User talk:Nancy/Archive 13

Recreating page

I was thinking of recreating a page you deleted. I think I have a lot of notable information I can add. The page was of a person Charles A.S. Hall who is well known according to this recently, but also known as the person behind this workshop. This is his other website connected with what he is doing here. This all seems interesting and notable to me and I think I can create a good article with material associated also like this he is associated with. Here is another I just found here, where he is the chairperson. I assume none of this information was in the previous article or not connected well? What do you think? This guy is a well known author on Systems ecology one of foremost, and related things so I could wikify an article about him pretty easily. Your opinion? I am not connected in any way to the person or institution, but have found out about this because of my own interests. Comment? skip sievert (talk) 15:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I have absolutely no issue with any editor resurrecting an article title that I have previously speedily deleted provided that it addresses the reasons the original was removed - in this case notability. You'll obviously need to show that Hall meets the criteria at WP:BIO (and possibly more specifically WP:PROF?) with reference to multiple, independent reliable sources - if you do that then there should be no problem. Best of luck, Nancy ^talk 16:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Nancy. Pleasure to speak with you. I will tear into the article Charles A S Hall, later this afternoon and am looking forward to it. If you would look in, or add suggestions that would be good. I see you put it back up. I will address those issues you mention. Here is an example of something I just did that will be similar but different. I just got started on that one and will improve it later today or soon also David A Sonnenfeld which was a tiny stub which was very messed up. Still needs work as said as to formatting more ref/notes, section titles etc. - Regards. skip sievert (talk) 17:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Datchet Bridge

Jolly good work, dash-it Motmit (talk)

Thanks Motmit. I didn't even know the bridge had ever existed until 4 days ago.... hurrah for the Local History Room at Maidenhead Library! All best, Nancy ^talk 07:26, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

AR

Hello Nancy, My user name is in homage to Nancy Blackett (character) too! If you want to pay some homage, your assistance or constructive criticism would be welcome at [arthur-ramsome.wikia.com Arthur Ransome Wiki]. Nankai (talk) 02:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

---

Jaz Dhami

Hello I would like to write an article on Jaz Dhami , & wikipedia mentions that you previously wrote an article on him, but you deleted it? Can i please ask why? Thank you Nazmeen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nazmeen.x (talk • contribs) 21:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nazmeen. I've never written an article on Jaz Dhami (indeed I have never even heard of him/her) but I did delete a Jaz Dhami article on the 26th October. I deleted it because it was a copyright infringement, i.e. it was a direct copy of someone else's copyrighted text and therefore unacceptable on Wikipedia. Nancy ^talk 17:34, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Datchet Bridge

On November 7, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Datchet Bridge, 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.

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 05:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphan redirect

Hi Nancy. Just thought I'd mention that you missed (orphan redirect) "White Robe (Album)" earlier when you deleted White Robe (album). Regards :) -- WikHead (talk) 21:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. Deleted now. Nancy ^talk 22:05, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

thanks....

for taking care of the vandal! Leaky Caldron 15:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure Nancy ^talk 17:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Edit summary

You are welcome, LOL. I sometimes wonder if anyone reads my stray comments. Bearian (talk) 18:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Onanana

The sockpuppeteer user:Onanana is still editing, I thought you blocked that account indefinitely. Unless I've misunderstood something. Grim²³★ 16:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

So did I. But I hadn't! Have now. Thanks for letting me know. Nancy ^talk 17:57, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of page "Katherine Waterston"

Why did you delete the page for the lead actress of The Babysitters movie, when the other actors are let to have pages all to themselves? Is that because she was not as established old timer as the others? Or was it because she is a woman? She does have about a half dozen movies behind her belt, so she deserves SOME respect.

Starring Katherine Waterston <<< You deleted here page

John Leguizamo <<< This page is not yet deleted

Cynthia Nixon <<< This page is not yet deleted

Andy Comeau <<< This page is not yet deleted.

IMDB has a profile page for Katherine: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2239702/bio

I just must admit that I hate deletions of pages the most. Please give us a bit more explanation for your SPEEDY deletion of this page. Thank you. Yaz (talk) 08:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The page was deleted in April 2008 and the entire extent of it was "Daughter of Sam Waterston, sister of Elisabeth Waterston and half-sister of James Waterston." so the reason given in the deletion log - "Real person, doesn't indicate importance/significance" - is about as spot on as it is possible to get.

As an aside I'm somewhat taken aback that you suggest that I may have deleted the page "because she is a woman". What an utterly offensive and baseless accusation. Nancy ^talk 08:44, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

It is not baseless. The movie page listed 2 male actors and 2 female actresses. You removed one of those females. I would suggest using "stub" flag rather than complete removal of the page. Please do some more background research before judging on your own incomplete knowledge. This person is important, and she deserves a page. As an inclusivist I urge all to first add and edit before deleting. Yaz (talk) 09:40, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Dete of page Wilson_Ang

Dear Nancy,

Understand you just deleted the page of the above stated and I have read your explanation. And I am here because I have not become any wiser and seek your kind advice please.

The mentioned candidate has his achievements being cover in several main stream media as well as couple of other awards on his works.

Should you still feel that he is not notable, could I request to get the write up from you at least because it took really alot of time to write it or archive it.

Many thanks.

Warm Regards, Hector —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilson ang81 (talk • contribs) 04:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Hector. The page I deleted was User talk:Wilson Ang and the reason was that it was the talk page of a user which does not exist. Notability criteria did not come in to it. I would be more than happy to provide you with a copy of the deleted text so that you can work on it in your own userspace for a short time prior to moving it to mainspace - I note that this draft had been on the talk page for nearly two and half years..... Do let me know, best, Nancy ^talk 09:42, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Deleted text copied here: User:Wilson ang81/Sandbox Nancy ^talk 11:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Contacting you via email

Dear Nancy,

Thank you for the reply here on wiki and the note to send to the user:wilson_ang81

I must admit I am not at all conversant using the wiki to reply both your note here and also on my talk page.

Do you think I can drop you an email or you can email me at nightwolfstalker@hotmail.com please?

Hector. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilson ang81 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

You seem to have managed to post here without any problem & I have your user talk watchlistsed so I would pick up on any reply you wrote there too. If you want to email me you may (as may any editor) using Special:EmailUser/Nancy however you should be aware that barring exceptional circumstances I will reply on-Wiki. Best, Nancy ^talk 16:51, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Poohsticks

I see that you applied WP:MOSUNLINKDATES to Poohsticks - just as I was about to do the same! Saved me the trouble. But is there any reason why you didn't also apply MOS:UNLINKYEARS? Should I do that, or not? --Redrose64 (talk) 19:27, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

btw: I seem to recall that Nancy Blackett changed her name from Ruth because pirates are ruthless. Are you ruthless too? :) --Redrose64 (talk) 19:27, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Be my guest with the year unlinking! With regard to the other question, no (for good or for bad), but then again Miss Blackett wasn't really either, much as she would like to think the reverse. See you around, Nancy ^talk 22:14, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

please revert my page

Nancy I accidentally fagged my own page for deletion User:Koman90/userboxes i had mistaken it for a similar URL, User:Koman90/userbox files in the process of flagging approx 30 pages after my transition to meta-wiki.

 Done Nancy ^talk 05:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Random!

