User talk:Ttonyb1/July 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 Tony,

I posted this page with all factual information. I would hope Wikipedia would not delete it and possibly edit the information. I made no assumptions and only put in factual information from newspaper articles that are widely published. I gave no specific information about contact information, and it is a general warning to the public.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuteteacherguy29 (talk • contribs)

There are a couple of issues with the article. The article appeared that it existed primarily to disparage its subject and as such this is an attack page. Any articles that is deemed to be a negative or attack article is removed immediately. Additionally, the individual was failed the criteria for notability of individuals. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Tony,

If we were to add positive information about the subject would that be acceptable. Positive with the Negitive? Also, I will look at the notable persons. I believe that the situation at hand and the press he recieved would make him a notable figure but I will check what the wiki policy is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuteteacherguy29 (talk • contribs) 01:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

He does not appear to be notable. ttonyb1 (talk) 04:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Tony,

I doubt you are from Rhode Island or even know anything about Poncho O'Malley Day other than it doesn't appear to be notable, but in RI, this past year it was notable. There were 4 bars that had featured specials and celebrations for Poncho O'Malley Day. There are already another 5 bars in the area that are signed on to promote it next year and the radio station 95.5 WBRU will also be promoting the holiday come April. This IS a legit and notable event that is growing in size.

Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JKBone (talk • contribs) 14:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

My location is irrelevant. I suggest you read WP:NOTE for what denotes notability. Notability generally needs to be beyond local acceptance. Five local bars and a radio station is not notable. Add to that the lack of no GNEWS hits showing any substantial news coverage and it fails notability. ttonyb1 (talk) 20:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you tell me what the issue is with adding Internet Heroes - I am new to this so would like to understand and move forward.

I feel they meet all the criteria of Wikipedia including notability like Geek Squad does.

I have used Internet Heroes in the past and always found them to be offering Impeccable service. They have 200 engineers who are friendly and unique in the city of Dubai. If anything goes wrong 24 hours they respond to you.

They are unique cause there is no one in the who country i.e. United Arab Emirates who provides the services they do.

Computers and its problems are a daily issue and they are notably the most important feature when technology goes wrong

Closer.stevens (talk) 16:42, 2 July 2009 (UTC) Closer.stevens

Hi, I'm new to this process, so I would appreciate your guidance. I'm not clear on what parts of this page were copyright infringment? All of the information comes from reviews or publicly available information which was used as promotional content. The purpose of this page is not for self promotion, but is a reference for 'The Franklin Party' which is in the process of becoming registered in three major states. By the way, I'm not sure why that page was also deleted. It strikes me as odd that a book like 'Liberal Fascism' can have a page and the 'Libertarian Party' can have a page, but my pages are tossed out??? I'd appreciate any help you can give me, thanks! --Bboeheim (talk) 18:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for your frustration, I too have have articles deleted from Wikipedia. The article Political Common Sense for America was deleted because it appeared to be a copyright infringement of this article and this article. Additionally, it did not meet the criteria in WP:ORG.

If you look at Liberal Fascism and Libertarian Party (United States) both are well substanciated and both have met the criteria set forth in WP:ORG.

Take a look at the section WP:ORG and read the sections:Your first article, How to write a great article, Help pages, Tutorial for more help. If there is anything I can do to give you a further hand, please let me know. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 18:59, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I undertand that you don't want blatant advertising and promotion. The part I don't get is that your definition of what is fact versus promotion is prejudicial. The other book I referenced has just sold more copies. It doesn't make it any more factual or referencable. The other political party I reference just has more people signed on but if you use that as a criteria then you might suggest they don't have enough references and exposure compared to the Democratic and Republican parties so they should be disallowed until they get in the top two. I have no recourse other than logic on either of these points but I do dispute the copyright issue. Both of the referenced notes are #1 a retail description of the book and #2 is a press release that was picked up by a news sources. If that is copyright infringement than we need to look at the page on Richard Bach because they have a description for Jonathen Livingston Seagull that pulls right from the retail description too (so does Liberal Fascism). See my point? Oh well, I'm frustrated, I really thought the point of this was to allow factual data to be provided to the masses. What I'm concluding is that the medai needs to accept it first and then its real. Too bad, since the media is a horribly prejudicial editor.

Thanks! --Bboeheim (talk) 19:21, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

One of the mistakes a new user makes is the assumption that Wikipedia is a separate entity that does not include the new user. The guidelines that define Wikipedia are as a result of users (new and established) proposing and voting to accept the proposal. Basically, you and I are part of the Wikipedia community - the guidelines are not mine, they are ours. 8-)

The other books and articles have substantial coverage in the form of news coverage and such. Just because something is sells more copies has no direct relevance to notability. It should be noted that generally speaking the better the sale of an item, the more coverage a it might experience.

There is plenty of coverage for Liberal Fascism and Libertarian Party (United States). Again, the criteria for inclusion has nothing to so with the number of people that belong to the organization.

You are more than welcome to dispute the copyright issue by providing the original and showing that it has been released as WP:GFDL or an equivalent.

Your comment that, "I really thought the point of this was to allow factual data to be provided to the masses." is not exactly correct. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello,

I noticed that you removed my update of a L. Londell McMillan page citing my use of copyrighted material. What material are you referring to? Please advise at your earliest convenience.

Julian K. Petty, Esq. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliankpetty (talk • contribs) 03:41, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

As stated in the edit summary, "Removed copyrighed material-source http://www.huffingtonpost.com/l-londell-mcmillan". ttonyb1 (talk) 05:26, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony. I revised the article and still contest that it is worthy to remain as TEK is the only webcomic that is centered around the world of tech-blogging and gadget reviews. This is a distinction that it shares with no other comic and one of the reasons it draws such a fanbase. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Logonk (talk • contribs) 18:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony,

On the Ernesto Cortazar page I posted recently ... that is my copy produced as promo material and printed as written by the All About Jazz site. Not my fault if they take a press release and don't bother.

I'm setting up Ernesto's site, but it's night time on this side of the world so I'm just doing the perfunct-dance until I have time to add all the bells and whistles. That will happen soon.

Thanks ... you're a good bull dog on this.

Sandra Hanks Cortazar (talk) 16:17, 5 July 2009 (UTC) Sandra

Ttonyb1, Please explain why you continually speedy delete the page I have created for Ken Mason. The only similarities are the facts as to where he worked and his job experience for each company. I am sorry if I have not correctly added the content but I have read all of the Wikipedia suggestions on writing pages and I have followed all of the rules. Thanks for your time. Tstakes (talk) 05:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

The article fails to meet the criteria for notability. ttonyb1 (talk) 05:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I did not use content from the Huffington Post. I used excerpts from Mr. McMillan bio which we have here at his law firm, Dewey & LeBoeuf. Mr. McMillan is a Partner at Dewey. We probably provided a bio to Huffington Post, if anything. What do we need to do to get a profile of Mr. McMillan added to Wikipedia? Please advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliankpetty (talk • contribs) 00:28, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I assume you are associated with the firm. Please read the section on donating material to Wikipedia. If I can be of any help please let me know. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, you added a template requesting better citing of material to The Penny (novel). Could you please explain was wrong with it as it is? I'm unsure if you think there should be more, or if you think the current ones are unreliable. Cheers - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 08:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:SOURCES. None of the sources are truly independent of the author. Additionally, blogs are not seen as good resources. ttonyb1 (talk) 18:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh right, I thought you were saying there was information that wasn't sourced, rather than are poor sources. I was half-aware whn adding hem that the weren't amazing, but I thought they probably served their purpose well enough. When I get the time I'll have a dig around for better ones. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 19:42, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I wrote a message a week or two ago in regards to the Speedy Deletion of my contribution page Serial Thrillers. As I noted, the content in question was written by the group Serial Thrillers and added to multiple websites including Powderfinger Promotions which is a company we hired and provided them with the content. Please let me know what the next steps are to reverse this deletion. Thanks, Nicole —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikirib (talk • contribs) 17:17, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

A few weeks ago I tried to create a page summarizing the Center for Innovation, Excellence and Leadership (IXL Center) at Hult. The page was marked for deletion and removed, but I was hoping to get some guidance about how to create an appropriate page.

There are similar institutions, affiliated with other universities, that have Wikipedia pages. For example the Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation and the University of Florida (see link below).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Entrepreneurship_and_Innovation

Some additional info on IXL Center is below. What is the best way to proceed?

IXL Center offers multiple Innovation Excellence Certifications that are MBA accredited. (see links)

http://www.ixl-center.com/courses.html http://www.ixl-center.com/downloads/IXL_Center_Training_and_Development_Package.pdf

In addition, the Center is responsible for planning, coordinating and running the capstone program at Hult International Business School known as the Action Learning Project (ALP).

Below are several links to press-releases covering this program and Hult / IXL's involvement - it is one of the major draws for Hult.

http://hult.edu/about-hult/press#1009 http://www.grailresearch.com/pdf/ContenPodsPdf/Grail_Research_Hult_Action_Learning_Project.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Independentview (talk • contribs) 19:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you please answer the above question? Independentview (talk) 19:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

It appears the article was tagged as a copyright violation. If an article is copied from an existing source and the source is not allowed to be used via a Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 or GFDL, the article deleted. The best bet is to rewrite the text in your own words. ttonyb1 (talk) 19:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm a partner and co-founder of IXL Center (the company in question) - what do i need to do to make this information allowable? Independentview (talk) 01:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at donating material to Wikipedia. If I can be of any help please let me know. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 03:25, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony,

What constitutes significant?

How many people need to attend?

With significant artists attending, and growing in stature each year, why does this make for a non-significant event?

With the principle of a greener way of life and conservation the festival is UNIQUE in New Brunswick and is already being copied by others, how is this insignificant?

I added some of the press coverage from 2008, and 2009 the festival will get even more, how much coverage is required?

What needs to be added to the article to avoid deletion?

How can other events such as Evolve been included that have no significant message? Purely on the basis that they get a few more heads? They certainly do not get as significant a list of performers or send out such a positive message as The Green Festival.

I would look to grow this article and continue links to top performers and people as they attend, but it is going to be impossible if the basic article is deleted.

Look forward to some positive help,

Regards,

Peter —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgajames (talk • contribs) 13:53, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Tony,

Please do not edit pages from Mary Starkey. We are Starkey International and own all copyrights to our material.

If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at XXX.XXX.XXXX as for Matt Henderson.

Thanks you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starkeyintl (talk • contribs) 15:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia requires documentation be in place prior to allowing the use of copyrighted material. Please read the section describing donating material to Wikipedia. Until the documentation is in place, the material will need to be removed. Sorry

Please note that articles are not owned by individual users. To quote the text just above the Save button, "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. Any text that you did not write yourself (apart from brief citations) must be available under terms consistent with Wikipedia's Terms of Use before you use it." If I can be of any help please let me know. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 19:47, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

This page is proposed for deletion but she is listed in ifad, imdb, afdb. Why would it be deleted?BumbaBaby (talk) 00:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

It appears the individual fails WP:PORNSTAR. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:24, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Massage Therapy Institute of Colorado, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Article about an educational institution without any sources

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Bearian (talk) 21:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ttonyb1! I just wanted to inform you that I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on Alden Marin- because: the article makes a credible claim of importance or significance. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. decltype (talk) 00:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 00:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I want to thank you for the corrections made on the Reach Canada article!

Best Regards

Alfredo Garcia 15:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Froigarcia (talk • contribs)

My pleasure, it still needs a bit of work. If I can be of any help please let me know. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello Ttonyb1, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have deleted a page you tagged (Alexander william suchman) under a different criteria, because the one you provided was inappropriate or incorrect. CSD criteria are narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct deletion rationale is supplied. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any queries, please let me know. Thanks again! decltype (talk) 03:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 03:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't use this so often, but I think it's important that the creator is warned when they create an attack page, and doesn't just receive a note about notability. Regards, decltype (talk) 03:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree, somehow I missed the attack portion of the article. Thanks for the follow-up. ttonyb1 (talk) 03:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

No hard feeling on this one. I simply removed the link in the George Jung entry where I came from (never heard of dude until tonight but remember the character from movie Blow). I am not sure why the entry was removed in the first place as an attack page on a convicted drug dealer of 135 years must have really sucked to be deleted in the first person. I just hope it has nothing to do with him being in witness protection because the US government is covering its own butt from its CIA Latin American misadventures in the 1970s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dumas777 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

No problems. The article was marked as attack because it did not have any references to support the allegations. It does not matter who the person is or the allegations, all people are treated the same when it comes to providing unsourced material in articles. There is no conspiracy to remove the article, only a regard for unsourced statements. My best to you...ttonyb1 (talk) 04:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Understood the sad thing is I am sure it would not be hard to just get the cold hard facts. I would do it but researching drug dealers a bit low on the priority list. It just broke the wikiflow why I was annoyed in first place. To be honest probably best to break the wikiflow on the subject as it doesn't take a whole lot of conspiracy theory to connect the US government with many of these drug dealers. The 1970's was not a good time for the CIA in Latin America (Noriega, Pinochet, Sandinesta, etc). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.56.25.30 (talk) 04:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Enjoy the evening. ttonyb1 (talk) 04:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Why did you remove my speedy delete tag from Mugabe and the white african movie then say in an edit summary that you were putting one in, when you didn't? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:14, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I can see your edit here, but not when I look at the article.  ??? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Now, I can, it must just be slow servers or something. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Our signals may have gotten mixed-up in the ether. I thought I had added the first tag using TW, but thought better of using a test page tag instead - I did not know the tag was yours. I then added the test page tag. [1]. Not sure what happened, and I am sorry I stepped on your tag. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 05:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, no problem.  :) Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:25, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

hey sorry i didnt know i just thought it was funny —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cenawoo1 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

If you want to experiment, you can create a user/sandbox and edit to heart's delight. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 23:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony

My page on a new private hospital in Cork, Ireland (the Cork Medical Centre) has been deleted. I'm sorry I didn't realise it was would be construed as advertising, it certainly was not envisaged to be that way. The intention was just to add a page alongside pages on the Sheehan family's other hospitals in Dublin and Galway, which are below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackrock_Clinic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galway_Clinic

The intention is for the page to be factual and informative about the new hospital.

Any insight you could give me about what I need to do to add a factual page on the hospital would me very much appreciated.

Kind regards,

Simon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonjohnpalmer (talk • contribs) 23:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Simon, first off don't get frustrated. We all get things that do not meet Wikipedia guidelines deleted - myself included. I do not remember the article details, but it seems to me the article tried to cover a lot of things including services, mission, etc and sounded like an ad for the Center. It would help if you could provide a copy of the article in a user/sandbox. Take a look at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital for a good article that provides the facts concerning a hospital/clinic without providing any advertising.

If I can be of any help please let me know. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:52, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony, Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I'm not at all frustrated and completely understand why it happens. I couldn't link back to our website because the details of the new hospital aren't on line yet but I can link to reputable news sources for references. Do you have a copy of original article? If not, then I will rewrite and ask for you comments and approval. Thanks a lot, Simon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonjohnpalmer (talk • contribs) 12:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, independent news coverage is great, is better than a link back to your own site, and would help provide the support needed for the article. I do not have a copy of the article, but you can contact one of these admins to request that they get you a copy. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 14:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

Sorry, I guess I'm new to this, but Nadine Sykora has a higher video count, higher video views and more subscribers than a number of "youtube celebrities" on the actual Wikipedia list of youtube celebrities. She's attended award shows, been featured in videos by a number of other prominent users and attended youtube meetups and conferences. Between youtube and her website she's been a prominent video blogging personality and is listed on youtube's website as a Partner in their partner's program. How is it that she doesn't qualify as a notable person?

By the way, the article clearly wasn't finished when you had it deleted(I actually had the edit page open), and was going to be expanded upon as soon as I received more detail(birth date, birth place etc) from Nadine via e-mail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Regulas5 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

As I told Simon in the entry above, don't get frustrated. I too have had articles deleted. The reason the article was deleted was it failed to meet the criteria for notability for individuals. There has to be significant coverage of the individual for their achievements. Unfortunately, attending meetings, award shows, conferences, or being videoed by others does not fall into this category. The number of web hits or video views does not insure notability as defined my Wikipedia.

As I suggested to Simon, you may want to create the article in a User/sandbox and edit it there. When you have completed the editing, you can move it to the mainspace. If I can be of any help, please let me know. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:08, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony, I fail to see how this article fails wikipedia's music biography criteria. The group has a cd from a reputable source, has won a major competition (ICCA), and all information is cited from strong secondary sources (university website, organization website, ICCA website). In addition, it follows the exact same format, and has the name accomplishments as other a cappella groups that are allowed under wikipedia. Dicks and Janes (University of Michigan) to same one. Please help with this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lipphard (talk • contribs)

Please reread WP:BAND. Having a CD is not considered notable unless it has charted on any national music chart or certified gold or higher in at least one country. Advancing to the quarter or semifinals is not winning or placing in a competition. A university website is "generally considered trivial." ttonyb1 (talk) 04:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Plase help me understand, how does this page differ from Dicks and Janes article? I made the article in response to that group, as we have the exact same accomplishments. Maybe I have excluded something they have, that we also have, but have not added yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lipphard (talk • contribs) 04:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

The criteria are not other articles, but WP:BAND. Dicks and Janes may or may not be up to Wikipedia criteria for ensembles; however, it does appear that their members as part of that group, have placed in competition and the group has been included in a compilation album. But again, the criteria are not other articles, but rather WP:BAND. ttonyb1 (talk) 04:30, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I understand that another article is not criteria, but I am using it as a template to help me understand. Obviously is they are allowed on the site, then a group with identical merits should be allowed. In fact, Capital Green is on the same compilation album (I have not made that a title, it is included under the ICCA title of the article, should I make that more obvious if that will make the group pass criteria?) Capital Green has also placed in the same competition with identical scores, for the same number of years. Perhaps the problem is in my wording. I have been keeping the tone of the article much less egotistical than I could. Perhaps if I were to play up the accomplishments more, this would change your mind?

I would add these items to the article. The article is in AfD, this means it has been nominated for deletion and placed in a process so other editors can discuss the merits of the article to determine if should stay or be deleted. After you add the items to the article you should add your thoughts to the AfD. In your discussion I would compare the article to the criteria, but not to other articles. Good luck... ttonyb1 (talk) 14:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony

I don't mind if this article is deleted. It was only addded to add factual information to the rough and tumble article, due to incorrect information about rough and tumble in a mainstream book about martial arts on sale in stores.

Best regards, --Steven Yates (talk) 10:43, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Tony – I guess I too am unclear about what makes a company “notable” for Wikipedia. I have read every section and sub section on the topic. I don’t understand why my article on Balloon Wholesalers was marked for speedy deletion. It was not advertisement, had no bias but did have many references and links. How is what they do any different then Party City?

This company did a lot last year to ensure that foil balloons were not outlawed in the State of California. As a balloon artist it is important to me, as it would be to others in the business, to keep balloons legal. I order from several different balloon companies for my store and this is the only one that has lots of free information available online. In today’s economy, where costs of everything are going up, as a small business owner that is important to me. Do I prefer to work with Balloon Wholesalers, you bet but I tried to put an article online about them that would be just information and not show bias.

What changes would need to be made to the article to keep it posted online? Your assistance is appreciated! --Twilightmom (talk) 23:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, TM, unfortunately I do not remember a lot about the article except it was marked for because it was too much like an advertisement. The notability that Party City has is "[it is the] largest retail party supply store in the United States and Puerto Rico..." Additionally, the article is written listing only facts and no POV. If you have a copy of the article I suggest you put it in a User/sandbox and I can then look at it and give you some specific comments about the article. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 00:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I have added the article info in my user sandbox. Please let me know what I need to edit or change about my info. Thanks for your assistance with this! --Twilightmom (talk) 16:48, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you give me a link to the page? Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 17:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Twilightmom Thanks! - --Twilightmom (talk) 17:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

First off, I have moved a copy of the article to User:Twilightmom/balloon.

Looking at the page, it appears you will have some problems getting this to meet WP:COMPANY. Per the criteria, "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. All content must be verifiable." I do not see any indication the company has had any significant coverage. If there has been any it needs to be added to the article. The article also looks as if it is an advertisement and not an encyclopedic article.

Read Primary criteria for more help in establishing Notability. Take a look at the article for Omniture. I know it is not the same type of company and is bigger, but it lays out the type of information needed in an article. it tells the story of the company, talks a little bit about products and cites coverage. Party City also accomplishes this and is able to cite NYTimes coverage.

