User talk:Amsaim/Archive 1

Re:Your email

Hi- that is odd! I can only assume it is a feature available on the German Wikipedia to allow translated articles to be completely GFDL compliant (see Wikipedia:Copyrights). I'm not aware of any similar feature on the English Wikipedia, so I think your best bet would be to ask for help over there. Sorry I couldn't be of more help, but I only really know about the English Wikipedia and Commons. J Milburn (talk) 19:54, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Apparently this seems to be common practice on the german page, because there are other articles on german wikipedia that have the entire version history of the original english article. A bit odd though. Amsaim (talk) 20:00, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I deleted it without opening it because I didn't recognize your name, and assumed it was spam (of which I get a lot at that address). Can you send it again? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 17:00, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Could you send it again? I don't think I received it. Nightscream (talk) 22:06, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

OTRS

Done. J Milburn (talk) 17:15, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Amsaim (talk) 17:43, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Done

It's up at sv:Genevieve Nnaji. Just a quick-n-dirty, but it should do the trick. I retired from Swedish Wikipedia a while ago, so I haven't done English-Swedish translations in quite a while. I thought I'd make an exception for your request since I assume that the Nigerian film industry isn't exactly over-represented on sv.wiki.

Peter ^Isotalo 17:02, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the nice translation. Amsaim (talk) 17:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: proofreading

Done. I made several rather minor corrections. GregorB (talk) 19:23, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the corrections. Amsaim (talk) 20:47, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Port Harcourt article vandalized

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at Phantomsteve's talk page.
Message added 07:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Reply

You might want to complain at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. --BorgQueen (talk) 20:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Amsaim (talk) 20:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Amsaim, I have created a new name for Civilian casualties of strategic bombing. Thanks for your help Gregology (talk) 02:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Email

Responded. Don't worry too much though. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Stephanie Okereke

On a more positive note, nice job with Stephanie Okereke! You know, a few hundred more characters and I think it would be eligible for a Did you know. The front page publicity would bring some eyes. =) -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:14, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Ricky. The article is by far not complete, as I've just created it a few days ago. There's still stuff to write about the actresses' additional awards and nominations, her work as a director and the car accident she had in 2005. Amsaim (talk) 21:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Greek Wikipedia

You have to deal with one of the administrators of the Greek Wikipedia, my administrator rights only work on the english wikipedia . DGG ( talk ) 19:29, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

ok. thnx for reply. Amsaim (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, Amsaim. I hope you are member me pretty well. You told me through mail that whenever I need your favor you'll be more than willing to help me out with it, isn't? Hope yes. Now, I'm begging you to write the article about Swahili Wikipedia at there on the German Wikipedia. Would you be so kind to help me for that? Yours,--_{Mwanaharakati}^(Longa) 04:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done. See the article here Amsaim (talk) 09:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the superb article. I've seen it. It's pretty much good. Thank you again and welcome again to the Swahili Wikipedia!--_{Mwanaharakati}^(Longa) 10:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Amsaim. Yes, brother, I've created that list for the sake of our friendship. Also, I expect to translate a whole list of the Nigerians actors/actresses and it would be better if you help me for the sources. What you said is good, though it seemed to be pretty hard for me to look for all those sources. If you can me help to check for them, I will be more than willing to create a large number of the articles about Nigerians actors. Yours,--_{Mwanaharakati}^(Longa) 06:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi MuddyB. Most wikipedia articles of nigerian prominent personalities are unsourced, written like an advert, do not follow wikipedia quality standards and do not have pictures in them. There are hardly any reliable verifiable third party sources available. This is why I have decided not to update most of the wiki articles of Nollywood actresses/actors. Those that I have updated had enough reliable sources that I could use as reference. For example, Pete Edochie is one of the most famous and successful nigerian nollywood actors. He has been acting since the 1970s, and is still very active in Nollywood. But there are no reliable sources available, not even his date of birth. This is why I will bypass his article until reliable sources are found. The article of Omotola Jalade Ekeinde is written like an advert, it has multiple issues, needs to be wikified, and has no sources. This again is why I bypassed it. The majority of Nollywood articles were created several years ago, when wikipedia obvously did not have strict rules like today, because if these articles would have been created today, they would surely be tagged for speedy deletion. Anybody who translates a tagged article is not doing wikipedia a favour, because in doing so all the mistakes, all the errors, and the low quality of that tagged article will be transfered to the new wiki of the translated language. So, in a nutshell,I will stick to those articles that have enough reliable sources, and I will also create new ones. Thanks very mucn for your assistance. Amsaim (talk) 08:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Sighs. As a matter of fact, it's not an easy job at all. Nevertheless, we'll try our best. Cheers.--_{Mwanaharakati}^(Longa) 08:47, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at LouriePieterse's talk page.
Message added 20:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

LouriePieterse 20:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at Arakunem's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Arakunem^Talk 22:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Stephanie Okereke

On October 11, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stephanie Okereke, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

JamieS93 15:28, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Jamie. thanks for the info. Is there any way to get the picture which I included in my DYK nomination to appear next to the article on the main page? Amsaim (talk) 15:54, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, at DYK we get a lot of hook suggestions that have images associated with them (almost half of the T:TDYK entries have images, I'd say). Since we can only have 1 image per 7 or 8 hooks, a lot of the suggested images are simply not used. And for each set of hooks, a DYK reviewer tries to pick a picture that's interesting, non-redundant, and easily visible as a thumbnail picture. So, while it could theoretically be changed, once the hooks are on the main page, the arrangement is usually not altered much (unless there turns out to be an issue with the image, like a copyright violation). Hope that helps, JamieS93 16:05, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks very much for the info. Amsaim (talk) 16:11, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Redirect

Take a look at it now - that work? --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 00:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

thank you, it's now working. but how about the redirect to the Through Glass article? They had the redirect pointed to the song's article (which imo is wrong, because "Through Glass" is not the same as "Through the glass"). Won't the editors of the "Through Glass" song disagree with the new redirect, even though this redirect is correct? Amsaim (talk) 00:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know - likely not, honestly, since the current redirect makes more sense. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 00:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree, this redirect makes more sense. thank you for your assistance. Amsaim (talk) 00:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I was offline when you stopped by - please let me know if I can help out with anything else. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 12:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks, will do so when something pops up :) Amsaim (talk) 13:09, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Infobox

Yes you have the right idea. To go live is just to move (rename) to {{Infobox African Moview Awards}} (plus the /doc and discusssion page)...

However I can then see an infobox being created for each separate award in Category:Film awards of which there are an awful lot, better would be a universal {{Infobox Movie Award}} taking a new parameter of award to specify each award and no one then needs reinvent the wheel :-)

Hence:

2006 African Movie Academy Awards
Date
Site
Host
Highlights
African Movie Academy Awards 2007 >

{{Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Proposed/Infobox Movie Awards
| award            = African Movie Academy Awards
| name             = 2006
| image            = 
| caption          = 
| date             = 
| site             = 
| host             = 
| producer         = 
| director         = 
| organizer        =
| best_picture     =
| most_wins        =
| most_nominations =
| next             = 2007
}}

and

75th Academy Awards
Date
Site
Host
Highlights
Academy Awards 79th >

{{Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Proposed/Infobox Movie Awards
| award            = Academy Awards
| name             = 75th
| image            = 
| caption          = 
| date             = 
| site             = 
| host             = 
| producer         = 
| director         = 
| organizer        =
| best_picture     =
| most_wins        =
| most_nominations =
| next             =  79th
}}

I'll notify the folks at WP:FILM project to see what else might be acheived. David Ruben ^Talk 01:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance. However, imo an individual infobox for the african movie academy awards is required, as this is the only major international film awards in Africa. A general movie award box just doesn't serve the purpose. if this were so, then wiki-editors wouldn't have created an individual award infobox for e.g. the emmies, golden globe, academy awards etc.

the infobox which you have created is good, and can be used by all other non-international, local movie awards, however for the amaa awards (which is attended by all 53 african countries) an individual one is required. thanks. Amsaim (talk) 01:23, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

See WT:FILM#More universal Award infoboxes, need to expand wikipedia out from US-centric (or UK-centric for that matter), so good on you :-) David Ruben ^Talk 01:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Your requests

Sorry I didn't get to your requests, I have been busy in real life lately and haven't had as much time on Wikipedia as I would like. If you still need help with them, send me an e-mail and I'll try to get to it shortly. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 22:44, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

thanx for your reply. In the meanwhile I've been able to create the template myself :) Amsaim (talk) 00:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Surulere

Hello - thought I was clear on the edit summary of this move. I will be creating page on Surulere, Oyo State within a few days and will provide necessary dab page when this is done. Regards (Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:20, 23 October 2009 (UTC)).

very good idea to create that article. wikipedia has too few african-related articles and so any new africa related article is very welcomed. thanks and best regards. Amsaim (talk) 11:39, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced Information

Unfortunately, I'm not in a position to check refs at the moment; you might consider the Reliable Sources noticeboard, the The No original research Noticeboard, or Requests for Page Protection. Since the edits stopped a few hours ago, protection might be premature - but they will be able to assist. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 15:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

yes, the ip-edits stopped, because they successfully added their own unsourced information. if I am now to removed all the unsourced info, the ip-edits most probably will start again, in clear violation of WP:V. thanks for the info with the noticeboards. Amsaim (talk) 15:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Surulere, Lagos State

The editor seems to have stopped (actually, moved onto Lagos) but I'm really not sure about your overreaction. The edits reverted aren't malicious, just newbie edits (what's the local municipality, what stadiums are there), and given the difficulty of finding editors willing to work on small Nigerian cities, I think it would be more productive if we actually tell them that we need sources on their talk page, rather than via edit summaries they aren't likely to read. I'm more concerned about WP:BITE and driving away a possible new editor rather than having a bit of news like "this stadium is in the city" unsourced. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:08, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Ricky, the edits are IP-edits, and when you compare the two edits here and here, you'll see that the IPs are different but the edits are one and the same, thus indicating a dynamic IP address. I left the WP:V in the edit summary simply because to me it doesnt make sense leaving messages on talk pages of dynamic IP-address. how effective is it leaving a message on a talk page of a dynamic IP address, when you know that the message most likely won't be read by the editor? My concern is to keep unsourced data out of wikipedia articles. When you look at the majority of nigeria-related articles (especially nigerian BLPs) you'll see that these articles contain loads of unsourced data which was added months/years back. when you now further trace the exact date when the unsourced information was added, you'll see that it was usually added via an IP-edit and remained there unchallenged ever since.

btw Ricky, Surulere is a residential area within Lagos, and has about 3 millions inhabitants :). cheers. Amsaim (talk) 10:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

After deprodding, AfD is next step

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from How to Orginize a Club and get it Prosper and to Stay Stable, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! —C.Fred (talk) 17:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

according to the text in the prod-template, one can only remove that template if a valid reason is given or if the article has been improved. you have done none of these. apart from this, in the light of all the articles deleted (e.g. BLP articles) trying to keep this gibberish article makes one to seriously wonder. Amsaim (talk) 17:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

No. "You may remove this [prod] message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason." Zalar objected to the deletion and removed the tag. I removed the tag because you may not retag a contested deletion. (Prod is a streamlined approach to AfD for uncontested deletion - which, with Zalar's objections, this is not.)