We were informed that Wikipedia has a page for Billion Dollar Click. You do not have permission to have information about this site(this is a message I got from the owner of the site. I got an email from the admin of this site and they DO NOT want it on Wikipedia. Please remove it ASAP. I thought it was a great charity - but they have other plans on how they want to promote it and It isn't with Wikipedia. They told me that they would sue me if the article was not removed. Please remove ALL references to http://www.billiondollarclick.com that is on your site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.174.245.207 (talk • contribs) 07:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Additional block notice template for suitable vandals

Nancy, in a moment of sheer snarkitude, I created this template, and if you think it might fit this user, well, feel free. — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 07:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

LOL, that's v funny. Thanks for sharing. Nancy ^talk 07:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Endolinguistic

Thanks for your advise. I've proposed therefore the deletion of that article (endolinguistics), in my opinion it does not at all meet the criteria for being included in Wikipedia. Cheers, --Djacnov (talk) 13:32, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

HAving a proper wiki site

Thanks Nancy for the reply. I was referring to how to do a talk back with my own page. I was lucky to have the "click here" to help me get to this page.

Perhaps you can advice how I may be able to make Wilson_Ang a proper wiki page?

Regards, Hector —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.197.82 (talk) 02:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Edit or vandalism?

Hi. I reported an edit I deem to be vandalism, while you differ here. The anonymous editor added to the possible life tragedies to be overcome "the implementation of an agency-wide Information Security Management Framework." I respect your decision, but I construe this edit on a level with those of the people adding, as examples to Annoyance, their brother or friend. This was just to point out why I regarded that as vandalism. Happy editing, Goochelaar (talk) 09:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem - I'm in agreement with you about that particular edit however blocking a shared IP is a big deal so I will always review any block decision in a wider context - in this case I considered the majority of constructive edits that had been made since the issuing of the final warning on the 12th November etc (which was what my "edits are not vandalism" referred to - perhaps we need a template "Edits are not all vandalism"....) & that the account hadn't edited for several hours. Hope this helps to explain, all best, Nancy ^talk 09:43, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see, it meant "There are edits that are not vandalism". Thanks for explaining, Goochelaar (talk) 12:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Clifton Daniel (disambiguation)

Hello. Just to let you know this dab has been nomnated for speedy deletion using the Template:db-disambig. If you have further questions on this, please let me know. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 21:46, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Uncertain Entailment and Inference

Thank you for your advice about the article of uncertain entailment and inference. i'll start a new article which will make the inference clear. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pingfanlj (talk • contribs) 15:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Wiki believes Rachel Uchitel is not Wiki Worthy

Nancy, your deletion was in violation of the Wikipedia Rules related to biography of a living person. Uchitel is the subject of 3 of the top 10 Hot Topic searches trending on Google for the past 48 hours. Her accomplishments in VIP operations is significant. She is closely associated with some of the most famous personalities in the world. Uchitel is the subject of thousands of news articles since yesterday associating her with Tiger Woods, the most recognized sports personality in the world. A7 criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source. The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible. By any objective standard Rachel Uchitel is "Significant" and meets the criteria for a living person bio. Wikipedia exists to information like this public as quickly as possible. I would think that hundereds of thousands of people have searched wiki for info on Rachel Uchitel in the past 48 hours. This number will increase into the millions. Check Google trends. People from all over the world are seeking information on Uchitel at this very moment as they have for the past two days. The Wall Street Journal reported this week that Wikipedia is losing millions of readers and contributors because of arbitrary editors like you Nancy. Read it and maybe you and your team of bias editors can save wiki before it is too late. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125893981183759969.html?mg=com-wsj

Bonzerwolf (talk) 19:05, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I am sure that many people have searched Wikipedia for this woman which is precisely why we cannot have an article which is nothing more than a coatrack for the peddling of rumour. I suggest you go and have a good read of our policy for the biographies of living people. Nancy ^talk 19:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Nancy, Bonzerwolf has just recreated the article as Nancy Uchitel. Cassandra 73 (talk) 19:50, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Cassandra - I've dealt with it. WP:POINT or what?? Cheers, Nancy ^talk 19:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I would say, that the article of WSJ shows that deleting the article of Nancy Uchitel contributes to a "nazilike" policing of some overeager Wikipedians who take themselves to seriously. What is wrong about writing about a new news story in Wikipedia. Even if it is a rumor. I prefer reading about that rumor on Wikipedia then reading about it in any other gossip magazine. I would also like to know what happened to her finance on 9/11 2001. This is interesting stuff that can be written about in Wikipedia. Wikipedia should be open to new stuff. The WSJ article has a nice example of how some comic writer had to proof the copyright of her own foto she made herself. I mean come on! This is not open as Wikipedia should be open. This is more like a closed club of some overeager enthusiasts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zdavatz (talk • contribs) 10:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

And BTW what do you mean by Wiki believes Rachel Uchitel is not Wiki Worthy? I am also a small Wiki-Editor and I believe that Rachel Uchitel is more then Wiki worthy. Are you god and do you believe you are the master of Wikipedia? Who are you to say that? Why not try the positive approach: Keep the article and improve it with facts that you can find! Try to be more progressive and positive thinking. This article can help by dealing with Gossip because there are people out there that want to read about gossip in Wikipedia. Why? Because it was scrutinized by independent people. So why not try to improve the article? zdavatz 10:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zdavatz (talk • contribs)

"Not eligible for speedy as contested PROD"

Can you please tell me where you got this rule from, which was your comment when you removed my speedy deletion template from Shahbaz music videos? It doesn't make sense. If an article is eligible for speedy deletion, the fact that someone got there earlier with a PROD, and the author then removed it, as the author is entitled to do even for no reason at all, doesn't have logical any relevance. In fact, the footnote at Wikipedia:Proposed_deletion#cite_note-2 indicates that posting of a CSD tag after removal of a PROD tag is an acceptable circumstance. Given that fact, for the moment I'm going to treat your removal as an error and revert it. If you can show me the basis in the guidelines for the removal, I'll gladly remove it again. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

It was something I thought I knew - obviously I had misremembered or it's changed in the interim! Anyway, thanks for pointing it out, it's a few years since I read the prod page - maybe overdue a refresher. All best, Nancy ^talk 16:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Not a problem! There are so many guidelines, it does get confusing. It is true that you can't restore a removed PROD. —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Demand

Give me the Talk page for Edwin Rosta you delete approximately 10 minutes ago, thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by NovellaMercuri (talk • contribs) 22:29, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

A please would have been nice....... I've copied the text from the talk page to your user space. You can find it here: User:NovellaMercuri/Sandbox. I would recommend that you heed Flying Toaster's wise words, Edwin does not yet meet our notability requirements so please expect any reposted of the article to be deleted quite quickly. Best, Nancy ^talk 22:38, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

A 'Thanks' at the end of a sentence is interchangeable with a 'please' at the beginning, according to my english major, but according to some variations of protocol and dialect, in various areas of England/America, it is considered rude —Preceding unsigned comment added by NovellaMercuri (talk • contribs) 22:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

LOL. That was exactly when a "thanks" would have been appropriate but never mind. Nancy ^talk 17:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

A thanks and a small request

Hi Nancy, I just want to say thanks for deleting the UFC 111 page on numerous occasions. It was getting slightly tiresome having to re-nominate it, so it was great to see it deleted without having to nominate.

