User talk:Bmusician/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

my new page Trinity Theological College

I would be very happy to include those external references to Trinity Theological College to give it more reference and more relevence, This is actually my first attempt at posting a page so I'm not across all of the requirements. I believe I have submitted a decent page which is congruent with what has gone before and I have supplied external corroboration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mollis12 (talk • contribs) 13:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

help for Manoj Bhargava page

you said The article lacks reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Please don't hesitate to ask me if you have any more questions. --Bmusician 12:59, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

He was interviewed in Forbes. Isn't that Independent? It was not a complimentary interview. He was given award as Entrepreneur of Year by Cranes magazine. Both are independent news sources. Please tell me how to fix this. Thanks so much- Melanie Melanie Grimes 13:21, 16 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melapatella (talk • contribs)

Yes. I was saying the article needs more similar references. --Bmusician 13:24, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I've gone back and referenced many comments with citations now, and resubmitted. I ran citation bot and there were some suggestions, I think, but I didn't know how to edit the citations.If you could help with this,I'd appreciate it. Thanks again for all your wiki-work.Melanie Grimes 13:08, 17 February 2012 (UTC) Melanie Melanie Grimes 12:55, 17 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melapatella (talk • contribs)

Declined article on Auslogics Disk Defrag

Dear Bmusician, You have declined the article I wrote about Auslogics Disk Defrag citing lack of notability as the reason. I believe that there is enough evidence to show the subject’s notability. It is a highly popular software application that has been downloaded by more than 10 million people from CNet.com alone, that is not counting all the other software distributing websites. The fact that it is being recommended by the Official Windows Magazine as a defragmenter of choice for the Windows operating system (and a substitute for the Windows original defragmenter) is another good proof of its notability. However, my main argument would be that while many other defragmenters are represented in Wikipedia by their own articles, Auslogics Disk Defrag, being more notable than many of those other applications, does not have an article. The reason I wrote the article is due to this software being one of the three applications in the Comparison of Defragmentation Software Wikipedia table (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_defragmentation_software) that does not have its own article, while it is far more notable than many of the other defragmenters in that table that DO have their own articles. It seems extremely unfair that Wikipedia editors can discriminate against this one application while giving the green light to others. I would also like to find out what is required besides what’s already in the article to show notability of a software application. You have to agree that software is not something people write books or conduct scientific research about. The main sources of reliable and independent information about a software application are usually the main IT industry news and reviews websites, like CNet.com, BetaNews.com, as well as industry magazines, like PC Magazine, PC Advisor, etc. Experts from these editions are not paid by software manufacturers, so their reviews and opinions have to be independent, unbiased and reliable. There are at least 5 reliable and independent sources referenced in the original article that provide information on the subject. However, I have edited the article to include more proof of notability and would like to ask you to review it once again and let me know what you think. Since I am new to Wikipedia (this is my first article, hopefully not the last), and since I plan to write about software and software publishers, I would really appreciate it if you could explain to me the criteria for accepting an article about software into Wikipedia - specifically, what do these other articles have that mine doesn't, which allowed them to be included in Wikipedia (I am referring to articles on software programs in the above referenced table). Thank you! TaraSwimms (talk) 13:45, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi! Thank you for reviewing the article that I submitted. This was my first article.
|MYounis | talk 02:38, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Your review of Article

Hi! In your review of Sudarshan Laser Guided Bomb, you have stated that This submission is not adequately supported by reliable, independent sources. If you would go through the page, you'l see that it includes an external link to a video of Zee News on Youtube. In India, Zee News is a major TV news channel, which is a reliable source. I admit the video is in Hindi (which is the prevalent language in India), but I hope doesn't disqualify a source as non-reliable. I have been unable to find an English video of the same. I have also referenced information from South Asia Defence & Strategic Review, which is a bi-monthly defense publication which is gaining reputation. These two sources are reliable and independent. Other sources have been used to supplement information. Can you suggest what more could I have done? Anir1uph (talk) 03:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

PS. I have gone through WP:IRS and I have removed the 2 blog references in my article. Anir1uph (talk) 03:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

It seems to look better. YouTube, blogs, and etc. are not reliable. --Bmusician 04:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