The article is also not patent nonsense. It is, however...let's call it unsalvageable. It does not fit into a speedy deletion category. However, I think this is a case to ignore all rules and remove it from mainspace. I've put a copy in Zalar's userspace (50/50 it's a school assignment). A redirect exists at the moment in mainspace, but it's subject to speedy deletion. —C.Fred (talk) 17:59, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

that's a good move there :) patent nonsense, at first, seemed like an appropriate tag, given the fact that I use Twinkle, however, reading through WP:PN I now get the idea.

So, a user can object without stating any reasons, and his objection is made known via removal of the tag? I'm asking to know, not to argue, cause I'm new to speedy-deletion tags. thnx for the info with AfD. Amsaim (talk) 18:13, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion is exactly what it sounds like: deletion for some reason that requires quick action (G12, copyright violation; G10, attack pages) or where there's a strong reason not to keep the page around (G11, spam; A3, empty pages; A7, non-notable people/groups/companies (to prevent what amounts to shameless promotion, even though it isn't spam)). There are stringent guidelines for what can be deleted under the criteria for speedy deletion. In the case of this article, when I removed a speedy tag, my edit summary read something like "decline speedy - does not meet WP:PN definition". In the case of speedy deletion, the page's creator may not remove the speedy deletion tag, though he may add {{hangon}}.

AfD is a discussion process where the case for deleting the article is presented (usually some combination of lack of notability and verifiability, but there can be other reasons) and discussed by editors. After a week (or more), an administrator otherwise not involved in the process gauges what consensus is (or that there isn't consensus) and closes the discussion. If consensus is to delete the article, the admin does that also.

Prod is for situations where it appears obvious that nobody will object to deletion. If anybody contests the deletion, including the page's creation, the proposed deletion fails. Prod also fails by definition if the page was previously under deletion discussion at AfD or previously deleted as a result of an expired prod. If nobody objects and seven days pass, the page is deleted by an admin. So, it's streamlined AfD, in a way; if prod fails, the person prodding the article will usually nominate it for deletion via AfD. —C.Fred (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks very much for the info. Amsaim (talk) 18:36, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Franklin Pierce

Why did you revert my edits on his page? He was the first President to be born in the 19th century, not the second. See List of United States Presidents by date of birth. Aquila89 (talk) 21:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

According to wikipedia rules of adding content into articles, especially BLP articles, all added content must be verifiable, must be from reliable sources with the appropriate citations. This is lacking in your edit. The wikipedia list of US american presidents does not contain any reference. The information about being the first or second president on both articles of the two presidents also do not contain any verifiable and reliable source. I suggest that you open a discussion about this issue on the articles' discussion page to try to get a consensus about this issue. Amsaim (talk) 22:17, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Re Gamatadenuma

I removed your G4 speedy deletion tag. G4 does not cover pages deleted by speedy deletion. It only covers pages deleted after discussion, i.e. AfD. Also, I noticed you cautioned the author for removing CSD tags, but I didn't see any edits where the author did that. Singularity42 (talk) 04:29, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

actually, G4 is listed at Wikipedia's Criteria For Speedy Deletion. The page was deleted by PMDrive1061 via WP:CSD#G1. Two minutes after the deletion of the page, Rmtrbk created the same page again. It was during the first creation of the page page that Rmtrbk removed the speedy-deletion tag twice, and thus the caution was added on Rmtrbk's talk page. Amsaim (talk) 04:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand me. G4 is a speedy deletion criteria - to speedy delete something deleted after AfD, MfD, etc. Not to speedy delete something that has been speedy deleted before. As per the policy for G4: "[G4] also excludes content undeleted via deletion review, deleted via proposed deletion, or to speedy deletions." Singularity42 (talk) 04:45, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

it's all good. thanks for your observations. fact remains, that an admin deleted the said article via WP:CSD#G1, and 2 minutes after the deletion, the same user recreated the same article. Amsaim (talk) 04:56, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Yep, it happens all the time. In most cases, just re-tag with the same speedy deletion as before, and caution the user with {{uw-create2}} (or one of the higher levels if it is repeated). Eventually an admin willl WP:SALT the article. In this case, though, as other admins pointed out, G1 was incorrect in the first place, since G1 specifically excludes foreign-language articles. Singularity42 (talk) 05:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Criteria

After making my above comments, I thought I would make a helpful comment regarding speedy deletion templates. It is very important to note that they have very narrow scopes, and should not be over-used. For example, A7 only covers individuals, animals, groups/organizations, and web content. Schools are specifically exempt from them, so you should not tag schools with A7. G11 is for obvious spam (i.e. "Check out our website and buy our product. We have the best prices in the world!"). If it appears to have the ulterior motive to promote a product, but is written in an encylopedic format, G11 does not apply.

PROD is a great tool when something does not meet a speedy deletion criteria but is obviously not proper for Wikipedia, and one I find very handy as a new page patroller. If you have any questions, please let me know. Singularity42 (talk) 04:42, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

James Gornall

Hi, I see you reverted some edits of mine, not a problem in itself but you tagged them as vandalism. The pages seems to an autobiography and is identical to the creators user pages, I redirected the page to its creators userpage and and requested its deletion as per the procedure for that sort of thing. If I made a mistake, fair enough but just to clrify, I was not vandalising the page GainLine ♠ _♥ 14:46, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

The edits of the BLP article were tagged as vandalism because the redirect to the userpage wasnt't correct. The copy of the created article on the editor's page doesn't justify the redirect. There could be several reasons why the editor has a copy of the article which he created on his user page. Using WP:AGF there is no evidence for an autobiography. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 15:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

As you are quoting AGF, I would remind you to apply it to my edits, if there were errors then please say so in the edit summary. Please do not label me as a vandal. Applying WP:QUACK the article is James Gornall and says the nickname of the subject is JIGGY, the creators username is JIGGY G and the article is recreated as their userpage. This all points to a self-bio. I believe it would have been better for an admin to have a look at this and make a decision. GainLine ♠ _♥ 15:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I have not labelled you as a vandal. If the impression has been created, pls accept my apologies. Amsaim (talk)

The edit summary (Reverted 3 edits by GainLine identified as vandalism to last revision by JIGGY G. (TW)) sort of gave that impression. Truth be told there was a time when you would have been right but nowadays I'm on the other side of the fence. Sorry if I came across as a bit short. I'm going to place a {{coi}} tag on the page as I do believe it is an autobiography. GainLine ♠ _♥ 16:09, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of James Gornall

An article that you have been involved in editing, James Gornall, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Gornall. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. GainLine ♠ _♥ 12:56, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at JohnCD's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 07:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SchuminWeb (Talk) 07:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Your user page

Unless you can provide any evidence that the song is in the public domain your user page would seem to constitute a copyright violation. Please change it, as we take copyright very seriously at Wikipedia. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Please state the wikipedia rule that is being violated against for writing lyrics of a song from the year 1929 on my user page, then I shall swiftly remove the lyrics from my user page. According to WP:UP I can't see how these lyrics on my user page constitute a copyright violation. Amsaim (talk) 22:10, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

This is a matter of real-life law, rather than Wikipedia rules. United States copyright law, which applies to Wikipedia's servers in Florida, protects content for 75 years after the death of its creator. You can try reading Wikipedia:Copyright violations and the pages linked from there if you want confirmation. I must add that I find the tone of your reply rather belligerent. Please be prepared to accept good-faith advice. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I replied in a friendly tone asking you to please provide proof for your claim. I am not attached to the text on my user page, and thus I can delete it without any problems. It is irritating to have someone order me to change my user page because of "copyright violation", when there is none. How do these 8 lines on my wikipedia user page violate against US copyright laws? Several admins have been on my user page and have found no copyright violation. WP:COPYVIO, from the way I understand it, doesn't forbid me from writing the 8 lined-lyrics on my user page. Please don't try to create an issue where there is none. Amsaim (talk) 22:56, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

This violates copyright law by the simple fact of reproducing copyrighted material. What makes you think that you have the right to reproduce someone else's intellectual property in this way? Just because some other people haven't noticed this it doesn't make it untrue. The second paragraph of WP:COPYVIO is clear about this point. I don't, in general, care what people have on their user pages, but I do care if there is any content anywhere on Wikipedia that violates copyright law. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

This issue is closed to me as I do not appreciate your aggressive tone. Please do not bother me with this issue again. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 23:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Amsaim. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Copyright violation at User:Amsaim. Thank you. Phil Bridger (talk) 00:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I'm afraid that the song lyrics have had to be removed. Copyright was renewed on them in 1956, and they are not public domain. As Wikipedia:Copyrights notes, we can only import previously published material if it is public domain or compatibly licensed with CC-By-SA. While we may sometimes incorporate limited quotations of copyrighted material in accordance with WP:NFC, we can't reproduce an entire song on our user pages. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Kapila Abhayawansa declined speedy

I've declined the speedy deletion on this as it asserts a significance, a lower standard than notability. With 40 Google scholar hits, it might be better to discuss at WP:AFD before deleting. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 19:04, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Nerd Corps Entertainment

Hello Amsaim, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Nerd Corps Entertainment - a page you tagged - because: producing notable television shows for a major broadcaster is an assertion of significance. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know.  Skomorokh, barbarian  19:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, Skomorokh. I have heeded your advice and refrained from tagging new pages. It is however interesting to notice how Wikipedia's rules and guidelines are being interpreted differently by various admins. One can expect admins to have a clear understanding of Wikipedia's rules, and thus when an admin tells me something, then I do what the admins says.