Let me know your thoughts. ttonyb1 (talk) 19:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I have sevearl links for papers all over the US that covered the balloon ban info. Please see below. Is that what it takes to make a company notable? I will review the sites and info you provided and see what changes I can make to try to fit the standard.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/02/opinion/oe-adishian2

http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/comments/cmt.php?sto_uri=L3N0b3JpZXMvMjAwOS8wNi8xNy9uZXdzLnFwLTg1MTQ0MDMuc3Rv&start=36

http://www.balloonhq.com/column/bhq/jun08/

http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/la-oew-scott10-2008jun10,0,7833105.story

http://community.myfoxmaine.com/blogs/DfDeportation/2008/06/04/California_Politicians_Hot_Air

http://www.uexpress.com/dearabby/?uc_full_date=19960916

http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=24757946

http://204.131.235.67/magazine/articles/2008/08SLoctnov08_stateline.pdf

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070527/NEWS/705270369/1036/BUSINESS01

http://www.fresnobee.com/business/story/552527.html

http://kentucky.illumen.org/kentucky?action=viewNewsArticle&documentId=2c9e4f69197f057a01198327e6460601&issueId=

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-14214893.html

Thanks for your help! --Twilightmom (talk) 17:57, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

These would be useful if the article was about the balloon ban, but it is about a company. ttonyb1 (talk) 18:01, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ttonyb, Is it possible for you to tell me what is wrong with my first article so that I can make it acceptable and within Wikipedia's guidelines? Thanks! Betodd (talk) 05:32, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

The article failed to meet the criteria in WP:COMPANY. ttonyb1 (talk) 05:43, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Ttonyb, for the direction! Will look at the details (tomorrow, as it's 1am here and will be heading to bed soon). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Betodd (talk • contribs) 06:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is the way to communicate with you or not, but hopefully you'll recieve this. Why do you say my edits are vandalistic? These are two articles I wish to write about, and can easily prove that both of these individuals exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AlfonzFred (talk • contribs) 23:53, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

This is the correct place to contact me. The articles should be written first and then added to 1986. There are notices in the article that indicate items without existing articles should not be entered and will be removed. ttonyb1 (talk) 23:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if I double posted somewhere but I don't see my previous comment and want to be sure to get to you. Whats wrong with my edits to 1986? And why would you call them vandalisim? I'm planning on writing articles about the two indiviuals I listed and wish to add them to the timeline. I don't see how this took away from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AlfonzFred (talk • contribs) 23:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

See the above section entitled 1986. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

hey tony you deleted my page i thought it was a world encyclopedia and i wanted the world to know who i a am thats not very nice to do that i even posted it to all my friends to add stuff on it for me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim 2810 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia page entries have to follow certain criteria for inclusion into the encyclopedia. Yours failed to meet WP:BIO and was considered to be an attack page. Sorry... ttonyb1 (talk) 00:34, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out this new user and especially for sending him a "welcome" message; that was very thoughtful. I've been working with him to help him over some hurdles we all faced when we got started (I don't know why he asked me, but what the heck) and I think he's going to make an excellent addition to the project. I'm interested in how he'll work on this article to try to demonstrate notability, and I'll be looking it over to help him if I can. If there's something you'd care to contribute, of course you'd be very welcome. Accounting4Taste:talk 18:05, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. I remember how nice it was when I got my welcome to the project. It was nice to see that someone was there watching my progress and interested. Thanks again and my best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 20:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm completely new at wikipedia, and I've been working hard to get this page up and running! Thank you for editing Gary Mark Smith's page and I've been meaning to redo the the references because before I was very confused at first with how all of that worked. Do you think that I can wait until Friday to add the inline citations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahstern (talk • contribs) 21:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC) Also do you think this page has enough notability to stay on Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahstern (talk • contribs) 21:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you are OK waiting a couple of days to fix the inline citations. I have started fixing them, so you should have examples for each. I am not sure about the Notability of the individual. The article clearly asserts notability, but without the citations there is some question. You may want to make a copy of the article in a User/sandbox in case someone nominates it for deletion. If I can be of any help please let me know. My best to you... ttonyb1 (talk) 04:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

if someone were to nominate it for deletion would I be able to bring the page back? or would I have to wait a number of years —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.124.49.14 (talk) 00:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

You would be able to bring it back - with changes - right away. Generally an article is not "salted", that is banned, unless there is some abuse associated with it. (i.e., continual copyright violations, attack pages, or recreation of the same page without good faith edits) ttonyb1 (talk) 00:33, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with the article (formatting references, etc.). I originally had not intended to save the article when I did (I must have accidently hit the enter key), I was going to add detail to the article as well properly format the references. Unfortunately I have not had time the last few days to work on the article, so I appreciate the fact you cleaned it up and propertly formatted the references. Thank You for your help and sorry to have taken up your time. Highground79 (talk) 03:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem and my pleasure. I have removed the tags except for Notability tag - I am not sure their is enough clear notability, but I will leave it for someone else to chime in. If I can be of any help please let me know. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 03:56, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

This is really annoying me now. I have 4 different people telling me all kinds of things. 1st: How does wikipedia know that I don't have permission to add copyrighted material to it? 2nd: I am a volunteer at the Teva Learning Center trying to create an entry for the organization, so OBVIOUSLY I have permission to use our own information. 3rd: I don't understand how Nike, JPMorgan Chase, and the million other companies have sites on here, but a little non-profit can't build one!!! 4th: I am talking to 4 different people. Isn't 1 person in charge of the site?!!! This is crazy!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tevacenter (talk • contribs) 18:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

First off, there is no one person in charge of editing or the site. It is a volunteer organization and anyone is allowed to contribute.

There are certain criteria that one needs to follow in order to create an article in Wikipedia. Those criteria are defined in the sections referenced in the Welcome message left on your talk page. I suggest you read the sections:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

for more information.

There are certain items in an article that cannot be accepted, one of those is copyrighted material without proper documentation that the material is indeed authorized for use in Wikipedia. You have indicated that Wikipedia should assume you have permission to use the material because you are a volunteer at the center. Unfortunately because this is an regulatory issue (U.S. Copyright Laws) there cannot be any assumption of permission. If you have permission to use that material, please see donating material to Wikipedia for information on how to have the organization allow its use. If I can be of any assistance, please let me know. ttonyb1 (talk) 19:20, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Brown Safe Manufacturing is notable in that they are an established security and manufacturing company receiving a significant amount of coverage by Reuters, The Wall Street Journal, San Diego Union Tribune, North County Times, and multiple AM radio stations covering subjects ranging from San Diego business to home security. This page satisfies the needed information for individuals who are concerned with safeguarding property and valuables. Beckett007 (talk) 19:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

As it stands the article appears not to meet the criteria in WP:COMPANY. I suggest you add the references to the article. BTW - the Reuters article listed is a Press Release and is not a good reference. ttonyb1 (talk) 19:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't violate any copyright... so, I'm not sure why you're informing me. I may have created the article-- but, if so, only as redirect to Rebecca Jane Middleton. Nephron  T|C 03:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ttonyb1, I just got a message RE speedy deletion for this page Pik Pak Logistics. However I can not seem to figure out what is wrong with it. I have kept to relevant subject of logistics and 4pl but I don't know if this is syntax error, content error, have I saved a link wrong or do i need to sign it?? (PikPakLogistics (talk) 03:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC))

PikPakLoggistics, there are a number of issues associated with the article. The major issue is it fails to meet the criteria associated with establishing Notability for companies. See the section for more information. In addition, it is best that article are not written by someone that has in interest with the subject of the article. See WP:COI for more information. My best to you . ttonyb1 (talk) 03:34, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Running for US Senate and one of the IL GOP highest African Americans seems notable. What should be improved?--Allenskillicorn (talk) 19:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Running for an office is typically not considered to be notable, holding an office is. I am not sure about being one of the highest IL GOP. The article is not in danger of being deleted, but take a look at WP:BIO for specifics on establishing notability. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 22:10, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ttonyb1 , By mistake, I created this [page]in Arabic language in the English pages, please delete it:

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghassanibrahim (talk • contribs) 02:11, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

It has been deleted. ttonyb1 (talk)

Hi Tony I'm struggling to see why this company is insignificant. I believe they are one of the most successful in their field and that this page would be of interest to anyone with an interest in the field of the subject in question Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjonessimon (talk • contribs) 01:07, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

The article fails to provide notability for company. I cannot find anything to support the statements in the article. If you can provide independent, third-party references to support the article it will go a long way to saving the article. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I am interested in knowing what can be done to save this particular article. The nature of the business that this man is involved in means that credible articles regarding him are not necessarily easy to find. Having said that, all one needs to do is type 'Mark Allen GDI' into google and thousands of pages and posts appear relating to this man and the business stated in the article. Many posts can be found made by people looking to find out how they can succeed in the same way as the subject has. I think this should be sufficient evidence that this man is as stated in the article, and the number of posts and pages about him should be sufficient to show his significance.Sjonessimon (talk) 01:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

The article fails to provide notability for an individual. The sources you refer to do not support the article and are not independent, third-party references. You need to provide support for the article and prove notability as defined by Wikipedia. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:25, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, well I haven't actually cited any sources. Your response indicates that you haven't actually read my message or the article in question. Please read the article and then give constructive feedback. I think that being a leader in your field is rather notable. Being of interest to thousands worldwide is also rather notableand reason for the article not to be deleted.Sjonessimon (talk) 01:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I have read both your article and your comment. You referred to sources in the message above, when you suggested, "all one needs to do is type 'Mark Allen GDI' into google." I took a look at those sources and found them to be insufficient. Being a leader in your field, if you are the only one that knows it, is not being a leader in the field, and is not notable.

I left you a welcome message on your talk page that I suggest you read. The sections in the welcome message provide information on what is needed to support an article. In addition, I suggest you reread my messages above, they provide sections about what is needed to establish notability and how to provide references to support articles. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

"Being a leader in your field, if you are the only one that knows it, is not being a leader in the field, and is not notable." Sorry, what does that actually mean? I think what you are suggesting in this completely nonsensical sentence is that I am the subject of the article and that I have written 14,000 articles in support of "myself". Is this what you are suggesting? I understand the articles aren't written in Reuters or Bloomberg but what I am arguing is that the scale of the influence of this individual in the internet community does indeed make him notable.Sjonessimon (talk) 01:58, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

What I was suggesting was if no one knows about your accomplishments, your accomplishments cannot be verified. If you cannot provide valid references to support the article, it will most likely be deleted. I also fail to see the 14,000 articles you refer to. I only count less than 3,000 285. I have sampled a number of those articles and they do not appear to meet Wikipedia criteria. Additionally, there appears to be no coverage of the individual in GNews. ttonyb1 (talk) 02:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

That's rather strange. Google is showing results 1-10 of around 14,000. Them not meeting 'Wikipedia criteria' is exactly my point. The sources may not be 'credilbe wiki sources' but they are, never-the-less, 14,000 people who do see this man as notable. Does somebody really need to make a news headline to be considered notable? There appear to be thousands of people with pages on wikipedia for whom I cannot find a single other reference. The man in question is not me, not that that should really make a difference. I don't mind this article not getting published but as a matter of principle I am not going to let it go until I get a sensible reason for deletion. I think that it is quite illogical to say that the man in question is not notable when there are 14,000 articles suggesting otherwise.Sjonessimon (talk) 02:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Google does show 14K hits if you search for the items 'Mark Allen GDI'. If you combine Mark and Allen into a phrase by using quotes (a much more meaningful search) it is reduced to 285 - Not 3K as I originally thought. If there are articles that do not meet Wikipedia criteria for inclusion you are welcome to nominate them for deletion.

Although using a search engine like Google can be useful in determining how common or well-known a particular topic is, a large number of hits on a search engine is no guarantee that the subject is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The numbers do not indicate notability only popularity (not a criteria for inclusion), ttonyb1 (talk) 03:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

You asked if, "Does somebody really need to make a news headline to be considered notable?" The answer is in order to be considered for an article in Wikipedia, the subject has to meet the criteria of Notability as defined by Wikipedia. You have asked for "a sensible reason for deletion", it is that the article does not meet Wikipedia criteria for inclusion.

This is not the forum to try to rewrite Wikipedia criteria. If you wish to try to change the critera you are welcome, but note the criteria was written and agreed to by a consensus of users with a much wider Wikipedia experience set than it appears you may have. (BTW - this is not an attack on your ability or experience, but rather just an observation based on your comments in this talk page.) I suggest you read the criteria and use that as a guideline for your edits to the article. ttonyb1 (talk) 03:54, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

..was written by me. It is Mr. Boast's Biography. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casting direct (talk • contribs) 01:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, Wikipedia requires documentation be in place prior to allowing the use of copyrighted material. Please read the section describing donating material to Wikipedia. Until the documentation is in place, the material will need to be removed. Sorry ttonyb1 (talk) 01:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Well this band does not meet those criteria , however , I feel it is important to document it here. Could we userfy the page once you delete it ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Radadam (talk • contribs) 02:29, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Radadam (talk) 02:53, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I will not be the one to delete the page. I have only nominated it for deletion.

I have moved a copy of the article to User_talk:Radadam/band for you work with - you can move it to the mainspace after you have completed your changes. Take a look at WP:BAND for information on notability for bands. If I can be of any help, please let me know. Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 04:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ttonyb1,

Thank you for indicating that my Wiki article Boba Phat needs some type of wikification, cleanup & sections. I received a message from you stating that I removed the tags but did not do anything significant, for which I apologize. I did go in and fix what I believed to be faulty. I am new to Wiki - this is my first article - and although I have read the Quality Standards page diligently, I cannot seem to figure out what exactly is wrong. I understand I may need to add additional sections. The Manual is quite vast, and I am by no means an expert in programming. Can you please help me narrow down precisely what needs to be fixed as I fully intend to abide by Wikipedia's standards, yet need some targeted direction to pinpoint what the problem areas are. Thank you in advance. SheighZam (talk) 00:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)SheighZam

Thanks for the message. No problem about the maintenance tags, consider it a Wikipedia learning curve. 8-)

First off, congratulations on creating your first article. Getting it from an idea to an article can sometimes be a pain. Add to that trying to follow the Wikipedia guidelines and it can be a real pain the first time. I have left you a welcome message on your talk page that might help you. The message has a number of nice links that will help you to create a new article and navigate the guidelines.

As the article currently stands, there are a couple of issues. The major one is not related to format, but Notability, I am not sure the subject is notable enough to warrant an article. See Wikipedia notability and its subsections for more information. There might be enough to support the article, but I am not yet sure. There needs to be enough substantial coverage in independent, third-party, references to support the article. Let's cross that bridge later.

One of the things I find useful in creating an article is to review other articles that are about subjects close to the one I am writing. Unfortunately there are probably not a lot of articles that are similar. The best I could come up with is The San Diego Chicken. Take a look at how the style of writing is straight-forward and lacks POV or fluff. It presents the subject in a rather mater-a-fact manner. One of the things you can do is convert some of the links to inline references. If you have any questions, feel free to let me know. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:48, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for taking the time to reply & for the welcome cookies, Ttonyb1! I will certainly take a look at The San Diego Chicken article within the upcoming week (as time permits) to gain more insight into how to format the Boba Phat article. There are more third-party references I intend to add - hopefully as a result of interviews that Boba Phat has done via several notable print media (Time (magazine), Wired (magazine), etc.) as well as commentary to be used in an upcoming Lucasfilm documentary about Star Wars fans. After Comic-Con this past weekend, more sources ideally will arise to help verify notability.

Again I apologize in advance for sounding naive, but I would like to be certain that I understand what you meant by "convert some of the links to inline references". The last thing I want to do is violate any Wikipedia policies so I thought it best to ask. I did read the Inline citation page, however upon viewing the history of my article, it appears as though you did this for me, for which I am grateful! Are you suggesting that I learn the proper format for inline references for future articles, or are there more areas I need to address on the present Boba Phat article?

I am extremely appreciative of the reply you provided, as well as the amount of time you have already donated in helping me with my first article. With Wikipedia as vast as it is, I imagine your time is precious so I am quite thankful for the time you are spending to assist me! SheighZam (talk) 05:01, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Glad I could be of some help. No need to apologize, converting some of the links to inline references is just taking a URL in the Links section and putting in between a <ref> and a </ref> in the right place in the article - you will be creating an inline referenence for the article. Don't worry about the format of the other references, I can use Reflinks to format the new reference. My best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 16:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Once again I am grateful for the help. I did a bit more homework by reading the suggested The San Diego Chicken article as well as a whole host of others, and cleaned up several adverbs & adjectives that perhaps appeared subjective. Additionally, I added two more verifiable media sources & cited their references accordingly as per your instructions. I also re-added a pseudonym by which Boba Phat is commonly referred which I had reverted because ClueBot had sent me a vandalism message regarding the change. Upon carefully reading Wiki's policy on vandalism, it is clear that the addiction of this pseudonym is not only NOT vandalism, but is pertinent in establishing identifiability of the article's subject. I have since re-added the reverted text as well as added a recent notable news source - LA Weekly - who refers to Boba Phat by this pseudonym under his photograph in their article. Finally, I added appropriate categories. I will still be working on it more as media mentions come to fruition, however would like to know what else is required for the notice indicating that the article is in need of "cleanup", "wikification" & "sections" at the top of the page could be feasibly removed. Also, I'd like to express that ClueBot had made an error & do not want to get another "Please stop" message threatening me with being blocked if I continue to vandalize, as my inclusion of the pseudonym does not constitute vandalism in any form & is, in fact, a necessity. Please advise, and thanks again! SheighZam (talk) 09:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi again Ttonyb1... I just left Wikipedia, and proceeded to google Boba Phat which was previously showing up within the first 7 links organically prior to my recent change. It is now not showing up on the search engine at all, even when I type the keywords Boba Phat Wikipedia. It is visible internally on Wikipedia's search, however there is nothing new in the history here indicating any bot, user or administrative editing, nor any listing of it on the deletion log. Why is the site no longer visible externally? Please advise. Thanks! SheighZam (talk) 12:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Nice work. I have removed the maintenance tags. (I'll leave it to you to remove the {{underconstruction}} tag.) There may still be some issues associated with Notability, but let's see what happens. I saw the Bot tag on your talk page. In the tag there is a section that allows one to report the text as a "false positive". You can save yourself the aggravation of another tag by reporting the text as valid for the article. I am not sure why Google is not capturing the article, but I suspect it has to do with the way Google works and not Wikipedia. Again, very nice effort to save the article. I am impressed. ttonyb1 (talk) 01:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Since you have been popular today, I went ahead and semi-protected your user page for a few days. Please feel free to let me know if you would like it turned off early. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 17:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. How about 24 hours? I suspect the accounts that were vandalizing my page were sockpuppets of User:Credop. He will probably tire of the game soon. Thanks again and my best to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 17:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello Ttonyb1, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Antioch Secret Society has been removed. It was removed by Qtron411 with the following edit summary '(Edited page to match the criterea for musicians and ensembles.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Qtron411 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) 21:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

A tag has been placed on PLUTO magazine (The most widely circulated Asia gay magazine), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

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. Favonian (talk) 08:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Put in my speedy deletion bid at the same time that you moved the article. Favonian (talk) 08:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I was a bit perplexed at first, thanks for bringing me back to reality. 8-) ttonyb1 (talk) 08:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I created article 3,14... 2 times. First time I copied bio from other website. But 2nd time I wrote all with my sentences. Why It must be deleted? thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emin314413 (talk • contribs) 10:18, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

It's OK, I will answer this. :) – B.hotep •talk• 11:33, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... ttonyb1 (talk) 15:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I have not disrupted wikipedia in more than the DiBella edits, is it possible that you read my explanation on the talk page for the pizzeria, i appologise for disrupting if i have, but i do not wish to be block as this website is run incredibly well, let me know when you read the article's talk to be able to discuss the topic. Thank You Juve10 (talk) 23:44, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I was curious to kmow whether or not you have read my newest additons to the DiBella talk page, and out of notification I would like to let you know that I have created nearly ten or more articles and have been a frequent editor and editor for over a year. Juve10 (talk) 00:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I have changed the only warning to a level 2 warning - I am convinced the additions are good faith edits. The reason the article has been nominated for deletion is it appears to fail WP:SPAM and WP:COMPANY. Take a look at the sections and let mew know if you have any questions. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:11, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I have looked at the article and believe you will have an uphill battle getting this past WP:SPAM and WP:COMPANY. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay thanks, it's fine if the article gets deleted, we wish it could remain, but it is not a big deal as the five-star ratings make us very happy as well. Thanks Juve10 (talk) 00:22, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry and good luck. If I can be of any other help, please let me know. ttonyb1 (talk) 00:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey, you put the page for Lone (musician) up for speedy deletion. Lone is an artist signed to Dealmaker records, who has released 2 full-length albums. Read here to find out more: http://www.dealmakerrecords.com/artists_detail.asp?id=24 I fail to see what was wrong with the article, seeing as how I used as many sources as possible, from various places over the internet, including his official myspace. Please let me know what I can do to fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goaliedudegreg (talk • contribs) 03:16, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Take look at notability criteria for bands. It appears they fail the criteria. You need to provide verifiable , independent, third-party references. Let me know if you have any questions. ttonyb1 (talk) 03:21, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

I noticed you cleared the User:CorenSearchBot tag from the above, noting that the source was GFDL. Unfortunately, it is listed as GFDL 1.2 strictly, which is no longer compatible with Wikipedia since June 16th this year. The correct action in such cases would be to rewrite from scratch, as we now have an infringing derivative work. MLauba (talk) 08:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message and information, it looks as if I have some reading to do. ttonyb1 (talk) 14:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Hello. Just to let you know that your PROD of the above article has been removed. If you want to take it to AFD, I will support you. The JPS^{talk to me} 22:18, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, already moved to AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Ron Jackson Show. Thanks for the message and the heads up. ttonyb1 (talk) 22:19, 31 July 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.