User talk:Dcshank/Archive 11

Speedy deletion nomination of JOPUX

A tag has been placed on JOPUX requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, image description page, image talk page, mediawiki page, mediawiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, or user talk page from the article space.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 01:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments on new article

Dear Dcshank, I'm not sure if I'm responding to your comments in the preferred way because I'm not experienced at this.

This message is in reference to your comment concerning the new article ('The Gravity Theory of Mass Extinction') which I submitted. I am the original writer of this article, my name is John Stojanowski. I have given Wikipedia the right to freely distribute the article.

Thank you for your comments, Jstheorist Jstheorist (talk) 16:45, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Jstheorist,

I'm sorry. That explains why another editor reversed the same decline. Since there was no talk page and the other editor did not leave a comment why, I did not know. I will see about getting it undeleted. I will have to learn how to check this. I learn something new here every day almost. Sorry for causing problem. --  :- ) Don 16:50, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Your request for undeletion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is WT:Articles for creation/The Gravity Theory of Mass Extinction. JohnCD (talk) 19:18, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

New Article The Gravity Theory of Mass Extinction

Dear Dcshank,

I have read through the latest comments and will try to answer them. I followed the link WP:DCM which states:

“When you contribute material to Wikipedia you are not giving us exclusive use of it. You still retain any rights you previously held, but you are giving non-exclusive license under Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License.“ This is what I thought would happen when I submitted the article, i.e., the article would automatically be contributed to Wikipedia. Is there something additional that needs to be done? If you need my email address, I can supply that.

I have read the commentary from JohnCD concerning the issues of original research and can only explain the article in the following way. This theory was developed over the last eight years by myself. Not being a professional geologist or Earth scientist, it is not possible to submit the theory to a peer reviewed publication. I do believe that this theory will eventually be accepted by the broad scientific community if it is able to “see the light of day.” The theory is able to explain many problems that have perplexed scientists concerning mass extinction and other phenomena, including the Earth’s magnetic pole reversals. I look forward to feedback from professionals who would be given the opportunity to review this theory if it appears on Wikipedia as this would probably be the only way they would become aware of it.

Thank you for your assistance, John Stojanowski Jstheorist (talk) 01:18, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Well John,

I had the same idea about the Wiki when I first discovered it many years ago, I have lots of ideas, but the Wiki is not for original research.  This page explains it better than I ever could:  WP:OR  You may be wrong about the peer review journals, I believe non-professionals have been published in the past.  I'm not sure in what discipline, but I have in the back of my mind that it has been done before.  I also think there are competitors, so to speak, to the Wiki that do publish original research. I will do a little checking and let you know if I find something.

When I first looked over your article, I thought it was very interesting, but there were not enough citations.  I knew at that point we had a problem, either you were going to have to add a lot more citations, or it was original research.  Then I saw the paper on the web which another reviewer discovered.  Then we had copyright problems.  The copyright problem is a mute point since we are dealing with original research.  I'm very sorry but I don't see how your article can be part of the Wiki.  I hope that you do stick around and maybe do some articles without original research or help with existing articles.  We need people with knowledge in every subject.  Thanks very much for your efforts. --  :- ) Don 09:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I have commented on his talk page, and suggested Wikiversity as a sister site which doesn't object to OR. JohnCD (talk) 16:17, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

7Lawrence page for Christopher J. Holcroft

12 Sep 12

Hi Don,

Many thanks for your assistance with the creation of the page I have been building for Christopher J. Holcroft - I appreciate it.

My task now is to wade through the third party requirements and amend and or update the page so it can ber published.

Christopher

Christopher 04:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 7Lawrence (talk • contribs)

No problem, that's what I'm here for. Hope your project is going well. Having all the reviews coming from his website is poison. Get rid of them if you can. --  :- ) Don 05:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

backlog elimination at WP:AfC

Good job eliminating the backlog at WP:AfC, although I didn't quite believe Wikipedia could collectively get a backlog down to -2. I should try doing that at various backlog pages on April 1^{st. BTW it was fixed. --Mysterytrey 22:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)}

My bad, "," vs. "|". The -2 is for the two pages "Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects" and "Wikipedia:Files for upload" which are always in the category. --  :- ) Don 22:55, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Yup. --Mysterytrey 23:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

