User talk:IainUK/Archive 1

Archive 1

Re: Deletion of 'Mark Carder'

Hi Ian,

I can restore it, but in the state it was in when I deleted it 2 years ago, it wouldn't pass a deletion discussion. Considering the scrutiny Biographies of Living Persons are under, it would be unwise to restore it in this state (it is entirely unreferenced). Could you please find some references about Mr Carder's work? Alternatively, I can offer to restore the page in your user space so you can work on it before we move it back in the Encyclopedia. Cheers! -- Luk ^talk 13:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I have restored it at User:IainUK/Mark Carder. As you can see, it is definitely not ready for prime time yet ;). Good luck! Note that I'll delete it in a few weeks if it remains untouched :). -- Luk ^talk 20:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Stone

This is the full version of a conversation which took place on User:Bwilkins' talkpage. The conversation has been subsequently modified on BWilkins talkpage and this is the full version as can be verified here.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Please check the article history before making speedy deletion requests - speedy deletion has already been requested and denied. Thanks. (Also, I have to say, notability is very clear in the article) IainUK (talk) 09:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Uh, I can't see where Bwilkins made a speedy deletion request? TFOWR 09:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Plus, a declined CSD does not mean it's a valid article: it means that the criteria for speedy deletion was not met. That does not mean it's a valid article on Wikipedia, and as such it is up for deletion discussion by the community. Please see WP:DELETE. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:55, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

If you want to put it up for deletion discussion that's fine - due to this man's frequent media activities, various prime-time national TV appearances, and band membership, there is no doubt he is a notable candidate for inclusion in Wikipedia and I struggle to understand why you would want to delete the article. IainUK (talk) 10:01, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

He meets none as per the current article. You assert that he does, but never prove it. All biographies of living persons must include 3rd party reliable sources when created, or else they can be immediately removed under a different speedy criteria. You either fix the article, or it will go quickly...the 7 days of the AFD will give you time to fix it, won't it? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:04, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Already done :) If all you wanted was references added, you could have asked me instead of nominating it for deletion. Or if you had added the 'no references' box at the top of the page, like others do when they see a page which just needs references, I would have rectified it straight away. You should only nominate an article for deletion if you really believe it should be deleted. IainUK (talk) 10:20, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I believe that it should be deleted. If it was only about ref's, I'd fix it myself - contrary to your snotty comments on the AFD. In my opinion, there's nothing about this dance teacher, or his studio, or even his little show that warrant an encyclopedia entry - and policy appears to support it, which is why it's under deletion discussion (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:29, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

BWilkins, do you really think it is right to delete an article because you don't like the subject? The question should not be, 'do you like Andrew Stone?', the question should be 'do you believe this subject requires an article on wikipedia?'. I'm not trying to be 'snotty' as you say, but I do feel that you are acting in bad spirit and that this sort of behaviour is detrimental to the wikipedia project. I am not interested in your personal views on Andrew Stone, but the fact that you live in Canada and know who he is kinda proves my notability point. IainUK (talk) 10:36, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Are you able to read? Did I say I "didn't like the subject"? I had never heard of him until this morning, and the research I have done in the past hour fails to show he deserves any notice on Wikipedia, as per policy. THAT is why he's AfD'd (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 10:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

You've done research now? When I type "Andrew Stone" into google.com from the UK, every single result on the first three pages relates to this Andrew Stone. Also, the studios he works in has an article, the TV show he is on has an article... far be it from me to question your ability to do research, but I seem to have uncovered more in 7 seconds than you claim to have done in an hour. I don't like the constant personal tone and insults you use - you appear to be a very well experienced user so please act like one. I don't take this personally at all - I know you don't know me - my only passion here is the benefit of wikipedia, to protect what it is, and to give people access to the information they need, and to prevent trigger-happy deletists from ruining the project to satisfy their own ends. IainUK (talk) 11:15, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Final statements

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

You both agreed to move on, and you have had several "final statements" each now. Please actually try disengaging for a while, and keep all the discussions on the topic of the article in question at the AfD. It isn't helpful to have debates spilling all over the place onto ANI and multiple talk pages. --Taelus (Talk) 12:32, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

---

Please be aware that all of my contributions are available here in the exact way that I said them. In this edit you claim that I said one thing, when I quite clearly did not state that, as can be seen from my contributions. The first time you "put words in my mouth" was on a validly-filed AfD, and you were asked not to. I should not have to ask further. You're very welcome to properly defend yourself, but making stuff up certainly does not help.

