User talk:Ttonyb1/August 2009 Archives

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi, you recently put an article I started (HJSplit) up for speedy deletion because of "blatant copyright infringement". However, also the link you provided did contain what I wrote, the information I put was available on many sites such as download.com and the official site so I doubt I was infringing copyright. Even though my page has now been deleted, I would appreciate it if you could review your decision or tell me what was wrong with my article since I am new here and would like to contribute to this encyclopedia. Thanks, Elppin (talk) 15:15, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. It is hard to determine the origin of text on the web. The site that used your text did not show that it was licensed under Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 or GFDL, so it was marked as a Copyvio. In order to get past a copyvio, you need to show the original publication and that the publication is licensed for use under the terms listed above. You might want to take a look at donating copyrighted material for use in Wikipedia. If you have any further questions, please let me know. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 15:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

The biography of Shirley Strawn has been flagged for speedy deletion. I placed a hang on in it. Please let me know what criteria the biography needs or whether we should delete the biography and put up another article "Strawn-Wagner Diamond" instead, or perhaps both the bio and the diamond. I have access to interviewing Shirley; is there anything she can provide that would be critical to add?

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unbiassed (talk • contribs) 16:40, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I removed the CSD tag from the article; however, I would suggest you rewrite the article so it is called "Strawn-Wagner Diamond" instead of Shirley Strawn and focus on the diamond instead of the person. I would suspect, most people would look for the diamond rather than Ms. Strawn. With that said, the article is probably OK as it stands, although someone else may make it for deletion. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:47, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

How may the title of a page be corrected? In this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawn-wagner_diamond

"wagner" should have a capital "W" as well as the "D" in "diamond".

I have another article that needs the title corrected, so I seek how to rather than someone doing it for me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unbiassed (talk • contribs) 18:38, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I took care of it for you. Since the article is a copy of Shirley Strawn I am going to forward that article to Strawn-Wagner Diamond. Is there a way to combine the two articles under Strawn-Wagner Diamond? ttonyb1 (talk) 19:09, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

What do the numbers in parenthesis, for example, (-2,480) or (+21) mean the "my watchlist" page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unbiassed (talk • contribs) 19:26, 1 August 2009 (UTC) --Unbiassed (talk) 20:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

They are the change in number of bytes resulting from the last edit. ttonyb1 (talk) 03:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello Ttonyb1, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Catholic Roots, Mormon Harvest has been removed. It was removed by ThaddeusB with the following edit summary '(remove prod - prod was contested on the talk page)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with ThaddeusB before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 22:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Just taking a short break. Please don't delete this. I'm still working on getting Mr. Webster's info on Wikipedia. Thanks, Thyssen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vegasproductions (talk • contribs) 03:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I only nominated the article for deletion. An admin will review the article and delete if it does not meet Wikipedia criteria. As it stands it will probably be deleted. The article fails to meet WP:BIO. ttonyb1 (talk) 03:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Ttonyb1, go ahead and delete the article about Benjamin Lee Webster. I read over the WP:BIO and Mr. Webster does not yet meet the criteria (that I know of). Thanks. Thyssen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vegasproductions (talk • contribs) 04:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

It has been deleted. Feel free to add it back in when he meets the criteria. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 04:30, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Please atleast give me a week to update the article its a little tough finding a good number of news on the operation. thank you. Homan05

I only nominated the article for deletion. An admin will review the article and delete if it does not meet Wikipedia criteria. As it stands it will probably be deleted. You may want to create the article in a User/sandbox, edit it there, and when finished upload it to the mainspace. ttonyb1 (talk) 04:55, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony. Please note that we have had numerous discussions at the village pump and at WT:CSD regarding the problem of people tagging new articles with A1/A3 templates, when the article was just created moments before the tagging. That is the reason {{hasty}} was created, as I used on the article (and which worked in this case), and why at Special:Newpages it states at the top "Please consider patrolling pages from the back of the unpatrolled backlog." There is general consensus that A1/A3s should not be applied to articles almost immediately after creation. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 06:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't let the anti-deletionists get you down. Keep up the good work. Wperdue (talk) 06:10, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, for the message. Much appreciated. I try to always keep smiling. 8-) ttonyb1 (talk) 06:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I have deleted as an admin, and caused deletion through tagging prior thereto, probably more than 10,000 "articles". I am as far from "anti-deletionist" as you can get. Coming here and basically saying "don't listen" (to the highly-experienced admin who is heavily involved in structuring our deletion policies) because I must just be a rabid inclusionist is not useful.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:19, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Deep cleaning breaths may be appropriate here. 8-) First of all, I did not see that anyone told me to ignore you or your advice – what I got from his comment was only not to get discouraged. I appreciate both your comments and Wpredue's comments. If you have an issue with Wperdue, please take it to his user page. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 14:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I apologize if I caused drama on your talk page. My comment was meant as lighthearted encouragement and I meant no offense. Attitude is hard to judge in electronic communication. Happy editing. Wperdue (talk) 17:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Wperdue, no apology necessary. I took your comment precisely as you intended it and again thank you for your encouragement. My best to all. ttonyb1 (talk) 19:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Instead of marking it for deletion, try helping me restore the original article on this man. He is a New York City performance artist, who has been doing his thing for some 15 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheLocalOne (talk • contribs)

Please note that referring to PMDrive1061 as a nobody is not an altitude that will not get you far on Wikipedia. It not only violates Wikipedia guidelines on civility, but is rude and unnecessary. If you wish to get some help, I suggest you remove that statement and create the article in a User/sandbox, edit it there, and when finished upload it to the mainspace. The article currently fails WP:BIO and will be deleted unless the article meets that criteria. If you have any questions after you move, you can ask for help. ttonyb1 (talk) 05:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Tony - just learning how to work within Wikipedia... Just saw you wrote me on my user page.

Is there anything else I should do to pass wikipedia standards? There are a number of additional news articles at the local, state and a few at the federal level - just did not have more time to add them tonite and did not want the whole thing deleted before I had time to get back to add them.

Is there enough for now to pass wikipedia notability standards?

