User talk:MadeYourReadThis/Archives/2009/November

SteveSwindells

Hi Radiofan, I noticed you merging the olive article and I was wondering what could be done for this article Steve Swindells it was also raised as coi at the BNP noticeboard, I am just looking for an experienced opinion or idea. e.g., regarding merge, delete or repair. Off2riorob (talk) 14:27, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't look especially notable. I'll prod it and see what happens.--RadioFan (talk) 14:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll keep my eye on it. Off2riorob (talk) 14:41, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments on article Mariló López Garrido

Hi RadioFan Thank you for checking article Mariló López Garrido for me (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariló_López_Garrido). I am new to Wikipedia and so I welcome your comments to make sure the article is good. I have replaced the wikipedia reference with an external reference. I hope the article looks good now. Thank you, Arteylocura (talk) 14:26, 3 November 2009 (UTC)arteylocuraArteylocura (talk) 14:26, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into additional references but unfortunately that isn't going to help establish notability here. Blogs are generally not considered reliable sources. If there are newspaper articles, magazine features or even better, books about this person, they will make much better references for the article. I'm only finding a single mention in a single book via Google book searching and no hits via Google news. Maybe I'm making the name to restrictive, can you help here? Also, since you are new, be sure to look at the welcome message at the top of your talk page, it contains links to some great information on getting started. --RadioFan (talk) 15:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Reading Southern railway station

Does Reading Southern railway station look better now? Mind, I've still not used all my books to produce passages, hence the "Further reading" section. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:38, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

new to wiki

RadioFan,

I have no clue how to use wiki I guess, but I am trying to put my bands on here for my label (Keeper Records), we have released two records from kansas, and done a split with INIT records, from SD. How can I make my page for POLAROPPOSITEbear legit? And then for the three other bands I have? What tags, codes or other things do I need? I am so confused with all the jargon. Thanks you for your help

Mathyoulynn (talk)Matthew Wiseman —Preceding undated comment added 03:36, 5 November 2009 (UTC).

First off, welcome to Wikipedia. You should read WP:BAND, it outlines the guidelines used to determine notability of bands. Those that dont meet those guidelines are deleted as was the case with PolarOPPOSITEbear. I dont see this subject meeting guidelines for inclusion.--RadioFan (talk) 12:35, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

What are those other bands?--RadioFan (talk) 12:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

POPAI

Hi, I am new in Wikipedia. My profile is deleted. I am the president of POPAI Turkish chapter. POPAI is a non profit US organization with a 7.000 members with 20 country offices in the world. We are helping the Point of Purchase Industry with organizations, researches,education,seminars etc worldwide. I personally coud not find many of the items, articles and related information in Wikipedia regarding our Industry. I intened to start this initiative so our memeber or other industry interested people may find sources in Wikipedia. I added another my article which has been issued in sector magazines has been deleted as well.. I appreciate if you may let these article and profile free to issue so industry may start the find related sources.

Thanks

Volkan Keskinoglu

Volkan Keskinoglu (talk) 18:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

First off, please create a new section when adding to a user talk page, it makes it much easier to keep the conversations straight. Secondly, please include the article you are talking about. I'm assuming you are talking about Volkan keskinoglu. There are number of problems with this article, it is in Turkish (though I'm about to replace that text with a very rough translation), this is an English encyclopedia. Also the subject does not meet notabilty guidelines. The article is written as an open letter rather than an encyclopedic article.--RadioFan (talk) 21:59, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:KLTQ logo.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KLTQ logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 22:03, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Guitar Vader

Did you even read the Guitar Vader article? It clear cites third party websites...

If this is unacceptable I would like a few examples as to what would be acceptable, as in LIST me wiki articles about bands and their albums. -Thanks Spaghettaboutit (talk) 03:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

These websites do not constitute the kind of significant coverage prescribed by WP:GNG and WP:BAND. There first reference is of unclear reliability. The others are primary sources (the record company and the band itself). This does not demonstrate notability.--RadioFan (talk) 03:15, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:WKMX logo.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WKMX logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 18:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:WLMS logo.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WLMS logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 23:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Altered Speedy Deletion rationale: Churchwall

Hello RadioFan, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I have deleted a page you tagged (Churchwall) under a criterion different from the one your provided, which was inappropriate or incorrect. CSD criteria are narrow and specific to protect the encyclopedia, and the process is more effective if the correct deletion rationale is supplied. Consider reviewing the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Thanks again! NW (Talk) 23:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Dynamo Moscow

Hi there! You've recently prodded Dynamo Moscow (women’s basketball), a stub I created minutes before that. What is the procedure to challenge the prodding? Maybe you can send it to AfD or something? I am adding some info from interwikis, but don't have time and desire to do much. Thanks, Yury Petrachenko (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Please read the tag, there are instructions there. If you are not interested in properly referencing the article, please refrain from creating it.--RadioFan (talk) 16:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

BeachTech

Can you please tell me why exactly you erased the BeachTech article? During my last beach holiday I have seen the use of the BeachTech beach cleaning vehicles and wanted to write an article about them on wikipedia. Before then I have never heard about such machines and wanted to inform other people about them. This is my first input on wikipedia and I would like to learn more about the editing of articles. I don´t quite understand, seeing as the "H. Barber and Sons" article neither gives any other informations about the company nor their products!? Thanks very much in advance for your help.

