User talk:PhilKnight/Archive86

Same editor as User:Jen37027

User:68.63.253.46 May be the same as Jen, who you blocked for BLP vios. They did the exact same thing. Vacation9 04:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

You also didn't oversight [1] and [2]. Vacation9 04:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Vacation9, thanks for letting me know. I've oversighted and blocked accordingly. PhilKnight (talk) 04:31, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Clarifying AfD

Hi Phil. Can you provide some additional insight regarding your closing rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giving him the business? You mention that "a phrase is being used isn't sufficient for inclusion in Wikipedia", but WP:NOT#DICTIONARY was not an argument brought up by any participants. Perhaps it got lost by some arguing about the phrase itself, but there are incidents behind the phrase that are discussed in sources identified in the AfD. This is more than a WP:NEO where sources just use the term. There were arguments about WP:OR, but they were countered by others who found sources with continuing coverage, not just mere usage of the term. Thanks in advance.—Bagumba (talk) 19:54, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Bagumba, looking again at the discussion, I stil consider the deletion arguments discussing notability to be more persuasive. The only counter-argument to the notability arguments was provided by PortlandOregon97217, and it was in relation to his comment that I mentioned a phrase is being used isn't sufficient for inclusion in Wikipedia. PhilKnight (talk) 20:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Delete vs keep aside, there was a healthy camp (disclosure: myself include) advocating a redirect as a valid search term, which seems in line with the policy to preserving content where possible and the "When in doubt, don't delete" credo. Enjoy your weekend.—Bagumba (talk) 21:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Beohari

Was this in error? Looking at the page, I don't see any deletion nomination, and it appears to be a normal, well-established article on a city in India. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Qwyrxian, yes very much in error. Thanks for telling me. PhilKnight (talk) 06:55, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

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

-- Tinu Cherian - 17:33, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Template:Poster rationale listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Poster rationale. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Poster rationale redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:02, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Juan Manuel de Rosas

Hi, I'm one of the parties in the mediation regarding Juan Manuel de Rosas. I'd like to tell you that everything that I have to say can be seen in here. Since the discussion in that article's talk page is quite hard to follow, I thought that one page with a summary of my point of view would make things easier. --Lecen (talk) 12:48, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Lecen, I appreciate you taking the time to succinctly outline your position. PhilKnight (talk) 12:57, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Cambalachero has dropped from the mediation.[3] It's not a surprise. Not at all. Neither the delay he forced us to endure. PhilKnight, I come here to appeal to you and ask you not to close the request for mediation. Cambalachero has indeed written his summary to his points as I did. You can see them in here (see the date which was made and the date to when he dropped out).

I did everything I could to settle this dispute in a correct way. I asked for a third opinion, I went to wikiprojects asking for opinions, I requested help at the dispute resolution noticeboard and I came here asking for mediation. It was I the one who did everything. He did nothing. He is "busy" in real life. But if I try to touch the article he will (or his friend MarshalN20) revert anything I do there. Thus I ask you to take a look at both points of ivews and give your opinion about it. If what has been said by both users isn't enough you may take a look at the discussions in the dispute resolution noticeboard. But please don't close the mediation. All I want is fairness. Nothing more. --Lecen (talk) 07:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Lecen, firstly thanks for letting me know. Unfortunately, what you're requesting is outside the scope of the mediation process. If you continue to experience difficulties in editing the article, I suggest you request arbitration at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests. PhilKnight (talk) 11:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

You have more than enough to form an opinion. Couldn't you at least do that? --Lecen (talk) 13:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Toxic situation at a BLP under sanctions: Anna Baltzer

We've got a mixture of IP and registered editors, determined to keep in this article some grave allegations of fraud against this pro-Palestine American Jew, sourced to a report on a severely non-NPOV website and follow-ups seemingly based on the initial report. One IP active in this claims to be the non-notable author of the report in question. I've tried to keep out of this toxic area, but something needs to be done, and I'm not sure what: sanctions enforcement is out of my usual purlieus (obscure legislators and blocking spammers). --Orange Mike | Talk 17:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mike, thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 10:32, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit to Paul Simon page

Hi PhilKnight.

