the MS Bio lead paragraph section, he introduced an issue that the anon IPs seized on. I tried to get him to see that as regular editors we need to stick with MS Bio guidelines but he did not agree - hence his position from my POV. --Morenooso (talk) 18:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'll be clear here. Morenooso misrepresents the contents of WP:BIO. He states that it contains statements that it does not contain, and that misrepresentation is one of the major causes of this furor. I am sticking with MOS:BIO guidelines, which discourage including ethnicity in the lead. If someone can actually find a source that documents her as having continually possessed dual Portuguese and Canadian citizenship, then the lead should describer her as "Portuguese-Canadian". We do not serve our purpose by deciding an answer in advance, and there is no proscription on dual-citizenship description in MOS:BIO.—Kww(talk) 20:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Sugrivajne (Sugriva pledge) edit
This is also there in Kannada wikipedia. --At-par (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
"Galvo" edit
You should do a google search for "Galvo"... It only appears once -- the Houston Press article....the other two are user-added dictionary entries added by an anonymous user at the end of last year. --nsaum75¡שיחת! 03:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion edit
I did not create that article. I am not sure why you thought I did. I did not, so there is no need to warn me. Please be more careful in the future. I have never created any article. Regards, Xtzou (Talk) 19:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Please look. :I moved the article to Aripra where, indeed, it resides today. Please be more careful in the future. Xtzou (Talk) 19:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I don't really see what there is to be careful about. Maybe I'm missing something, but why is it important to have the article Post a article redirect to Aripra, which is apparently about some sort of place in India? — e. ripley\talk 21:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Talkback edit
Message added 21:18, 27 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
The Eyes Have It (Book) edit
I've removed your speedy from this article and replaced it with a prod as books are not eligible for A7. The criterion states "This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works" (my emphasis). Please be more careful with your speedy tagging in future. Dpmuk (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Speedy categories edit
Hi there; you recently tagged the article Put a add (sic) for deletion, which was obviously correct; but you tagged as A7 which is lack of notability. It was an obvious advertisement, indeed a blatant one, and should have been tagged as such. Please keep up the good work, but please also take time to review WP:CSD, where the various categories are listed and explained. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 20:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, as I said already, the article was clearly speediable. It was, to be fair, posted as if it had been submitted to the "for sale" column in the local newspapaper. Perhaps you think that I am nit-picking, and perhaps I am; but you might be surprised at how many editors complain about deletion of obviously deletable articles merely because they are incorrectly categorised! Best wishes. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 11:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Deletion nomination of Talk:APCO Worldwide edit
Hi E. Ripley, this is a message from an automated bot, regarding Talk:APCO Worldwide. You blanked the page and, since you are its sole author, FrescoBot has interpreted it as a request for deletion of the page and asked administrators to satisfy the requests per speedy deletion criterion G7. Next time you want a page that you've created deleted, you can explicitly request the deletion by inserting the text {{db-author}}. If you didn't want the page deleted, please remove the {{db-author}} tag from the page and undo your blanking or put some content in the page. Admins are able to recover deleted pages. Please do not contact the bot operator for issues not related with bot's behaviour. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=FrescoBot}} somewhere on your talk page. -- FrescoBot (msg) 09:01, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Fernando Saraceni edit
what happens? --Exorcist Z (talk) 08:01, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
AIESEC MUMBAI edit
Hi, I noticed you put this up for speedy - quite right. But what about AIESEC Mumbai then? Page was created allcaps AIESEC MUMBAI, so I moved it to AIESEC Mumbai and put a redirect at AIESEC MUMBAI, which was undone by the COI editor/creator, who is anyway persistently destroying any attempt to improve. Superp (talk) 09:38, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Removal of PROD from Jean-Pierre Levy edit
Hello E. Ripley, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Jean-Pierre Levy has been removed. It was removed by Phil Bridger with the following edit summary '(contest deletion with sources)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Phil Bridger before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 09:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 09:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Carter Fleming edit
Dear Ripley. Thanks for the feedback. Wikipedia is confusing in terms of rights and I have created the article with whatever sources I could find. The firm Carter Fleming is notible by word of mouth but elusive to gather secondary sources on them as they have only become less public shy today. How can one create an article when secondary sources are limited?
Update on prodded article edit
Just a quick update: one of the articles that you've recently prodded has just been moved to Andrew Stone (singer) and the redirect at the original name deleted as an improbable typo. I have not removed the prod tag from the article as 1) it is still an unreferenced BLP and 2) I am not convinced of Stone's notability outside of the television show and band. B.Wind (talk) 17:31, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Dont worry edit
About those articles on Aden Charmkehand Irandy Byron, i am aware of the abstinence of citations, so don't worry about me forgetting them. I am currently researching stuff, so I will be on it in a few seconds, thanks! --Equd (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
No problem edit
I appreciate you watching out for that though. But yeah I'm researching more for a future article I am about to write so I'll have them around maybe 2:00 p.m. (CST)--Equd (talk) 18:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Vinismo edit
Thanks for your comments about my nascent article on Vinismo. I know I have more work to do on external references, and I shall be doing that.