But WP:RS says the following about video sources, which includes Youtube - "However, audio, video, and multimedia materials that have been recorded then broadcast, distributed, or archived by a reputable third party may also meet the necessary criteria to be considered reliable sources."" Nowhere it says that Youtube is not a reliable source. Also, my reference video is a recording of a TV broadcast and has the watermark of Zee News on the top right corner.Anir1uph (talk) 04:29, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Also, WP:V says nothing about a video source or Youtube. I have also added more independent news references to my article. What more can i do? Thanks Anir1uph (talk) 04:27, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Also, there exists open source image for the Sudarshan bomb (under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 UK: England & Wales) which i have uploaded here Sudarshan Bomb. Presence of images in public domain can contribute in enhancing the notability of the article. Anir1uph (talk) 05:09, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Accepted. --Bmusician 05:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Anir1uph (talk) 06:31, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Bmusician 14:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Article for creation - Glovico

Hi BMusician,

Thank you for taking the time to review the article I submitted relating to the organisation, Glovico. I have amended this and added in information from Welt Online, relating to the user numbers of the organisation's services. They have also featured in a programme on NDR, a German public broadcaster. However, the only link I can find is featured on Youtube, so I haven't included this. The clip has the television station's watermark, so if you think this would be acceptable as a source, I will include it.

Thank you for your assistance - Fbell74 (talk) 03:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

The submission lacks reliable sources that are independent of the subject, currently. That is why it was declined. --Bmusician 14:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Article creation - Mu Sigma

Hi BMusician,

I am trying to create an article about organization Mu Sigma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/mu_sigma ). I have found that the article was denied because of notability issue.

I went through the notability guidelines (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CORP#Primary_criteria). My page meeting the primary criteria mentioned in this. I have included the references form Bloomberg, Inc 500, Reuters, Wall street Journal(WSJ), livemint,Business Today.

^ . http://www.inc.com/inc5000/profile/mu-sigma.

^ . http://www.inc.com/inc5000/list/2011/industry/business-products-services.

^ . http://www.inc.com/inc5000/list/2010/industry/business-products-services.

^ . http://stockmarketsreview.com/pressrelease/category/regional-politics/page/1689/.

^ . http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/idUS205809+30-Mar-2011+MW20110330.

^ . http://venturebeat.com/2011/06/06/sequoia-capital-bets-on-analytics-with-25-million-mu-sigma-investment/.

^ . http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-28/general-atlantic-sequoia-invest-108-million-in-mu-sigma-1-.html.

^ . http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203899504577126720815824762.html.

^ . http://businesstoday.intoday.in/story/how-analytics-firm-mu-sigma-attracts-investors/1/21758.html.

^ . http://www.livemint.com/2007/08/04001518/Startup-success-Global-giant.html.

All these are active links and independent resources. Mu sigma is ranked as No.1 KPO ranking of Data monitor. Data monitor is a respected independent authority. I am not able to understand the reason for rejection based on notability issue. It will be very helpful if you mention the specific details ,which you feel I have not taken care from notability point of view.

Thanks, --Menotmeterm6 (talk) 08:00, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Jamshed qamar siddiqui

Hello Bmusician, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Jamshed qamar siddiqui, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: renowned poet is an assertio of importance. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. ϢereSpielChequers 14:13, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I speedied the article, because excluding that unreferenced statement, it did not make a claim of notability, but now I know even if unreferenced, any article that makes a claim of significance does not qualify for A7. But look at the format of the article - it's messy, and the BLP is unreferenced. --Bmusician 14:20, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Messyness is something that can be fixed with ordinary editing. I did notice that it was unreferenced and tagged it as such, someone has since escalated that to a BLPprod. But thanks for taking on that point about claims not needing to be referenced to avoid speedy deletion, of course if you think the claim is suspicious you have a range of options from {{fact}} tagging to tagging as a hoax. ϢereSpielChequers 16:38, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Chuck Baird article

Ahh- I sent an email - but now I see I can leave a mssg here.

Here is my explanation of why I used the resources I did on the Chuck Baird article. The Deaf community is a linguistic minority - and as such does not always have the same access to the White, hearing, English speaking publications that wikipedia wants us to cite.