Greetings Sandy-gurl84 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandy-gurl84 (talk • contribs) 16:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

To be accurate, I deleted nothing. I marked BeachTech for review by an administrator who agreed that it did not meet guidelines for inclusion on Wikipedia. H. Barber and Sons differs from BeachTech because it makes some claim of notability and most importantly provides some references demonstrating its notability. H. Barber and Sons is far froma model article but it has enough of the required elements to avoid deletion, unlike BeachTech. I've added some welcome information to your talk page with additional useful information.--RadioFan (talk) 16:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

David E. Baker

I replaced the {{db-nocontext}} tag that you placed on David E. Baker with a {{db-bio}}. Clearly there is enough context to identify the subject (he's a producer of named films -- there's enough to look him up). However, his bio contains false assertions (the awards that were claimed cannot be verified), and without those assertions, the bio has insufficient notability. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Kuhn's Quality Foods

Some references have been added to Kuhn's Quality Foods You may wish to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kuhn's Quality Foods -- Eastmain (talk) 19:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Nominator withdrew (rightly), not much else to say there.--RadioFan (talk) 19:59, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Julie child kitchen.jpg

File:Julie child kitchen.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Julie child kitchen.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Julie child kitchen.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 17:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Carmiooro A Style

Can you please explain why you have decided to tag the Carmiooro cycling team stub I created? Jorge da silva goncalves —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jorge da silva goncalves (talk • contribs) 19:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

As the prod tag indicates. it's not clear how this might meet notability guidelines. References from only a single source are there and there is no claim of notabilty, just that it exists.--RadioFan (talk) 19:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Miss India CT

Hi, I added multiple 3rd party references, see if this is ok Wikiuser7777 (talk) 15:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Nomination of Battalion Nemesis

Why is my article prone to speedy deletion? It is under construction, and even though it is under constrcution it still has content (few) it has about the same amount of content of a stub article. But, it is under construction! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesuzfreak777 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Please read the tag, it's not speedy deletion but a proposed deletion. Under construction or not, I dont see how this subject is notable but you are free to remove the tag if you feel it has been improved sufficently to meet WP:GNG. It may be brought up for a deletion discussion however, especially if there are not sufficient references to reliable sources present in the article.--RadioFan (talk) 03:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Maria Anna Fesemayr

Hello RadioFan, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Maria Anna Fesemayr - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. NW (Talk) 01:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:850 buzz logo.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:850 buzz logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 06:34, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:WWHI logo.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WWHI logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 06:47, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:WAFN logo.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WAFN logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 06:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:IMPACT

Thank you so much for this!-Blargh29 (talk) 16:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure, its a nice essay that will make explaining prods, AFDs and other actions a bit easier to explain. Good job.--RadioFan (talk) 16:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Credit Unions

Hello. I declined your speedy deletion requests for the various credit union articles. Although you're probably right that they are not article-worthy, speedy deletion is only for uncontestably obvious cases and the long-standing nature of some of the articles is sufficient to give me pause. I'm afraid you'll have to use WP:PROD or AfD if you wish to pursue deletion. CIreland (talk) 17:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

While I disagree with your decision and see these as clear-cut cases, as have other admins who have speedily deleted similar articles tagged today, I respect your decision and will take them to prod or AFD.--RadioFan (talk) 22:00, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hermann Josef Hack

Please make an attempt to locate suitable references for an article before tagging it for prod or AfD. I was able to find quite rapidly several references for Hermann Josef Hack using http://news.google.com/archivesearch It is better to improve a weak article on a notable topic than to delete it. -- Eastmain (talk) 02:20, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

deletion of bank article

why in the world would you want to delete an article like that?Bachcell (talk) 03:42, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Without the article you are talking about, I cant answer your question very specifically. In general, all articles must meet general notability guidelines The problem was likely that it lacked coverage in 3rd party sources and probably had no references. All articles must have good references to demonstrate notability, despite what some may claim, this is not optional.--RadioFan (talk) 09:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Alon Stivi

Hello RadioFan, and thanks for your help there. It looks better now. Have a good day :) --Vejvančický (talk) 13:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for your additions as well. Let's keep an eye on it for a few days to keep it from becoming a POI Linkfarm again.--RadioFan (talk) 13:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Fort Worth Museum of Science and History

Hi. This article came due for closure today at WP:CP. On investigation, I see that your edit here restored copyrighted material to publication. The material "During its first 40 years, the museum was a quiet place where one could dream of the past or contemplate the future in relative solitude" and subsequent is also present at that official site. The copyright violation was first introduced here.