Vinismo is becoming a recognized and reliable site for information about wines, a topic near and dear to many Wikipedians' hearts. There are not very many non-commercial sites to which one can refer on this topic. In fact at least 4 current Wikipedia pages link to Vinismo.com as sources for their content. Please see Sauvignon blanc, Mendoza Province, Yarra Valley and Marlborough Region. I had hoped that it would be possible to improve many other wine-related pages by having a {vinismo]] page here in Wikipedia. Gaiamei (talk) 17:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- I found a paper on "Competitiveness of Wine Export from the Republic of Serbia" http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/57495/2/Vlahovic%20Branislav%20cover.pdf by Branislav Vlahovic of the Faculty of Agriculture, Novi Sad Serbia that referenced Vinismo. I think this indicates the reach of the Vinismo site in the wine world. Gaiamei (talk) 21:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
National Insurance Timor Leste edit
I have removed the {{db-spam}} tag from NITL - National Insurance Timor Leste. I don't agree that the article is blatantly spammy. The article merely claims that the company is the first onshore company to receive a license to sell insurance in East Timor -- which may well be a valid claim to notability. The article relies on primary sources, and needs improvement, but I don't think it's a candidate for speedy deletion. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Geograph edit
Please upload Geograph images to the Commons, preferably using Magnus' tool. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:18, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Talk:J.G. Wentworth edit
So far, so good--I think you're doing a great job. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 15:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you and please help edit
Informationnest (talk) 15:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)Thanks for taking the time to help with the J.G. Wentworth page. I understand that it is against the wikipedia rules to make multiple edits within such frequency. But i need your help. The user keeps deleting everything without any justification, he even deleted my request to work together from the talk page... i need you help in getting this page to a unbiased and accurate version that does not have any personal interests reflected in it.
My association with J.G. Wentworth is that i was a layer representing a client who was "taken advantage of". i have seen the way they misinform people. i would really appreciate your help to getting that page accurate, and not allowing others to just delete it, i dont have infinite time, and if this goes on, it will just be a page that will have a small and one sided story about j.g. Wentworth, and will not reflect the information that some people should know about. Informationnest (talk) 15:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Informationnest (talk) 16:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC) Again thank you! i really do appreciate any help! trust me, while i was a lawyer against them, it does not effect my common sense. it just kills to see something that I strongly believe is corporate interest, being so blunt about it and winning. again thanks. Informationnest (talk) 16:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Re: Steve Sexton Composer edit
I apologize if this is unorthodox, I am new at this and I am assuming I am to contact you to stop the deletion of this article as you were the one who proposed the deletion initially.
Voceditenore has re-written the article and I hope it meets with your satisfaction, thank you. Stvsxtn (talk) 20:42, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
immigrant labor in florida deletion edit
Ripley, What was your reasoning for nominating my entry for deletion before I had finished it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcowherd (talk • contribs) 21:14, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
New edit
well I have been asking for help,it seem to many chiefs but not indians I really don't understand how all this bureaucracy works ,well just delete me from your Wikipedia,I wouldn't like to be a part of it anymore, thank you for everything 21:32, 10 May 2010 (UTC)photographtv Daniel Amar siad —Preceding unsigned comment added by Photographtv (talk • contribs) 21:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
ANI edit
Fair point. I'll bow out!
Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 17:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- In hindsight I'm less than impressed by my comments. I've made a more detailed comment at Matt57's talk page. Thanks for nudging me; I'd prefer not to think about where that thread would have ended up if you hadn't poked me when you did! Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 23:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey dude! edit
Do you ever know how to post pictures on your article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iron-Maiden4335 (talk • contribs) 01:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of MochiView edit
Hello, E. Ripley. I have declined your nomination of MochiView for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used (A7) does not apply to software. If you still want the article deleted I suggest trying WP:AfD. WP:PROD probably won't work because the author of the article, having contested the speedy, will probably also contest a PROD. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Alcatraz Media, Inc. Speedy Deletion edit
Hello E. Ripley, I wish to contest the deletion of Alcatraz Media, Inc. under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion because the criteria does not apply to the deleted page. All information provided about Alcatraz Media, Inc. was purely informational; no advertising was taking place anywhere on the page. We are not trying to advertise, we merely want our company listed in Wikipedia as we have news articles about us, and have been in business for 11 years. We will remove whatever information was on the page with which you did not agree. Thank you.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Traz123 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 14 May 2010 (UTC) '
John H. Myers edit
This article already had a reference when you placed the BLP prod tag on it, so I deprodded it. It wasnt a very good ref, so I added a better one. DGG ( talk ) 21:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)