In the case of this article which I tagged for speedy-deletion, the said article has now been deleted again by an admin 4 days after you wrote me your message. This article which, according to you, was significant, because it was about a "notable television show(s) for a major broadcaster" was deleted twice already in February 2009 by 2 different admins. The deletion of the same article on November 26 2009 is the third deletion of the article. Could you please add your comment to the deletion of the article which, according to the 2 admins that deleted the article 3 times, I rightly tagged for speedy deletion? Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 14:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello Amsaim. This may sound bureaucratic, but I declined your nomination because you cited WP:A7 – that the article does not make a credible assertion of significance – which I felt did not apply in this case for the reason mentioned above. The three times the article was deleted, it was for other reasons, namely WP:G1, WP:A3, and WP:A1. Regards,  Skomorokh, barbarian  20:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Lawrence Onuzulike

Your proposed deletion of this article has been disputed so I have sent it to AFD and have used part of your original prod rational in my nomination - hope this is OK with you. The AFD is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lawrence Onuzulike. Best, Nancy ^talk 10:26, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nancy. Using my original prod rational in the nomination is ok with me. Do you think it is possible for you, as an admin, to explain to the article writer that he has to actually CLICK the internal Wikipedia links provided for him on his talk page in order for him to understand issues like notability or reliable sources? I'm asking this because from what he has written on the AfD page, it appears that he hasn't yet read through any WP rules. Thanks. Amsaim (talk) 04:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I've commented on the AFD and suggested he click through & alerted him at his talk. Best, Nancy ^talk 05:22, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 05:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at Ucucha's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi,

Hi, I made a mistake when editing that Chumnnambar boat house, it wasn't my article, I was trying to nominate it for deletion but ended up destroying your tag in the process by mistake :) ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Happy Birthday To You! (talk • contribs) 12:01, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem. The article was deleted and was recreated again by the same author. The article has now been merged into the Ariyankuppam article. Amsaim (talk) 12:56, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Homance

Hello Amsaim. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Homance, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not blatantly vandalism or a hoax. Thank you. GedUK  22:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello GedUK. Thanks for the message. As you know, neologisms must be avoided in wikipedia because they are not well understood. Sometimes the line between a hoax and neologism is hardly visible, such is the case in homance, this is why I added the CSD#G3 tag to that article. Amsaim (talk) 23:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Victoria ezike

I moved it there so the user can work on the article while it is not in the article space. The user is a new user, so I gave them a chance to edit it in userspace so they don't have to rewrite the whole thing. At the same time it can safely be removed from the article space. –BuickCenturyDriver 10:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

CSL Sofas

Hi, I understand that you would put that deletion thing on the page, because it was badly written but if its deleted before I even have a chance to speak out for myself (on the talk page) I think its a bit unfair. Please undelete it and give me a fighting chance! Quiggers1P (talk) 20:41, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Quiggers. Your CSL Sofas article was deleted not because it was badly written, but because it contained unambiguous advertising or promotion. Apart from that, this is now the 5th time this article has been created and speedily-deleted. I suggest that you acquaint yourself with the basic Rules of Wikipedia before creating another article. Read through the links and sublinks to get a good idea on how to create your article without it being nominated for deletion. Happy reading. Amsaim (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

What i don't understand is that it is a well known company in England so I was actually surprised there was no article, never mind 5 deletions. If I got some kind of 'proof' that it is a good company would that work? Or would it just fail like the last attempt? Quiggers1P (talk) 20:53, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Any article you create must adhere to Wikipedia's rules. The topic of the article must meet Wikipedia's rules of Notability, and the content of the article must be verifiable with citations to reliable sources. The article should not contain any personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions. To summarize it: first you need to establish the notability of the company, then you need to find verifiable and reliable sources to back up the content of your article. That's basically all you need to get your article included into Wikipedia. Amsaim (talk) 21:02, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I've had enough go at creating the page, is it any better or does it need improving? Quiggers1P (talk) 21:14, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Evidently you did not read through Wikipedia's rules of article creation, and thus the page you recreated again merely contains unambiguous advertising and promotion. Chances are high that this page will be nominated for deletion again. Why don't you just thoroughly inform yourself on how to properly create a wikipedia article using the links I provided for you? Amsaim (talk) 21:19, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes but my article seemed to fit all of your links. It is notable it is any personal experiences etc and I had reliable sources! Is it just impossible to make a page on wikipedia? My friends did once, but then they were found to be connected and all got banned. Quiggers1P (talk) 21:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

MATURAM

Re this, are you able to understand the content of the article?--Jac16888^Talk 21:37, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

What is meant with "Re this"? You mean "in reference to this"? The article does not give any context whatsoever, so I placed the CSD#A1 tag on it. Amsaim (talk) 21:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I meant "in reference to". I'm asking if you understand the language the article is written in? Or is your deletion tag based on it not being in English--Jac16888^Talk 22:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I do not understand the language of the article. As such, the article does not give any context, hence the CSD#A1 tag. Apart from this, there are now 2 editors who seem to have different views on the nature of that language. One claims it to be Estonian, the other thinks it is Burmese. Google's auto-detect is clueless as to what this language is. All the same, this article and its creator merely serve as a disruption to wikipedia. Amsaim (talk) 22:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm aware of the language identification trouble, and the disruptiveness of the creator, however, you should be aware that we do not delete articles simply because they are not in english, the admin who just did shouldn't have done so, no doubt it was because they assumed you knew the language. We list them at WP:PNT untill it is determined if they should be kept--Jac16888^Talk 22:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Tata Magic, Magic Iris and Tata Venture

Tata Motors have launched many new vehicles at Delhi Auto Show, kindly use Google News to know more about these Cars. I started these new articles using other(Tata Ace) as draft, and was planning to add more data as soon as it is available (specifications, dimensions etc).I haven't added anything new, so i don't know how the new article is infringing copyright when i have used data from wikipedia itself. I will deal with this matter tomorrow as I am feeling a bit tired. --Anmol.2k4 (talk) 23:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Funke Akindele

I have rolled back your edit re-adding an Expand tag to Funke Akindele. Under the guidance at Template:Expand it states that the template should not be used on articles concurrently with stub templates, only for articles beyond stub length which still require expansion. Miyagawa (talk) 22:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of this rule. Thanks very much for the information. Amsaim (talk) 00:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Post about Dako1 at WP:AIV

Hi Amsaim. WP:AIV is not the best forum for the post you made there about Dako1. I have moved the post to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Dako1. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:35, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit, thanks for moving it to the right forum. Amsaim (talk) 23:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Wasted Bandwidth

Re your message: Yup. I suspect that it is towards the end of the school day and the kids are bored. It seems to come in bursts, unfortunately. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:47, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Guvano

Looks like another admin beat me to it; thanks for the heads up, though! Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome :) Amsaim (talk) 09:34, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

List of Mature Cartoon Series

Hi, Amsaim. I removed the A10 tag you placed on List of Mature Cartoon Series because {{Db-a10}} states the article tagged for deletion "does not expand upon, detail or improve information within the existing article". List of Mature Cartoon Series does attempt to detail, as it lists only animated series targetting adult viewers while List of animated television series lists all animated series.

I personally like the idea behind the article, but it is contestable because it doesn't state what qualifies a series for inclusion, so you're welcome to bring it up at AFD if you'd like. Liqudluck✽talk 01:08, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Liqudluck. This list does not expand upon the information within the existing article, neither does it give any additional detail whatsoever. All the article does is to add confusion to the matter by introducing the word "mature" into the article title, making the article ambiguous. The cartoons mentioned in the new article are already in the main List of animated television series article. Placing the article on Afd is a waste of bandwidth, as this is a clear case of a redundant article. Amsaim (talk) 17:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Looks like someone else nailed it...

...thanks for letting me know. Gawdalmighty, I wish folks like that would read the doggoned rules before slapping stuff like this on the site. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:28, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of speedy removal template.

Thanks for the heads up, but I am not the creator of the article in question.

There is sufficient information in the Richard Baker article to assert notablility, even if the article currently fails to meet wikipedia standards, hence the removal of your speedy nomination. I've tagged the article with a 'Like resume' template and will monitor the article for improvement and submit it for AFD if none comes.Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

The CSD#G11 tag which was placed on that article is fully appropriate. The template text reads: "....pages which exclusively promote a company, product, group, service or person....". Since you have again removed the tag, and in order to avoid war-edit you will be reported to the admins. Amsaim (talk) 14:42, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Please read the text of User talk namespace template messages before using them. Template:Uw-speedy1 is for use on the user pages of people who have removed a speedy delete tag from pages they have created theirselves.

Also, read the text of the speedy deletion template itself. "If this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself." Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 14:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

The issue here is not the tag I placed via Twinkle on your talk page. The issue that lead to this is your removal of the CSD#G11 tag from the Richard Baker (Businessman) article. While it is unfortunate that Twinkle doesn't fully give editors a good oversight over the effects of the tags (and I do regret and apologise for the placing of that tag on your talk page), yet this isnt't the issue here. Amsaim (talk) 14:56, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Apology accepted. I removed the speedy delete tag because I didn't believe the article fitted those criteria. A couple of minutes on Google brings up multiple independent sources for Richard Baker... he's a pretty big name by all accounts. I agree that the page is terribly written, but there is a glimmer of a decent article there. Sorry for stepping on your toes! :) Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 15:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Cat delete

I notice that NJA deleted the cat for you. I would have done it myself, but I was doing a complex history merge, and I couldn't deal with your message at the time. I wasn't trying to ignore you. Graham87 13:37, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

No probs. Thanks for the reply. Amsaim (talk) 13:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Richard Baker (Businessman)

Hi, the article is still undergoing the AFD process, having failed to reach consensus. As the original author did not come back to improve it, I took it upon myself to add references that establish notability as per WP:GNG. It's now a substantially different article. As the person who nominated the article for deletion in the first place, you might want to add a comment to the AFD discussion. Cheers, Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 18:19, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

This BLP article is of a non-notable person. The article merely presents a résumé of a non-notable person. A successful Afd doesn't give notability to a non-notable person. It is unfortunate that wikipedia is filled with articles of non-notable people. Presently, Wikipedia's BLP rules are subject to reform, this is why there is an ongoing open discussion about it. Hopefully at the end of the discussion community consensus will emerge that will make it impossible for such self-promotional articles to be included into Wikipedia. Amsaim (talk) 18:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Never mind, the AFD was closed in the mean-time. Curious response though. Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 19:38, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The Beam