I see you have deleted the comment on the Paul Simon page that identifies Kathy Chitty as the lady in the photo on the front of The Paul Simon Songbook album cover. You say that the notes on the album cover indicate the person in the photograph isn't Kathy. That's interesting as I had always understood it to be Kathy. I have a UK copy of the album and it does not mention the identity of the lady. Does your version identify her? Thanks for your help. Regards. Rickedmo (talk) 01:26, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Rickedmo, to be honest, I was going off memory. Looking at http://www.paul-simon.info/Covers/SimonPaul-PaulSimonSongbook-front.jpg I can't see any mention either, so I'll self-revert. PhilKnight (talk) 13:18, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Regards Rickedmo (talk) 14:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Request for increase on importance scale

Please consider elevating the importance of this article (Alpins method of astigmatism analysis) from low to mid priority. The article fits the definition for mid priority: "Normal priority for article improvement. A good article would be interesting or useful to many readers. Subject is notable within its particular specialty. This category includes most medical conditions, tests, approved drugs, medical subspecialties, well-known anatomy, and common signs and symptoms."

The Alpins Method is notable in its particular specialties: refractive, cataract, and corneal surgery. Groups of ophthalmologists devote themselves solely to these specific individual areas, such that they refer to themselves as a refractive surgeon, a cataract surgeon, or a corneal surgeon. Each of these areas also have societies and journals devoted specifically to the respective areas. The American Academy of Ophthalmology acknowledges these subspecialty areas (http://www.aao.org/careers/envision/subspecialties.cfm).

The Alpins Method is of clear importance to these specialists, and is used daily in their professional lives by many.

Thank you. Kcroes (talk) 20:16, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Phil, I haven't received an answer to this, as far as I know. I'd like to reiterate the request: please consider an increase in importance scale from low to at least mid priority for the reasons stated. Thanks for considering. Kcroes (talk) 21:16, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I see no reason that you cannot upgrade it yourself, but since the priority is assigned by WikiProjects, it'd be better if you ask the relevant WikiProjects first for consensus to do so, on their talkpages. Then, they'll be able to help you :) gwickwire^talk_editing 21:34, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!

Kcroes (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Christmas in Spiceworld DRV

Hi PhilKnight, please see a DRV of Christmas in Spiceworld that I have opened up as you were the admin who handled the AFD. The short version of it is that you handled the AFD and deleted the article in July 2008. In November 2009, someone re-created the article at a different title, where it has existed since then. Neither summarily deleting under G4 an article that has existed for three years nor unilaterally decreeing the AFD null and void seem to be reasonable alternatives, so I opened a deletion review to get a consensus about what to do with it. Anyway, if you are so inclined, please opine. Thanks. --B (talk) 03:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Alok Kejriwal

Hi Phil,

This is with refernce to the wikipedia page on Alok Kejriwal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alok_Kejriwal) which was deleted under PROD back in 2008. I understand "Article has no verifiable or reliable sources and nothing to establish the notability of the subject."

However Alok Kejriwal is a serial entrepreneur from India who is the founder and CEO of Games2win which is one of the top 20 online gaming Online gaming businesses in the world as per Comscore.

You can refer to the wiki page on Games2win to verify the same - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Games2win

A few other media sources for your reference:

1.live mint http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/tJgF0JH5HDAJzllgLMsLrK/Alok-Kejriwal--From-socks-to-software.html

2.cnbc – hi wired writeup - http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/special-videos/alok-kejriwal-the-instant-entrepreneur-_579208.html

3.cnbc – hi- wired vids (part 1,2,3) http://www.moneycontrol.com/video/special-videos/alok-kejriwal-the-instant-entrepreneur-_579208.html

4.entrepreneur - http://entrepreneurindia.in/people/inconversation/i-want-to-be-the-monk-who-bought-the-ferrari-alok-kejriwal/13850/

5. livemint - Aiming to be among world’s Top 10 players - http://www.livemint.com/Consumer/x1J7uLZwTgTh7pI9Qn6vTN/Alok-Kejriwal--Aiming-to-be-among-world8217s-Top-10-play.html

6. HT - http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/North/What-I-did-with-100-million/Article1-653590.aspx

7. forbesindia - http://forbesindia.com/article/my-learnings/i-passed-on-the-rescue-tank/19672/1

We would be highly obliged if you could undo this deletion so that we can edit the page and fix it with media sources according to the wiki guidelines.

Will wait for a revert on this. If you need any additional detail please feel free to get in touch with me at mukul@games2win.com

Thanks

Mukul — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.248.112.74 (talk) 15:32, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mukul, I've restored the article. PhilKnight (talk) 18:25, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a ton for this Phil. I will get the page edited to meet with wiki guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.248.112.74 (talk) 10:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Time for a chat?

Hey Phil, do you have some time for a chat over the next day or so? Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 02:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Steven, yes, certainly. How about tomorrow? PhilKnight (talk) 02:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Where abouts are you located? I am in Australia, so we would need to make a time that works for both of us. Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 02:26, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm able to do any time after 14:00 UTC (but need notice as this is late here). Send me an email how you want to do things - I can do Skype, Google Hangout or if you'd rather I can do IRC. Speak to you soon. Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 11:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Ready when you are. Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 23:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, PhilKnight. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 12:44, 19 April 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 12:44, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Steven, I've received the email, and I'll reply this weekend. PhilKnight (talk) 23:07, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Pending requests for mediation

Hi Phil. As you will see at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Pending, there are three outstanding requests for mediation. All three require attention:

• Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Jose Antonio Vargas: You seem to want to reject this request. In order to do so, you need to flag the request as "declined" in a way that the bot understands. See User:AGK/Guide for chairman#Rejecting requests for instructions.
• Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Argentine history on Wikipedia: As with the above.
• Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Lutici/Pomerania during the High Middle Ages: As you will see on the WP:RFM/Pending page, this case results in broken output at the moment (its link is red-linked). This is probably because it's using three different case names at various places in the request page, which is a problem in and of itself. You should:

• Rename the page to simply "Requests for mediation/Lutici" (simple request names are best!).
• Then, edit the request page and, in the very first line, at {{Medcombox/top|article=Pomerania during the High Middle Ages}}, change the value of the parameter to |article=Lutici; :*In the next line, at === Pomerania during the High Middle Ages ===, replace the title with "Lutici"; and
• Finally, a couple of lines down, change the other instance of |article=Pomerania during the High Middle Ages to |article=Lutici.

It sounds far more complicated than it really is.

I'd do all this myself, but, as I explained by e-mail, I'm trying to reduce the dependency that the RFM process has on me personally. I was also very pleased to see you respond to Marek's comment; it used to only be me who answered questions like that. Thanks Phil! AGK [•] 20:52, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi AGK, thanks for explaining. PhilKnight (talk) 23:08, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Phil, thank you for the note. Regards.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 20:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Interac (Japan)

Can you give me a hand with Interac (Japan)? I'd call it vandalism, but it retains the veneer of legitimacy. Please see the Talk page for the last year of discussion.Taurus669 (talk) 02:41, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Taurus669, sure, I'll read the discussion and see if I can be of assistance. PhilKnight (talk) 11:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

File:Ichemelogocorplowres.png

What is the deal with tiny little files like this which are not available in SVG? My photo editor will not convert to SVG. GIF would be a little bit smaller, but would presumably still attract a box saying convert to SVG. I really do not see it is worth anyone spending time even labelling them. Chemical Engineer (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Chemical Engineer, I agree, there isn't any particular benefit in converting a png file to a svg. PhilKnight (talk) 15:29, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Tenmei → Enkyo2

Please notice the reasons for a username change here. A simple name change was done here --Enkyo2 15:17, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

G10

Could you share why you thought Maria Divine Mercy qualified as a G10? I didn't see it. I thought the image should be removed, but I didn't see an attack.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 13:49, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Addendum - I don't want to make too much of this, the article had problems, and would take a fair amount of work to survive, but I am aware we treat newbies poorly on occasion. I don't have any problem with swift action when there's little doubt that the creator is trying to be a jerk, but I viewed this as an imperfect attempt at a positive contribution, and thought a different action would have been better.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:00, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Sphilbrick, while G10 does cover attack pages, it also covers "biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced". From my perspective, if the negative unsourced material in a biography can simply be removed, then the best course of action is to simply remove it. However, if the entire article is negative and unsourced, then the entire article should be deleted. PhilKnight (talk) 23:00, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Then we read it differently. No big deal, unless the editor brings it up.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 02:10, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Asphalt sealcoating, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Acrylic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Henry Vaughan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Llansanffraid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Financial Ombudsman Service article

Hello Phil

Thanks a lot for getting back to me. I really appreciate your help and advice. We're determined to ensure our approach to our Wikipedia page is ethical and fully transparent, so any tips you could give me would be great.

One of the main problems with the current page is that most of the stats and figures are at least four years out of date. I’m more than happy to highlight these and will supply you with the new figures (along with links to our published annual review as a source). If it's easier for us to upload this information - and we can meet your ethical guidelines - we'd be happy to do so.

Needless to say, because our job is solving disputes, we have a few people who have posted some quite negative comments about the service. We're great believers in free speech (check out our social media pages - we don't edit conversations) but I'm concerned that some comments appear on the page as fact, when they're actually inaccurate or opinions. There's also a bit of information that is redundant and unnecessary. Again, we're happy to point these out for you, and work with you on the best way to get things sorted.

Finally, I’ve also spotted a couple of spelling mistakes (‘triennenial’, ‘substanstantially’) that we can correct (or you can if you prefer). Also, if you think some of the formatting can be improved, we’d be grateful if you could take the time to tell us how best we can do this too.

Phew! That seems quite a lot, doesn’t it! I appreciate we're asking quite a few questions here, but so many of the people who use our free service look at the Wikipedia page first, so it's really important to us that it accurately represents the work we do.

I’ll discuss with my colleagues, and get back to you with our highlights and suggestions.

Once again, thanks again for your help – it’s much appreciated.

Shane

Thanks

Thanks for the oversight.--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 13:04, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

PhilKnight - thank you for your help with the mediation request regarding users Sticks830 and Superfly94, and the WMSCOG page. Just wanted to let you know that we received a third opinion on the dispute: 3O Response: The 3O question is: "should the article say that in 1985 the church split into the New Covenant Passover Church of God (NCPCOG) and World Mission Society Church of God (WMSCOG)?" The 3o response is "No". If there is independent, non-church, non-personal, non-SPS, third-party type news sources that say so, then those sources can be used to say a split occurred. (The 1985 bullet item in history does not have independent RS, so the stuff about the division should be removed. The NCPCOG website is SPS (not a newsblog), and since it involves info about third parties it is inappropriate.) In general, the NCPCOG stuff is a POV fork. This is clear from the NCPCOG website that describes it as the only, one, true, etc. church. Moreover, if NCPCOG is notable, then WP:WTAF. At that point a "See also" link can be added to this article. Until then, someone might add a footnote about the founder which says "Founder AS-h later established the NCPCOG. [Whatever.]" And you leave it at that! (PS: As this dispute has spilled onto the EWNB, it really isn't a 3O.) – S. Rich (talk) 14:47, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Sticks830 15:02, 11 July 2013 (UTC)Sticks830 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sticks830 (talk • contribs)

Possibly unfree File:Sepid Div.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sepid Div.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

DRN needs your help!

Hi there. I've noticed it's been a while since you've been active at DRN, and we could really use your help! DRN is going to undergo some changes soon, so it'd really be great if our backlog is cleared before the start of August and we have as many people on board to help with the changes (they include a move to subpages and the creation of a rotating "co-ordinator" role to help manage things day-to-day. Hope to see you soon! Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 11:37, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Sepid Div.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

• File:Sepid Div.jpg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 23

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Inam Kulathur, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Recently deleted article

Hey Phil, could you either merge the content of the last edition of Psychedelic hip hop with the article it originally branched off of Experimental hip hop, or give me a copy so I can merge the relevant content. STATic message me! 02:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi STATic, I've restored the history, so the relevant content is now available. PhilKnight (talk) 02:18, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for that! STATic message me! 02:40, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Re: My user page deletion

Any chance you could block JoshuSasori's obvious sockpuppet while you're at it?[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]

Also, Bagworm has been harassing me for over a year. Now that you have deleted my official statement of retirement, I might as well use the opportunity to start and SPI against him because he has also been using sockpuppetry as part of his harassment campaign.

Cheers!

Coldman the Barbarian (talk) 01:50, 4 August 2013 (UTC)