When material has been tagged as a copyvio, we need to be especially careful in addressing it. Restoring it to publication once it is tagged opens both us and the project to potential charges of contributory infringement. In this particular case, I suspect there's no real danger of that, because I suspect that the person who placed the text is affiliated with the source, but because the Wikimedia Foundation has chosen to be conservative about copyright and require verification of identity when material has been previously published, we have to treat every instance of text duplication as unauthorized and address it with the same level of care. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

This was inadvertant as I was reverting edits to remove other copyrighted material at the time.--RadioFan (talk) 17:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Photo of Ken Ober

Hello. I think the Ken Ober that you uploaded was taken from page of my web site. I disable right clicking for a reason; I do not appreciate anyone using my content without my permission. Please remove the picture at once. (24.18.252.32 (talk) 03:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC))

The image was taken from wire photos credited to MTV. It appeared in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Examiner newspapers, Fox News, and many other news sources last night. I'll gladly update the image uploaded to Wikipedia to show the URL of your site for this screen snapshot from the show if you like.--RadioFan (talk) 03:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Wow. I owe you an apology. I know that originally came from my site, so I figured you swiped it since you uploaded it here. I am sorry for that. If you would update the upload file, I would apreciate that. (24.18.252.32 (talk) 03:25, 18 November 2009 (UTC))

No worries, sorry for the trouble. Those wire services may have taken the photo from your site, but as a screenshot, it appears to be rightly attributed to MTV rather that your site.--RadioFan (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Removed speedy deletion tag: How to be a spy

Hi RadioFan! Firstly, thanks for helping out in CSD areas. I just wanted to inform you that I removed the speedy deletion tag you placed on How to be a spy- because: page is not nonsense; as it is not a random muddle of characters or words, and is understandable If you have any questions or other message, please contact me. Thanks Kingpin¹³ (talk) 13:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I disagree. While it may not be someone mashing their hands on the keyboard, it's clearly a nonsense article. However I will take it to prod instead.--RadioFan (talk) 13:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

With apologies for the talkpage stalking, I agree with RadioFan. I have prod2'ed it. Syrthiss (talk) 13:07, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I agree that PROD is better, so I've already tagged it as such. But please remember that CSD G1 (as per WP:PN) only refers to random characters, or a word salad. I personally don't think this article is either. Anyway, thanks for your otherwise great NPPing, you always seem to be at Special:NewPages tagging CSD and PROD :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 13:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

More talk page stalking.... I ask myself "What would I do if the author removed the prod?" Answer: I'd just delete it and put "IAR deletion" as the rationale because there is no way I'm prepared to waste people's time at AfD with this. CIreland (talk) 13:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Removed speedy - Unity bainbridge

Hey there, just FYI I removed your speedy tag on Unity bainbridge. In the 10-15 minutes after you added the tag, the creator added enough content to get by the criteria. Cheers! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:27, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Scope Map Professional

An article that you have been involved in editing, Scope Map Professional , has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scope Map Professional. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Favonian (talk) 14:38, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia's licensing requirements

Hi. I note that you removed the Corensearchbot tag from a now deleted version of Wireless Commons License with a note that [1] "appears to have a compatible license". Material licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 is not compatible, because it does not permit commercial reproduction and WP:CC-BY-SA does. There is a chart of compatible licenses at the Copyright FAQ which you might find helpful in your patrolling of new articles. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

thanks for correction, I get it now.--RadioFan (talk) 17:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I do a lot with this stuff. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:53, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:WMSX logo.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WMSX logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 03:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:WNMH logo.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WNMH logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 03:36, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: What is architecture

You are generating unnecessary work for people. It is obvious that an editor added the search term "what is architecture", found nothing, and created an article about it. It should be redirected to Architecture, not sent to Afd. I'm curious if you even stopped to think about this. Viriditas (talk) 04:27, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Slow down there. Did you stop to look at the history? I redirected this article to Architecture within minutes of it being created only to have the original creator of the article revert those changes. I then sent it to prod instead and placed a notice on the editors talk page which was quickly removed by that same editor. This is likely a new editor who is stubbornly trying to protect what they've written and unfamiliar with Wikipedia process. This isn't a clear case of vandalism so our only choice here is AFD. AFD tags are not to be removed while the discussion is in process, regardless of the situation.--RadioFan (talk) 13:26, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Revolver