Thanks for the update! I didn't know those D3 policies existed, but definitely helpful! The links you chose in your revision weren't where I wanted the disambig to go, so I ended up changing it to the instrument and tale directly. Silivrenion (talk) 14:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Right. I created The Beam (tale) as a stub. Hopefully more people will be able to add to it. Silivrenion (talk) 14:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Well done, that's a cool way to solve the issue :) Amsaim (talk) 14:55, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Re this

It's gone (; Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:39, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. :) Amsaim (talk) 14:48, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Re:Question

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at Fastily's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 03:23, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Ayaan Hirsi Ali edit warring

Please be aware that you and Zencv (talk · contribs) are currently engaged in an edit war. Should this behavior persist, one or both of you may find yourselves blocked for edit warring in order to prevent further disruption to the Ayaan Hirsi Ali article. Please take time to discuss your issue on the article's talk page and possibly visit our third opinion or dispute resolution venues. Thank you. — ξ^xplicit 01:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

An administrator's quote on this issue: You are never violating the three revert rule if you're reverting vandalism. Full reply on talk page]. Amsaim (talk) 02:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Update: after reporting the matter to AiN, it was established by consensus & actions taken by the admins, that my reverts were in line with Wikipedia's BLP & NPOV guidelines. Amsaim (talk) 01:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

First of all, please take some time to read WP:DTTR. It would be more helpful if you leave a proper message either in my talk page or in the talk page of the article, explaining why do you think that adding Islamophobia to the list here violates NPOV. I added the link as Islamophobia and Criticism of Islam often overlap. Or do you have an explanation why Irshad Manji, Wafa Sultan, Tasleema Nasreen and Criticism of Islam do not violate NPOV and Islamophobia does? Take some time to explain instead of dropping templates. Thanks Zencv ^Whisper 12:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Many thianks...

...off to clobber it again. Gawdalmighty, I wish folks like that would read the rles and not treat this site like a doggoned chalkboard. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 02:25, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

reply

how you gone deleted the page and you just got the work that i just did and now its up for deletion —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrshistory2010 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

List of Wikipedias

Why you reverted my edit? Cross namespace links are not good. Articles should link to articles and pages from the Wikipedia namespace to Wikipedia pages. --Obersachse (talk) 15:16, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Kannst auch deutsch antworten. --Obersachse (talk) 15:18, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Just posted a reply on your talk page. Amsaim (talk) 15:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Crossposting is bad, too. --Obersachse (talk) 15:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

The first posting concerning this issue was done by me on your talk page, so I am not the one "crossposting". Please do not post redundant postings on my talk page via copy & paste. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 15:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

That's not true. I wrote you at 15:16 and your answer on my user talk page was at 15:20. --Obersachse (talk) 15:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

My revert was done at 15:07, and I was in the process of posting a message on your talk page at the said time. So when I pressed "Save page", your message was already on my talk page 2 minutes earlier. Thus there was no crossposting done by either of us. Please do not take this issue any further. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 15:54, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Question about notability

Re your message: Paul Erik replied to you on his talk page with a very good explanation of why the article now meets the notability standards. The only thing I have to add is that the deletion log for the article doesn't give the whole story. The first two deletions were done on the same article creator and probably should have been labeled as CSD#A3, however, back then admins didn't have the fancy popup menu to fill in the deletion reasons like we do now. The fourth deletion was actually do to not only a copyright violation, but an AfD discussion. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:15, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Amsaim (talk) 19:21, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

PIXELearning Ltd speedy declined

Hi Admsaim. Just letting you know I declined the speedy tag on this article because I don't think it was unambiguously promotional. Cheers, Olaf Davis (talk) 16:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RE: Removal of references

The references I removed didn't state anything about the peoples ethnicity. Plus some were dead links. Ukabia (talk) 20:06, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

AN/I

Thanks, I guess I appreciate your (procedural) notification on my talk, but—as I pointed out at AN/I—your complaint is overblown and spurious. You resorted to AN/I without any sort of mediation, which is frankly ridiculous. I suggest that you review the dispute resolution process before resorting to the "nuclear option." I think you will find that nothing will come of this AN/I post, nor should it. Also—as I pointed out at AN/I—Category:Demo albums was on there before I ever edited it, so by your own reasoning, it should stay on until the AfD is closed. If you would like to respond, please do so on my talk or possibly at AN/I. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Have commented --Jubilee♫clipman 02:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Ridiculous This is equally spurious, as I posted to talk and you didn't respond and you still didn't follow the AN/I procedure of posting to my talk first and you still didn't go through dispute resolution. There are so many steps that you blatantly ignored that this is inevitably going to be ignored itself. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:31, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Friedrich Dusseldorf

I feel that my page "War of Ideas" was taken down unjustly. Ive been told by another administrater that I need a citation in the opening paragrah. You say its a copyright infringment. The Strategic Studies Institute does NOT have a Copyright policy because its part of the US Military, hence its taxpayer funded.The following is from their website: Copyright and Reprinting Policy SSI studies hold no copyright. Current statutes prevent the U.S. government from copyrighting intellectual property since that property is paid for by the public and is therefore 'owned by the public'.

Reprinting - Since, at this time, there is no copyright policy, many organizations reprint our studies for classroom/seminar use. We do ask that you write us a message with the number of reprints and their intended use so that we can report this information for budgeting and resource allocation. [[1]] By all means, please check this out.--Friedrich Dusseldorf (talk) 05:21, 28 April 2010 (UTC)Friedrich Dusseldorf

It might be a good idea for your to first read through Wikipedia's basic Rules & Guidelines before writing your first article. This will give you all the information needed to properly write your first article. If your article does not comply with Wikipedia's guidelines, then it will be tagged for deletion, irrespective of whether the material you copied from external websites is public domain or not. So please, acquaint yourself first with Wikipedia's Rules & Guidelines, and after that start editing. Amsaim (talk) 08:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Terence Shone

Hello Amsaim, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Terence Shone has been removed. It was removed by Phil Bridger with the following edit summary '(remove blp prod tag - not a BLP)'. 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) 09:49, 3 May 2010 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 09:49, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at Talk:Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
Message added 13:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Colds7ream (talk) 13:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Template:User committed identity

How do i use this template? I've read the documentation, but I can't find a place to enter my hash string. Mandavo88 (talk) 09:44, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Click here to find out the correct syntax for the template. Amsaim (talk) 13:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Disambiguation

Hello, I saw your edit on Scoff (disambiguation), and wanted to say thanks.

Can I also ask, on that disambiguation page, because the word "Scoff" is used much more in the English language to refer to a "Mocking expression" than the two other uses I have added it to the main list, this is disobeying the rules (WP:D3) but it is there for a reason, what do you think? Thanks, Captain n00dle\^Talk 13:58, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

(I haven't added a definition as such, but just another link to wiktionary TBH Captain n00dle\^Talk 13:59, 13 June 2010 (UTC))

I attempted a different solution here Sorry for the excess commentage Captain n00dle\^Talk 14:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Dictionary definitions can be placed in disambiguation pages, however not as main entries, but within wiktionary-templates, just like the way you've rightly done in the Scoff (disambiguation) page. See other examples here, here and here. Amsaim (talk) 14:30, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer permission

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

• Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
• Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
• Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
• Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
• Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
• You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
• You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

--I know you didnd't ask for it, but I thought you might find it useful. If you don;t want it, let me know. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:34, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mitchell. Thanks for the Reviewer & Rollback rights, and for the swift reply. Amsaim (talk) 14:40, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: Your rejection to proposed deletion

Sorry, I hadn't noticed that the creator was actually objecting to an earlier speedy; nevertheless as s/he contested deletion by a reasonably acceptable rationale my rejection of the prod stands. The creator appears to be a good-faith contributor who is new to Wikipedia, and it feels unfriendly to me to place a speedy within 6 minutes of the article's creation, and then successively escalate to prod & AfD, whilst making little or no attempt to help them get the article up to scratch or to give them time to find appropriate references.

I did put a note on the creator's page explaining that the article needed work, and particularly references, in order to be acceptable, and would have hoped that you would have given them at least a week to try to comply. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: Removal of valid entry

Yep, strictly speaking there was a reason: my mistake. I was quick editing stuff in different languages and just... mixed up players :$. Thanks! --DataSport (talk) 20:17, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding a couple of PRODs

Sorry, but you'll have to explain to me how Kirsten Rosenberg and Courtney Cox (musician) meets the criteria of all the guidelines you just quoted, as I don't see it. I'll bring it to AfD if need be. Nymf _hideliho! 20:45, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

From the look of things both Rosenberg and Cox meet Wikipedia's General Guideline on Notability. They both have significant coverage in reliable verifiable sources where they are directly addressed. While Rosenberg's notability is covered by her involvement with The Iron Maidens and her award winning vegan cafe "Sticky Fingers" (both received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject), Cox fulfills WP:BAND sections 1,4,5 and has received significant coverage in reliable sources. The articles just need to be rewritten, cleaned up and wikified. Basically instead of merely prodding or Afding the articles, it might be a good idea to try to improve them (that's what I've started to do at the moment). Amsaim (talk) 21:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Few thoughts on Courtney Cox (musician), though. I see 6 forum posts being used as references (which we obviously can't use) and 2 profiles (the Japanese one is probably not reliable, the Jackson one is borderline reliable). I can find no albums on notable labels that she has been a part of, nor can I find any non-trivial coverage of any national tours that she has been a part of. So in its current state, it does not meet the WP:MUSICBIO criteria. Feel free to work on it though, and I'll check back in in a couple of weeks. Nymf _hideliho! 21:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. A couple of weeks it will take, cause most of the reliable sources are from US Print Media, and it'll take a while to gather the info. Of course, the material from forum postings will be removed as forum boards or blogs are largely not accepted as reliable sources. About concert tours, Cox did take part in several nationwide tours with The Iron Maidens (in the US and Japan), thus fulfilling Section 4 of WP:BAND. Verifiable sources about the non-trivial coverage of the concert tours will be provided in the next couple of days/weeks. Amsaim (talk) 14:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Ebeyeamanda

Thank you for your query. Notability criteria are not normally applied to userspace. The page is in reality a page about its author, which is true of most userpages. But it is not offensive or promotional, so I am not eager to delete it. Feel free to nominate it at WP:CSD to gauge opinion. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 20:18, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The article might have been removed, since it was a clear case of non-existing notability, yet the content of the deleted article is preserved on the userpage, and this userpage-article is traceable on internet search engines, thus creating the impression that Wikipedia has an article about that person (at least to those who don't know the difference between userpage & namespace). It appears as if this seems to be one way to "bypass" Wikipedia's BLP Guidelines and have usepage-articles of non-notable persons appear in internet search engines. Amsaim (talk) 20:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Fair comment, but any editor is allowed to post personal details on their userpage so long as it is not promotional, offensive or otherwise in breach of wikipedia policy. I am not happy to delete, but certainly have no particular interest in retention either. Why do you not nominate at WP:CSD, or get a view at WP:ANI?--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:35, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