Also be aware that all conversations on my talkpage are archived regularly. Even if I were to "remove" something, it will forever exist on Wikipedia. If you wait long enough, the unfortunate conversation you unfortunately escalated on my talkpage will be archived. I will not perform or permit modifications to it, as your statements were never altered in any way, nor are there currently any violations of WP:NPA on it, as has been confirmed by others.

I will also (for the umpteenth time) reiterate: according to Wikipedia policy, any biography of a living person must contain valid reliable sources at the time of creation, or it must be deleted. That, and only that is the reason it was submitted for WP:AFD. I do not desire to "have my way", I merely enforce policy. When I ask you to read a policy, I do expect you to do so before replying. It is frustrating as hell when you escalate situations merely because you do not read them, and then react improperly.

It is unfortunate that you failed to follow simple steps, simple requests, and did not read simple policies. You certainly could have avoided all of the attention you have received.

Know this: I am not childish, nor do I hold grudges. In fact, I cannot hold a grudge against someone who's only "sins" were to not read thing, and then fail to do what you had been asked, which was to stay off my talkpage and keep deletion discussions in one place where they belong.

I expect that you have actually taken the time now to read and understand the policies - as such, you will have learned much. The frustration remains that I politely and clearly led you towards how to work with the Afd - you seem to have taken the deletion discussion personally against me - again, all I do is uphold policy and the policy is clear, as stated above. Once you look back, you will recognize that I have actually done nothing that is against policy, nor against the community, nor against you.

If you choose to edit as per policy, act collegially, do not attempt to take ownership of articles, and most importantly do not take things personally, then I am certain you will have success on Wikipedia. That said, if you choose instead to take a different route and be the exact opposite, then things will not go as smoothly.

I will paraphrase my first paragraph due to its importance: don't make shit up. I will also paraphrase my last paragraph: I sincerely wish you the best on Wikipedia.

(talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:43, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I regret that you have totally misjudged me and my intentions, and I regret that you are not willing to archive the conversation in its true form, but I appreciate the (partly) good intention in your post and would like to forget about it. IainUK talk 18:16, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Obviously, based on your copy/paste above (which is against policy), I judged you quite well. Well done showing that you've learned and "moved on". The conversation as it appears on my talkpage is the sole "true form" - you don't get the "last say". You had been told to have all discussions regarding the deletion in one place (the AfD). (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:11, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

You only told me to discuss it at the AfD after you had already reverted my reply and then archived the conversation. People can see the conversation and the edits you have made to it and can make their own mind up. The history shows you removed my last comment before closing the conversation. I do not need to show I have "learned" as there has been nothing for me to learn. Now every time I tried to talk to you in a civil manner, you deleted my posts stating "Vandalism". I won't go down there, but please stop talking to me about this because like I have told you already, I would rather just forget about it. IainUK talk 11:22, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Additionally, as I said to Bwilkins, if this issue continues despite these closures please give me a poke on my talk page. Regards, --Taelus (Talk) 12:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

How was I found?

I am new to Wikipedia. I am a "mature" person (something like three decades of professional writing and editing for newspapers, private publishers and non-profits), but I am pretty clueless about Wikipedia. How did you "find" me working on a small site? I am rather thrilled at being "found" but just wondering how it works. Oh, you asked me to be polite... Yes, of course! Moorebridges (talk) 23:04, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Moorebridges nice to meet you :) I "found" you by clicking the Recent changes link on the left column, and looking at new users - it shows a list of all edits made by new users, so that fellow Wikipedians can patrol the edits, or simply welcome new users! The links on your talk page should be helpful, and if there is anything I can help you with feel free to ask me and I'll do my best... cheers IainUK talk 23:14, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:55, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

UGG Australia AfD

It's clear from the discussion that you have some strong feelings about what the Ugg boots article should contain and to that extent, I agree with you. Why don't you help out with the Ugg boots article? Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 09:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Phoenix and Winslow thanks for your message. I don't know much about Ugg boots or the trademark issues surrounding them - but from a WP:NPOV I do feel that everything should be in one article. The fact that in Australia there are other companies who legitimately produce Ugg boots does not take away the significance of the brand. It is highly notable information, and although I'm no expert - I will see if I can do anything to help improve the article. Sometimes it does help to have an outsider involved, especially when it comes to WP:NPOV. Cheers IainUK talk 10:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

IainUK, you are cordially invited to participate in mediation here. Phoenix and Winslow (talk) 00:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Don't cut-and-paste move

Please do not move pages by cutting-and-pasting in the future; use the built-in "move" tab instead. Cut-and-paste moves mess up attribution history, thus violating Wikipedia's copyright license. When an existing page blocks a move, use {{db-move}} or WP:Requested moves, as appropriate. --Cybercobra (talk) 21:31, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Ok IainUK talk 21:50, 19 February 2011 (UTC)