The song has been confirmed by Warner Music Netherlands as the second single lifted from Celebration. It sais in the source. As the moment of the release gets closer, the more info will appear. For now, that's all, but since it was confirmed, there is no need to delete it just because it has little information. Alecsdaniel (talk) 14:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Was there something specific in WP:NSONGS that you feel makes this song eligible for a dedicated Wikipedia article? If not, it needs to be redirected to the artist's page until sufficient 3rd party coverage exists.--RadioFan (talk) 14:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

No, it needs to redirect to the album where the song appears. Your edit here makes no sense. Please try to think these things through. If you need help, feel free to ask members of the corresponding WikiProjects. That's what I and many others do. Otherwise, you are making extra work for people by always cleaning up after your edits. If you aren't sure about something, ask. Viriditas (talk) 07:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Rhaune Laslett - Notting Hill Carnival

Notability is already established and reliable sources are provided already - is there a possibility that some wikipedians are too quick to apply labels without understanding the article involved - BorisAndDoris (talk) 20:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

These tags have been restored to the article. This person's notability is still not clear from the referencing style used and it does not meet guidelines for inclusion at present. However, we can leave the tags there for a few days, if citations to significant coverage in 3rd party reliable sources cannot be located and added to the article, it may be deleted. --RadioFan (talk) 22:38, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." - Wikipedia:Notability (people) A brief look at Google:Books shows 25 entries for Rhaune Laslett, a short search of the articles or book mentioned will reveal sources. It is much easier to apply a tag than to do some constructive editing, guidelines are not rules and open to interpretation, if an article can be improved then please make suggestions or do the editing that is required but don't apply tags without discussion first.BorisAndDoris (talk) 08:29, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Boris, have you considered merging the information into Notting Hill Carnival until you have enough for a separate article? If you have multiple sources for biographical information, then yes, keep it, but if you don't, I would recommend a merge and redirect to the parent article. Viriditas (talk) 08:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Kool Savas

I have no idea why you would try to delete this page. It is in 10 different Wikipedias. Perhaps you should do the research tags yourself; this is a team effort here. Tfine80 (talk) 04:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: PBS idents

Withdrawn there seems to be strong feelings that this article should be kept. Instead of continuing this discussion, let's focus on improving it, especially with the references above. I'll leave it for a few days. Anything left unreferenced after that can be removed from the article which will resolve the concerns about excessive length and details in the article.

No, that is not acceptable. The prod didn't work, the three AfD's all ended in snow keeps, and you should probably stay away from the article for a while, or simply confine yourself to using the talk page and making suggestions. You do not get to make a royal decree declaring that everything can be removed after a few days, simply because you say so. You are showing signs of obsession, and unless you are ready and willing to do active research on this topic, you should not be removing anything. Furthermore, the outcome of the AfD had nothing to do with "strong feelings" but with your inability to provide a valid rationale for deletion. Viriditas (talk) 07:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I have a very strong reason, the lack of citations to reliable sources for 90% of the article. Without these citations, the information is essentially original research. These references are not optional. It's no royal decree it's Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. Any editor may challenge any unreferenced material. --RadioFan (talk) 16:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

You were pointed to citations in the AfD discussion, and there does not appear to be any "original research" in the article. Do you understand what OR is, RadioFan? And as far as challenging the material, that's exactly what I asked you to do on the talk page. Of course, you need to be able to challenge it, not simply say, "it lacks cites". You really should not be editing this article unless you can take some time to do actual research and fact-check it. Your obsession with deleting it has gotten to the point where you are no longer in the right frame of mind. After three snow keeps, you need to backdown and take a seat and use the talk page. Viriditas (talk) 22:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I putr up a page for 8 hours to work on next day and some fascist bins it

Wikip[edia has world wide scope . I find it a bit rich that Americans think that their idea of what is famous enough gets applied to us in Thailand. Thor Halland is an English Guy with a great deal of face time on Thai TV .what would some American know about it ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guardian reader (talk • contribs) 10:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I can appreciate your frustration but ease up a bit. This has nothing to do with the nationality of the editors involved, the subject of the biography or the country where he is known. All articles must meet notability guidelines and this article has been deleted 3 times becasue it has not measured up, including a deletion discussion where 9 editors unanimously agreed that this person did not meet guidelines for inclusion. Wikipedia's (not America's) idea of "famous" is pretty well spelled out and it's your responsibility as the editor adding the article to provide sufficient references to demonstrate that notability. If there were sufficient Thai sources available that show him as famous in that country, why weren't they added? Non-English sources are fine as long as they are verifiable. But sufficient sources were not there after several opportunities to add them so the article was deleted.--RadioFan (talk) 15:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hunger