I also noticed that you placed a block on its recreation. I think this is a great idea and would like to make a small request. Could you do the same for any creations of UFC 112, 113 and 114? A few minutes ago, a similarly unfounded page about 113 was created and to avoid any recreation, it would be great to have a block. If this can be done, it would be great. Thanks again! Paralympiakos (talk) 22:55, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Paralympiakos, glad that the salting of that page helped you out. With regard to doing the same for the others, I can;t see a justification for it quite yet but I have got them watchlisted now so if any over-enthusiastic creation occurs I can reassess. Keep up the good work, all best, Nancy ^talk 17:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nancy, When the deletion discussion you cite occurred back on October 22nd, very little was known about this event. Now there is a fair amount of solid information about the location and the participants (do a google news search for UFC 111, you will see what I'm saying). Per the discussion, I say that at this time we allow the page to be built at this time. --Mblumber (talk) 03:55, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mlumber. I have checked online and I still see nothing concrete, Google news "UFC 111" gives me 9 results and the ones which aren't blogs are reporting rumour. Looking to the primary source UFC 109 isn't even mentioned let alone 111! This is not to rule out ever creating this article but we need to have sourced facts to work with, once we have this then as I noted in the protection log any editor can create a properly referenced draft and approach any admin for unprotection. Kind regards, Nancy ^talk 09:01, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

"Ax Handle Saturday as excerpted from my book, "It was never about a hot dog and a Coke!"" ‎

Nancy...I took this excerpt from my book and showed the copyright references which belong to me. There is no copyright violation. You show information already in Wikipedia about this event that is fact challenged and simply inaccurate. Since, I was one of the principals that dealt with Ax Handle Saturday...and since I tell the real story of Ax Handle Saturday, my article is submitted to set the record straight. Please advise why it was deleted. Thank you--Cowboy5863 (talk) 22:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Cowboy5863. Unfortunately copyright on Wikipedia is a bit more complicated than that. Everything here must be released under a GFDL licence - this is a copyleft licence which basically allows anyone to do pretty much whatever they want with the material - you no longer retain control. If this is something you are comfortable with then there is a process you need to go through to release the copyright which involves proving that you are indeed the copyright holder etc. It's a lot of hoops to jump through and often ends up being a bit of a waste of time as such material ofen violates other Wikipedia policies and guidelines, in this case possibly no original research, neutral point of view and verifiability. A good place for you to start would be Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Kind regards, Nancy ^talk 09:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Professorship a credible criteria for speedy deletion

Thanks for your note on my talk page about removal of my speedy deletion request of Dr. David Foreman. I've started a discussion of professorship a credible criteria for speedy deletion. Could you add your thoughts there?--RadioFan (talk) 17:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

"Ax Handle Saturday as excerpted from my book, "It was never about a hot dog and a Coke!"" ‎

Nancy...Thank you for your response. This is getting very complicated and I thank you for your explanation. I understand. Please delete my article. I will work on something later. Again, thank you for your response and professionalism.--Cowboy5863 (talk) 02:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Delete of "Mike Zamora"

28 NOV 2009 I was working on an article on Wikipedia. I saw that it had a Speedy Delete message on the top. I went to get some resources and came back to a deleted page. How do I get the page back so I can add {{Hang On}} and the explanation? Thanks for your assistance.

Very Respectfully,

Mike Zamora Construction Management Department Chair Charter College | Anchorage Campus 2221 E Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, AK 99508 (907) 277-1000 x351 mike.zamora@chartercollege.edu Mgz001 (talk) 00:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Mike, hi & welcome to Wikipedia. The problem you have here is not so much how to get your deleted text back but rather that if you do recreate the article it will immediately be deleted again as you do not meet the notability requirements for inclusion as laid out in WP:BIO, and specifically WP:PROF. Often, when people submit autobiographies we come up against this problem, a good rule of thumb is that if and when you are notable enough for inclusion then someone unconnected and objective will be along soon enough to create an article about you. I hope it doesn't sound to harsh to point out that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, it is not MySpace. Kindest regards, Nancy ^talk 08:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I have also left you a note explaining that you can write about yourself, within guidelines, on your user page and have copied the text of the deleted article there but would strongly recommend that you do not post it to mainspace again. Best, Nancy ^talk 08:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Nancy, Thanks! Will you help me put the information on my user page? Thanks, Mike (MGZ001) Mgz001 (talk) 09:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Not so fast

Hi, thanks for cluing me in:

• pls do not blank content when adding speedy tags

I was hasty there, and I thank you and the others for your patience with my error. --Uncle Ed (talk) 01:49, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem Uncle Ed. Nancy ^talk 09:13, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

DAB not listing non-WP pages

With regard to the Brad Hunt disambiguation page, looking through the DAB guidance I cannot see where this is a strict rule. I can see qualifications in order to allow for exceptions. Can you point me to the right part of the guidance? Perhaps you can advise as to the alternative as the Brad Hunt page needs disambiguating after previous confusion, particularly if the other Brad Hunt is not considered notable enough for another article and the page is likely to have incorrect films and references added due to this confusion.—Ash (talk) 18:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello again! It would be a combination of WP:EL and common sense, the latter being that if a person is not notable enough for their own article then they shouldn't be DABbed and we certainly shouldn't be directing people off wiki. Also, we do not create DAB pages where there are only two topics - we just hatnote the primary. Best, Nancy ^talk 18:31, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Luminary

Hi Nancy,

Thank you for your note and for removing the hang on tag. You are correct I did not want the article removed. I am having some difficulty with posting photographs of the sculpture I am writing about and meant to post the tag for the photographs only.

Thank you, Jill — Preceding unsigned comment added by JillRGordon (talk • contribs) 16:38, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Userspace photographs

Nancy,

Thank you very much for the explanation. I was getting very frustrated and your note helped quite a bit.

Best, Jill —Preceding unsigned comment added by JillRGordon (talk • contribs) 17:06, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Rachel Uchitel

Could you restore that page and take it to AfD or PROD. It isn't a slam dunk enough for speedy. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 17:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, Peregrine I am not restoring it & if you had seen it you would understand why. It was a gross WP:BLP violation which existed only as a coatrack to peddle unsubstantiated rumour and speculation copied from the National Enquirer. I have no problem with recreation though - as I said in the protection log, please free to create a neutral, well sourced article in userspace and then take it to any admin to request the unprotection of the title. Best, Nancy ^talk 17:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Peregrine Fisher/Rachel Uchitel. I left out the Woods stuff. You may want to semi protect or full protect: not sure. I'm not going to creat too fancy of an article, since it's going to be put up for AfD instantly, and I don't want to waste too much time. It turns out she arguably has passed WP:GNG and WP:NOT#NEWS before this latest scandal. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 17:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Replied on Peregrines talk. Nancy ^talk 17:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Belmez

Not sure why you deleted this dis page, but I'm overturning your actions. Their are two other articles with Belmez in them, and I had asked about doing so here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2009_November_25#Belmez Smarkflea (talk) 21:38, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, not overturning, but I will re-create if you can't give a better explanation. Thanks... Smarkflea (talk) 21:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I created the dis page because "Belmez" shouldn't go to just that page. I was looking up "Belmez Faces", and it wasn't readily accessible because of that re-direct... Smarkflea (talk) 22:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Please see WP:DAB - where there are only two terms to disambiguate a standalone DAB page is redundant as the diasambig can be dealt with by hatnotes at the top of each article (as has been done in this case). Best, Nancy ^talk 10:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