/* Brow Monument and Brow Monument Trail */

thank you. this has truly been an amazing experience. i will spend tomorrow thanking everyone who helped me through this. bpolk Abearfellow (talk) 05:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you I've hiked and camped quit a bit in Arizona, but never been north of the Canyon. I've heard it is nice. Thanks again for your work. Believe me, I know it's work. --  :- ) Don 05:03, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

hi. don't know how many times i can thank everyone for hanging in there with me. but, for you, go find this hike. go get a four wheel drive from salt lake or somewhere and explore all of the forest service roads on the north rim. point sublime. jump up point. right vehicle, amazing results. again, thanks. Abearfellow (talk) 05:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

hi. again. any thoughts on why the file was deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abearfellow (talk • contribs) 15:49, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

hi once more. looks like it is all cleared up. thanks again!!Abearfellow (talk) 17:31, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dnyaneshwar Mulay

Hi,

As we discussed earlier, I have added inline citations for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dnyaneshwar Mulay. Can you please review.

Thanks for your help.

-Jitendra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jitendra.chudappa (talk • contribs) 15:52, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dnyaneshwar Mulay

Hello,

I just help to understand what is the next process for Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dnyaneshwar Mulay.

Appreciate your help.

-Jitendra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jitendra.chudappa (talk • contribs) 21:41, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jitendra,

I don't have much time right now. Your article looks much better. I did some touch up on your article, mainly technical stuff. It still has some problems.

My suggestions:

1. Use citations rather than an external link in the article when ever possible and only the first time they appear.
2. If possible, use only the best 2 or 3 citations in one place. You have 10 or 12 here and there.
3. I would remove the tables, especially the languages and academics.

I don't have the time now, and I feel like someone else should review it, not me. The way it reads now, the next reviewer will say it is promotional and reads like a CV. That is why I think you need to delete the tables. Good luck. --  :- ) Don 21:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jitendra,

Your template was malfunctioning. I would look over your article, the only remaining problem mentions seems to be NPOV, Neutral Point of View. Make sure that there are no WP:PEACOCK words. That it is not exaggerating anything. In the top template there is a link, when ready to resubmit, Click here. Good luck. --  :- ) Don 23:52, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Myelin gene Regulatory Factor

Dear Don,

I'm writing in regards to the "myelin gene regulatory factor" article creation.

Other proteins with comparable function, like YY1 and Ascl1, also have their own article on wikipedia. That's why I thought an article about MRF would fit. Articles comprising the known information about proteins are always helpful, in particular for students that come across an abbreviation and want to gain an overview.

If you have any comments on how the article can be improved I'm happy to do that.

Regards, Koermo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koermo (talk • contribs) 01:53, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you.

Koermo,

I'm actually on your side here, but I have rules to follow. Perhaps we need to set up a specific notability criteria for proteins as we have for astrological objects. The other two articles you mentioned have bunches of "Additional reading" and "References". If I get slapped for this I'm going to come slap you. Happy editing. --  :- ) Don 02:27, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Dcshank

Dear Don, thanks for that. I'll add further references to it as soon as I get the chance. In the meantime maybe its activated status will help lure other people to add references in the first place.Do you think a "Biologic Relevance" section would help as well? Regards, Koermo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koermo (talk • contribs) 03:11, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

You might have a look that the existing projects here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Science. Please sign your posts with ~~~~ the computer will automatically complete your infomation when you post. --  :- ) Don 03:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The MEDIS study

Thank you for your email ... There is no Copyright issue on my page ... pls let me know whether you are goiung to accept the article or not.

Demosthenes B. Panagiotakos, DrMed, FRSPH, FACE Associate Professor in Biostatistics-Epidemiology of Nutrition Director, Graduate Studies

Dept of Nutrition and Dietetics Harokopio University of Athens 70 Eleftheriou Venizelou Str. 17671 Athens, Greece Tel. <redacted> Fax. <redacted> http://www.tmimadiaitologias.hua.gr — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbpanag (talk • contribs) 05:13, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Dbpanag,

If your article is about The MEDIS study itself, then we need third party independent sources to establish the notability of The MEDIS study. If you article is about the Study itself, that would be original research, which is not suitable for the Wikipedia. Please see: WP:NOT.

If you wish to publish original research, as I said before, Wikisource and I believe the Wikiversity accepts original research. Thanks for your effort. --  :- ) Don 06:40, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

how to delete an article?