Hi -- I just created Hunger (motivational state) as a copy-paste fork, and you reverted it to a redirect. I am trying to split the article in two -- there is consensus to do so on Talk:Hunger, and as far as I know I am going about it correctly -- I asked a question at WP:AN#how to properly fork an artice?, and I believe I am following the advice given. Can I go ahead? Regards, Looie496 (talk) 19:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't realize it was a split effort. Appeared just to be someone cutting and pasting.--RadioFan (talk) 19:32, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I probably should have used the word "split" in the edit summary -- this is my first attempt at article-splitting, and it's a bit complicated. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 19:35, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

WOKE radio

I don't understand this article. It looks like it's the WPKE-FM article with a few details that are different. Is there any evidence this station is now or ever was WOKE?Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

For now, I think the radio station in Garrison, Kentucky deserves its own article.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:13, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Removed prod from Coachwhips

Hi there, just letting you know I've removed the proposed deletion tag from the article because they seem to meet criteria 5 of WP:BAND. They have released a few records with Narnack Records, which has been around for a number of years with some notable acts (including Sonic Youth and Lee "Scratch" Perry who won a Grammy in 2003). If you still feel it should be deleted you should consider AfD, thanks. -- Atama頭 23:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I find Narnack Records of questionable notability and Coachwhips questionable as well but will leave it to be improved for a while before considering AFD.--RadioFan (talk) 01:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd need your help.

I have to make sure where you're from.Are you english nature speaker?If the answer is yes,then I'd need you to solve my grammartical problems.By the way,my spelling is very bad.--俠刀行 (talk) 09:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd be glad to help as would many other Wikipedia editors. If you add {{helpme}} to your talk page with some details about what you need including the article you are working on, you might get a faster response.--RadioFan (talk) 13:03, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi RadioFan. Hope you don't think I'm butting in but I came here after your RfA (to add some moral support, basically) and I couldn't help but notice this plea from ?? here. I checked it out a little and have left a message at his talkpage, explaining that the level of help he needs in English is beyond the scope of editors here, and to suggest he get stuck in over at the Simple English wiki instead. Your courteous response and willingness is admirable but, from what I've seen, the amount of assistance he would need to get by here could be overwhelming and the possibility of consequent problems arising from misunderstandings etc is something you don't need getting involved in (as you well could be, unfortunately). His message here is an example in itself: you and I may suss that its probably just eager desperation coming across as an insistantly imperious command but if the guy doesn't even know to put please/thanks in...well, you can see where this could lead.

Anyway, seriously good on you for trying to sort him out but random online ESL teacher training isn't what you're after, I'm sure

All the best Plutonium27 (talk) 17:34, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I thought I'd give him the chance to be a bit more specific but you may be right that he's beyond the help of most editors here.--RadioFan (talk) 17:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

RFA

Hi - was going to add your edit stats to the talk page, but I'm confused. Popups shows your edit history in WP to be around 53k edits - but Soxred tools and a few others show only around 16k. I don't want to post something that is incorrect, so can you let me know where to find a correct edit summary. Thanks.  7  13:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, I strongly recommend adding a nice detailed nomination statement and answering the questions laid out, or else you could get roasted. Which would be a shame as you look like a potentially great candidate. -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 13:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict)You'd have done better to follow the instructions here and transcluded the nomination after creating it not before. Just saying. If you're not intending to answer the questions (unless you're busy trying to answer them now!) I'd advise that you put a note on the RFA to that affect. Pedro :  Chat  13:41, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm answering them now.--RadioFan (talk) 13:54, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Dr. Richard

Sspind (talk) 15:24, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

As you can see on the Wikipedia Grayline Worldwide page this new pages is like the others for Austria. Full copyright for wikipedia is provided.

The issue was not with copyright but with the article itself. The article contained no content and consisted only of an external link. If you planned to add more content, you may recreate the article but dont forget to add sufficient citations to reliable sources to demonstrate the notability of the subject. Even if the link in question has some mention of authorizing copying to wikipedia, I'd recommend against it. Wikipedia's copyright policies are very strict and have only a limited number of instances where material can be succesfully copied from a web page into an wikipedia article without being quickly deleted. It's best just to write a new article.--RadioFan (talk) 15:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: your post on my talk page