IUPUI Public Art

Thank you for your edits on many of the IUPUI Public Art articles and for tagging them all as Educational Assignments. I am the creator of Mega-Gem and Broken Walrus I. We appreciate your help in bringing our articles up to a higher Wikipedia standard. We're all newbies at this! I am in charge of our template that we're all using and will be updating it per your suggestions. HstryQT (talk) 14:23, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Glad to be able to help - we were all newbies once!! Best, Nancy ^talk 15:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Anatomy Vessel (Saplings)

Hi Nancy -

Thanks for adjusting my articles (Anatomy Vesssel (Saplings) and Entangled). I have a question for you. I originally wrote the Anatomy Vessel (Saplings) article on mytalk page so the artist could review it before going live. I assumed that by moving the article it would clear from mytalk page - but it didn't. I tried to clear it myself and it deleted the moved article too. Can you tell me how to fix it? Or do it for me?

Thanks, ElizabethIUPUI —Preceding unsigned comment added by ElizabethIUPUI (talk • contribs) 19:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Replied Nancy ^talk 21:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Help

Hi! I beg your pardon for disturbing you and i beg your pardon for my bad english too, as i'm not a native english speaker. However, i decided, in order to prevent an edit war, to ask to an admin about the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josip_Broz_Tito. I start editing the article one day ago and two users (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DIREKTOR, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AlasdairGreen27) deleted my addings to the article, stating they were pov. I imagined that they considered them pov because they were unsourced, so i insert (instead of my previous addings) a new section, which i heavily sourced recurring to books and articles from historians and scholars. But AlasdairGreen27 deleted it again. I noticed (from the talk of the article:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Josip_Broz_Tito and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Josip_Broz_Tito/Archive_2) that both users had keep deleting any new section of the article that may be perceived as critic towards tito, supporting each others in doing so against a lot of different users. I also noticed, as i can see from their user pages, they both come from ex-yugoslavia and (from what i can see from direktor's page) that direktor even supports titoist yugoslavia. I tell you this, because i'm starting to think that they may have delete my passage, because of their personal view of tito, not because it was pov. The situation is getting worse because they refuse to discuss the delation and they keep talking agressive to me (even insulting me and in general any users from other wikipedias), so i really don't know what to do and i ask you to please, if you can, express your opinion on the matter, in order to prevent this situation to became an edit war. Thanks. --AndreaFox (talk) 22:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Images

Hi,

I am having such a hard time loading images. I have tried everything to correct the problem, but I can't seem to fix them.

ThanksEris1999 (talk) 03:58, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Eris. Can you be a bit more specific about the problem you are having? I saw that you tried to add File:Table of Contents Front.jpg to an article and the problem there is that the name doesn't exist but I'm guessing that's a just symptom of what you need help with? Best, Nancy ^talk 08:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

How do I get the name to extist?Eris1999 (talk) 20:37, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Untitled

Hi, you just deleted a page I created about "The Stinky Will (cocktail)" but as I removed the links to wikipedia's pages promoting companies and, this is a real article about a real cocktail as we can find on wikipedia (bloody mary or even here : List Of Cocktails) I don't really understand the reason why you deleted it. It's not a try to promote bands or anything but the fact is that a member of an existing band created this cocktail. Have a nice day,

Kryïss —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kryissofo (talk • contribs) 16:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Sock of Tancarville/Mobile Historian

Just FYI, it looks like our friend is back at it with User:Nemesis029, a new account whose edits to date involve vandalism and edit warring on the Maltese nobility article [1][2][3][4] and tinkering with my user page [5].  RGTraynor  20:24, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

LOL, what a silly troll he is. I see he got sock-blocked pretty rapidly; I'd have done the same if I had been on line. Best, Nancy ^talk 07:46, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah ... there are times with these serial vandals when you want to grab them by the shoulders and ask them if they realize how pathetic it all is! (waves cheerfully)  RGTraynor  14:16, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

The Official Hip Hop Chef

Good afternoon,

I sent a talk message to Singerlarity42 explaning the information that was posted. I'm the Manager/publicist for "The Hip Hop Chef", Cooking Tyrone, if you need any information I can be reached at 410-500-2267 or theofficialpublicist@gmail.com. Tyrone Jones has the name "The Hip Hop Chef", Cooking Tyrone Trademarked, I'm the person that developed his website. I have all Permission to post any information about him. If you need to reach out to him also I can give you his information.

Thanks in advance,

Chast Fleming, Gemini Business Develpment & PR Firm —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Hip Hop Chef (talk • contribs) 22:58, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

User now {{spamusername}} blocked. Nancy ^talk 07:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Erm, suggest changing one word...

... on the above user's talk page: "Note that even if you do get a new username you much ensure that you avoid editing about HHC." — Sizzle Flambé (☎/✍) 08:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Sizzle (great username by the way). Maybe I should stick to template messages, LOL. Nancy ^talk 08:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Keith Ransom-Kehler

Hi Nancy. I noticed that you recently removed a copyvio tag from the Keith Ransom-Kehler article because Bahaikipedia is a copyleft site. However, GFDL-only text can no longer be used on Wikipedia since the switch to dual licensing on June 16 (see Wikipedia:Licensing update). Just thought I'd let you know. :) Regards, Theleftorium 13:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Goodness, I take a backseat for a few months and when I come back everything has changed! Thanks for the nudge. All best, Nancy ^talk 15:59, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Image deletion nominations

Thanks for this edit. I doubt you guys really have an idea how much work has so far gone into cleaning up the FOP mess of your group but we seem to be getting there now. I have done little else here for the last week, maybe spending upwards of 10 hours on this issue alone; that is not constructive editing for me. Each individual image has had to be reviewed at least once and, for ease of finding them, grouped on a worksheet where another editor has also helped out with nominations and making lower resolution files. When the nominated images are gone I intend reviewing the remaining contributions to see if anything has been missed, though that is something you could possibly do for us. You are welcome to add new sections or notes as appropriate on my worksheet if you do any more work on this. I am watching this page for a while because I like to keep discussions in one place, so just reply here. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 14:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Now that I looked at your history, I see you are an admin and that you have done a load of work on these images too. Thanks again. ww2censor (talk) 15:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes I'm not part of the project! - no worries :. I've mainly been working on the article content (chock full of WP:OR and other crimes against encyclopaedias) but have also done a bit of work with the image copyrights here on en-wiki and also getting them deleted from commons as copyvios. Your worksheet is a great resource - wish I'd know about it a couple of days ago! All best, Nancy ^talk 20:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Joe McElderry

Hello Nancy. I notice you gave a warning to User:Hassaan19. I hope that my 31-hour block did not exceed what you thought was the best response there; you can adjust it if you prefer another result. I've been following this case for a month or so and given previous warnings, and judged that this action showed Hasaan19 was just not paying attention at all. EdJohnston (talk) 14:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Seems right to me, just long enough to be inconvenient to him & make him understand that he must play by Wiki rules not his own. Nancy ^talk 17:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Joe is now in the TOP THREE or to put it another way he's a FINALIST ~ so according to Wikipedia rules, he warrents his own page now, so stop being a bully and let him have his own page... play by the Wikipedia rules please and stop issuing bullying-tone messages to me. Whitebrightlight (talk) 22:29, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Whitebrightlight is on a final warning concerning their attitude. Just so you know. P. Pedro :  Chat  22:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Pedro. What I'm really puzzled about now is why User:Whitebrightlight came here to complain in the first person about a warning I left for User:Hassaan19.... mmmmmmmn..... is there a hint of Eau de Sock in the air? Nancy ^talk 07:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Somewhat pungent smell of footwear I think..... :) Pedro :  Chat  08:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Fatso (2008 film)

Fatso (2008 film), on IMDB here http://pro.imdb.com/title/tt1145446/, is an award-winning motion picture released in multiple languages. I am unsure as to why exactly this does not qualify for inclusion in wikipedia.

I had nothing to do with the previous effort of creating a wikipedia page for this film but found myself wishing to read up on the film. When I saw that the page had been deleted I contacted you in this peculiarly self-referential message. Could you advise me on a suitable course of action?

Thanks,

Swimdb (talk) 04:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi there Swimdb, the article was deleted for no reason other than it had no content. The deletion was in no way a comment on the notability of the film and there is absolutely no restriction on you recreating an article on it. Best of luck with it, kind regards, Nancy ^talk 10:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

The American Outlaws

Hi Nancy, as you can see The American Outlaws page has been vastly improved with links, sources, and improved layout. Please let me know what you think and how it can be improved. Garrett3000 (talk) 16:18, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

ANI

Hello, I noticed that nobody else had informed you, so this is just a quick note to let you know that a topic in which you're involved is being discussed at WP:AN/I under the sub-heading "feeling harassed". Thank you! Jhfortier (talk) 08:06, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know & sorry for the late gratitude - I was short of time this morning. Best, Nancy ^talk 17:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Rarely do I visit AN/I (it's bad for the blood pressure), but was watching another matter and saw that nobody had informed you. Best of luck with the whole (messy) issue turning out well. Jhfortier (talk) 23:20, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Ping

Replied to email - sorry think I sent two as on blackberry. Ta :) Pedro :  Chat  19:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Or none. Nothing turned up yet but might be gmail being slow. Nancy ^talk 19:25, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Probably my blackbery! Pedro :  Chat  20:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

You may be right - just checked and still nothing. Nancy ^talk 20:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Chrissie Watts article

Hi Nancy! Thanks for picking out the "wandering" mis-spelling on the Chrissie Watts page.... things like that my eye goes right over. I would welcome any criticisms and thoughts you may have on that page as I am trying to get it up to a good article standard. :) Familiae Watts (talk) 18:04, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Glad to be able to help. I have to admit that I am clueless on the subject matter (I'm an Archers girl) but I'm happy to copyedit & review for spelling, grammar etc. Nancy ^talk 07:38, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Deleted History of MyMusicStream

Hi,

Just wondering why you deleted the article on MyMusicStream?

I thought I gave a brief history of the company which I thought would suit a wiki article. Was also planning on adding to it later.

I have been running the company for over 5 years and disappointed that the article has been deleted. I hope you don't think I was just trying to advertise the site.

Any advice would be appreciate as I'm pretty new to wikipedia.

Andrew —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedrake78 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

As per the note that was left on your talk-page, the article was deleted because there was no indication that the website would meet any of the three inclusion criteria of Wikipedia's notability requirements for web content. I also notice that you are in some way connected with the site? Whilst writing about your own website is not absolutely outlawed, it is strongly discouraged as we recognise that a conflict of interest may make it difficult to remain neutral and objective. A good rule of thumb is that if a topic meets the notability standards then someone uninvolved will be along soon enough to create an article about it. All best, Nancy ^talk 14:23, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Brian Hubble

Hi Nancy,

I certainly defer to you, as you seem to be an expert Wikiperson. I was just browsing and I noticed this page on Mr Hubble, who, while perhaps an accomplished illustrator, presents enough disinformation in his page that I feel the responsible thing would be to point out that:

• Brian Hubble is not a notable fine artist. He has not exhibited in any notable fine arts galleries. I would challenge you to find an artist with an equivalent background that is getting this much attention on Wikipedia. In my opinion, the entire article is penned by Mr. Hubble himself. The nomination for deletion is a challenge to anyone to establish his noteworthiness on objective terms and not based on the constructions Mr Hubble has fabricated for himself.

• When he says " In 2004, he collaborated with Yoko Ono through The Stranger, author of Under the Tuscan Sun Francis Mayes through Atlanta Magazine, and legendary rock band Guided By Voices through Cincinnati Citybeat." what he means is that he did an illustration for The Stranger about Yoko Ono, and that he did an illustration for the Atlanta Magazine about Francis Mayes and an illustration of Guided by Voices for the website Cincinatti Citybeat. To say he collaborated with any of these people is inaccurate.

• This line "Brian Hubble's paintings, drawings, photographs, video, and interactive experience blurs the line between reality and imagination, with a reminder to be wary of a culture constantly barraged with misinformation. His work reflects satirical commentary on topics that have become a part of our society’s routine digestion. Subjects such as internet consumption, the media, politics, substandard healthcare, and social class prejudices are spared no lenience. Through allegorical approach, the artist perplexes, amuses, and provokes. The viewer must decide when truth is negotiated, and what underlying message is ultimately voiced." is his own artist's statement, not an analysis of his work.

• This sentence too: "The physical process of Brian Hubble's illustrative work consists of a multi-stepped and repeated process. He begins by taking several photographs of the subject matter at hand. After photographing is complete, the artist performs a process of elimination, choosing the strongest 2 to 5 images for the illustration. He then begins to manipulate the photographs by means of screen-printing, photo-transferring, scratching and melting. Much of these results are then adhered to glass. This act allows him to draw and paint on, around, behind and on top of the image via the glass and come closer to a final outcome. He sometimes pushes and pulls the images digitally to start forming a composition. This result is printed. He then begins to draw, scratch, paint, cut, rip apart and tape the printed image before re-scanning. This process is repeated starting from the beginning until the illustration is complete." This is press material, self-promotional advertising.

• William Williams does not exist, it is a character Mr Hubble has invented and is passing off as real.

• There is no Descend magazine. That cover is a spoof. The image on that cover is of Mr Hubble himself in costume.

• There is no D.B. Wood who ran his bike for president in 1988. This is pure fiction and should not be on Wikipedia as fact.

I my opinion, all of this is a misuse of Wikipedia resources. Mr. Hubble is plainly inserting himself as a well-known artist, when all links and resources seem to indicate that he is a professional illustrator. I have no objection to a page that details his accomplishments as a commercial illustrator, but at least the misinformation must go.

I trust your judgment though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.215.80.22 (talk) 18:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Outdoors Show page

Hi Nancy,

I had changed much of the details on the page so it wasn't marketing/ advertising biased. There were also many links on their to external Wiki pages and I don't believe that much of the content was copied straight from the site.

Is there any chance of me editing a few things you suggest and re launching it?