Chase —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chase Fonteno (talk • contribs) 01:36, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem, negotiating the streets of Wikipedia as a new user can be a bit daunting, it will get easier. I think the article is ready for prime time and do not think it is in danger of being deleted. I have left the Notability and COI tags in place, but probably will remove them after looking at the article sometime tomorrow. You can take a look at notability for biographies for more information about what is needed in an article. My best to you ... ttonyb1 (talk) 04:38, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help Tony, I will do just that. Chase —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chase Fonteno (talk • contribs) 05:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Please take a look at the page on Cheeks. I think you should be able to take off the SD now. In the future, as Cheeks is certainly notable, it may be better to take 5 mins and pare it down to a stub rather than delete this type of problem. Thank you for your great work! Joe407 (talk) 05:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Nice work saving the article. I have removed the CSD tags. ttonyb1 (talk) 05:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

<http://www.linkedin-ech3.com/in/rythmomachy> is creative commons represented, I will verify —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.87.123.44 (talk) 11:54, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. What article is this in reference to? ttonyb1 (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, why has there been a speedy deletion tag been placed on my Walt Howarth page? He was my Grandpa and I have absolutely no idea why this has happened.

Thanks, Michael —Preceding unsigned comment added by MJH-12 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

It has been marked as a copyright violation. The text is a copy of text that exists in [1]. ttonyb1 (talk) 15:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

That was originally copied from a newspaper article about my Grandpa, that is being used to sell his work for profit! This is outrageous —Preceding unsigned comment added by MJH-12 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

If it is copied from a newspaper, then the newspaper has been copyrighted as well. ttonyb1 (talk) 15:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

We have had copyright of the local newspaper as we commissioned the article! This is a joke, this page needs to be reinstated! Appalling —Preceding unsigned comment added by MJH-12 (talk • contribs) 15:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I can't believe this has happened! Please can you just reinstate it. How can it be copyright infringement when we own the copyright?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MJH-12 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I cannot recreate the article, it has been deleted by an admin. Wikipedia is very serious about following copyright laws. If you are the owner of the material, please see donating copyrighted materials to Wikipedia. Until you have completed the steps in the discussion the article will be deleted. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:07, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for deleting the article. I'm so very pleased to have spent my time and effort when all you have done is got rid of it in COMPLETE ERROR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MJH-12 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

First off, I did not delete the article, I only nominated it for deletion because if failed to meet Wikipedia criteria by violating Wikipedai copyright guidelines. If you wish to reinstate it , I suggest you read the articles listed above.. BTW - your sarcasm will not get you far in the Wikipedia community. There are many of us willing to help you negotiate the Wikipedia maze, but not at the expense of sarcastic comments. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I sincerely apologise, I was frustrated. However it cannot be copyright when it is his life story. Especially when the ebay auction would have stolen the details from my MySpace tribute page to my Grandpa - www.myspace.com/walthowarthart

Sorry once again. However if I reinstate the page, it will include the same detail....which is his life story. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.23.9.240 (talk) 07:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the apology. His life story is not being copyrighted, it is the text that describes his life story that is copyrighted. If that text exists on a myspace page and was copied from it there is an implied copyright of the text. If you are the owner/author of the text, you need to follow the steps in donating copyrighted materials to Wikipedia to allow its use in Wikipedia. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 12:19, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

The article creator has removed the PROD. Would you care to set up and AfD for it? 98.248.32.178 (talk) 20:44, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I have AfD'd the article. ttonyb1 (talk) 21:44, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Tony,

I don't understand why my entry for DoubleHorn Communications was deleted. I know there are other corporate entries, including another one I have posted. I can't imagine my entry for DoubleHorn was too marketing-oriented, but maybe it was. This was the feedback:

Removed CSD notification tag Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Thearcadiannewspaper"

The article appeared to fail WP:COMPANY. ttonyb1 (talk) 21:46, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam Ttonyb1,

This is my first attempt after much research to post an article on Wikipedia.

I am afraid that i have barely the knowledge of computer, in which to type.

When you would possibly find the time to have the subject article posted on at least the talk page, it would be most appreciated.

It would be nice should i also be able to receive an emailed copy.

Don't know how much i am asking for even. Any help for this strict layman, would be most appreciated.

Warm Regards Friend,

Mark B. Minckler (heraldic@email.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by HeraldicEagle (talk • contribs) 04:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Dear Mark, thanks for the message and congratulations on your new article. I am hesitant to create the article for you for the simple reason that it will show me as the author and would deny you the feedback that is so much a part of Wikipedia. By creating the article it will allow you to get feedback directly from the Wikipedia community about your article and, if necessary, how to improve it. Please read the section how to create a page, specifically, the section entitled How to create a page. The process is really not that difficult, basically you have done the hard part by creating and editing the text. If you have any questions, please feel to let me know. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 04:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I thought I was a bit of a newbie biter but I was disgusted to see you tag Lvanhouten/railroad for speedy deletion. Surely it was obvious that it was a user page? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:06, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Ouch, I am a little concerned that you would use the word "disgusted" in your message. I can see you use the word perplexed or an equivalent word, but "disgusted". I made a mistake - pure and simple. I apologize for any extra work I created, but I am not perfect. I understand the work of an Admin is sometimes thankless and you take a lot of heat for your valid actions; and I thank you for pointing it out my mistake, but wish you had approached it a little differently. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 00:22, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

So as I look at the situation further, I see that I marked the article Lvanhouten/railroad with a valid CSD; additionally, I did check to see if there was an article for Grand Elk Railroad. Which there was. I assumed Lvanhouten/railroad and Grand Elk Railroad were by the same authors. Again, a mistake on my part. So if you had assumed good faith, neither of us would be creating drama on my talk page. Again, my best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 00:50, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, for "disgusted" read "surprised". Is that acceptable? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 01:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 04:22, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I shall assume good faith but it does seem a lot of a coincidence that you and user:Tony1 both want their user talk page to be within a formatting div. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 01:21, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, it now looks as if this has gotten muddy and I do not appreciate the mud you are slinging. You have got to be joking, that is the only way I can even start to justify you comment about me being a sock. If you wish to declare me a sockpuppet, do so, I welcome it. But I suggest you do so with evidence stronger than a missing or added div statement. If I was to be a sock, why would I choose an almost identical name. I am not sure I have ever seen two unrelated editors one with 40K+ and the other with 23K+ edits accused of being socks - particularly by an admin, so fire away. Nothing in your statement makes sense to me. Gee whiz... ttonyb1 (talk) 04:22, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

• Silly season. Ohconfucius (talk) 06:44, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

What is a "formatting div."? See this interesting debate, too. Tony (talk) 07:01, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

The phrase "formatting div" was shorthand for saying: both your user talk pages contain <div style="… tags defining special border and background colours and you expect messages to be placed before the </div> which closes that div. OK, so it is an interesting coincidence and nothing more. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 09:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

<sarcasm>...and he and I both use the word "and" repeatedly in our talk pages. Interesting, oh, please... </sarcasm> ttonyb1 (talk) 15:22, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

• Is this connected with the apparent breakdown of the system on my talk page earlier today? Messages were suddenly appearing below the "div" box. Tony (talk) 17:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea, I did note that RHaworth added a /div tag to my talk page that forced comments below the box. Perhaps he did the same to yours. ttonyb1 (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I certainly did. The puzzle is: Tony1, if you want contributions to come within your pretty box, why on earth did you not delete my </div> tag? — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 08:34, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony,

I saw that you nominated the MLIA article for deletion. I did not create the article, but I did try to improve it. Please tell me what I can do make sure this article is not deleted. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gohoushmandzadeh (talk • contribs) 18:42, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at the Notability criteria for websites. The article has to meet this criteria. Also, keep in mind the article must conform to the Wikipedia policy on verifiability to reliable sources, and that primary sources alone are not sufficient to establish notability; web-specific content. After you have looked at the criteria, let me know if you have any questions or if I can be of any help. ttonyb1 (talk) 18:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

You may need to read Sarey's discussion page. You should not delete the article for several reasons on the discussion page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wheelmade (talk • contribs) 02:53, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Please add your comments concerning the article to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarey Savy (Singer/Songwriter) ttonyb1 (talk) 03:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

My apology, I failed to notice his removals of CSD. Your move to AfD is the right one. Once again, I apologise for my lack of knowledge. --Lionelisbest (talk) 04:59, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

No need to apologize. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 05:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

And mine to you. Cheers,Lionelisbest (talk) 05:02, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I removed the speedy tag you place at Diane Schuler. The subject has coverage in reliable sources such as New York Times; it's not an obvious candidate for speedy. I think you should use AfD instead. Offliner (talk) 13:02, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. ttonyb1 (talk) 13:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Next time, try not to be so hasty on tagging for speedy deletion for legit articles like this. The creator is creating a huge stink over at IRC as a result, which could have been avoided. Thank you, MuZemike 16:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

He is more than welcome to complain; however, did he mention he could have added a hangon tag and then added the references needed to substantiate the article instead of just removing the tags. (At that point, I would have removed the CSD.) BTW - did he mention the uncivil remarks he left on his page about the CSD tagging? ttonyb1 (talk) 16:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Done.. is ok? thanks.. Vidal Cantu —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicantu (talk • contribs) 22:11, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I have removed the CSD tag and replaced it with a {{subst:copyvio}} tag. When there is verification that the article qualifies, the tag will be removed. Thanks and if I can be of any help please let me know. ttonyb1 (talk) 22:57, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, do you know how long could take the verification? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicantu (talk • contribs) 03:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure, unfortunately I do not. My uneducated guess is within 48 hours. I have seen it much quicker, but there may be a backlog or no volunteers to work the cases are available. If I can be if any help, please let me know. ttonyb1 (talk) 04:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Nothing yet, even you place the copyvio tag 3 days ago, regards..Vidal—Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicantu (talk • contribs)

Not sure what is going on. You may want to get a hold of someone on [2] and ask for the status. Sorry this is taking so long, but they should be able to help. Let me know what happens. Thanks and good luck... ttonyb1 (talk) 04:12, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello, my article on a radio station has been deleted for a second time. I had put the base article down with the intention of tweaking & adding more & before I even have time it has been deleted. No warning just deleted. I have messaged the first person to delete my article a few months ago, with no reply so I am hoping you will give me a reply. The radio station has acheived notable work in the music industy, I have been an avid listener since the beginning, and furthermore the radio station is the only one in the world with a playlist consisting of predominantly this kind of music. Please can you guys do your research on this organisation & stop deleting my topic before it is even finished. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elemental-bass (talk • contribs) 23:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, the article was not called Topic Dark Wax Radio, but rather Contributte. The article was deleted because it did not meet the criteria for companies/organizations. Please note that when an article is put on Wikipedia it should have the necessary support to establish Notability, otherwise it may be deleted. Additionally, I would suggest you create the article in a User/sandbox, finish it, and then move it the the mainspace. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 01:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello, thankyou for the reply. The station is an underground music station. It cannot be discarded simply because the general public are not talking about it. I will complete my article in sandbox. Can you talk to the person who deleted my first entry, he is not replying & I would like the text back, it took me a very long time to write my first article as it had many notes & links & it was deleted unfairly without warning. The radio station is the only one in the world with a playlist consisting of predominantly this kind of music. Please can you guys do your research on this organisation & stop deleting my topic. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elemental-bass (talk • contribs) 11:25, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

One of Wikipedia's core content policies is Verifiability. If one cannot verify notability for an article's content, it is likely it will be deleted. When recreating your article it needs to have verifiable, independent, third-party references that support notability. BTW - the article was not deleted without warning, it was marked with a CSD tag and a few hours later it was deleted. If you would like a copy of the article, you can look at the "Speedy deletion nomination of Contributte" in your talk page, at the bottom of the tag is has a link to Admins that will help you get a copy of your article. Thanks and good luck. ttonyb1 (talk) 15:52, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

can you please tell me why you have deleted my page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gradylanderyou (talk • contribs) 23:53, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I presume you are talking about Fatcam. Actually, I did not delete it. It was deleted by an Admin. I only nominated it for deletion. It was deleted because it failed to meet the criteria in WP:NOTE or one of the sub-pages associated with notability. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello--

I see the page for Camerado had been deleted due to not being notable enough; I'd assumed the fact that it's one of the few active movie entities left in a country (Cambodia) which had had its *entire movie industry* (and most filmmakers) destroyed during the Khmer Rouge regime, and which is solely dedicated to the cause of reviving said industry would make it notable -- my bad if not.

Can you please email a copy of the article to my at johncmorley@gmail.com so I can examine it, etc, improve it and start it up as an incubator page.

I still don't think it should have been deleted...there are so few motion picture organizations existing out here - and how tough it is to actually operate under these circumstances.

Would have thought that would be notable.

Anyway, thanks

JCM —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncmorley (talk • contribs) 05:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I cannot recreate a deleted article. Take a look at the "Speedy deletion nomination of Camerado" in your talk page, at the bottom of the tag is has a link to Admins that will help you get a copy of your article. As far as why it was deleted, take a look at notability and the associated subpages for help in establishing an article. I'll also make sure you have a welcome message on your talk page that will provide you with links to help you create a great article. Thanks and good luck. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:00, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Please see points on my talk page. Links were added as reference sources and as info, not to enhance search ranking. Multiple edits were made to enhance the text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zanze123 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

What, exactly, was "badly created" about the AfD? 98.248.32.178 (talk) 00:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Only the first part of the AfD was completed. Steps 2 and 3 were missing. Step 2 = Create the article's deletion discussion page. Step 3 = Notify users who monitor AfD discussions. See How to list pages for deletion. I believe the issue may be that in order to create an AfD, one has to be a registered user. Have you thought about creating a user account? ttonyb1 (talk) 01:03, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Wrong. Step 2 cannot be completed by an IP, which is why the last line of the AfD template says, "Unregistered users placing this tag on an article cannot complete the deletion nomination and should leave detailed reasons for deletion on (the talk page)." Which I did.

Step 3 was completed, but only shows up as a redlink until the page for step 2 is created. 98.248.32.178 (talk) 01:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Not sure what was wrong. Let me try to drop to the bottom line – if I have offended you by my use of "badly", this was not my intent and you have my apology. I would suggest you become a registered user so you can complete AfDs. As the AfD instructions state, "If this is the case, consider creating or requesting a user account before listing an article on AfD." BTW - A CSD was probably more appropriate since the music was was not supported by an article about the artist. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 01:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me that.--S_U_F (talk) 01:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure... ttonyb1 (talk) 01:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Prakash Chand requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 02:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure why my article submission jonova, Inc. is being flagged as not significant or important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurenwsu (talk • contribs)

The article fails to meet the criteria in notability. Take a look at the criteria and let me know of you have any questions. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: speedy deletion

Hi, can you please look at "George Pappas", the Prof. George Pappas Scarborough-Agincourt Ward 40 We are having the same issue in establishing separate identities. Can you help or consult to see how to keep?

There are no 'sockpuppets', we share systems, people I may know/ or people that may know me could enter an item-anyone could be technically considered a puppet.

I'm George Pappas. I'm learning real quick from all the admin help (like blocks, deletions, etc.) and I'm using the tools you've directed me to. Frances Gaudet is real; She is at www.weewhitesnowflake.com (Rogers internet) and resides at 50 Burn Hill-I don't know her IP address, but you'd be able to verify that as well.

Now, in all honesty she has beeen here using my system and she needed my partnering with her as she wanted a little help...

There are many of us that would like to partake/ contribute to Wiki. We're just trying to document some of the demonstrably significant groups and people in our community, not to make them significant.

--76.69.147.146 (talk) 10:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I am not an admin, but from what I can see the block looks justified. For an article that blatantly fails to meet WP:BIO to be repeatedly recreated over a dozen times by multiple accounts in a few days sure looks like sock puppetry. Your recruitment of User talk:Frances Gaudet to create the article is Meat Puppetry as described in WP:SOCK. I suggest you read WP:SOCK and plead your case for unblocking on the user page. BTW - solely stating in the unblock request that, "meets or exceeds notability requirements-read "George Pappas" and you will see both articles are having the same issue", does not address the issue nor will it get you unblocked. ttonyb1 (talk) 11:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

There's an OTRS ticket which states that Deep Shag record allows its text and pics on the site to fall under GFDL. Two caveats, though: underneath the blanket permission they list which pages this permission covers, not listing Assassin (however seeing as they are allowing all copywritten content on their site to be freely used, I don't think that matters too much.) However I cannot find the Assassin publicity image on their site, the closest page being [3]. Coupled with the lack of authorship and source information on the image page, that puts its status rather untenable. They do say "feel free to contact us if you require any further details", that might be the best idea.--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 14:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to research and answer my question. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 15:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello! I was hoping you could point me in the right direction in figuring out how to create a new subcategory under American photographers, is there a link to a page where I can learn how to create this? Thanks so much! Sarahstern (talk) 16:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure this will give you what you are looking for, but try Wikipedia:Categorization. Let me know if this works for you. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I just wanted to know if I can recreate the article because it was only a copyright infringment and not a notability issue. Facha93 (talk) 22:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you should be able to recreate the article; however, note that if it was deleted for a copyright violation it will have to be rewritten in your own words and it needs to meet the criteria for notability. Good luck. ttonyb1 (talk) 15:19, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thank you :)Facha93 (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Can you please tell me how this article meets the grounds for nomination and deletion? (Article is still under construction) Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravynmerch (talk • contribs) 04:21, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

The article does not meet the criteria for notability. Since there are no GHits, no GNEWS, and no referneces, it is unlikely it will survive any scrutiny. I nominated using the theory in WP:SNOW. Moving it to a AfD will actually help you if there are things out there that can support the article in that others will bring it to everyone's attention. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 04:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I initially thought it was a public university and thought the content might (theoretically) be freely licensed. As it turns out, it is private. I'll delete. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 17:10, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 17:25, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I removed your A1 tag from Liv dolls, because the article does contain enough context to identify the subject (the subject is a brand of dolls). Feel free to prod instead. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 20:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Jafeluv, thanks for the message. Let me look closer at it and I might. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 20:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I did that on purpose. I was under the impression advertising was not permitted even on user pages? I've seen loads of user pages tagged for the same reason lately. XXX antiuser 05:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Really? New one on me. I could be wrong. Let me see if I can track this down. Sorry if I stepped on your tag for the wrong reasons. ttonyb1 (talk) 05:26, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Please do let me know if I'm in the wrong and I'll stop doing it. I've just seen this happen a lot while monitoring recent changes. XXX antiuser 05:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I see the page was deleted by an admin, so I am going to assume you are right. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 05:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Why revert my edit? JagWar1752 on YouTube said so. You should read this video's comments.
~~LDEJRuff~~ ^{(see what I've contributed)} 16:25, 14 August 2009 (EDT)

YouTube videos or comments are not considered reliable sources. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Wouldn't this fall more under "unremarkable band" rather than a hoax? Because it's not obvious. Cheers, Mazeau (talk) 16:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I vacillated between both but chose {{db-hoax}} because of the comment, ..."performing alongside the likes of Cher, Mariah Carey and Celine Dion." Stating that those performers will work with an unknown performer strikes me as a blatant hoax (or at least wishful thinking). My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 17:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Your request for speedy deletion of this article was removed by an IP user with only this contribution to her/his credit, so I've nominated it as AfD instead. Cheers, Favonian (talk) 20:19, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I have added my Speedy Delete to the AfD. ttonyb1 (talk) 23:40, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I re-added her name on 1994 because

• There is no rule or regulation regarding adding someone's birthday on Year's page unless no article is created in English.
• She has 5-non English articles. Not merely Japan-centric.
• There are many entries those who are their own country-centric, but no regulation is set about international notability for those people.
• If you would like to set a regulation about entry of birthday, you should get concensus first on the Talk page.

--Belle Equipe (talk) 05:53, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

See response in Talk:1994. ttonyb1 (talk) 14:31, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

cant i put a content of a website on wikipedia and attach a link regarding the same as reference. Can you suggest a way of putting something on wikipedia which is a known fact —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eamitmurarka (talk • contribs) 19:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

You cannot copy copyrighted text to Wikipedia without the permission of the author. See WP:COPYVIO. I suggest you rewrite the text in your own words. Please note a few words changed here and there does not constitute reformulation and the text will be removed. The text cannot resemble the original text. ttonyb1 (talk) 19:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Is there something I am doing completely incorrect on this article? I thought I've completed all the guidlines and Tiffany Mink is a legitimate topic who has thousands of fans following her on this year's Warped Tour. Could you help me out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cotuhreenuh (talk • contribs) 21:30, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message and sorry for your frustration. There are criteria that all articles in Wikipedia need to follow. For biographical articles the criteria is notability. Unfortunately the article does not meet this criteria – popularity does not equal notability in the Wikipedia criteria . Take a look at notability and let me know if you have any questions. Good luck... ttonyb1 (talk) 21:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Does she not fall under creative professionals as a journalist/photographer/reporter for the entire tour? Does it not make her notable because of the target audience she has? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cotuhreenuh (talk • contribs) 21:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, there is nothing in the criteria that mentions "target audience" as a factor for notability. ttonyb1 (talk) 21:46, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay. She hasn't gained enough notability to be on here yet is all? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cotuhreenuh (talk • contribs) 21:54, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

How about she has not yet met the criteria needed for an article in Wikipedia. Notability in the "real world" differs somewhat from the Wikipedia criteria for notability. ttonyb1 (talk) 22:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh okay, I see. I'm still thinking you're making a mistake by not letting her on. She publishes reports, photographs, videos every day for one of the biggest music festival up to date. But still, thank you for your explanation and time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cotuhreenuh (talk • contribs) 22:08, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello there,

I see you think my page I created will soon be deleted, why is that? thanks JonElevator —Preceding unsigned comment added by JonElevator (talk • contribs) 02:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Unfortunately, the article failed to meet the Wikipedia criteria to establish notability for web pages. ttonyb1 (talk) 02:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

At the end... they delete my page... very disappointing and confusing experience... saludos. Vicantu (talk) 16:21, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Not sure what happened to the OTRS approval, but I would suggest you recreate the page with the text rewritten so it does not resemble the copyrighted text. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 16:30, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

working on rewrite, just wondering, can i cite his website (created and co-authored by me) as a reference, at least temporarily? for example: harold thornton was principal of burnley artschool, which is what the artist tells me, but may or may not be documented information at my disposal (i'll be looking into it). would it be valid to cite the website for this reference and others like it? --Maggpye (talk) 07:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

This is getting into gray areas, see verifiability for more on allowable sourcing. From a practical perspective, for a minor fact it probably will not be an issue. You can also cite something such as an artist interview if you can provide a means to verify. ttonyb1 (talk) 14:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello - thank you for your help. Please let me know how to enter the {{hangon}} on the Andrew Printer page. I am contacting the maker of andrewprinter.com to get permission to use the CV from that website. I should know by this afternoon. I am new to using wikipedia. Thank you for your help. Breezesdelsur —Preceding unsigned comment added by Breezesdelsur (talk • contribs) 15:25, 21 August 2009

Moved to talk page from user page by Bencherlite^Talk 16:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I am trying to create an Article of my boss Samir N. Ghazal & I used things from his company website & listed the refrences. I have permission because he is the one that asked me to create it. I sent an e-mail but have had no responce, I have never created an article on here so maybe I did something wrong. If you can please get back to me with an answer as to what I did wrong, like if I didn't put the refrence correctly. Id greatly appreciate it.

- Melanie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.148.130.8 (talk) 20:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

There are really three issues associated with the article. First, there is a conflict of interest issue. To quote Wikipedia, "Do not edit Wikipedia to promote your own interests, or those of other individuals or of organizations, including employers, unless you are certain that the interests of Wikipedia remain paramount." For your "boss" to ask you to include an article in Wikipedia about him is not in the spirit of Wikipedia. I have seen it said that if someone independent of you does not create an article about you, you may not be notable enough. That brings up the second issue, the individual may not be notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. The last issue relates to the copyright problem. It can take a while for approval to use copyrighted material. Please see donating copyright material for use in Wikipedia.

Please read the sections I have referred to for more information and let me know if you have any questions. ttonyb1 (talk) 23:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi – I've seen you've removed some copyvio text from the above article. What are your overall thoughts about the article? From my POV, it's a hugely biased article (not sure whether WP:AUTO or WP:COI applies), and it cites only two third party references (one of which doesn't mention the subject of the article). I wouldn't want to piss the author off by condensing it all down (it looks as if it's taken a while, and I'm pretty sure all the facts could be reduced to a couple of short paragraphs without the bias). A quick google search shows that the guy passes the general notability guideline with multiple pieces of coverage: [4] [5] etc (could easily be used as more neutral sources), but it definitely can't stay as it is. Cheers, Fribbulus Xax (talk) 13:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I have a bit of an issue with the article. It does seem to be somewhat self-serving and chock full of POV. I have marked it as COI based on the ownership/permission of the picture. I would say a rewrite of the article to remove the fluff and POV would be justified. There is a lot of superficial and unneeded text. (i.e., "Also there is a question – did the RCMP fabricate charges or have a legal right under Canadian law to provide information to Bulgarian authorities and request they arrest, question and torture a citizen of Canada?") There may have been a lot of time needed to create the text, but it will also take a bit of time to make this an encyclopedic article. Let me know if I can help. ttonyb1 (talk) 13:38, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Looking for some sources, it seems like the image was oiked from [6]. Fribbulus Xax (talk) 13:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Credit was given to Tracy Kapoustin. I believe his wife. ttonyb1 (talk) 13:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, hadn't noticed that. DI has been removed, so I'll put the image in the article. Fribbulus Xax (talk) 14:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Whooo-hooo! Thank you very much :) Fribbulus Xax (talk) 18:19, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure and thanks for fixing my rather embarrassing typo. ttonyb1 (talk) 18:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, concerning the speedy deletion of this, how does it look now? I know it's a very short article, I done my best I think though. --Hidden Secret (talk) 16:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I removed the tag. ttonyb1 (talk) 17:22, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!!! - --Hidden Secret (talk) 18:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey. im sorry, but im trying ot edit a page. and you dont let me in and delete all the infor i wrote. please, this take my time, and ashley asked me to do it. stop doing it. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by JaredMurilloSpain (talk • contribs) 20:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

The article is not adequate as a stand alone article and should be redirected to Dance on Sunset. I suggest you create the article in a User/sandbox and then upload it when it is completed. If you need help accomplishing this I can help you; however, your disruptive edits are not appreciated and will get you banned from editing. ttonyb1 (talk) 21:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I just replied to the persons having made changes to the bio someone is preparing on me.Its a herculean effort and deleting his work was a thing done unfairly, I particular found offensive the attempts to "simplify" a story that covers 14 years of struggle. A struggle that continues today and to this moment.

And I find even more disturbing is that anyone ignorant of all the facts would have the arrogance to "simply" and remove "fluff" from a life story that they do not even know, much less have had time to research. To make alleged "educated" conclusions of fact and law and then "assumptions" solely from the bits and pieces they might garner in a matter of a few minutes or hours of a goggle search is, well deeply distressing. And unwise, in particularly the comments made on "did the RCMP have a legal right" shows this person having no knowledge, understanding of national or international laws governing police activity outside of the borders of Canada and even more demonstrates ignorance of the findings made in the O'Connor and Iacobucci Commission. RCMP wrong doing outside of Canada is the norm, not the exception.

I therefore respectfully request the community of editors be less "self-serving" when it comes to allowing complex biographic works to grow. Ask question, ask for references and reliable sources, and more important ALLOW the author time to post those references or verify their veracity. But do NOT pretend that a quick Google search and the reading of a few newspaper articles is enough to give you the right to alter the hard work of others.

I have read a lot of material on other stories similar to mine, having lived it means that there is MUCH I doubt and more that I disagree with. However, I do not alter the work of the author because MY conclusions and MY Google search results conflict with his or hers. Some people like to whine about their suffering, to publicly wallow in their misery and scream out how they have been wronged and should be paid money for compensation. Then taking their cash disappear, and never once giving another public though for the hundreds of others like them who are still suffering. Yes, there are exceptions, and I am trying to be one. Far from perfect we are trying to tell a story that maybe if told and retold will find a solution. I welcome constructive not destructive criticisms. MichaelMKapoustin (talk) 23:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

As has been pointed out to you in other messages, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. No one is trying to simplify a complex story, only remove unreferenced or poorly referenced material. Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed, particularly contentious material. The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material – hence any ignorance stems from the lack of facts in the article. Your comment about "did the RCMP have a legal right" leads me to believe you are not aware of the format of an encyclopedia and how to present facts in a manner worthy of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a forum, but an encyclopedia of verifiable facts. You may wish to review the welcome message in your talk page for more information on what makes a good article. Given you message, I would also suggest you review conflict of interest.

BTW – referring to to the Wikipedia community as arrogant or self-serving is hardly enticement to get someone to work alongside with you and I would suggest you rethink your use of negative terms when referring to the Wikipedia community. It is best to assume good faith when dealing with others. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 00:07, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

ttonb1

My desire to cooperate with men and women of conscience is more than an idle dream. It was the key to my survival for nearly 13 years and also since being allowed to return. My reaction is that of a person who has deep, painfully deep knowledge of the facts/documents/law/events and human suffering my family and I experienced. And to then witness "new friends" dismiss what I know [and can and will establish] as accurate representation of those events and that life with a "delete key" is, well disturbing? I would have instead expected - because it is how I would react - some respectful "benefit of the doubt" and a "wow, lets see if this is verifiable by a third party or if we can't find it lets ask the guy himself" as a more humane reaction.

There is no enmity in me towards anyone, not even the guards who beat me for nearly the full two plus years I spent in solitary. And why? Because hate is a negative emotion and getting angry does nothing when you are so helpless.

Now, all that said, let's see whose side of the story is closer to the truth, the RCMP and Bulgarian versions or the documents and events. I guess I was taken aback because this is a BIO and these are controversies and YOU SHOULD allow both sides to be expressed in the bio. I should NOT be placed in trial by the editors, should i?

With all respect, MK MKapoustin (talk) 00:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I applaud your philosophy. Again, the "threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true." There is no evaluation of the truth in the edits, only an attempt to establish verifiability. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 00:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

But I have a question, one that arising from my painful experiences with media manipulated by the state and organized crime. Is the "media" or other "published source" sufficient to establish verifiability and should this be enough or as it appears the "first line" of verifiability? If someone determined publishes falsehoods and that "someone" is powerful or popular enough and so his/her/their material is "verifiable" but the person who holds in their hand the truth but is powerless, then how will the reader on Wiki know the "whole story" when the powerful liar is published and the innocent "teller of truth" stands alone and a victim of his/her powerlessness? Frankly this system of "verifiability" through "published" sources places TO MUCH power and influence into the hands of those less than scrupulous who "get published" and does NOT PROVIDE ENOUGH power to the powerless. Interesting, because this approach reminds me of the Goebbels quotes "the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily" and the misquote , "The bigger the lie, the more it will be believed" can now be paraphrased further as "publish a lie often enough and it then becomes indistinguishable from the unpublished truth". Verifiable falsehoods, wow a new concept for me to deal with. I do not envy anyone this job, imagine doing Nelson Mandala's bio on Wiki and having to rely solely on the white supremacist "reliable and verifiable" South African press of the time and he was still in prison and his followers underground. Just thinking aloud here. mk MKapoustin (talk) 20:15, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ttonyb1. I noticed you placed a F4 CSD tag on File:Adtrtour.JPG. Please note that images that qualify for deletion under WP:CSD#F4 need to have been tagged with a tag such as {{nld}} for at least 7+ days before they qualify for deletion under this criterion. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:40, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I have just started looking at images and their copyrights. I appreciate the help. ttonyb1 (talk) 23:02, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

thanks for being alert about possible copyright infringements regarding the above new page I created. The webpage I copied from was actually written by myself, so no infringement here. That's why I thought I could just delete the notice. Sorry about that. But - just to save time, since I'm not entirely familiar with all Wikipedia procedures, I've now completely re-written the article. Please let me know if that is sufficient. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beyondthesea (talk • contribs) 07:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi

The Michael Kapoustin article is up for deletion now (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Kapoustin). My stance is neutral, mainly because we are obviously lacking all the reliable sources that we need, but there is clearly scope for an article (under WP:GNG). However, as I pointed out, the talk page has now degraded into the involvement of solicitors and insulting other editors' quality of work. As WP:V is a policy, which we may not be able to meet, then I presume this'll end up as a delete. Fribbulus Xax (talk) 09:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

This is the first time I have ever been accused of being a "tool" of an oppressive government. I guess no good deed goes unpunished. <sigh> ttonyb1 (talk) 15:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't know if you have seen 1.8 Michael Kapoustin (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) ttonyb1 (talk) 15:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I spotted that after a link was posted at WP:BLP/N after the AfD was started. It just boils down to WP:OWN and WP:SOAP – especially as the protection request asked for "The ORIGINAL FIRST post [to] be reinstated". As I said at the AfD, the article talk page is useless at the moment – and I don't see that changing. I can't help assume that the two original editors have some sort of link or relationship (I'm not assuming bad faith); it seems rather odd everything has happened so quickly after the start of the article – there has been 13 months since Kapoustin was released in which an article could have been written. Of course that doesn't cause a problem in itself, but I don't think that the other editors realise that:

• We're not trying to suppress anything, nor are we necessarily doubting the legitamacy of the claims
• Unsourced, unverifiable negative statements are against WP:NPOV policy and can lead to WP:LIBEL

Those are what I see as the major obstacles in changing the article. It's clear that the article doesn't tell the story, but I don't think the current version is particularly negative – even if it is, it's sourced. I've even changed a few minor bits that Kapoustin challenged on the talk page – such as the location of detention. I know I've tried to show willing and demonstrate that I will help edit the page, but evidently we're at the proverbial brick wall. Thanks very much for your help in this – this reply was probably largely irrelevant; we're obviously on the same wavelength! Fribbulus Xax (talk) 16:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Well said and yes I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. I would add that given the emotion associated with topic; the fact the individual named in the article is an editor; and yes, I do believe there is an association between the creator and the editor, the talk page deteriorated from a discussion of process to a justification of the subject by directly involved parties.

It has been a pleasure working with you and I look forward to our future collaborations – hopefully on something less controversial. ttonyb1 (talk) 18:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ttonyb1, I am still new and reading all the wikipedia infomation pages (theres' a lot!) and I'm wonder how my edits were categorized as vandalism? I created the page Water Lilies Food and I was still in the process of making updates when I got your last message to me. Was this because I was adding citations or adding references to other Wikipedia pages such as Organic certification? Please go easy on a newbie! I'd like to keep posting information, but I'm afraid it will be further marked "vandalism". Can you give me some suggestions/guidance?

Thanks, NickM —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiNickM (talk • contribs) 16:50, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Nick, the issue was you were re-adding material that was removed because some of it was WP:SPAM and others of it was a copy violation. The text you added that had the "We" words is considered to be spam (advertising) and the text that was copied from the website is a copyright violation. If you rewrite the material so it no longer has the we comments and is not a copied from the site you should be OK. Let me know if I can be of help... ttonyb1 (talk) 16:57, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response! I will try to rewrite some of the material, but if I add a reference to the original source doesn't that indicate that I am citing my material (similar to writing a high school paper with a works cited page)? So if the original web pages says, "Water Lilies was founded in 1996." I shouldn't I be able to write this:

Water Lilies was founded in 1996. <ref name="History">[http://waterliliesfood.com/history.html Water Lilies Food history]</ref>

Also, if I have consent from the website author, would I be able to then use their wording (and cite it of course!)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiNickM (talk • contribs) 17:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure... You should be able to use text such as, "Water Lilies was founded in 1996," with a reference to verify the statement. A short sentence alone is not considered a copyright violation. However, the use of multiple sentences with little or no reformulation would be a problem. If you have permission to the text from the site, there is a process that needs to be followed to allow its use. See donating copyrighted material for use in Wikipedia. ttonyb1 (talk) 17:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

ttonyb1 -you have twice removed my sincere and logical corrections to the plot of this film, which were supplied along with references and permission. There are no issues with copyright -the copyright holder is fine with its inclusion, as it simply the plot and hence is in the public domain. As it stands now it does not make any sense.

What do you recommend -that I reword the plot slightly to avoid 'copyright' infringment? Please advise, as the content at present is illogical.

Dan Parkes (talk) 15:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Dan, thanks for the message. First of all no one is doubting your edits are good faith edits; however, they do appear to be copyright violations. Adding a reference to the original work does not remove the copyright issue and text is not in the public domain unless it is not copyrighted, either through explicit license or expiration of copyright. There are a couple of options. If you are the owner of the material you can donate the material for use in Wikipedia or you can rewrite the material so it does not resemble the original text. Sorry for the frustration, but Wikipedia takes all copyright issues very seriously. Please let me know if you have any questions or if I can be if any help. ttonyb1 (talk) 15:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you ttonyb1 for your quick and helpful response! It seems a slight rephrasing is obviously the best and easiest option. Will give it a try. Thanks. Dan Parkes (talk) 21:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Please note it as to be more than a "slight" reformulation. If you can identify the original text from the new, it is not enough of a change. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 21:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

hi, i'm new to this and would like to know more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1Minal1 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to put some infor about a company I went on hoilday wit.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1Minal1 (talk • contribs) 23:39, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! Currently the article does not establish notability for the company. I have left you a welcome message on your talk page. Take a look at how to write a great article and notability and let me know if you have any questions. ttonyb1 (talk) 23:41, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm tryin my best. well can you help and start me off, I'm trying to write about this company phoenix tours in uk. the web site is www.phoenixtours.co.uk. ple help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1Minal1 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

As mentioned above, you need to indicate in the article how Phoenix Tours is notable by Wikipedia's standards. The criteria can be found here: WP:N. You can practise writing the article in your user space at User:1Minal1/Phoenix Tours and ask for other editors' opinions at The Drawing Board. ... discospinster _talk 23:52, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

In a nutshell, "A company, corporation, organization, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject." Has the company been the subject of any newspaper articles? Has it won any awards? Is there significant coverage of the company in electronic media? If so, you will need to add this information to the article to make it notable. If you can find examples of coverage, I can help you get it into the article. ttonyb1 (talk) 23:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I will look and try to find out more, thanks bye for now..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1Minal1 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

hi this is Kel' Question; 1.Will someone automatically translate the page I was setting up? "Eulalio Gonzalez" Im a bit new to this... and as an assistant Ive been given the task of doing "this"...geezz.. Im logging off... but please any imput would help. :) 2. Oh, and how longdo i have to wait to upload images with articles. :)

K Hamilton —Preceding unsigned comment added by KellyHamilton (talk • contribs) 05:15, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Kel, there is no automatic translation of foreign language articles. It is up to you to do it. It appears the article is a copyright violation, so there is a good chance it will be deleted soon. BTW - you should read WP:COI, it discusses conflict of interest and why Wikipedia frowns on people telling others to create and article about them. ttonyb1 (talk) 05:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello? Are you there? I thought I did add Hangon to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Action Video 22 (talk • contribs) 05:44, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

You did, but you also removed the CSD tag multiple times. ttonyb1 (talk) 05:49, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello Ttonyb1,
could you help me with my questions here? --Brackenheim (talk) 12:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Answered on your page. ttonyb1 (talk) 14:57, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that -- I misread the header -- I'm going to check to see if it's something he was trying to put in his userspace now. Antandrus (talk) 18:36, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, you had me going for a minute (or two). 8-) ttonyb1 (talk) 18:37, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia's so darn slow right now I wasn't even sure if I'd deleted it -- evidently Folantin's move went through before my delete did. (I was going to undelete and move it but I had about four tabs with hourglasses...) Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 18:45, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, all cleared up now, I hope. I inadvertently omitted the "User" bit. Thanks. --Folantin (talk) 19:12, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Glad to hear all is now well. ttonyb1 (talk) 19:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you, but can you confirm the OTRS ticket to allow the use of material for teh articles Jeffrey Lieberman and Sarah Lisanby. The talk page shows an OTRS ticket number of 3427654 on both pages. What is interesting is it appears the user copied a message that you posted somewhere else as the validation. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 18:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

As indicated in the message, OTRS:3427654 is valid for all material from [7] added by User:Psychiatry777. Stifle (talk) 20:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 21:41, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for any help and guidance. I am trying to make sure I am following all of the rules and more importantly, the spirit of the rules of Wikipedia. This is my first attempt at working with Wikipedia, and I am doing my best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyc mattieu (talk • contribs) 22:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

please let me know what I can do to improve the page to have you remove the nomination for deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyc mattieu (talk • contribs) 22:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I have talked to the owner of the picture directly and he gave me permission to use the image. He said it is distributed so widely anyway, and that it was public domain. Just because a web site has a copyright warning on their page does not mean that all of the content on the site is copyrighted. If you need evidence that this is in the public domain, or that I have permission to use this on Wikipedia, please tell me how to do so and I will provide it as soon as possible. Coreywalters06 (talk) 23:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. The owner's assertion that the picture is in the public domain because it is widely distributed is not true. Also, unless the published text or images are specifically marked as Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0 or an equivalent, Wikipedia must assume it is copyrighted. If the owner wishes to donate the material Wikipedia, the owner needs to follow the process in donating copyrighted materials to Wikipedia. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

It is NOT clear that my article meets the criteria for a speedy deletion. Rather a little polishing at best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnyswords (talk • contribs)

The information served a purpose, including the definition of "Vandalize" I guess the administrators are not help to the same standards as people who would just like to write and be considerate of others. I hope this was consise enough for you. Thank you for not even objectively reading the information or the article for that matter. --Writer of this article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnyswords (talk • contribs)

Tony,

You have accused me of sockpuppetry with is false. I have worked with Paolo Zampolli in the past but I am neither Paolo nor the author of the page. I thought the tools at Wikipedia would be able to tell that pretty easily. There is nothing fraudulent or twisted in either the Paolo Zampolli page or my intentions to add to it with my work with Zampolli in the fashion modeling business.

In short, I am not doing anything misleading or in anyway a violation of Wikipedia policies. Your accusation of "Sockpuppetry" is not accurate.

Notorious guy (talk) 18:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)Notorious_guy

Not sure where you got the idea you were being accused on being the subject of the article, but based on the frequency and limited nature of the edits, it appeared you were a sock puppet. Glad to hear you are not. ttonyb1 (talk) 18:23, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I see no link between Nanocat and Catalan Institute of Nanotechnology. Nanocat is a company while the former is a learning institute, according to google. also, the article. I may be wrong though, if i am wrong, feel free to point out please. Thank you... Freshymail-user_talk:fngosa--the-knowledge-defender 00:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

The article Nanocat was originally a copy of the Catalan Institute of Nanotechnology. As such I redirected it to Catalan Institute of Nanotechnology. If you note the article also refers to Nanocat, in the line "NanoCAT or Institut Català de Nanotecnologia". I have restored the original redirect. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. I dont not understand why my page has been deleted. I tried asking on my talk page but didn't recieve any reasons when it was deleted. I am a fan of this comedian and wondering why they cannot have a page, where other comedians with equilivent popularity and type of page informarion get to keep theirs? I do not believe this is fair, can you help? I am willing to improve anything that is needed to make it more valid, I just need to be told what instead of a an automatic message. Thanks for you time. Curryyeah (talk) 02:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

The page fails the Wikipedia criteria for notability. Take a look at the section and let me know if you have any questions. ttonyb1 (talk) 02:35, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

ive read the section but, as i said, their are fellow comedians with just as much information and popularity who have been able to keep their pages. One example is Fox K same industry, same type of bio and listed experince ie; festrival shows. I just think its fair in my mind that this page is considered not important compared to others simliar. Curryyeah (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC).

There is nothing that stops users from creating articles that do not meet Wikipedia. I have not looked the article you mentioned, so it may well be that the article you mentioned does not meet the criteria. I can only speak to Sharyn Booth (Comedian). Fairness does not come into play, only if the article meets the criteria. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 02:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

sorry, i am confused. the above mentioned article is still there and has been for quite a while. are you saying you can not actually see it? thats werid because i can and it does not state its in trouble, my point was that there are a number of simlair pages that i can see about fellow comedians that do not state are being tagged for deletion for not 'meeting criteria'Curryyeah (talk) 03:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Because comparison of articles is not a valid reason to keep an article, I did not look at Fox K. If you are convinced the article does not meet WP:ENT, you are welcome to nominate if for deletion. ttonyb1 (talk) 03:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't saying i wish for the other article/s to be looked at for deletion- i was using it as an example to show my confusion as to why this page wasn't seen as important and needed to be deleted yet others, being quite similar obviously seems to be seen as fine.Curryyeah (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC).

Refer to my prior message. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 03:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony, I added a talk page to the GiftTree page that was recently deleted. I'm not sure if I should let you know or if you'll automatically see my talk request. Thanks! Jennifer (JenCrego) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jencrego (talk • contribs) 18:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Here is what I would suggest. I would create the article in a User/sandbox. You can click on this link to create one. If you do not have a copy of the article, you can you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. After you have the article in a User/sandbox, and fixed it up, you can request it be reviewed for content before moving it to the mainspace. Let me know if you have any questions. ttonyb1 (talk) 21:03, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.