I would run again when you feel you have satisfied all the concerns of the oppose votes, or about this time next year, whichever is later. Having two RfA's in close succession can lead to the impression of desperation for admin rights, whether or not it is true. Sometimes people run and pass 6 months or less after their previous nomination, but I would be wary of doing that myself and don't generally advise it. It also helps not to be a self-nominated candidate, because again, this can give off the impression of untrustworthiness, whether or not it be true (many of the greatest admins were self-noms). -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 15:26, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, thats the kind of information I was looking for.--RadioFan (talk) 15:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Radiofan, I'm still reviewing your contributions, am about to logoff and won't be ready to !vote for another 24 hours. But while I'm here I'll chip in on this. Three months was being described as the normal gap until fairly recently, and when I started my second run earlier this year I waited till the end of the three months then asked some of my opposers for advice as to how long I should wait, and that lead to my surprisingly easy run four months after my first with a former opposer as a conom. But one of the problems at RFA is standards inflation, and we recently had people start saying that 6 months was the right gap. Which is an awfully longwinded way of saying if this fail wait three months then look at RFA, or if I'm still active then feel free to Email me and ask for advice. ϢereSpielChequers 15:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Ouch! Sorry about the unpleasant RfA. I think WSC is right, more people are voting against anyone running sooner than 5 or 6 months these days, so for difficult RfAs, best to wait at least 5 and probably 6 months, but you never know, maybe those standards will change within the next 3 months. Btw, I'm a fan of your work, and I'll be happy to collaborate on articles any time if you're looking for a collaborator, just let me know on my talk page. - Dank (push to talk) 16:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Your question

Here - The issue is that you were not seen as "asking about Rfa's" - that could have been done on a general page, such as the pump, or asking one person you knew was experienced. Instead, you pasted the exact same question on the talk pages of multiple people who opposed you. Please note the three issues: You did not ask about their concerns; you focused only on opposers, you pasted the same identical query to multiple talk pages. Please let me know if you are still unclear on why this is an issue. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 16:13, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

To be fair, I asked all who had participated in the discussion at that time and that time there were only opposers. Why is the same question posted to everyone who had participated at that point a problem? I honestly wanted an answer to the question and have received very good explanations and opinions (see above). Would phrasing the question slightly differently on each talk page have eased your concerns?--RadioFan (talk) 16:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Their graciousness in trying to help you does not make your multiple talk page spamming, an arguable violation of Wikipedia:Canvassing, any more acceptable. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 16:20, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I do not see this as canvassing which seeks to change the outcome, that was not what in intended nor what could have conceivable happened. The !votes had been cast, I do not see how my question might have changed the outcome. This was information gathering through exit polling in good faith.--RadioFan (talk) 16:30, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Not everything is written down; attempts to do so are (rightfully) attacked as scope creep. We dont' have rules about a lot of stuff which a little experience and/or common sense will inform you is unacceptable. If you ask a bunch of people the same question, and its something as premature and, I am sorry to say, self-serving as "how long should I wait before I try for admin again?", then its not appropriate. An exit poll is a poll; we don't have exit polls but if we did then the best way to set one up would probably be to make a page with poll choices, and then notify everyone who !voted in your Rfa to participate. Subtle, but significant, difference. The issue is not whether you were tying to change the outcome; the issue is how many people you were annoying with the same question. If I ask one person I respect "What am I doing wrong here?" it is not the same as pasting that same query on the talk pages of half a dozen people. Its the volume. Also, asking "how long should I wait" before your first Rfa is even a day old strikes a bad note; it looks like you are panting for the bit - too eager, too desirous of the buttons. This may not be the case; please be aware that this is how your actions appear to others. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 18:17, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Grace Harlowe

what is insufficiently cited in this article, please? I see no reason for your template. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 16:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

The article is sufficiently referenced but its inline references could be improved. Notes can be improved by conversion to citations to the bulleted items in the references section and notes and references collapsed.--RadioFan (talk) 16:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I am pleased to see you are doing so. More of this type of serious, actual work/help and less of the templating you've been doing, and you'll see a lot of your opposers' concerns melt away. Well done. KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 18:09, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I think you need this

ϢereSpielChequers is offering you a Wiki Beer! Liquid refreshment promotes WikiHarmony and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the harmony by offering a beer to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Best served refrigerated (not applicable in England). Temperature and Alcoholic strength varies according to age, religion and geographic location of recipient, US residents below the age of 21 are best advised to keep this beerstar until travelling in a country with less ageist drinking laws. NB This Beerstar is compatible with all known fake IDs

Sorry about the trainwreck, I think the !vote doesn't give you an accurate picture of how close to adminship you are. A couple of months after my first RFA I reread Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/WereSpielChequers, it was uncomfortable reading and I counted 7 reasons why it failed. So though the percentage was higher than yours the gap between where I was and what the community wanted in an admin was much higher. I would suggest that you make a mental note to forget about the subject of RFA for two months, and then reread Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RadioFan. In the meantime I would reccomend reading some of the stuff at User:WereSpielChequers#We're Spiel Checkers - thoughts on deletion, and if I may do a bit of canvassing myself, I'd appreciate your input on some of the proposals inspired by wp:NEWT at Wikipedia:Newbie treatment at Criteria for speedy deletion#proposals inspired by these tests. Not least because one of my motivations for starting NEWT was to address the problem of New Page patrollers not realising that anyone was concerned about their tagging until they had an RFA like yours. ϢereSpielChequers 17:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words and guidance. Looking at the RFA it seems like I should really pissed off right now, particularly by the accusations of canvasing, but I'm not. It is what it is and I'll take it all in, wait at least as long as admins are recommending, despite the issues with my asking the question in the first place, and give it another go when the time is right. Your recommendation to look back at the RFA later is a good one. I dont need to be an admin, I can and will continue to make an impact particularly with new page patrolling. I think I can help make it better around here with some additional privileges, this will just have to wait until I can make folks a bit more comfortable and address the concerns that have been brought up.--RadioFan (talk) 17:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm concerned, what makes you think you should be pissed off? KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 18:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Quadrapop

