User talk:Bongomatic/Archive 3

Unknown topic

I see nothing on Talk page. Please provide the explanation first and then tag articles. Otherwise , people are likely to misunderstand your intents. Thanks--Internet Scholar(talk) 22:37, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Minor Tactics of the Chalk Stream

You deleted the Contents section of this article with the following edit summary: Deleted Un-encyclopedic material. I disagree with that edit but have posted a question on the subject at:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Books#Contents_Section_-_Non-Fiction_Books --Mike Cline (talk) 15:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Retaliatory {Notability} tagging

Replied at User_talk:Enric_Naval#Retaliatory_.7BNotability.7D_tagging --Enric Naval (talk) 02:58, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

One comment. As User:Internet Scholar pointed out to me, I advise that, when you tag an article and someone reverts it, you should leave a short comment on the talk page explaining why you placed the tag (for example, "does not meet X" or "lacks sources of type Y"), and post it before restoring the tag. I'm not saying that you did anything wrong, just that it's more effective if you leave a comment with an explanation. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:46, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

József and István

This is the umpteen occasion. You not american? The wikipedia is wastrel, as America declaim: It cannot be Europa! But the Saint United States! Doncsecz (talk) 12:45, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Saleem Sinai

I think you are mistaken on two accounts.

• One: Characters such as Colonel Cathcart or many of the characters which link from List of characters in Catch-22, among others, have not "gained significance in popular culture beyond the novel in which they appear, and have significant papers, articles, and other works (outside of WP) devoted to their character and significance". Besides, if there is such a policy which supports your claim regarding creation of character pages in wikipedia, please specifically cite the policy page to me. Then, we wont have to waste our time in these discussions and spare the time to do something more helpful to wikipedia.
• Two: Saleem Sinai is studied widely and there are works devoted to his character and significance. Here are a few references to him outside the book (add http to all links to see them) ://books.google.com/books?id=Bia5PuDTgjYC&pg=PA104&lpg=PA104&dq=saleem+sinai&source=web&ots=8XPpl4zQ1g&sig=H6uP-rtfNKcG-e5sbni_DWx5Kac&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=7&ct=result#PPA104,M1, ://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Sunday_Specials/Review/One_more_bouquet_for_Saleem_Sinai/articleshow/3254751.cms, ://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/reviews/2708795.stm (report of stage play), ://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/indo_anglian_fiction/87879 (comparison with other characters), ://www.shvoong.com/social-sciences/psychology/1840781-laws-attraction/ which I could find with a simple google search, minus blogs.

I dont know what your problem with the page is. But, I would be a lot more grateful if you could specifically cite the basis of your repeated interventions and antagonism to the creation of the page. Thank you.--Eukesh (talk) 15:56, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I described my issues with the page in detail at [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saleem Sinai]]. The AfD process. You may notice that I haven't edited the page since 7 November 2008, when I made the nomination. Not quite sure what you mean by "repeated interventions", as I edited the page precisely twice, and in each case accompanied the edits with appropriate commentary. Bongomatic01:05, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

By interventions I meant the repeated attempts to delete the page rather than improve it. The discussion was over before I could edit there so am writing to you. I had written to you about characters which are of lesser literary significance and you did not attempt to remove them but were focussed on the central character of a Booker's Prize winning novel who metaphorically represents Salman Rushdie's interpretation of Modern India. I am sorry for taking this to personal level, but I dont know the motivations behind this delete request of a character which is citable, widely studied and expandable (and has been expanded to certain extent at present). Regards--Eukesh(talk) 07:03, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Your idea of a Wikialmanac

I noticed that you had an idea about it. You may want to look at this link:http://requests.wikia.com/wiki/Special:RequestWiki. By the way, you can add {{db-author}} on your userpage since you apparently don't want one. -- IRP ☎ 17:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. On the almanac, my utopia involves the shifting of a large amount of content to a new almanac, not just its creation. It doesn't reflect consensus. On the other point, don't like the red link, but have now just redirected here. 00:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. -- IRP ☎ 01:15, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

subst:deprod József Szakovics

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from József Szakovics, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it atWikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks!

It has some historical importance for Wends living in Hungary. Misibacsi (talk) 20:23, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Notifications on removing deletion: SQL View

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from SQL View, which you proposed for deletion, because I think that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks!