RELIABLE SOURCES

Dear Bmusician - Thanks for trying to keep the standards of Wikipedia high. I want to discuss the reliability of sources in the Deaf community in the US. I am not trying to be disrespectful, but it appears that in this case wikipedia's standards are ethnocentric - and therefore discounting the norms of Deaf community information sharing.

In the Deaf community these blogs are written and in ASL. They have authenticity since they come from the community. As an oppressed minority, the language of communication is an important issue.

The sources I have cited are important in the Deaf community - RIT/NTID - that is one of the few technical colleges for the Deaf in the US. Gallaudet is the only liberal arts college for the Deaf in the world. DeafTexas - The Texas Association of the Deaf does not print in the mainstream journals or books, rather these blogs are the way the members of this organization communicate information of import. The youtube videos are direct sources for an ASL speaking community. If you were fluent in ASL you would be able to register the veracity of the content AND the face-to-face value of such information. These are the print media of the new deaf community. Deafart is a respected source for Deaf arts. Deaf Media is an organization with over 30 years experience in providing performing and visual arts access. Disability word.org - is just that - the disability community info central. And Chuck Baird's own foundation that was created for the purpose of supporting Deaf artists.

Please reconsider the standards to respect and allow the Deaf community's sources in wikipedia. Thank you! Itwasthelark (talk) 23:56, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

As per my reply to your email you sent to me, I have accepted it. --Bmusician 10:43, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Citing help

Dear Bryce,

You recently reviewed my article on Sheri McConnell and declined it due to the lack of citations. I have reviewed some of Wikipedia's guidelines around this but I am overwhelmed with information and do not easily understand. Could you please tell me what areas of text in the article need to be cited and anything I need to know?

Many thanks.

Kathy A. Smith, February 15, 2012 (Kathyasmith (talk) 16:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC))

Hi Kathy. Especially with users who do not know basic wiki markup and formatting, formatting citations in the form of inline citations is pretty tricky. As WP:ILC states:

Footnotes using the Cite.php system, usually called "<ref> tags", is the most widely used method for citing sources. It can be used for both bibliographic citations and also for explanatory notes. This method automatically arranges the references presented in an article through the use of two tags: <ref> and </ref>. Information placed between the two tags forms the footnote. Either standard wiki markup or citations templates can be used to format bibliographic citations. This system requires the presence of the multi-featured {{Reflist}} template or the simple code on the page. Ref tags will not appear in the list of notes unless they are placed somewhere above the list.

If multiple citations for the same source are included in the article, and you are using <ref> tags, you can name the footnote to link to the same note repeatedly. To do this, add name="X" to the first <ref> tag, so that it looks like this:<ref name="X">. As before, this will generate a number at the end of the sentence. Replace the "X" with any word to denote which source the computer should jump to when multi-linking like this. Notice that this method of citing creates the same number for each entry cited with a <ref name="X"> citation. You can reuse the footnote repeatedly merely by typing the named <ref> tag with a slash following the name, like this: <ref name="X" />

To simplify this, let's say you want to put example.com as a reference. You just put the code <ref>example.com</ref> somewhere that allows the reader to associate a given bit of material in an article with the specific reliable source(s) that support the material. The references will then be listed. You put the code ==References== {{reflist}} to list the references placed in the article. I hope this helps, Bmusician 01:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Bryce,

Thank you for this. I am perplexed as in my very first submission, I did have references listed but then took them out as it seemed getting "verifable" sources was more important, e.g. the two references now appearing at the bottom in the References section.

Previously I tried to link the references I had listed before to existing Wikipedia pages like the CBS TV page, but the link keeps coming up dead. It works when I check it on Wikipedia but when I link it in the article, it doesn't work. Should I use an external link instead?

What is the difference between citations and references - are they the same thing? There is a Wikipedia article on Alexandria Brown, an American women entrepreneur. What I've done with my article on Sheri McConnell is very similar to hers so I get confused as to why mine is declined.

So...the links I've put into the article itself are what need to be listed in the citations as references, correct?

Many thanks again for your help.