I saw your comment asking me to delete three articles from the list of four that I've submitted. But how can I remove it? Kindly guide. Principalkec (talk) 09:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Principalkec,

Go to your sandbox here: User:Principalkec/sandbox. When you click "Edit", and scroll down, you will find 4 articles. Highlight the unwanted text with your cursor and press the Delete key or right click on your mouse and click Cut or Delete. When you have finished, don't forget to click the "Show preview" button in order to ensure you have done it correctly, then press the "Save page" button. If you have any other problems, write me here, or post to the Help Desk. It would be good to leave me a message here, when you have finished, then I can proceed with you article. Thanks. --  :- ) Don 15:55, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I see someone has moved the page already, and you have fixed it. Thanks. --  :- ) Don 16:03, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

my latest edition, kindly review and inform me the needed changes

My previous articles have been rejected thrice. I've edited the previous article and want to submit it for review. Kindly check the matter and do let me know if the article needs any more revisions or is it fit for submission.

Thanks.

Hi,

There is no need to cut and paste your article, you can link to it by placing double brackets around the name. [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/KMEA Engineering College (KEC)]] in the edit window looks like this: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/KMEA Engineering College (KEC) when displayed.

I have looked at your page history, and I only see it has been declined once by User:Godimrm on 2012 September 14 because it was "not adequately supported by reliable sources." You had one reliable source, but removed it. I have added back the source from India Today I have also restored the AfC template, so that when you are ready to resubmit you can click the link in the template.

Information about filling in the infobox is >here<. For example: the "type" should be: Public, private, four year, undergraduate, graduate, etc. I have done some minor touch-up on the article. There is nothing seriously wrong. You have one reliable source, you need to add one or two more independent, reliable sources to demonstrate that the college is notable. See: WP:NOTE, WP:RELIABLE and WP:VERIFY.

When you are ready to resubmit, in the decline template it says, "When you are ready to resubmit, click here."

Good luck. --  :- ) Don 14:37, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

P.S. You may want to consider changing your user name also before someone tags you. You can change your username here: WP:RENAME. --  :- ) Don 15:59, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

9front v. AFC

Hello! I wanted to ask about the removal of {{WikiProject Articles for creation}} – why did you do that? It was accepted in AFC. If you think it shouldn't have been accepted, you'd better move it back to WT:Articles for creation/9front... — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 08:35, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dmitrij,

I saw that you had worked on the article. After 3 attempts, the editor moved the article into Main space from AfC. Since it still shows up on our list for review and the editor apparently did not care if it was approved, I removed our templates so as not to clutter Main space. It was in AfC, but never approved. We have enough back log in AfC, chasing renegades is just another burden. It I think an article is good and salvageable, I will move it back. In this case, I think it is article we don't need added to the chaos in AfC. If you would like to move it back, I do not have a problem with that. I do not revert reverts, I discuss or accept the situation. --  :- ) Don 13:20, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

The other tweak which set my opinion to let it fly or die, was that the editor added (←Created page with '{{WikiProject Articles for creation|class = B|ts = |reviewer = }}') to the talk page. --  :- ) Don 13:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Geomedical engineering

Hello, I see there is message on published article about geomedical engineering from the Wikipedia. There are some issues related to citation of the references and wikifying the article. Being a new user I can not understand to rectify it. I believe, all the references in this artcile have strong sources and many terminologies used a;ready in the Wikipedia. Would you please help me again to resolve these issues. Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.219.235.174 (talk) 07:33, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you SineBot. --  :- ) Don 07:38, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi 196.219.235.174,

There were minor problems with the references when I first looked at your article here. I looked and found the PDF's and fixed up your references, so they should be fine now. I think the article looks alright, so I removed most of the tags. Many people here feel that every sentence should have an inline citation. This is not true. If you're bored sometime, you can start reading at WP:CITE. If you don't want to bother with inline citations, remove the tag in your article, and explain your position on the article's talk page based on WP:CITE or some other Wikipedia reference. You probably forgot to sign-in tonight, since the Bot signed you as an IP. I will leave Talk Back on the IP talk page. Please remember to sign you posts on any talk pages with ~~~~. This will automatically add your nick, date, and time. Happy editing. Nice article. --  :- ) Don 08:11, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Articles for Creation urgently needs your help!

Articles for Creation is desperately short of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors, in reviewing submissions in the pending submissions queue. Currently there are 2636 submissions waiting to be reviewed and many help requests at our Help Desk. Do you have what it takes? Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not? Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions? Can you review submissions based on their individual merits? If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog. You might wish to add {{AFC status}} or {{AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. PS: we have a great AFC helper script at WP:AFCH! News Good article nominee 04 Aug 2012 – Parental brain (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Carina1205 (t · c); see discussion AFCH script improvements 1.16 to 1.17 Batman still works!