WP:CSD only has a 3 main templates for userpages. None of them apply to this case. As you've already stated the content of the userpage is not offensive/promotional and so in my opinion it isn't an issue big enough to take to WP:Ani. The appropriate place might be WP:MFD? Amsaim (talk) 22:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

If you so wish. As I have said, in my personal opinion it is not deletable. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 11:03, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Public Domain

See Talk:Shia Islam in Kuwait DGG ( talk ) 14:32, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Genevieve Nnaji

Actually, you are looking at the wrong project. The ones you've been changing is the WP:ACTOR project, which states this for the high priority criteria: "Actors and filmmakers who are well-known in the film industry, to film buffs, and others. These people can reasonably be expected to be included in any print encyclopedia." See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers/Assessment#Priority_scale. --> Gggh ^talk/_contribs 11:14, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

It might be a good idea for you to actually read through the entire article and go through the sources provided in the article so that you are well-informed about the subject of the BLP article before downgrading the priority scale label. Genevieve Nnaji is internationally well known in the film industry and is well known to filmfans/filmbuffs not only in Nnaji's home country Nigeria, but in Africa, Europe and the United States (the international sources in the article prove exactly that). Nnaji fulfills the priority assessment requirements for the "High" Label as her name is already mentioned in print encyclopedias and film books (see sources below). Having provided reliable verifiable sources both in the article and in this message, I have placed the priority level back to High. Please do not downgrade it again. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 11:51, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Codewit Global Network Ry

Hello Amsaim, I am Xu , a chinese studying in Helsinki. I attended a workshop on Codewit self development workshop last saturday. Today I was browsing about them and noticed that their organsiation was about to be deleted in wikipedia. I was wondering why. Please take your time to reserach more about them and check their website too at Codewit Global Network Ry. probably you will observe that they are not suppose to deleted. that is my opinion anyway. Thank you for listening to meXuci-p (talk) 15:20, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello Xu, thanks for your message. Before nominating any article for deletion, the nominating editor is required to review the article to see if the article can be improved. I have reviewed the article: the article does not have reliable verifiable sources to establish notability, neither are reliable sources available and thus the article is a candidate for deletion. Please read and understand the content found in this Wikipedia Guideline so that you understand why the website of Codewit is not a reliable source. If you have any reliable verifiable sources with which to establish notability for the article, please feel free to add them to the article (via correct citations), however before you do that you might want to first read through Wikipedia's Basic Policies and Guidelines so that you are well-informed about how editing in Wikipedia works. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 17:09, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

African cinema entry

Hi Amsaim,

I'd be happy to include specific pages for the entry on African cinema; I didn't didn't realize I needed to be that specific when I was citing - given that there were no direct quotes from the text and that most of what I was saying can be found in any number of texts on African cinema.

Do I have to re-write the whole section, or is there a way to revert to the text I wrote before you made the edits?

Best, Jmembe (talk) 20:41, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jmembe, When quoting from a book, it is recommended that you include the page number of the book in your citation. Please read through this content guideline which will also take you to further pages on correct citations. A fast and easy way to comfortably add citations from books to articles can be done via the Reference Toolbar which you can activate by clicking on My preferences - Gadgets - Editing gadgets - refTools. "refTools" adds a "cite" button to the editing toolbar for quick and easy addition of commonly used citation templates.

You don't have to rewrite the whole section, as all edits are stored in the history page. In the history page trace your last edits, and click on the "Prev" links which are located on the left side of your edits. You will then see the section you've written (e.g. here - on the right side in red color are your additions). Copy it, and paste it into the article with the appropriate citation from the book. Please do not forget to include the page number and the chapter where you found the material you are adding. Hope this helps. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 08:24, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

: Hi Asaim, I added sources and page numbers. Thanks. Jmembe (talk) 10:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

AN/I Report

Hello, Amsaim! The report you filed at AN/I concerning User:Varlaam is stale, and no action is likely to occur on it. Would you mind if I closed the thread as: "Resolved: No administrator action required." Because that is the situation, and this board has many threads that many editors comment on. Closing threads as resolved is the best way to avoid "clogging" stale reports with extraneous comments. What say you? Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 05:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello Doc9871, the report was brought to ANI for the specific reason of getting the attention of an administrator, so please do not close it yourself. Presently 2 editors have commented on the issue, and their comments ignore the main issue at hand. Apart from this, is there any Wikipedia Guideline or Policy about "clogging"? Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 07:50, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I've no intention of closing it, and Varlaam is currently blocked for other reasons. Most threads that don't get closed as resolved just get buried in archives, but there's certain no policy against "clogging". Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 12:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

It is exactly this type of edit warring (as seen in the Vietnam War in film article) that I am avoiding, which Varlaam, with his highly unfriendly edit summary and refusal to enter into discussion with me, assumedly was poised to enter into. An experienced Senior II editor with a history of blocks is less reluctant to enter into an edit war than a new editor such as myself. Thus my ANI report. It is rather irritating to witness Wikipedia Editors applying one set of rules to articles from less represented demographic groups and another set of rules (Wikipedia's Rules) to all other articles. The result of such biased editing is a non-standardization of articles (e.g. film articles, music articles, BLP articles etc). As for the report, if no admin comments on it, I will ask an administrator for comment. Amsaim (talk) 12:44, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Aja Kim

What are you talking about? I cited public Los Angeles County court documents. You don't believe that as sufficient?! LOL It looks pretty strange that you would cover up (censor) public information on Wikipedia. I've never heard of quoting a court document as being libelous, or adding a performer's real name as being libelous. I think you need to actually look up the definition of this word, because the last time I checked -- saying someone's name, or repeating the content of public court documents wasn't slander. It only appears as if you did not even take the time to look at what was included on the page and the references that were indeed added. Just canceling everything like this is the worse type of "vandalism" on here, and the heavy handed approach what gives Wikipedia an ever increasing bad name. 76.89.129.139 (talk) 05:48, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

You need to take this issue to the Administrator who is handling the issue. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 08:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

The Iron Maidens article

I know you want to improve The Iron Maidens article, but why did you remove Melanie Sisneros and Elizabeth Schall from the History section? Sisneros was a founding member of the band, and Schall - not Heather Baker - was Jojo Draven's direct replacement from 2005 to 2006. - Areaseven (talk) 02:36, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. If you want to add material into any Wikipedia article then the Burden of Evidence lies on you to provide reliable verifiable sources as a reference. Primary sources (like a band's website), self-published sources, forum boards and blogsites are largely not acceptable as reliable sources. The source which you've introduced is a forumboard and thusly not acceptable. I have reverted your additions on the ground that the reference given is a forumboard. Please try to find a reliable source for your addition, and do not add material again into the said article taken from self-published / questionable and unreliable sources. The info on who replaced who will be placed on hold (=removed from the article) until a reliable source is found. Lastly, your edit summary here suggests conflict of interest. This could explain your continual usage of a forumboard as a reference. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 10:40, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

You know what your problem is? You're not looking hard enough for that info. I would add those "reliable resources" myself, but you just had the article locked again. Therefore, because of your recent edits, Wikipedia has posted completely false information on the band. You know, the article was fine until you showed up. Some editor you turned out to be. - Areaseven (talk) 01:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Your reply reveals your disregard toward Wikipedia's Policy of Verifiability and Reliable Sources Content Guideline. The next time you add unsourced material, original research or material from unreliable sources (like a forumboard) into the said article, you will be reported to the Administrator's board for disruptive editing. Amsaim (talk) 08:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Nollywood

I have left another note, suggesting he talk to you and other interested folk. Remember to [{WP:AGF|assume good faith]], and that the requirements for lists are sometimes less than "it is notable enough to have an article" - they are likely to be "significance". There's an essay somewhere I'm sure... Regards. Rich Farmbrough, 19:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC).

Thank you, Rich. The significance of a topic that does not have an article must be established via significant coverage in reliable verifiable sources. This is not the case with the additions of the editor as there is no coverage in reliable sources of any of the additions he made into the list. As a result, we now have page with a broken table format and non-encyclopedic entries. Concerning essays, I know of this one here, which is why unsourced red links shouldn't be added to lists. Amsaim (talk) 19:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

RE: Your edits in the Port Harcourt article

None of the things I included into the article was unsourced. I provided many sources that were direct, and one indirect.

* Some of the material which you added is not sourced, e.g. in the infobox data field "native_name" you placed the word "Diobu", but there's no source given for that, and in the lead section of the article you wrote that Port Harcourt in the Igbo language is Diobu, and again no source is given for that.

The sources I used for the name were in the main text, so I left the infobox without sources, as I think this is the mode of style for wikipedia.

* The source which you attributed to this sentence of the lead section "The area that became Port Harcourt in 1912 was originally the farmland of the Diobu village group of the Ikwerre, a subgroup of the Igbo people" is from a self-published source (published by iUniverse, a selfpublishing company), and thus cannot be used for inclusion in Wikipedia, and most certainly not to source controversial material.

That book you opened wasn't the original book. This may have been my fault. The original book is referenced as "Isichei, Elizabeth Allo (1976). A history of the Igbo people. Quote at the bottom of the page.: Macmillan. p. 200. ISBN 0-312-37975-7. http://books.google.com/books?id=YM_8P7O_VDEC&pg=PA53."

I couldn't find a preview of the book or the page of that book I was referencing, so I thought it would be helpful for the users to point to a quote of the referenced book in another book, even if it was a self published source. If you look at the referenced book it actually cites the author of the book above. I can remove this if it is a problem.

*In the opening sentence of the History section, you used 2 sources as a reference for Diobu. The first source is the same self-published source as in the lead section (from iUniverse), and you also used this source as a reference for your statements about Diobu. However, the word Diobu does not appear anywhere in the second source. Thusly, your additions about Diobu are either unsourced or are from a self-published source.

The second source (the guide book) was a reference for the 1912 date, the founding of the city of Port Harcourt, instead of putting it in the middle of the sentence, I put it at the end with the other source (linking to a quote of Isichei).