Kathy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kathyasmith (talk • contribs) 04:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Youre right about citations and references being the same thing - they are synonyms. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is also not an acceptable excuse for a submission to be declined. I'll try to help you with the submission. --Bmusician 05:33, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Bryce,

Thank you. Shall I not do any changes and wait to see what you're able to help with? Again, thank you. (Kathyasmith (talk) 16:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC))

Hello Bryce,

I'm sure you are kept very busy but I was wondering what I should do next re my note above. Thanks so much. (Kathyasmith (talk) 12:07, 19 February 2012 (UTC))

Articles for creation/A. W. Moore

Dear Bmusician,

It is the second time that I receive a comment concerning the above submission regarding the notability of the subject. However, it seems to me this comment has already been addressed the first time - I quoted several reviews by authors who are included as important philosophers in Wikipedia and who clearly testify to the notability of the subject of my entry.

Moreover, I have had a look at other similar entries accepted in Wikipedia, where much less ground for notability was provided, and yet the entries are accepted. I also read the information about notability to which I am being sent from your comments.

At the moment, it seems to me that no matter how much information I provide to justify notability, my entry can always be declined with the argument that it is not sufficient. I am told to cite sources which are reliable and independent. I am unclear what such sources would be if not famous refereed journals that are included as notable in Wikipedia and which are written by authors who are included as notable in Wikipedia.

Could you clarify please?

Thanks in anticipation!

Yours, --SBaiasu (talk) 17:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Mohammed Ehsan Pathan Khan - Declined by reviewer Bmusician

Dear Bmusician,

I am new to wikipedia,an article of mine [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mohammed_Ehsan_Pathan_Khan] has been declined twice.The last review was done by you.The comments left by you were [This submission doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. See the guidelines on the notability of people. Please provide more information on why the person or group is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia, and support it by citing published sources that are reliable and independent].I have read the guidelines and have provided worthy,reliable & independent information by citing published sources from popular Urdu language news papers on the web.As i am new to wikipedia i am confused on how to proceed further to improve my article please throw some light on how do i improve the article and what exactly is the reliable,independent information that i have to improve on.Please help me i am struggling to make a contrubution to wikipedia.Thank you. Gulbargrathore (talk) 18:42, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hi Bryce, I sent you an email.

Thanks, Jerine

GriffithJDiane (talk) 05:24, 19 February 2012 (UTC)Jerine 2/18/12

Luiz Palhares article

Bmusician, thank you very much for reviewing my article on Luiz Palhares. I have deleted any terms that might not be considered neutral and also checked a recently approved article on another martial artist Simeone George Pesare for comparison. If there is anything further that I can do, please let me know. FloridaFaye (talk) 15:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Pls review ... I have quoted as many press articles as I could lay my hands on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Group_FMG

173.61.152.230 (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)tgrbengal

viken berberian

Bmusicician, I have reviewed the guidelines and added an additional source (citation 2), which is an extended, full-length profile by Joanna Smith Rakoff of the author in Poets & Writers, one of the largest independent nonprofit literary organizations in the United States. Please also have a look at Citation 1, which lists the author's agent and a partial list of the authors she represents, among them a nobel laureate. There should be more than 25 citations with multiple independent sources, including several from national publications and journals. The award from the CNL (euros 14,000 as the pdf indicates) of the French Ministry of Culture (2009-2010) is an international one; the only one that year given to an American national. The list and nationalities of the authors should be in the cited link. Thank you for reviewing again. Fountainheads, February 20, 2012 --Fountainheads (talk) 05:19, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

'k I'll have a look. --Bmusician 05:39, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

AFD close on List of Air Training Corps squadrons

Quick question - do you use Twinkle or some other tool to close AFD debates? UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 13:14, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I use User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD to close debates. --Bmusician 13:16, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

It seems to have closed the debate and logged it on the article's talk page, but did not actually remove the AFD tag from the article. Not sure why, but thought it might be a scripting thing - and I've been seeing this a lot over the past few weeks, it's not just you. No worries. Thanks! UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 13:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Probably the script crashed...oh well :P --Bmusician 13:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

A script problem? On Wikipedia? No way! Thanks for helping be narrow it down. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:32, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Deletions