It has a long history which in my personal opinion may worth considerable citation.View0319 (talk) 04:01, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

First Information Report

How did you concluded that a First Information Report is non notable? =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Matthew W. Gassen

You marked this page for deletion. Why? He's well-known, politically active, and a sustainability expert. He's published, has a website, and meets the criteria for inclusion. Now the page is gone. All of the links were verifiable. —Precedingunsigned comment added by Soultown73 (talk • contribs) 05:19, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I have removed your merge tags from Satyr play and the target mergee. You posted nothing on the discussion pages. Please provide reasons before restoring the tags. Tealwisp(talk) 00:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Hi! Would you mind weighing in on this AfD: Brownmark Films Thanks! SERSeanCrane (talk) 01:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

• Could you also take a look at the wiki pages of some of the 'films' released bySpecial Entertainment and tell me if they're notable. I'm unsure about them. Thanks! SERSeanCrane (talk) 01:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Have commented at the AfD for Brownmark Films. Don't see much evidence of notability for the Special Entertainment films (though some would argue that any work involving more than incidental involvment of William Shatner is automatically notable).

What are your views on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Magic Voyage (2nd nomination)? Bongomatic 01:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I put my two cents in at the article's afd. Thanks for your help. SERSeanCrane(talk) 03:43, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Bongo, I'm okay with deleting articles that aren't any good, but repeating nominations? I don't get it. There are so many articles that aren't worth keeping why go this route?ChildofMidnight (talk) 08:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of AnyLogic

I found good survey of the simulation tools, I hope it will prove the notability of the software. I've added it as the reference for the article:http://lionhrtpub.com/orms/surveys/Simulation/Simulation.html

I and other AnyLogic users are trying to make the article better. Could you please remove notability issue template? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergey Suslov (talk •contribs) 08:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sergey Suslov. I note that you stated in one of the edit summaries that you work on AnyLogic. This is a conflict of interest which, while not restricting you from making edits to any article, is discouraged. Have you read the notability guidelines? They state that:

If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article.

I have not been able to identify any significant coverage in independent sources. Neither the tabular comparison in the linke above, nor the brief mention in the attached article, changes my view on this.

I will not remove the tag, but anyone is free to do so. My recommendation would be to find some significant independent coverage of the product, rather than see the article sent to AfD. Bongomatic 13:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you again

Hey, Bongo, LTNS. I enjoyed your guest appearance in the Endgadget AfD chat. Hope life is treating you well.

Ecoleetage (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promoteWikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!=)
Smile at others by adding{{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

James A. Peters

Hello:

I am perplexed. Why is James A. Peters less notable or more in need of references than any of these?

Ernst Ahl, Sherman C. Bishop, Frank N. Blanchard, Alice Middleton Boring, Doris Mable Cochran, Roger Conant (herpetologist), Raymond Ditmars, James R. Dixon, just to name a few from the beginning of the list in Category: Herpetologists. There are many, many more in other categories. Will you please remove those notices as they are unjustified. Or else catch up with the ones that really lack references or significance. BTW, I added a couple of references. --Polinizador (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I came across Peters when doing Wikipedia:New pages patrol. Note that I placed tags on the article exactly 30 days after it was created (when it came across the patrol when going from oldest to most recent). I have no views on the other herpetologists, nor do I expect to formulate any. A quick review of the contents of the Smithsonian archive does not change my opinion. I added the tags because felt the article lacks either a claim or demonstration of notability. Feel free to add or subtract any tags you wish--there's no prohibition on doing so. Bongomatic19:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I created this article because the following pages link to this author:

• Atelopus arthuri Peters, 1973
• Atelopus balios Peters, 1973
• Atelopus bomolochos Peters, 1973
• Atelopus halihelos Peters, 1973
• Atelopus mindoensis Peters, 1973
• Atelopus nepiozomus Peters, 1973
• Atelopus petersi Coloma, Lötters, Duellman & Miranda-Leiva, 2007

--Polinizador (talk) 22:11, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Mergers

Hey Bongo, a proposed merger into the Ifrit article has had consensus for a while. I haven't done a merge, so I'm a little nervous to try it. I checked out the listings of proposed mergers, and when I saw your name attached to a couple I knew you'd be happy to help me out! Other than the cut and paste, I see I am supposed to put notice on the top of the talk page, and close the discussion somehow, do you think I should try it, or would you be willing to help out with it? Let me know what you think. If I try it I'd like to have someone follow up and make sure I haven't destroyed all of Wikipedia with some egregious mistake. Thanks. And Happy Holidays to you and yours.ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi CoM, see Help:Merging and moving pages#Closing/archive a proposed merger, which details how to add tags similar to those for closing AfDs to a merger discussion. Generally Help:Merging and moving pages gives pretty reasonable advice on how to go through the entire process. Let me know if you have any more questions (not that I'm particularly expert in this. Best to you, too. Bongomatic 00:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)