This is my last version of the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Port_Harcourt&oldid=392400951#cite_note-8

Apart from the quoted reference, there were other citations that were reliable and had backed up the infromation I entered into the article, such as this:

Njoku, Onwuka N (October 2008). "Eastern Nigeria Under British Rule" (PDF). Department of History, University of Nigeria (University of Nigeria, Nsukka): 23.

A journal from the University of Nigeria, it has everything that I entered into the article including:

"Port Harcourt arose from the creation of a wharf at Diobu and the construction of the railway to access the coal discovered at Udi"

Did you note see this? If you want to see information about the relationship between Port Harcourt and Enugu, see the Enugu article. Ukabia - talk 11:50, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Could you tell me any sources that are cited that are self published? Ukabia - talk 14:05, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Ariya Astrobeat Arkestra

Please could you explain to me why you have repeatedly deleted this article. I have spoken to a number of editors now who say there is nothing wrong with the article as it currently stands, however you have relentlessly objected to it. I am new to Wikipedia however I have done hours of reading and as far as I am aware, there is nothing wrong with this article. Many thanks Wikimuso (talk) 21:02, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Reading can be an advantage. If you simply read the numerous internal links provided for you on your talk page, and on the talk page of Administrator Alexf, and in the nomination rationale of the AfD, then you will surely find the answer to your question. It might be a good idea for you to read & understand Wikipedia's Basic Policies & Guidelines first before editing or creating Wikipedia articles. Amsaim (talk) 22:03, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

List of Nigerians your last edit

Hello I did see this one before you but I couldnt bring myself to undo, just in case he really is notable (even after the injection)!! Cheers (Crusoe8181 (talk) 10:09, 4 December 2010 (UTC)).

Could it be that the name is spelled differently than how the IP editor spelled it (Otumala Ibu)? There are no search engine entries on this person. Apart from that, as you know the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds material, and so it is required that each entry into a stand-alone-list either has its own Wikipedia article or the entry is sourced with reliable sources to prove notability. Since this wasn't the case with this entry, I had not option than to revert it. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 11:48, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

African Hip hop

hey how are you you have monitored some of my changes to the above mentioned article /thank you very much/ could you please then look after the article by adding relevant information and or cleaning up especially the zimbabwean section and where the grammar and punctuation is poor. sorry im new here and being that im zimbabwean, my edits affect mostly the zimbabwean articles (references hard to come by, so trolling the internet right now and trying to understand how i can use non online references in general) and so while im getting my feet i prefer not to create new articles all together but clean up grammar and add common sense to articles that need it and where i deem myself knowledgeable enough to sufficiently make contributions of note for example blaklizt entertainment is not a person but a record company whose only notable artist is tek neek but you reversed that information that i had cleaned up. i am not sure he is even notable enough to mention on wikipedia but i guess someone put it there in the first place. then the most noteworthy hiphop artist from zimbabwe happens to be carlprit who i added but you removed and reverted to an older version so i guess its fine but im just trying to understand how i can get articles becoming relevant

hey im not sure what to do next so please advise as youre in a position to mentor me into creating better articles Wikispott (talk) 12:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

You might want to check these links for more information about mentorship: WP:MENTOR & Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. I don't have the time to mentor new editors.

As for the article in question, the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Your edit was reverted because the added material was unsourced. For you as a new editor, it might be a good idea to acquaint yourself first with Wikipedia's Basic Policies & Guidelines before editing or creating articles. Amsaim (talk) 05:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Deleted subpage

As requested. Deb (talk) 09:42, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 10:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

RefTools fixed

RefTools should be totally back to normal now. Kaldari (talk) 02:46, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the info. Amsaim (talk) 03:08, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

List of Nigerian writers

Hi! I notice you rather summarily reverted my addition of dates etc. for writers on this page, as well as one redlinked (but referenced) individual, Samson Amali, on the grounds Amali was non-notable. I wondered why. Best, Dsp13 (talk) 21:20, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi there. I reverted to the wrong position, your first edit was correct. Sorry about that. I've thusly re-added your first edit into the list. However, the addition of a non-notable entry into the list is problematic. As you are aware, WP:LISTPEOPLE stipulates that "...a person may be included if...the person meets the Wikipedia notability requirements...". Since it is a list of writers, WP:AUTHOR must be fulfilled for each entry. Your addition does not fulfill WP:AUTHOR. Surely you'll agree, that one source is not enough to establish notability (significant coverage). The best solution to this issue can be found in this essay. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 20:17, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Amsaim, for looking at this, taking the trouble to revise your edits, & replying. I don't find myself in agreement with the essay's deprecation of redlinks, I'm afraid. I still find redlinks useful as a reader and editor. I also think that an author being given his own biographical entry in a one-volume encyclopedia of African literature is prima facie evidence of notability - while a standalone bio of Amali should try to get several references together, a single relatively high-quality reference like this should be sufficient for a list. Is it (a) that you think that Samson Amali does not meet notability requirements, or (b) that references in lists should definitively establish notability, and a single reference can't achieve this? Dsp13 (talk) 20:59, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

My own personal opinion of a person's notability is of no relevance to Wikipedia, and so what I do is to closely look at Wikipedia's Policies & Guidelines, do my best and apply them to Wikipedia articles. In the case of Samson Amali being included into the list of nigerian writers, WP:LISTPEOPLE, WP:BIO and WP:RS should be fulfilled. WP:LISTPEOPLE points to WP:BIO. WP:BIO will then take you to WP:BASIC and WP:AUTHOR. Take for instance WP:BASIC, which is a subsection of WP:BIO. This guideline stipulates that "...A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources...". One of the keywords here is the word "multiple". Surely, one reference does not count as multiple. Next, lets look at WP:AUTHOR which is also subsection of WP:BIO. Look at Point 1 of WP:AUTHOR, again we see a quantitative word there: "widely cited by peers...". The source you brought does not establish any of the the 5 requirements of WP:AUTHOR. Please do not misunderstand me. I don't really care whose name gets added into the list. My main concern is to ensure that this list, and other Nigeria-related lists, will no longer look like this, the way it did a couple of months ago. Amsaim (talk) 21:39, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I totally agree with your main concern - long lists of redlinks, many of which likely point to vanity or clearly NN bio, are of no use to anyone. Rereading the guidelines as they are atm (they've tightened a little in the 6 months or so since I last looked at them), I see how following the links leads to your reading - that any redlink in a list of people must have multiple references - but it seems to me to go beyond common sense. My feeling is that any Nigerian writer with their own entry in Gikandi's Encyclopedia of African Literature, or Killam & Rowe's Companion to African Literatures, merits inclusion in a list of Nigerian writers - and that working through missing encyclopedic articles in this way is a sensible way to tackle systemic bias. Dsp13 (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Your postings somehow create the impression, as if you are trying to bypass Wikipedia's Notability & Manual of Style guidelines by creating your own rule. There are three critera for an entry into a stand-alone list. Apparently these three do not impress you, and so you've created your own: "....any Nigerian writer with their own entry in Gikandi's Encyclopedia of African Literature, or Killam & Rowe's Companion to African Literatures, merits inclusion in a list....". Next, you quote the systemic bias essay (please note that essays are not policies or guidelines). Systemic bias is in full swing when one set of rules is created for Africa-related Wikipedia articles, and another set of rules is created for all other non-Africa-related Wikipedia articles. For example: please check this list of English writers. Do you see any red links there? How about an entry with just one source? You don't find such things there because the editors who are maintaining that list are adhering to Wikipedia's guideline of Stand-alone lists. List of Chinese writers is another example of a well-written stand-alone list. Lastly, when you add a red link or a single sourced entry into a stand-alone list, then this sets the precedent for other editors to tag along, and place their own favorite person into the list with just a single source. As a result of this, Wikipedia's Guideline of Stand-Alone-Lists will thusly be abrogated. Amsaim (talk) 20:23, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your careful reply! You're right that I'm more interested in what guidelines are trying to achieve, and in working with others towards that, than in establishing, independently of that concern, a definitive reading of guidelines. One reason is that guidelines often represent an imperfect compromise between different viewpoints. (WP:LISTPEOPLE's three criteria seem to include an example of this: we have (a) "If a person in a list does not have an article in Wikipedia about them, a citation (or link to another article) must be provided to establish their membership in the list's group and to establish their notability", as well as (b) "The person's membership in the list's group is established by reliable sources." As I understand you, (a) is misleading and redundant, since general notability and (b) both imply, on a strict reading, that more than one citation be provided for any redlink in a list. I think (a) agrees with common sense, and the strict reading which would make it misleading and redundant, doesn't.)

And placing a favourite person into the list wasn't exactly what I was doing, of course. I was aiming to fill out the list using a criterion of notability - inclusion in a reference work - independent of me. (See for an example of this sort of thing, the inclusion of David Baumgardt in List of philosophers born in the 19th century, on the grounds that the Concise Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy includes him.) At present, List of Nigerian writers opens with Abimbola Adelakun - I haven't made a serious effort to judge notability there, but it certainly isn't clearly established at present: the external links are broken, and the single reference amounts to one sentence of a review in a newspaper apparently edited by the page's author. I do think the list would be improved with the inclusion of Nigerians in Gikandi's enyclopedia (accessible online here): Samson Amali, I. N. C. Aniebo, Obinkaram Echewa, Obi Egbuna, Bakare Gbadamosi, James Ene Henshaw, Eddie Iroh, Bello Kagara, Ifeanyi Menkiti, Mazi J. U. T. Nzeako, Ude Odilora, Frederick Chidozie Ogbalu, Agu Ogali Ogali, Wale Ogunyemi, Isidore Okephwo, Julie Onwuchekwa, Louis Nnamdi Oraka, Bertram Iwunwa Nkemgemedi Osuagwu, Tony Uchenna Ubesie, & Sam Ugochukwu. In the spirit of Write The Article First, do you fancy lending a hand in stubbing out articles on these Nigerian writers? Dsp13 (talk) 23:39, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

The Wikipedia project is centered around community consensus. Policies and Guidelines in Wikipedia are the direct result of community consesus achieved via discussions. If you want to discuss & change the inclusion criteria of entries in stand-alone-lists, then the talk page of an editor is not the right place for that; you need to take it to the talk page of the guideline. Criteria Number 1 & 3 of WP:LISTPEOPLE are not redundant. Please keep in mind that all 3 criteria of WP:LISTPEOPLE must be fulfilled and not just one or two. The inclusion of David Baumgartd in the philosophers' list has remained unchallenged, however that does not render WP:LISTPEOPLE ineffective. The essay WP:WAX provides some more insight. Creating BLP stub articles for people whose notability is not 100% established, is not really my style of editing. I can however occasionally browse through this category and improve any new articles found there. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 19:39, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - I've started a thread on the talk page. Thanks also for saying you'll give Nigerian writers an occasional browse - you clearly know and care more about Nigerian matters than many editors :) Dsp13 (talk) 21:23, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

• I've done a significant amount of work cleaning up lists this past month that had people entries that lacked both a wp article or any ref. I don't read the guideline as requiring multiple refs; one appropriate ref should suffice. Sometimes people misconstrue "significant", as it is used on wp. Significant can refer to one significant ref. I'll ping one or two senior editors I respect who work in the AfD/notability area and therefore have had reason to consider this issue, who can express their own views in the event they wish to join this discussion, but that is mine.