Thanks, Ian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ianods09 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

The problem with the page is that it was little more than listing of all the events at the show and the opening sentence was a cut and paste of marketing puff from the show's own publicity material. What the article should do is explain why the show is notable by reference to independent reliable sources. You might want to read the general notability quidelines to get an idea of what is acceptable. Next step would be to create a draft in your userspace, e.g. at User:Ianods09/Sandbox for review. Nancy ^talk 14:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Durham University Swimming Club

Why has the Durham University Swimming Club (DUSC) been deleted and redirected to Durham University Athletics Union? They are not the same thing at all. If this page is worthy of deletion, then surely Durham University Boat Club and any university based sports club, including the big American collegiate teams, are worthy of similar disdain. This was completely unneccessry. If you believe the page is not worthy of being on wikipedia, then I cannot help but be suprised, given the webpages previously mentioned that still exist.

Sorry if I seem in a mood, but i honestly can't believe you've done this —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bensonj01 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

I can't comment on the other articles but with regard to DUSC it was deleted because the club showed no evidence of meeting the notability requirement for organisations. I elected to recreate as a redirect I thought the article said that DUSC was affiliated to DUAU? If I am wrong please do let me know and I will delete the page all together. Best, Nancy ^talk 14:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see you pre-empted the latter and recreated the standalone article. It's been deleted again now and as you clearly have a problem with the redirect I've left it as a redlink this time. Please don't post that material again. Nancy ^talk 14:32, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, so if I recreated the page and altered it to be in conjunction with the notability policy, will this be accepted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bensonj01 (talk • contribs) 03:26, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I think the problem you are going to have is that it simply doesn't meet the notability criteria. I have done some searching and I have not been able to find the independent, third-party reliable sources which would indicate notability. To be honest, not many University clubs are notable - they really need to be of the calibre of Footlights or the Oxford Union to be so. Typically University clubs and associations are covered off by a sentence or paragraph in an umbrella article (the University for example) with a redirect. Also the type of detailed record keeping it looks like you are trying to achieve would be much more appropriate on the clubs own website. Best, Nancy ^talk 09:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Message On My Talk Page

Hi Nancy, thanks for your message on my talk page. Those surname related articles are difficult to verify, with lack of references. Where there are sources, the sources and authorship are dubious to say the least. The list of Jat surnames is a prime example. I have notice, this user Ldnpunjab and all his alts has made spam like altration to surname related articles. It was very difficult to keep up with him. I don't like asking people to be blocked, but in this case it really was problematic. Thanks for your efforts.--Sikh-History 13:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually...

If you reread the edit summary, my objection is to SH's characterizing my edits as vandalism... by using rollback on them.- Sinneed 14:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

The important thing here is for both of you to quit edit warring on the article and get on to the talk page and resolve your differences there. Will you do that for me? Nancy ^talk 14:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

As soon as there was a discussion, I joined. Before that, I used wp:edit summaries. Usually, after a warning, SH calms down. - Sinneed 14:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

O my. "bickering". I'll disengage entirely at this point. All the best.- Sinneed 14:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Maybe in future it would be better to go to the talk page as a first resort not a last. A simple edit summary along the lines of "reverting change, taking to talk" would do the trick and would prevent the situation deteriorating in to an edit war/slanging match which is just a waste of everybody's time. Nancy ^talk 14:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

mmmm. Sunny Leone.

SH and I have worked very successfully on a number of articles together (not that one, the editors fought to a standstill and all left, I cleaned up the edit war debris later).

There tend to be anti-Sikhs on one side, SH on the other, and me getting hate from both sides. Of my 2 barnstars, one is from SH. SH is truly an expert on Sikhism, and I have learned all of what little I know about it from him, however, that expert view has a downside: if SH and the sources in the article disagree, SH is right. SH may very well be right, but that isn't in the article.

There is also the "baby with the bathwater" thing... I spent many many hours restoring sources the opposing sides kept killing in a number of Sikh/Punjab squabbles. Literally hundreds of edits where the 2 sides would simply roll back instead of editing in detail.- Sinneed 14:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

• An essay on a conflict of interest: Wikipedia's best interest vs. the editor's best interest as a Wikipedian. - Only applies peripherally in this case, but some. The entire Sikh/Punjab/terrorism/Khalistan article set gets very little attention, partly because of this.- - Sinneed 15:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Hassaan19 is recreating X Factor articles again

Could you review this edit? Thanks! (Note also the discussion here which Hassaan19 has contributed to.) I42 (talk) 18:53, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Page reverted to redirect. Hassaan blocked 1 week. Thanks for letting me know. Best, Nancy ^talk 04:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks! I42 (talk) 08:09, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: User Sineed

Hi Nancy, sorry to bother you again, but User:Sineed keeps reverting my edits to the article related to this talk page. He does not seem to want to join the discussion on the talk page, and keeps deleting material despite it being correctly referenced. He does not seem to understand what "Rehat Maryada" id and what "Sikh Rehat Maryada" is. While the latter can be referd to by the former ( a generic term), the latter does not mean the former. He also keeps adding warnings to my page incorrectly.Thanks--Sikh-History 13:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nancy, I have had difficulty dealing with User:Sineed and at least one of his meatpuppets User:AE1968 for quite some time. With that in mind I am posting here to assist others in recognizing this pattern of behavior. 1.) The user has threatened me when I have posted to the user's page. 2.) The user repeatedly deleted material despite it being correctly referenced. 3.) When deletion of material failed to obtain the desired result, User:Sineed engaged the assistance of a meatpuppet User:AE1978. 4.) User:Sineed has added copious amounts of warnings to my talk page. 5.) Eventually the User:Sineed succeeded in having me banned by accusing me of using sockpuppets. 6.) In my last instance of posting to User:Sineed's talk page, the user tried to again have me banned for sockpuppetry [6]. 7.) User:Sineed is also quite willing to comment and edit on topics in which the user's knowledge and training is woefully uninformed. In closing I note that User:Sineed is a great lawyer when it comes to application of Wikipedia policy (see point 5. and 6.) and will use Wiki policy to promulgate the user's point of view. Mdphd2012 (talk) 21:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Mdphd2012, I don't think he is that bad. He just had an off day. When he has someone blocked usually, it is for good reason. Thanks --Sikh-History 13:41, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

"He just had an off day." - Nope. Stop now. I simply disagree with you. That is excellent, as depending on which direction one looks at it, either of us is entitled to be wrong.- Sinneed 14:34, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nancy. You have new messages at Amsaim's talk page.
Message added 04:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Amsaim (talk) 04:57, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I Think Ldnpunjab has returned

See this user. Thanks --Sikh-History 13:37, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

and this user. Thanks --Sikh-History 13:39, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay - I've been away for a few days. I'll take a look at the contributions this morning and take what ever action is necessary. Best, Nancy ^talk 08:09, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I blocked the user indefinitely as a sock of Ldpunjab and the IP address for a week - ldpunjab is on BT Internet & has dynamically allocated IP addresses so it is hard to find a permanent solution. Nancy ^talk 10:43, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

He's back again as this user. He seems to be creating duplicate articles with the world "clan" everywhere. Most from what I can tell are nonsense articles. Thanks --Sikh-History 18:49, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nancy, I think he is creating articles under this IP too. Thanks and a Merry Christmas --Sikh-History 10:19, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Anon

why did u delete my page. it's not fair i put effort into dat! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.140.203 (talk) 19:15, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Please sign in otherwise I cannot tell what article you may be referring to. Nancy ^talk 10:54, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

User:Hassaan19, again

Hi, again. Hassan19 has now restored Lucie Jones (another X Factor contestant) despite the AfD for this article closing as redirect, and despite being blocked by you for this kind of behaviour.