Sorry for making mistakes, just trying to get used to patrolling new articles, wasnt quite sure what category Films fitted in too. Just about got the hang of it now, Cheers! Aunty-S (talk) 13:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Replied on your talk. --Bmusician 13:32, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Baron Lilford

Thank you for reverting what that last editor had done, it seems silly to delete it, i was actually expanding the page as you edited it haha (lost my work now) but have re done it! just wanted to say thanks JMRH6 (talk) 13:30, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The last editor was new(ish) to new page patrolling and have made some first-time mistakes...but they have apologized for them. You're welcome. --Bmusician 13:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Please could you do the same for John Powys, 5th Baron Lilford‎ cause its not letting me removed it without the bot kicking in! :(

ThanksJMRH6 (talk) 13:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Done. --Bmusician 13:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! why will it let you remove it and not me? is it cause i did the previous edits? Cheers again! JMRH6 (talk) 13:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. You cannot remove speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself. You can contest the speedy deletion on the article's talk page. --Bmusician 13:42, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bmusician. You have new messages at Nolelover's talk page.
Message added 22:05, 20 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 22:05, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

• Special report: The plight of the new page patrollers

• News and notes: Fundraiser row continues, new director of engineering

• Discussion report: Discussion on copyrighted files from non-US relation states

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Poland

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Civility enforcement closed, proposed decision in TimidGuy, two cases remain open

• Technology report: Major strands of development cycle coalesce as 1.19 is deployed to first wikis

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 22:38, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Igor Bauersima

Hi, could you please be specific on what you're missing? DatMoment (talk) 10:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not missing anything. Were you trying to ask a question regarding this submission? --Bmusician 10:43, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes. What do you think is missing in the submission? Can you be more specific? DatMoment (talk) 21:09, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

The decline rationale and User:Bmusician/AFC states clearly what's missing. Lack of coverage in reliable independent sources. Please provide more information on why this individual is worthy for inclusion on Wikipedia, and do not hesitate to ask me if you need help. --Bmusician 14:03, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. It looks like I need help. I have added more references of independent sources (there's references to books, research, articles about the author etc) than I can find on many other pages. Not sure where to take it from here.DatMoment (talk) 20:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

In case that I wasn't clear in my previous post to you, I'm gladly accepting your offer to help.DatMoment (talk) 20:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

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

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Your a truely good person! Thank you for your help and I wish there was more wikipedia users like you as your qualities on here are a rarity! Very kind, polite and helpful! JMRH6 (talk) 13:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! --Bmusician 00:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Please help!!

The article in question:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/WelicoRuss

I'VE DONE THIS:

"This submission doesn't sufficiently explain the importance or significance of the subject. See the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics. Please provide more information on why this musical artist or musical recording is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia, and support it by citing published sources that are reliable and independent."

I am really getting frustrated with this. I've met at least two of the guidelnes for notability on this article. What else is there?! There are tons of articles on Wikipedia that have been published with less data then I have presented here. I've been going back and forth ad nauseum for at least a month and I've gotten very little meaningful feedback from the admin here. This is the second most famous Black Metal band from Russia, so it's not like I am creating this article on behalf of a bunch of nobodies. PLEASE give me some comprehensive, USEFUL feedback on what I need to do in order for this article to be published so I can move on from here.

S3NT13NT_GL1TCH (talk) 22:48, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I apologize for your frustration. We aren't here to "criticize" your work, but we're here to help. So our main concern is that the article probably fails the notability guidelines for music. As [there are tons of articles on Wikipedia that have been published with... ] please live with the fact that another crap article exists won't help you get your own article accepted. Please cite more reliable third party sources so you can prove that this band is worthy for inclusion on Wikipedia. Of course, I'll be willing to help if you need it. Cheers. --Bmusician 00:59, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Corey Smith (artist)

I don't see any credible claim of significance or importance. --UnQuébécois (talk) 05:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

"Smith has been featured in countless notable print magazines and online sources" is a claim of significance. --Bmusician 05:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Credible claim? I don't see it.--UnQuébécois (talk) 05:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

That is a credible claim of significance, . From WP:CSD#A7: The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. The claim is credible. Also, a list of his exhibitions are supported by reliable sources. --Bmusician 05:48, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