One related issue I've run into in cleaning up lists, that input would be appreciated on. Sometimes an editor has one ref at the beginning of the list, and says it covers all redlinked entries on the below list. To my mind, that does not suffice. The reason is that the initial editor has no control over later-added redlinks conforming. It is for that reason that I think that a ref only works for a redlink if it follows the entry. And is not sufficient if it is only in a paragraph or heading preceding a number of entries. See, e.g., List of table tennis players. Thoughts would be appreciated. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:20, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

One of the consequences of using a single reference for a red-linked entry into a stand-alone list of people, is that it might open Pandora's box, and unleash a flood of single-referenced entries of clearly non-notable people - as can be seen in many of Wikipedia's lists. This is an issue of either adhering to community consensus (=Wikipedia's Policies & Guidelines), or bypassing community consensus by doing what each editors thinks is right. Personally, I like to remain with Wikipedia's Guidelines & Policies. The reference placed at the beginning of a section of red-linked entries, is not valid - not because of the location of the reference, but because WP:LISTPEOPLE requires multiple references for each entry. Amsaim (talk) 22:58, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

The number of entries would not solve that problem. Two non-notable refs can easily be founded for many non-notables, and are in no way superior to one significant ref. I share your concern, but that's not the panacea, IMHO. The list problem is even more basic -- the lists replete with red-linked, no-ref entries. Arguing as to the sufficiency of entries -- and by extension opening up AfD-like discussions as to them, is IMHO of secondary importance and beyond the bandwidth of the current complement of editors. What I'm referring to is precisely about adhering to consensus. This is a matter of interpretation. I've given you mine. I think that you are confusing the word "significant" with "multiple". I think your interpretation is wrong, and therefore at odds with what the guideline requires. You think the opposite. We can see what others say.--Epeefleche (talk) 23:29, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

The confusion here is not on my part but is created by those who try to bypass Wikipedia's guidelines. I am not interpreting. What I do is to simply repeat (word-for-word) what is written in the guideline for inclusion into a stand-alone list. One gets to wonder how you come up with "...Two non-notable refs...many non-notable (references)..."? The references that are required to establish notability must of course be from reliable sources. This is a simple issue: for an entry to be included into a stand-alone list, WP:LISTPEOPLE is required. WP:LISTPEOPLE lists WP:BIO as its first criteria. WP:BIO contains WP:BASIC which stipulates that "...A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources...". What are "...mulitple published sources..."? Can there seriously be any discussion about such an obvious statement? Next, also contained within WP:BIO is WP:AUTHOR, which again uses another quantitative word in its first criteria: "...The person is ... widely cited by peers or successors...". Amsaim (talk) 00:51, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Viva Riva!

Re your reversion of my edit: on what basis do you consider the photo irrelevant? We lack a separate article on the writer/director; this is (so far) his only feature film, and it is one that has won numerous awards; he is, to the best of my knowledge, the first Congolese to successfully bring a commercial film to fruition in a couple of decades. We are unlikely to have more relevant 'free' image for the film, since anything from the film itself will be copyrighted. - Jmabel | Talk 06:18, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Film has several goals, including "to standardize the film articles in Wikipedia". Wikipedia film articles do not have the pictures of directors or producers in their articles (e.g. check these lists). Adding the picture of the director right in the middle of the article where it doesn't belong, goes against the goals of WikiProject Film. Besides, Djo Tunda Wa Munga, the director of Viva Riva!, won the award for Best Director at the African Movie Academy Award in 2011, and thusly he is notable for his own article. He has directed & produced many feature films since the late 1990s. Lastly, the posters of Viva Riva! are available, and can easily be obtained. It might be a good idea to place the film poster into the film article. Amsaim (talk) 09:03, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

The posters are not free-licensed.

I agree that Munga deserves an article of his own, but no one has written that article, and, often as not, the way we 'incubate' an article is to get few paragraphs of material in a closely related article, then refactor. I figured, precisely, that by getting a bit more of him into the article on his film, we'd eventually accumulate enough to end up with that other article, and could then spin it out. - Jmabel | Talk 07:29, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

By the way, from WikiProject Film: "Free licence images can include filming locations, on-set photos, and photos of the cast and crew." The director is the quintessential member of the crew. - Jmabel | Talk 07:32, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Hop, skip and dump...

Thanks for letting me know. I'd not got that one on my watchlist. Peridon (talk) 18:56, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Nice work on the sock, by the way. Peridon (talk) 23:28, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 07:41, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Chameleone and Afrobeat

Hello. I have noticed your insistence on including chameleone from Uganda as an afrobeat artist. This is very misleading and if you really knew Chameleone you would know he is mostly a dancehall musicians and sometimes does whats called "kidandali" in Uganda. His music has never had the stylistic elements described on the afrobeat page. Please view his official profile with all his songs and you will know for sure. Follow this link: http://www.kerere.com/artists.php?id=100

Thanx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xalixo (talk • contribs) 08:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

IP user

Hi Asmain I am at Wikimani right now so I can't look at this deeply, but on the Lional Richie page at least it doesn't look vandalistic, possibly wrong, of course, in which case it shoul;d be reolved by discussion in the usual way. I notcie you alos rasiedthe matter on AIV, so hopefully anyt necessary action wil be taken. All the best, Rich Farmbrough, 09:33, 6 August 2011 (UTC).

Looking closer I have left a noteon one of the IP pages. I wil try to keep an eye open. Rich Farmbrough, 09:39, 6 August 2011 (UTC).

Hi Rich. Thanks for your assistance. Amsaim (talk) 11:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at JamesBWatson's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

JamesBWatson (talk) 10:59, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

... and again. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Amsaim/Archive 1! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 11:03, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

Google Books / Page missing

I moved your request for a page number to Talk:Elohim#Page_number_missing as it is not now accessible. Hopefully someone else will see it. Though the grammatical point that elohim is singular is very basic knowledge and could be supplied from any reference work or grammar. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:39, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Sabina Umeh-Akamune

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		Exceptional work in finding sources for and improving the Sabina Umeh-Akamune article, which appears to have very likely rescued the article from deletion. Northamerica1000(talk) 04:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 07:15, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at Thompson.matthew's talk page.
Message added 14:26, 6 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Email would have been better, but oh well. Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 14:26, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Re: Vector (artiste)

Just saw your message concerning the page I put up. This is a page of a well known Nigerian rapper widely appreciated so I see no reason why this should be regarded as "inappropriate" because all other related articles are still up and running till today. Like I said, I have previously had a comprehensive conversation with one of the other admins and I was given the go ahead to continue with it. I hope you consider it and allow this page to stand without any warning whatsoever and I take full responsibility regarding that. Thanks.

comment added by Seandbadest (talk • contribs) 19:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Before you create articles or edit articles in Wikipedia, it might be a good idea for you to first acquaint yourself with Wikipedia's Basic Policies & Guidelines. That way your edits won't be reverted and your articles won't be deleted. A BLP article in Wikipedia must adhere to a set of basic standards. The articles on Vector The Viper that you've created, do not adhere to Wikipedia's Policy on Biographies of Living People, they do not contain verifiable reliable sources. You have opted to ignore all the well meant messages left on your talk page, including the very first welcome message left for you by Editor SwisterTwister. The article in question contains only 1 (one) reliable source from the Nigerian Compasss Newspaper. However, one reliable source is not enough to establish notability, as WP:BIO clearly stipulates: "...A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject". In order to know which source is reliable, I suggest you do some reading here. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 19:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Kano and Logos state list articles

I have not deleted them. (1) the errors of the editor elsewhere are irrelevant, unless created by an indefinitely banned or blocked editor during their period of block. (if the problems were copyright related it would justify a very close look, but they do not seem to be) (2) The sources would obviously be in the individual area articles. The refs could presumably be copied over if you like, but I think that's unnecessary. (Perhaps, btw, there's a general government source that could be added that would cover them all. DGG ( talk ) 01:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

True, the sources are in the individual articles. However, the lists do contain redlinks and some additional unsourced entries. Amsaim (talk) 07:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

List of companies of Nigeria

Awesome job of maintaining the article at List of companies of Nigeria; most articles of that type devolve quickly into spam magnets, but you've kept that one up well! Kuru (talk) 22:06, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Amsaim (talk) 13:19, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

QS on Mike Ezuruonye

Regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mike_Ezuruonye&diff=prev&oldid=503084939, I see many articles on Wikipedia which use thenigerianvoice.com as a source or reference, see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=thenigerianvoice.com&title=Special%3ASearch. Are you suggesting all of these references and links should be removed? Why do you believe this source is questionable? --beefyt (talk) 13:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Content Guideline on Reliable Sources is pretty accurate in determining what a reliable source is. To summarize it briefly: a reliable source consists of several people engaged in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the writing. The reliable source must have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. The reliable source must have editorial oversight, usually in the form of an editorial board, whose members are clearly listed on the "About us" link of the site. If there is no editorial board, chances are high, that it's a one-man show presenting her/his personal ideas. In the case of thenigerianvoice.com, the About us page does not list an editorial board which means that there is no editorial oversight, thus this site does not fulfill Wikipedia's criteria of a reliable source. Thenigerianvoice.com is part of the "MG Media Group", which also hosts modernghana.com and nigeriafilms.com. From the near word-to-word identical About-us pages, and the lack of an editorial board, it is clear that these three sites are the product of a "one-man-show".