Hassaan19's account is still blocked and they have done this using their fixed IP address User talk:82.36.17.10. See the sections Woohookitty, Disruption of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lloyd Daniels (singer) and You've continued to use this IP, after agreeing to switch to your registered account on the talk page of the IP for the history of how this IP was itself temporarily blocked because they were using that IP address to !vote multiple times in AfDs and forging signatures etc. The upshot of this was that Hassaan19 agreed to only edit when logged in. This is clearly Hassaan19 again - apart from the IP address being fixed, the edit summary of the article resoration is typical of them and because they edited Hassaan19's user page, which was also typical behaviour in the past.

Could you take a look and deal appropriately? Many thanks! I cannot believe it's still going on.

I42 (talk) 18:55, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

I've extended Hassaan's block for another 2 weeks and blocked the IP for 3 months. Let's hope he gets the message otherwise next time it will be an indef for Hassaan. Nancy ^talk 10:58, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again! I42 (talk) 13:12, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

MisterSoup

Just read your unblock denial for MisterSoup. Are you aware that there is currently a sockpuppet investigation occurring in regard to this user and that MisterSoup has been found to be a sock of KermitTheClown [7]. The current goings-on of the sockpuppet case can be seen here: [8].

Thanks. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 18:28, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, yes I saw it but it didn't really affect my decision or reasoning in declining the unblock request. Nancy ^talk 08:03, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

ANI

That other user Chooyooliuouououou closed it and nobody said anything. But thank you for letting me know. Now I know I have common sense because that other involved user kept closing it and I wrote that she/he shouldn't. JB50000 (talk) 07:33, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Jerry thomas hunter

Hi Nancy. I left the following message on MS's talk page also, but as I see you also had an edit in this I am contacting you also for assistance. I have attempted to reason with the fellow, but it doesn't seem to be doing any good.

Can I request some sort of protection (salt, move?) for this? The original author is trying to re-add his bio to it, but since another admin (Nancy) pseudo-speedied your capitalized move, I felt it best if this was re-directed also for the time being until this could be addressed. I have already placed templated messages on the talkpage advising about autobiographies, but it seems that he has ignored them. I have also tried to advise him of how reliable sources work (since that page wasn't redirected). ArcAngel (talk) 14:56, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

JTH doesn't seem to have edited since you posted this but I'm keeping an eye on his contributions and on the relevant articles. If admin intervention is required I'll step in. Best, Nancy ^talk 08:35, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Why the Special Needs Tax Credit- Solution for Guardianship should NOT be deleted

This article was written by me, in support of our nonprofit's (Special Needs Tax Credit Alliance www.specialneedstaxcredit.org) efforts for more equal civil rights for the disabled. The legal work to create our nobnprofit and IRS filings were done pro bono (free) by the international law firm of Proskauer Rose of New York.

We do not sell any product or service. We are educating families, attorneys and legislators on the fact that parents of special needs children need to spend $5,000 to become a legal guardian, and speak on behalf of their disabled family member.

Just like women got the right to vote, just like freed slaves got the right to vote, to be heard, our proposal is striving for greater Freedom of Speech and Equal Representation Under the Law for Americans with Disabilities who cannot speak for themselves.

Thank you for your reconsideration.

Jaret Vogel <redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaretlvogel (talk • contribs) 22:12, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

If you can write a neutral, encyclopaedic article in your userspace which demonstrates by citations to multiple, independent reliable sources, that your organisation meets Wikipedia's notability requirements for organisations I may reconsider. Best, Nancy ^talk 22:23, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Could you help me?

Hi,

You recently deleted a page I had nominated for deletion and I was wondering if you could help me delete other two pages I am having trouble finding the right template for.

The first is the talk page of , it needs to be moved or deleted or merged (or I dont know what) to Talk:Colegio Cristiano El-Shaddai (the problem is that both are talk pages of the same article just in different spellings). That talk page is the talk page of a redirect page, it has talk templates like if it were an independent page but that just means that the same article just appears twice in those wikiprojects, I tried to erase the templates but it was undone by the page creator who I contacted and refused to fix the error.

The second is La Dorada, I requested this page to be moved to the already existing page of La Dorada, Caldas, but it has not yet been merged. You will find that it was made in the same fashion as the page you deleted Buenos Aires, Colombia, and it created an opportunity for users to be given misinformation of the actual subject.

I would appreciate any help in the matter as they are associated with the Wikiproject Colombia. mijotoba (talk) 04:50, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorted. I have removed the project tags from Talk:El-Shaddai Christian School but not deleted it as there is an old-AFD notice on there which should be kept. For La Dorada I have just redirected it to the original, I could not see that there was anything on there worth merging. Best, Nancy ^talk 08:29, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. mijotoba (talk) 16:42, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Chuck Negron's Father

My intent on starting this article was to have other readers contribute in elaborating and inputing more information as to who was Mr Negron, Chuck Negron's father, the lead singer from three dog night, an american icon. Specifically I was interesting in finding out the ethnicity. Latinos tend to be overlooked as part of the rock culture and thier concontribution. Hope this helps in getting the article reinstated.

Nelson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec2 (talk • contribs) 20:19, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nec2. This is an encyclopaedia which means that we deal in known fact. A good place for you to request info on this person would be somewhere like WikiAnswers. Genealogy message boards might also be a useful resource. Best of luck with your search, Nancy ^talk 08:56, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Nancy! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 939 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Derek Kwok - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 07:09, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I didn't write that article but thanks for alerting me to a cut & paste move over a redirect which I have now corrected. (Why am I replying to a bot as if it were a real person?) Nancy ^talk 08:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Do you think this was appropriate?

I don't. - Sinneed 07:07, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes I do. The pair of you were behaving quite impossibly and needed some blunt talking - which is what I did in that comment and others. As I recall you kissed and made up moments later. Nancy ^talk 08:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

No. We did not "kiss and make up".

I would point to wp:talk and observe that "Hold on Sinneed"... and "You don't seem to be approaching this debate with a great deal of maturity" were not comments on the content of the article. You did not help in any way. I am sorry that you see your behaviour as helpful.

The article is now in more damaged condition as SH believes you support the edits and his approach.- Sinneed 16:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I am unsure why you are complaining to me about this single edit up some several weeks after the event. I was asked to intervene in an edit war. I did so. I did not support either side in the dispute, my prime concerns were that you both took it to talk to sort it out instead of hitting the undo button and that the talk was conducted in a constructive manner. If you are unhappy about whatever agreement was reached then perhaps article talk should be revisited.

If in fact you are here because you have a problem with SH which requires a neutral third party then please expand on your concerns and we'll see what we can do but if it's really just about one ancient comment of mine then I have said all I am going to on the matter. All best, Nancy ^talk 18:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

"I am unsure why you are complaining to me about this single edit up some several weeks after the event." - When an editor makes an edit that I find inappropriate, I usually simply warn them. However, if that editor is someone who has just warned me, I consider: "Am I just lashing out, or did they really misbehave?" On careful reflection, your edits were ill-considered, unhelpful, and merited a response. Beyond that, after your valueless remark, I posted that I was going to take a step back... meaning that I was not going to address the remarks at that time. To which you responded, as I read it, indicating you thought that best.