Sent on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation. If you do not wish to receive anymore messages from this WikiProject, please remove your username from this page.
Happy reviewing! TheSpecialUser ^TSU

• Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 08:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bryan Hall (American football)

But I added more sources. 24.227.93.118 (talk) 02:17, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

Yes, I noticed you added sources but none of the sources constitute substantial coverage. The rules for professional football notability are:

Have appeared in at least one regular season or post season game in any one of the following professional leagues: the Arena Football League, the Canadian Football League, the National Football League, the third American Football League, the All-America Football Conference or the United States Football League, or any other top-level professional league.

Failing this, college or high-school athletic notability requires:

A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.

There are many similar submissions this time of the year, unfortunately 90% are declined. As soon as he play in a professional game, he will meet the notability requirements. Thanks for you efforts. When he makes his first play with the Ravens hit the resubmit button. --  :- ) Don 02:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh ok well Thanks. 24.227.93.118 (talk) 03:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

The article about Rubén Marshall Tikalova

Thank you very much for the approval, of course I will do my best to improve it and to make contributions to existing and to future articles (written by myself). Of course wikipedia is an impressive project which needs from all of us. I will try to be online with a new contribution soon!!!--Dan Prior (talk) 13:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it deserved to be approved. You did all the work, I clicked the button. I just added categories something I neglected to do. You may want to check those and delete some or add more. Thanks for your contribution. --  :- ) Don 14:11, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	You have been absolutely wonderful to me the past couple of days, and I owe you many thanks. :-) RunnerOnIce (talk) 02:21, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Matthew Landy Steen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Mark Clark, Clean Air Act, John Sinclair, S.S.S., Progressive Labor Party and Weatherman

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

a small parameter?

You'd mentioned a 'small' parameter here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation#a small parameter. I'm not familiar with it but am wondering if the script ever is intended to actually use it for anything. If the page was a WP:BLP violation (such as an attack page on some ill-behaved student of Non-Notable Elementary School by one of their supposedly esteemed peers) the script actually blanks the page, replacing the content with a template. (An entire article plagiarised from a copyrighted source might also be blanked and templated, but I'm not sure if the script does this automatically.) For these, the templates do indicate the text is still available in the article's history. Do we actually want these resubmitted? Even if the topic is legitimate, it may be best to restart it as a fresh page instead of resubmitting a legally-questionable article history. K7L (talk) 00:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I poked through some articles Articles for Submission, some have the small parameter set, others don't. When it is set, the only thing you see is the gray error box. --  :- ) Don 00:48, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

From my digging at code, "small" removes all the resubmit and extra links from that decline template, supposedly leaving only one per page in order to save space. Works well unless they all happen to get the small parameter, then there is no way to resubmit. --  :- ) Don 15:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Atiya (Life & Purpose Coach, Inspirational Speaker and Author)

Could you delete my submission? I don't like it want to work on a doc instead of my sandbox. Could you delete this page too: http://wpedia.goo.ne.jp/enwiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Atiya

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cincywriter4u (talk • contribs) 18:14, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Are you talking about Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Atiya (2) and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Atiya? If you want to delete a page it is best if you do it as author. Simply add or cut and paste the following to the top of the page: {{db-author}} It may take up to 24 hours to happen. Let me know if you have any problems. Thanks for your efforts so far. --  :- ) Don 18:45, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback!

Hi Don, thanks for the feedback on my recently submitted article. I'm new to Wikipedia and wanted to contribute by fleshing out information about the government in my corner of the world. I had 2 quick questions: Is my article plainly not notable or does it have the potential to be if I referenced a bit more and fleshed it out? And, if the former, would it be more appropriate/notable enough/otherwise live up to Wikipedia standards to add it as a "Government" section to the Monterey County, California page? Thanks in advance for your help and your kind message! It's been really nice to find that you editors are so nice on here! Mbay2012 (talk) 23:17, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

The question is: "Why is this county government notable and the one next door is not?" Every county has one. We need to see third party references that show it is notable. Like, they received national attention for slashing their budget more than any other county in the U.S., all their members are former felons, everyone is gay, etc. Thanks for your efforts. Maybe you could look at WP:NOTE. There might be something I am missing. --  :- ) Don 23:22, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I'll take a look tonight and let you know. Thanks for helping this old lady figure out this whole Wikipedia thing! Mbay2012 (talk) 23:28, 28 September 2012 (UTC)