If you want to edit Nigeria or Africa related articles, there are scores of reliable sources that you can use for Wikipedia articles other than these three unreliable sources. Nigerian daily newspapers for instance, have greatly improved their internet websites, and usually have adequate information on celebrities like Nollywood actresses & actors. Lastly, concerning your comment about the usuage of thenigerianvoice.com in other Wikipedia articles, I think this essay will answer your question. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 21:52, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Very good, thank you, I fully agree with your observations. --beefyt (talk) 05:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at Talk:Reno Omokri.
Message added 20:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GregJackP Boomer! 20:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Osuofia in London

Hi Amsaim, thanks for spotting my additional info on 'Osuofia in London' lacked a citation. It's a difficult one: I know that 'Osuofia in London' was filmed in south east London because I've watched the film several times and I recognise the places (I live in south east London). I've written extensively about the film for my MA research here: http://freepdfhosting.com/d7dfaf1ffb.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.117.219 (talk) 18:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

If you want to include this information into the article, then you need to provide a reliable source as a reference. Please understand that there are sources which are not accepted as reliable sources within Wikipedia. Placing the info into the text without a reliable source, stating that you recognize the places because you live there, is defined as original research, and this is not allowed in Wikipedia. If you can find a reliable source for this info it would be good to place that info back into the article, given that the article still is rather small. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 21:41, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Chiomayoung

Hi. I was checking the contributions of accounts recently issued spam warning and I saw your warnings to this new user. I did not see anything I would call spam. First you warned him for not adding references to support his edits. Then he linked to Nigerian newspapers and you warned him for spamming. Normally we save spam warnings for people trying to "push" a particular web site.

Am I missing something here? If not, I'm worried maybe we're being to BITEy with a newcomer. If I am missing a spam problem, I'm interested in following up.

Thanks, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:17, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

As an administrator, you are well aware that new and inexperienced editors usually edit articles (in good faith or bad faith) without adhering to Wikipedia's policies and content guidelines (e.g. adding unsourced material, inappropriate external links etc.). This is what this new editor did with her/his first edits here and here. I fully agree that the newspaper link which was added as the second edit is what I must have overlooked (thanks for the heads-up), however this newspaper link does not support the 2 large bits of material that were added, it merely support a newly added material of Ade Bantu being a judge in a tv show. Furthermore, the editor removed the name of Bantu's band (Afrobeat Academy Band) without providing any explanation, even though the references on the article (e.g. 1 ) support this info. After I reverted the first three edits, the editor added new unsourced material back into the article, and again, removed without explanation the name of Bantu's band (Afrobeat Academy Band). I reverted these edits as well. Lastly, the editor placed 8 links into the external links section. From these 8 links, only 2 are reliable sources (1 & 2). The other 6 are selfpublished or questionable sources: sources without editorial oversight, without an editorial board. While the NME link is merely a video link, the Aljazera link writes about a 2010 album of Bantu. I had planned to update the article with this and other links last night when I reverted the additions. I don't like to manually undo and sift through the mixed reliable and unreliable sources that new editors place into articles with a single edit, I just dont have the time for this. The impression is created as if this editor is not interested in contributing constructively to the Wikipedia project, or else s/he would have replied to my first Level 1 warning template. The editor opted to ignore it. I'll update this article later on in the evening when I have more time. Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 08:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia

Hello, Amsaim. You have new messages at Johnmoor's talk page.
Message added 11:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Referencing

Hi, Amsaim! Thank you for the notice.

Anyhow, Wikipedia:Verifiability says "This means that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." - I believed that the corporate name wasn't likely to be challenged. Usually I cite almost everything I write but on some occasions I do leave something uncited if I think it isn't likely to be challenged. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:53, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

With this interpretation of WP:V, editors could be tempted to add their "favourite" unsourced material into an article, and then simply state that they didn't think the added material was likely to be challenged. To avoid this issue, WP:BURDEN stipulates, that "...the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds material...".

The link to the Punch website does not state the name of the publisher, neither does it state any initials. The copyright name on a newspaper's website does not automatically refer to the publisher (e.g. check The Washington Post, New York Times, Philadelphia Daily News etc). How do you know the name of the publisher, and the publisher's initials? This appears to be original research. Again, could you please provide a source that states the publisher of The Punch and the initials used? Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 00:09, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Regarding your edits...

Hi, I'm new to editing Wikipedia so I apologise if I made some errors when editing the Declan Galbraith page. I am a representative of his Management and so I have been trying to correct the errors and false information that was on the page. I would appreciate your help in doing this, as I know you deleted some of my corrections, the info I have given is correct but maybe I didn't input it in the right way. Firstly the so called 'Official' MySpace page is not official at all, so we don't want that on the page. Also you removed some information I placed in the 'Fame' section regarding Declan's recent work at the Hackney Empire (London), my source of this info is the 'About' page on his official web site. I also changed the Genre...It was Pop, but I changed it to Folk, Rock, Pop. I'm not sure what you're problem was with this and why you changed it back. If you could explain this to me I would appreciate it. Also you removed the link to Declan's Official YouTube channel. Could you tell me why this is? Also is it possible to change the photo? The one currently being used is very old. Preferably we would like to use something from his official Web Site, something from a recent photo shoot. Thank you in advance, Declan-Galbraith-Management Declan-Galbraith-Management 16:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Declan-Galbraith-Management (talk • contribs)

Welcome to Wikipedia. As a new editor, you are best advised to fully acquaint yourself first with Wikipedia's Basic Policies and Guidelines before editing Wikipedia articles. That way your edits won't be reverted. Since you are a representative of the subject of the BLP article, chances are high that you might have a conflict of interest. Basically, what you should always keep in mind while editing, is that you need to source every material that you add to Wikipedia articles with reliable sources so that readers are able to verify the added material. Please note, that Wikipedia has its own definition of what a reliable source is, and what sources are regarded as unreliable. The official youtube link you added was automatically removed when I reverted all of your edits. As you can see, I have removed the user-generated wrong links and replaced them with the real official website / facebook links. Evidently I must have overlooked the youtube link. I've readded that link. Again, please acquaint yourself with Wikipedia's Policies and Guidelines. The following should be of interest to you:

Wikipedia's Teahouse, a friendly place to help new editors

How to sign your post

Reliable Sources

Unreliable Sources

Verifiability

Conflict of Interest

Neutral point of view

Happy reading. Amsaim (talk) 17:03, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Concerning the image on the article, yes it is possible to change that image. Basically you need to consider two things: establishing the copyright status of the image, and the proper labelling of the image in regards to its origin and copyright status. You can upload images or files yourself, just make sure that you are the copyright owner of the image, or if not, that you have the owner's permission to use her/his image on Wikipedia. Please note, that the copyright status of the image must be appropriate for a free-content encyclopedia. It's pretty easy to upload photos in Wikipedia. Find out more here and here. Amsaim (talk) 17:27, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok I understand your point but with the changes that were made in mind, there was really no conflict of interest. I only want to make sure that the Wikipedia page has the correct information. There was a very small update to a recent concert Declan has done, a change to the Genre, which is really a subjective thing anyway and then some updates to the external links, so that his real official site is seen and not something fake. I don't see where any problem could lie with any of that.

You have not removed the MySpace page and as I mentioned to you this is not an official page..It is a fake, which I assume is the reason why it has not been updated in over 4 years.

The sources of info that have been used by people in the past on Wikipedia have supposedly been Declan's official site and official forum...The source for the info I have now given is his official site and now for some reason it's not accepted. Why's that? Thanks for putting the YouTube channel back on and for informing me about photos. Kind regards, Declan Team --Declan-Galbraith-Management 18:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Declan-Galbraith-Management (talk • contribs)

You have again left your posting unsigned, even though I recommended that you acquaint yourself with the How to sign your post guideline. I will again advise and urge you as a new editor to read through the blue-links which I provided for you on your talk page and on my talk page. That way most of your questions will be answered. Failure to do so might result in edits being reverted. As for the fake myspace link, just go ahead, be bold and remove it. Any material which Wikipedia editors add into Wikipedia articles, including musical genres & styles, must be properly referenced with a reliable source (see WP:CITE). Genres are not subject to Wikipedia Editors own subjective opinion, but must be sourced. For example: in order to classify the musical style of Declan Galbraith, you need to find a reliable source which classifies Galbraith's music. Allmusic.com is a good reliable source for musical artists, so in this case the music genre would thusly be classified exactly as it is found on Galbraith's Allmusic.com entry, namely "Pop/Rock, Adult Contemporary, Teen Pop". Concerning material found on the official website of an artist (which is a primary source), you need to acquaint yourself with Wikipedia's Reliable Sources content guideline, which amongst others stipulates that "...Wikipedia articles should be based mainly on reliable secondary sources...". Wikipedia distinguishes between primary, secondary and tertiary sources. Galbraith is all over the news, and so it is recommended that you use reliable sources like newspapers, magazines, books to source your additions. Using a primary source on a BLP article is not encouraged in Wikipedia. Just try to understand this basic concept, that all material added into Wikipedia must be sourced with a reliable source. Amsaim (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok with regards to signing, I clicked the signature button (the little blue pencil button) at the end of my posts so I'm not sure what you're talking about. Again with regards to the acceptable sources, my point is that the official sites were accepted in the past as reasonable sources, so why not now? Secondly, when it comes to biographical info or news on recent work Galbraith has done, surely the best source is his official Web Site. Even news articles can be wrong or report incorrect information but for the kind of details and information we are talking about here, it doesn't get any more reliable than his own official web site. With regards to the MySpace link, I asked you to remove it because it only appeared after your edits and so I assumed that you had put it there. Being bold has nothing to do with it. I do find the Wikipedia policy on things a little funny at times. Who is to say that Allmusic.com are actually correct in their information regarding Genre? Or that they are correct every time? Adult/contemporary and Teen Pop as they have listed seem a bit of a contradiction to me. Aside from that I don't see any reference of source given for the current genre listed on Galbraith's page...All I see is someone mentioning that Irish folk songs or Folky Pop would be too colloquial so instead they chose pop music...That doesn't very reliable or correct to me. Just sounds like someone editing things based on their opinion. Regards, --Declan-Galbraith-Management 20:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC)--Declan-Galbraith-Management 20:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Declan-Galbraith-Management (talk • contribs)

It is pretty obvious that you did not read through any of the blue linked policies and guidelines which were kindly provided for you. This is evident for instance in your repeated failure to sign your post, your questions about reliable sources (which would be obsolete if you had read through the polices) and your somewhat slightly disparaging remark about Wikipedia's policies. I will take my leave here as I simply do not have the time to keep on repeating myself. If you need an experienced editor to assist you for a longer period of time, I suggest you go to Wikipedia's teahouse. Good luck. Amsaim (talk) 22:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)