In response to your edit summary for the above edit, I would point you to wp:assume good faith. You have not done your best work here. (nor have I, This is the 7th(? Sikh Extremism, Sunny Leone, Vegetarianism in Sikhism, Vegetarian, so many more) article with this identical issue, but this is your talk page, about your behaviour. You made your opinion known clearly on mine, and whether I agree or not, I have read and understood your comments) - Sinneed 23:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

User:Hassaan19

Hi Nancy, I can see from his talk page that you have been warning and blocking this user for creating pages about non-notable contestants in reality television shows, specifically X Factor. Having read the various comments and his replies on the subject, and reviewed his recent edits, I wondered if you were aware that he has continued to create pages for similar 'celebrities', despite in some cases other editors replacing those articles with re-directs. For example, Aidan Davis was set to re-direct, and reverted by Hassaan19; Jessica Hammond does not seem particular notable IMHO.

Please feel free to tell me to shut my over sized mouth if you feel that these articles are fine! Thanks. Bertcocaine (talk) 19:55, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Shoving my nose in, but having reviewed both of those they are at least WP:BLPs with decent sourcing and fairly to very neutral. Neither would seem to fall foul of speedy deletion. However if you have concerns Bertcocaine then I'd recommend WP:AFD for a full community discussion. Aidan Davis looks, IMHO, to be pretty sound on notability, Jessica Hammon maybe less so, but that's just my view - actually she does look very WP:BLP1E as it goes. Pedro :  Chat  21:32, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

I welcome all shoving of noses!! I've just gone back and looked again at the Aidan article, and am now in two minds. He does seem to have been mentioned or discussed in a context beyond BGT (redirect pointed to series 3 article previously), but I'm now a bit concerned that the majority of refs are either a local newspaper (bias?) and Aidan's personal website. Although there is one that seems to be in Turkish.. I'm thinking that this classes that article as WP:BLP1E, and I definitely think Jessica's article fits that description. Bertcocaine (talk) 22:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for dropping by Bertcocaine, I've checked out those articles this morning and I pretty much agree with Pedro in that I'd definitely be inclined to send Jessica to AFD, I'm sure she's a lovely talented girl but I can't see any real Wikipedia notability and even if she scrapes it she's still a WP:BLP1E. Aidan I think is more borderline although nothing he's done post Britain's Got Talent seems to add up to much & probably unlikely to change. The "Post Talent" section looks to me like a list of BGT related activity interspersed with trivia (rides in police cars?). With regard to Hassaan19's involvement in this, the articles were both created months ago and he seems finally to be responding to the reams of advice he's been given so I'm not planning on making a fuss about this with him. Thanks again, very best regards, Nancy ^talk 07:40, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Checking in over formerly deleted page

Hello Nancy! Checking in; I just finished work on a new entry and noticed that you deleted an older version about two years ago. I obviously haven't seen the expunged page, but I assume it was deleted with good reason, like the old writer doing nothing to prove notability, etc. Anyways, I kinda assume you'll be the person checking up on the new page since the old is on your watchlist, and I was wondering if you could give it a quick look and make sure it fits all the criteria.

Obviously I believe the band is notable (they've come extremely far in two years), but I still wanted to avoid the suspense of waiting for a bot. :)

ORIGINAL? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Xbox_boys&action=edit&redlink=1

NEW ENTRY http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_EX_Box_Boys

Thanks! Even a quick note would be much appreciated.

Sloggerbum (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Sloggerbum, that article was long gone from my watchlist so I wouldn't have picked up on its recreation. I've had a look at your replacement and it looks OK to me - certainly plenty good enough to avoid a speedy deletion. However.... whilst the article has lots of references the quality of them is questionable and this is something you need to address quickly as any deletion debate will focus on the availability of independent, third-party sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Looking at the current cites in the article:

1. Xboxboys.com , band's own website = WP:PRIMARY
2. 360style.com, an XBox fansite, probably fails WP:RS
3. Link to a newsreport on MySpace. I'm concerned that the MySpace clip may be a violation of King5 News' copyright and should therefore not be linked from Wikipedia.
4. audiosparx.com, appears to be independent but may not be considered reliable
5. prweb.com, copy of bands own press release = WP:PRIMARY
6. Kirkland Reporter, even though local it passes as a WP:RS and may be used for citation
7. pr.com, copy of bands own press release = WP:PRIMARY
8. myspace.com, bands myspace page = WP:PRIMARY and myspace in general is not considered a WP:RS
9. associatedcontent.com - this appears to be a copy of the Wikipedia article I deleted in June 2008 and was created at the same time - suspect by the same person! Material on AC is self-published and not considered a WP:RS, indeed the site is blacklisted as a "spam site" such that you can't even post a link to it on Wiki!
10. doinghere.com, copy of press release from band's record label = WP:PRIMARY

I'm obviously being quite picky here but that is exactly how people would be in an AFD debate. As I said, the article as it stands will not be speedily deleted but to make sure that it would survive an AFD you should locate some better sources, specifically sources that are not associated with the band. Considering the Microsoft association I would expect that you should be able to find plenty of mainstream news coverage (& if you can't then that might indicate a general failing of the notability guidelines......)

Very best of luck with developing the article, kindest regards, Nancy ^talk 09:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

MisterSoup is back

How is it possible that MisterSoup is vandalizing my User Page as of this evening? He's been previously blocked and revealed to be a sock...what's going on??? --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 04:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Replied Nancy ^talk 10:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply - but, he's been discovered to be a sock, so why is he even still here? Sockpuppet accounts are supposed to be banned in Wikipedia... --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 16:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

According to the CU case MisterSoup was unrelated to Wildhartlive but it was discovered that he was operating two accounts - the other one has been blocked & he's been left this one to edit with..... for the time being..... until he finds himself blocked for harassment..... Best, Nancy ^talk 16:36, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Nancy, thank you for your concern. I, too will be monitoring SRQ for future false sockppuppet accusations against myslef WidHart, or whoever, although I see she is currently blocked herselfMisterSoup (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Page Deletion Not Working? Wiki bugged?

this page was flagged for deletion, and as far as i know it was delete by you. But if you go to the url http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spook's_Apprentice:_The_Video_Game its still there. If you then click on the discussion tag it says its deleted. If you then click back on the article it shows it as deleted. I am wondering if this has anything to do with the apostrophe creating a duplicate? Anyway, if it is a duplicate have a giggle at his shameless self promotion and mediafire links (and that they claim to have the lead singer from blur making the soundtrack), then delete the article plz :3 --Mat 11/1/10 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.239.40 (talk • contribs)

Hi Mat. Not sure whether you were perhaps seeing a cached version (cached in your browser?) but when I click the link above I just get the deleted page. The only way I managed to get to the text was by googling it and clicking at the Google cache - that will be gone in a day or so. You were right to raise it though as sometimes odd things do happen with deletions. All best, Nancy ^talk 09:04, 11 January 2010 (UTC)