Hi, could you please help me to increase the quality of the page Quadrapop to avoid deletion ? Varciasz (talk) 18:20, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I and another editor have searched for significant coverage in 3rd party references for this game to help demonstrate its notability but have not found any so it appears that this does not meet guidelines for inclusion. There are a number of google hits and google news hits but nothing beyond trivial mentions or blogs. If there were some game review from a magazine or newspaper, that would help, do you know of anything like this?--RadioFan (talk) 18:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, here is short review: http://blog.3g.co.uk/2009/10/quadrapop-mobile-game-gets-upgrade.html

Game was also a finalist of ADOBE MAX award: http://2009.max.adobe.com/awards/finalists/

official Quadrapop site: www.sonyericsson.com/quadrapop/

Here you can find information about mobile phones that contain Quadrapop: http://www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/mobilephones/topics/f305/gaming?lc=en&cc=gb

http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_ericsson_aino-review-413p9.php

http://www.sonyericsson.com/pulse/assets/locales/en-Latn-GB/pdf/handset/yari/Yari_PRO.pdf

http://www.esato.com/phones/compare.php?phone=273&cp=520

here are official documents for creation of Quadrapop themes: http://developer.sonyericsson.com/getDocument.do?docId=101292

Varciasz (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC).

Speedy deletion declined: Dr. David Foreman

Hello RadioFan, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Dr. David Foreman - a page you tagged - because: Profs are an credible assertion of notability for CSD. PROD or take to AFD (may well fail WP:PROF). Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. GedUK  16:33, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Can you point me to the guideline which shows profs as a credible assertion of notability? Wikipedia:CSD#A7 makes no mention of it.--RadioFan (talk) 16:40, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

It's my guideline, it's not written down. Credible assertions of notability are often a judgement call. GedUK  16:43, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid I must disagree, would you mind returning the CSD request to the article and allowing another admin to take a look? If they feel your guideline is appropriate, then I'll gladly take it to prod/AFD but would appreciate a second opinion on this.--RadioFan (talk) 16:45, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to put it back on (link to this discussion). The Admin Noticeboard (not ANI though) might be a good place for a discussion on this. I may be out on my own on this. GedUK  16:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding. Let's see what another admin thinks, Admin Noticeboard may or may not be appropriate in this case we'll see. I just want to make sure we are doing the right thing here.--RadioFan (talk) 16:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

On second thoughts, the CSD talkpages would seem more sensible. GedUK  17:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Dr. David Foreman

Hello RadioFan, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Dr. David Foreman - a page you tagged - because: professorship enough to survive speedy & website checks out. Suggest PROD or AFD. . Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Nancy ^talk 16:59, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Very well. I appears that professorship is a commonly held, though unwritten, guideline in avoiding CSD. Perhaps this should be added to the guidelines for speedy deletion so that it is more clear to other editors.--RadioFan (talk) 17:01, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, well, see my comment above. Start the discussion at the CSD talk pages. My opinion may well come from the fact that UK professorships are that much 'harder' to get than US ones (if you see what I mean). GedUK  17:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I've already started the discussion, can both of you weigh in there please? Thanks, --RadioFan (talk) 17:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

That article about Dr. David Foreman would be a lot more interesting (and helpful to your typical Wikipedia user) if you included some funny anecdotes about him. Nothing libelous, of course, just funny in a pithy or witty sort of way. You know, spoonerisms and the like. Dexter Nextnumber (talk) 22:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

FYI

I added a number of third party RS refs today to the Bethlehem Baptist Church (Minneapolis) article (the subject of the AfD that you've participated in). Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Carmiooro A Style

Hello RadioFan, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Carmiooro A Style has been removed. It was removed by Phil Bridger with the following edit summary 'contest prod - the sources in the article, plus the many more avaialable from a Google News archive search, show notability'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Phil Bridger 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) 19:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 19:31, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:MINDREADER