"The criterion does apply if the claim of significance or importance given is not credible." - "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization (for example, a band, club, or company, not including educational institutions), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant." - "This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources"

I do not see a credible claim of significance or importance, it's dubious at best. A credible claim would be along the lines of "x was featured in Time magazine as a pioneer in y"--UnQuébécois (talk) 05:58, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zindagi Games

There is only a single Keep proponent, and four editors advocating deletion. I'm at a loss to understand why this was this relisted even once, let alone twice. Ravenswing 06:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

If an admin feels the debate should be closed, they may feel free to close it. (There are only three delete !votes). --Bmusician 07:26, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bmusician. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk.
Message added 13:30, 21 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

mabdul 13:30, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for jumping in quickly with kind words to support my RfA, which was successful and nearly unanimous. Be among the first to see my L-plate! – Fayenatic L (talk) 13:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome! Good luck! --Bmusician 13:40, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

CONFUSED

Hi,

You declined my page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Emily_Baker - I'm just really confused on several accounts.

1 It was declined the first time for not being adequately supported by reliable, independent sources. I put more in and it was declined again and I was asked to cite my sources using footnotes. After 3 hours I managed this. Then it was declined (by you) for the first reason again!! I assumed that because the second reason was different to the first, then that the sources were now ok!?!? I am quite confused by this...

2 Also there are articles that do neither of what I have been asked - for example Amy Wadge page has two references, her site and the BBC Wales profile site (which is really just a cut and paste of Amy's site) - surely they are primary sources only? It also doesn't have any citations using footnotes, whereas I had to put them in?? There are loads more!!

3 My first three declines were done within a few hours (I think 4 hours most, 1 hour least) - I have now been waiting over 74 hours. I find this strange.

I'm getting quite frustrated with it now - I've spent hours on this (not really 'clever' when it comes to computers), have you any explanations to my confusions...or advice on how this page will be accepted please?

Thank you

Rea

Readominguez (talk) 18:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

1: the majority of sources you "put in" aren't reliable; please take a look at WP:IRS to perceive the difference between reliable sources and unreliable sources. 2. WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is never an excuse for complaining about a declined submission, and I don't tolerate such complaints, so please refrain from doing that again. 3. Articles for Creation is currently backlogged, so please be patient. I hope this helps; please don't hesitate to ask me if you need more help. --Bmusician 03:56, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't a complaint (none of it) - it was a query. As I said, the things above confused me as they seem strange to me. Especially the first point (ie did the second person believe my sources to be fine?). That was all I was querying - sorry if my queries were intolerable. I must also point out that I didn't say the Amy Wadge article was crap (or any other articles), just wondered what the difference was with my article, ie why mine was being declined and that one was in. Just a 'reason' why some needed what I was being asked for and others didn't. I know the AfC is backlogged, I read that - just wondered if there was a specific reason for the massively different time frames. The number of AfC's were going up and down, the differences in the number of AfC each time I looked indicated that if it were done on a first to be submitted, first to be reviewed system, then mine should have been reviewed. Again it was a query...and in no way a complaint.

Readominguez (talk) 00:30, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Natalia_Alonso

I have made additional edits and added more sources. Negative reviews of dancers in companies are very rare, if they exist at all... reviewers tend to keep their comments to the company in general and choreography. This explains why all the quotes are positive. How can I make this article more neutral, if this is still an issue?

Cannons10 (talk) 20:45, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Bmusician. You have new messages at Mabdul's talk page.
Message added 12:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

mabdul 12:55, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Blocking

Hi. I note you have been getting involved in the unblock request at User talk:Ranjith92. However, you do not appear to be sufficiently familiar with Wikipedia's unblocking policies and guidelines, and have made two inappropriate comments.

• Your claim that indefinitely blocked editors are rarely unblocked was just plain wrong.
• The "Standard offer" is generally used for longer term troublemakers who wish to turn over a new leaf, and is not immediately slapped on newcomers whose only failing is likely to be unfamiliarity with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

Dealing with problematic newcomers can be a delicate matter, and it is for that reason that reviews of unblock requests are handled by admins, whose record has led them to be trusted by the community to handle such things.

Of course, non-admins are welcome to join in with unblock discussions, but they really do need to properly understand Wikipedia's blocking policies. Making false statements and inappropriate recommendations is only likely to confuse a new editor rather than help us towards the optimum outcome - attracting the maximum number of productive editors to the project.

So can I respectfully suggest that you do not involve yourself in unblock request discussions until you are sufficiently familiar with the relevant policies and guidelines. If there is any help I can offer you in this general area, please feel free to ask me at any time. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

WP:UNBLOCK and WP:BLOCK have been sufficiently reviewed. Sorry, Bmusician 14:16, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Reviewing those two policy pages is a very good start. But if unblock review is an area you wish to work in (perhaps leading to adminship some day?), I'd strongly recommend you spend some time observing the way experienced people deal with them first, to get a good feel for the way policies are put into practice. I don't claim to be an expert unblock reviewer myself, but I did spend a very long time watching how others more experience that me dealt with such things before I started work in that area - and I learned a lot more from them then I did from the policies themselves. Anyway, as I say, I'd be very happy to help you in this area if it's something you're interested in - my Talk door is always open -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:24, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay. I will take your advice seriously. It's an area I'm interested in. --Bmusician 01:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Mark Amos

Gday Bryce,

You proposed that an article I created on Mark Amos should be deleted as their were no references. I've added refernces but their is still a notification on the page that the article could be deleted. I was just wondering when that will be taken off of the page? User:E_Con211

(edit conflict) There is a discussion, here, that will last for seven days, which will decide whether or not the page will be deleted. The notification is not to be taken off while the discussion is in place. Regards, Bmusician 02:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Goha.Ru Submission Review

Hey Bryce, I've added more links that back up the information on the page, to a point where everything is backed by an inline reference. Could you take a look at it again?

Thanks, Tataxfn (talk) 18:41, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

sorry about loss

im sorry about your loss i hope that you feel better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.12.108 (talk) 20:29, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

It's fine, thank you. --Bmusician 00:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

you know could you help me with attacking vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.12.108 (talk) 03:56, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Log in to your account first and we can get started. You know, vandalism patrol is easier with Twinkle, and you can only be logged it to install it. Cheers, Bmusician 04:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

im sorry but my dad changed my password but i could make a new account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.12.108 (talk) 04:38, 26 February 2012 (UTC) i have created an account walter55024. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter55024 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

following up

Hello, Bmusician. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

GriffithJDiane (talk) 23:55, 25 February 2012 (UTC)Jerine

help me!

well for some reason people are accuseing me of sock puppetry!--Walter55024 (talk) 23:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Where? --Bmusician 02:24, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh I see User talk:RHaworth#walter55024. But don't worry about it. Absolutely nothing will happen to your account if you do not engage in trolling or other bad behavior. Good luck! --Bmusician 12:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Regarding article 'Akash Rajpal'

Dear Editor, You have mentioned that the references are not notable / reliable. However all notable references are provided. For example: Hindustan times is a leading newspaper in India. Express healthcare is a leading healthcare publication of the highly reputed Indian Express Newspaper group in India Imecca is the mexican congress of international malcolm balrdridge quality award. It represent the Asia Pacific Quality awards in Mexico. NABH is the national quality body of Indian GOvernment which outlines best quality practices and standards for Healthcare in india.

I would request you to reconsider the above references and allow a Indian Quality professional to be studied and researched further by wikipedia. I see very very few Indian quality professionals on wikipedia.

Thanks. Your acceptance will encourage me to research further and contribute more to wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.62.186.229 (talk) 18:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

• News and notes: Finance meeting fallout, Gardner recommendations forthcoming

• Recent research: Gender gap and conflict aversion; collaboration on breaking news; effects of leadership on participation; legacy of Public Policy Initiative

• Discussion report: Focus on admin conduct and editor retention

• WikiProject report: Just don't call it "sci-fi": WikiProject Science Fiction

• Featured content: By plane, by ship, and by stagecoach: Featured content goes trekking this week

• Arbitration report: Final decision in TimidGuy ban appeal, one case remains open

• Technology report: 1.19 deployment stress, Meta debates whether to enforce SUL

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 00:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

joining

hello bmusician theres a disccuion on a talk page go to walter55024s talk page and you will find a link to the disccuion.This is the link:User Talk:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Walter55024--Walter55024 (talk) 01:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Things crashing to earth

Thanks. 68.107.135.146 (talk) 01:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. What for? --Bmusician 01:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

[1] Minor, but useful. 68.107.135.146 (talk) 02:47, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

It's a plausible search term, so a redirect such as that is helpful. (You're welcome) --Bmusician 03:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For giving Moral Support to TheAustinMan in his RfA !!! Yasht101 09:26, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. --Bmusician 10:48, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

• News and notes: Chapter-selected Board seats, an invite to the Teahouse, patrol becomes triage, and this week in history

• In the news: Heights reached in search rankings, privacy and mental health info; clouds remain over content policing

• Discussion report: COI and NOTCENSORED: policies under discussion

• WikiProject report: We don't bite: WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles

• Featured content: Best of the week

• Arbitration report: AUSC appointments announced, one case remains open

• Technology report: With the 1.19 deployment now (mostly) complete, developers consider possible "mini" deployment later in the month

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 15:38, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Very kind to the new guys! =) ZappaOMati (talk) 01:38, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! --Bmusician 01:57, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Request article for Kelly Sullivan American Actress

Hi I requested an Article be created for Kelly Sullivan an American actress who currently is working on the ABC Soap Opera General Hospital. I was instructed to add her name to the list for Requested Articles. under Entertainment Actors. I filed it on March 7th but upon returning tonight her name was no longer listed.

There is another Kelly Sullivan who is a American painter but the Kelly I want to add is someone completely different. Can you help. Thanks

I don't know what I keep doing wrong but I can't seem to get a page added for her lol. Allen.corrina (talk) 06:09, 10 March 2012 (UTC)Allen.corrina

Hi. I don't work at Wikipedia:Requested articles and am currently on a business trip so I cannot solve your problem. I'll try to see what I can do, however. --Bmusician 10:59, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

• Interview: Liaising with the Education Program

• Women and Wikipedia: Women's history, what we're missing, and why it matters

• Arbitration analysis: A look at new arbitrators

• News and notes: Sue Gardner tackles the funds, and the terms of use update nears implementation

• In the news: Britannica runs out of print as Jimmy Wales anointed UK transparency tsar

• Discussion report: Nothing changes as long discussions continue

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Women's History

• Featured content: Extinct humans, birds, and Birdman

• Arbitration report: Proposed decision in 'Article titles', only one open case

• Education report: Diverse approaches to Wikipedia in Education

• Technology report: Git learning curve steep but not insurmountable, plus a diff style we can all agree on?

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:19, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

PAGEANT THE MOVIE

Hi...I don't understand your reason for declining based upon lack of adequate sources or reliable ones? I am new to this but...IMDB, reviews in the Village Voilce, from the Sundance Channel, Cinemaqueer... Are those not all reliable and prove the information that I submitted? I'm sorry to seem thick but aren't those ok?

Thanks for any help.

Bonchic (talk) 12:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)BonchicBonchic (talk) 12:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

First things first...please use a level two header when leaving me a new message ok? I declined your submission because it didn't have any references; if you need help citing them, please see WP:REFB. Please don't hesitate to contact me or post at the help desk if you have any more questions. (IMDb is not considered reliable.) Bmusician 12:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arpad Haraszthy

Hi-- I am afraid I am confused. I have written an article titled Arpad Haraszthy. I tried to submit it (or thought I did), but perhaps I didn't do it correctly. I see a note to the effect that it was deleted and another to the effect that it was never submitted. As I say, I am confused. The article seems to me to meet all Wikipedia requirements and should be approved. I has reliable, independent references. Please tell me if I need to do something I am not doing, or how I can get the article approved. I have posted threee other Wikipedia articles that were accepted. Thank you. March 17, 2012. Americanulex Americanuslex (talk) 17:32, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I think you did nothing wrong, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Arpad Haraszthy is currently submitted for review. If that is not the problem you are having, please tell me. Bmusician 00:32, 17 March 2012 (UTC)