You say f you would like to comment on the speed that I and other New Page Patrollers tag newly created articles, consider creating the page under your user space first or at least adding the

tag to let us know you haven't posted an incomplete, unsourced article for others to finish. How else are we to know? - how are new editors supposed to know obscure wikipedia tags? It's a wiki; articles are supposed to be incomplete. You should take some time to find sources, not just delete other people's content. NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 01:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

You are quoting from Wikipedia:Editors are not mindreaders , an essay which is used by new page patrollers to explain the confusion that often occurs when incomplete articles are created. It explains things from the perspective of the new page patrollers, something newbies aren't likely to think about. It educates them about ways they can better communicate their editing style and prevent deletion tags from being added. This isn't biting newbies, it's giving new page patrollers a tool they can use to educate newbies.--RadioFan (talk) 01:39, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Sometime by it's very nature you (not meNING Radio Fan) can bite a newbie just by nom'ing an article. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Hell in a Bucket. Pouncing on a freshly created article (as though it had been sitting there for a few years getting dusty) and suddenly nominating it for deletion is akin to telephonic harassment (assuming you do it again and again, no matter how much they try to avoid you). Dexter Nextnumber (talk) 09:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

While some editors agree with you, others do not I tend towards the latter opinion (but not always). I tend this way because newly created articles where the notability just isn't there very very rarely are made notable, leaving them around doesn't improve Wikipedia. New editors who ask for help will get it from many many volunteers. However so many new editors are simply vandals. I'm not saying either of you are but you should see it from the point of view of the volunteers who are working to keep Wikipedia as high quality as possible. You should take your concerns to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol as I'm only 1 of many many editors who regularly review new pages and mark those that do not meet inclusion guidelines for deletion. --RadioFan (talk) 12:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

--RadioFan (talk) 11:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:An unfinished house is a real problem

I agree with Radio Fans Statement, sometimes the notability isn't there and no matter how long you wait will never be there. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:49, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

RE:English Wikipedia

Maybe refusing people wasn't a good choice even though I'm a beginner. Anyway,I wanted to have a good teacher,who is a english native speaker.That was my attention.

You know in my country how many people coudn't learn english?The reason may make you unbelievable.We don't have money to hire a english teacher(unlucky no ESL training here,no school-teaching).Each people who wanna learn English has to study at the university and only 10% people can.So just stop your unfriendly view.English wikipedia is a good place.--俠刀行 (talk) 15:26, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Why did you remove my message?--俠刀行 (talk) 15:32, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

The above message? I find it rude. Accusations of being "unfriendly" or "unbelievable" are not appreciated, especially when I offered help in editing any articles that you are interested in. If there is something specific I can help you with, please let me know, otherwise please stop. Forgive me if I'm misreading your intention here but unfortunately your messages are very difficult to read and may be interpreted as insulting as a result. As another editor has mentioned on your talk page, maybe the English Wikipedia is not for you and you would be more at home at [[2]]. Please understand that this is not intended as a personal insult but a more practical suggestion for you.--RadioFan (talk) 15:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

• What did "content" mean?I didn't get it.--俠刀行 (talk) 16:05, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Content means "articles", the actual things people come to wikipedia to read. I'm happy to help you create or update articles. But as I and another editor have pointed out, am not able to help you learn English as your messages have mentioned.--RadioFan (talk) 16:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

• Did you mean you're so busy that you can't teach me english?mentioned,pointed out is what.I'd like you to use basic english.--俠刀行 (talk) 16:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I do not teach English. Please stop asking. If you are finding the words used here difficult to understand, the English Wikipedia is probably not for you. Try http://simple.wikipedia.org instead.--RadioFan (talk) 16:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Note re: warnings

Hi RadioFan, I'm not sure why you issued this warning. Of course, you have the right to remove posts on your talk page, but I didn't see any personal attacks in the one you removed or the one that followed it. Please don't be bitey. Thank you, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 15:42, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

As mentioned above, I find the above message rude. It's frustrating when you try to help someone and they respond this way. I've previously offered this editor help, another editor has tried to guide them as well and they responded only negatively and I dont appreciate it. Even if this is just a communication issue, it necessary to inform this new editor of Wikipedia's policy of keeping comments focused on the content rather than the editors.--RadioFan (talk) 15:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I will try to pass the message along to the user (right now we're exchanging messages on my talk page). Best, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance here, you are far better equipped to communicate with this editor than I. I noticed on your talk page athat it appears they are now asking you to teach them English. Best of luck.--RadioFan (talk) 16:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Yep; I'm trying to redirect him to some other avenues. Hopefully this will be the end of it. Best, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 19:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Quadrapop

Hi, I wrote you a lot of information (moved to archive)about Quadrapop you requested for and I do not have your answer. Could you please help me to prevent deletion of this page ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Varciasz (talk • contribs) 15:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Please place any references on the article itself, not here. --RadioFan (talk) 18:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC)