User talk:Orangemike/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Speedy Deletion of Batteries Included

Not a computer user? I'm surprised that you deleted the start of a page for this famous computer retailer and software publisher. Their PaperClip word processor was arguably the first which attained widespread use. Speedy deletion is a speedy way to discourage people from contributing. Lexor1969 (talk)

Hello

Politics rule has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Castillero Middle School

Hey, I have no idea how to do a wikitable. I left some data on the article. Could anyone who's reading this make the table. will u help me please

Changes to Pension re: Chile

Mike - my purpose is not to dispute the changes made in Chile, I had simply moved that reference to the countries section of that page, and I've opened up a new page on the Chilean pension system.

The definition of pension should stay general and not reference any particular country or system. Country-specific changes are occurring constantly.

Okay=

Seems a bit confusing for the causal user but I'll be mindful of that in the future. -Leodmacleod 5:28, 24 Sept 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thanks for the image help

Hi, Orangemike! I'm curious at to where I helped you out - I'd like to know if I did something right :-) east.718 at 09:38, December 19, 2007

PostBooks Deletion on December 2, 2007

Orangemike, I would like to better understand why you felt the page I recreated was so blatantly advertising. I wanted to get this product in Wikipedia, and I spent a great deal of time researching other companies that are in a similar space. After being deleted once, I went back over again to include assistance in getting factual information here. Thx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wallyton (talk • contribs)

Making History edit

Dear OrangeMike,

I think there has been some kind of misunderstanding concerning my supposedly 'inappropriate' editing of Making History (novel). I merely corrected a couple of grammatical errors, and I certainly made no attempt to deface the article, as your message to me seems to imply. Please write back as soon you get this, I'm sure we simply have our wires crossed. Thank you.

Yours,

User:6afraidof7

Thank you for your quick response, and I shall be more stringent in future.

Yours,

6afraidof7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 6afraidof7 (talk • contribs)

I think you deserve this...

		The Orange Barnstar
		For your positive wording in here and in so many--omtay38

"SAE - World Council of Hellenes Abroad" article?

Hi Mike,

I dont understand, why you deleted the following article? 03:23, 14 February 2008 Orangemike deleted "SAE - World Council of Hellenes Abroad".

I have all the rights from the SAE Organisation to publish their text on Wikipedia! Could you please undo the deletion.

Greetings Th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bountos (talk • contribs)

Orange Mike

Today you murdered my account because you are a fat fucking IWW queer. The reason you gave was that you didn't like my username, which like yours, matches your webpage. Then you started dicking around with other content I posted here, laying warning tags just to be a spiteful faggot. You assholes bypassed all of your own protocol. Therefore, I am fucking all of you from now on. Because you did this to back user IrishGuy, and because my appeals were sabotaged by other whitelisted abusers of nonadmins, you will all be systematically outed at my convenience. Have fun blocking this ip, as it is the ip for an entire library. --contextflexed

Lyrics

There's lyrics all over Wikipedia. See article on Julie London, for example.

Deletion of the Bluenose Chapter of the BMW Club of Canada

I started this entry as I was adding content to the Atlantic Motorsport Park entry and thought that it should be included, perhaps after quickly reading the criteria for entry I should have entered it as a redirected page or something, but I've not really gotten the hang of the Wikipedia protocol yet.

I felt the Bluenose BMW Club likely warranted it's our citation separate from the likes of Atlantic Motorsport Park or Westwood, because it isn't just about AMP. Atlantic Motorsport Park is the facility that the club uses to teach young drivers vehicle control through practicing emergency manouvers, car control along with studying and applying the theories and == Great Wall China Adoption ==

Hello, and my apolgies for the lack of communication. This is my first attempt to post any information to Wikipedia. I have rewritten the text for Great Wall China Adoption organziation to be unbiased and unaffiliated, please let me know what parts need more editing. Thank you. - Justin

Speedy deletion

You really don't have a clue, do you? Remove anything anybody but yourself writes on here... yeah, sure way to help Wikipedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leighbe (talk • contribs)

Re: Meanie

Ah, don't do that, I saw the header on my watchlist script and I thought someone came to yell at me for a declined unblock. X-D Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:01, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Request to view proposed new content

Hi Mike, Can you please view my talk page to see if you think the proposed new information presented is ok to lodge for NetBox blue. I modeled the information and the presentation criteia on some of NetBox Blue's competitors - Ironport and Trend Micro pages to make sure it sounds fair and unbiased. Mickyounger (talk) 02:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

First Tuesday

somewhat to my surprise, turned out to have multiple good sources when I looked on google as far as the second screen. I agree it's the sort of article which is often spam, but this time it wasn't. DGG (talk) 16:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Just to second that, First Tuesday was an important part of the UK dot-com boom of the late '90s, not just in London. In later years it has certainly reduced in importance (frequently alleged to have folded entirely, but that seems incorrect), but it's of considerable notability for historical interest of that period, even if it never met again. Not being part of the US scene doesn't mean that it wasn't notable.

As to any CoI, the content added by those apparently connected is uncontentious as far as I can see - although my personal experience of First Tuesday doesn't go far beyond 2000. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Elma Electronic not done........

Mike, I've been working on an article for Elma Electronic but you deleted it (even though I put a hangon tag). I've been gathering third party references to the company and I have seen other articles in Wikipedia about other companies of similiar notability with less info (that were not deleted). Before you quote me the COI terms, I do admit I'm involved with the company but I've tried to be very careful to keep the article neutral. Either way, can you give me a copy of the article? Scfe92 (talk) 20:16, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the copy of the article. I've seen plenty of company articles on Wikipedia with no links (other than website) and minimum info (i.e. no third party references, etc). How did they get past deletion? Are they "grandfathered" in (so to speak)?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.25.139.154 (talk) 20:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

oops, forgot to sign Scfe92 (talk) 20:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

We try to catch 'em. They can be nominated for deletion at any time by any editor, including you; nobody is "grandfathered in" here. (The continued existence of poor articles does not justify the creation of new poor ones; that argument is called WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and is rejected in deletion discussions.) --Orange Mike | Talk 20:49, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Apples and chondrites are exactly similar

Why won't you remove Olan Mills article? It's a similar company, and a similar article, so it should be removed too! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pika62221 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Mike.

Thanks for temporally blocking Pika62221. I have no doubts he is mostly a good editor, but for now i feel he is simply going to far. I hope you won't mind me asking, but would you mind leaving a short block notification on his talk page? I doubt he can find the pointer to WP:POINT at AIV.

Thanks in advance, and of course, thanks in retrospect. Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 20:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

• Aaah, slow slow typing me, i see its already done. In that case sorry for the bother with the request, and another thanks for doing so. Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 20:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

BC Progress Board

Mike: the BC Progress Board is analogous to any number of American government agencies. What I'm doing is not promotional, but informational only. Jhrynyshyn (talk) 21:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

One Planet Living

Hola Mike - see you just deleted our One Planet Living Page for copyright infringement - even though it had a "hang on" in there - have to say I'm a bit upset not just because you just wasted the last hour of my work, but because I run the website that I took the copy from. I love the fact that you're on the ball and how all this works, but Jaysus - could you not wait the 25 minutes I asked for to update our page on our site that you think was supposedly copyright infringed? It's not like I like to waste my time on these things, I've got a planet to save mate. --Stedrayton (talk) 13:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

1) For legal reasons, we have to be very proactive on copyright violations. 2) You can't license the use of copyrighted material on Wikipedia; only the copyright owners can do that. 3) This article would probably have been deleted anyway, as being about an non-notable organization; see WP:GROUP. 4) Since you have a relationship with this organization, you probably shouldn't be editing any articles about them anyway, under our restrictions on edits by persons with conflicts of interest

Thanks Mike - I understand where you are coming from. On 1) No problem at all - I think this is very important 2) We are the copyright owners, in fact the guy who wrote the principles is my colleague here. 3) That's interesting - and yea - I can see how that could rate the article for destruction. I checked other pages done about, say WWF, like the 1001 1001_Club - and thought the OPL was an even more valid issue, especially given how we're really messing things up on this lump of rock of ours. 4) Yup - did not want to hide it - but then how do you get stuff up on Wiki for people to read - if the issue not relevant, then 3) applies - if the text is crap, then someone can edit, delete or change (the beauty of wiki), if there are opposing viewpoints (which there must be) bring them on. Anyway Sir - I leave it up to you - I think the shock is more that I specifically made all text on our global web site sharealike - so when the bot caught it I was very dismayed because I'd worked hard at getting the GNU and CC stuff up there. You got any suggestions how I can stop that happening again if someone else decides the OPL is a good and relevant subject? The erroneous copyright is now off the original page on our site. any other advice you can give us (WWF) about making content more shareable would also be very welcome. Appreciate your time to respond. --Stedrayton (talk) 14:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Mike - you're gentleman. Is good that I learn this stuff and I sincerely appreciate your taking the time to explain the issues and processes. I owe you one Sir. --Stedrayton (talk) 14:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The Lightning Theif

i was just telling the user not to insult people. Just so you know, I'mOnBase and you're not. 19:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

BC Progress Board

Mike: I appreciate where you're coming from. I, too, do not want Wikipedia to be full of non-notable entries. However, the BC Progress Board is comparable to Statistics Canada, The Conference Board of Canada, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office, all of which have entries. It is an invaluable source of economic and social information for the province of B.C. and I see no reason why it should not have its own entry. I am basically doing this is a favor for a friend. Could you please reconsider? Jhrynyshyn (talk) 19:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleting stub "Marek Garztecki"

I initiated today an entry on a personality from Poland and your were VERY fast to delete it. Typical American approach - anything outside of Wisconsin (or wherever you live) is obscure. If you google the name "Marek Garztecki" you will get around 4000 hits, all serious information from many fields - politics, music, sociology, journalism. I think all articles start as stubs and are later edited and expanded. Kotoviski (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

speedy

With respect to Siege of Jerusalem (597 BC), please dont delete an article Im working on without telling me. I do, you know, rewrite article to eliminate copyvio. Its a notable event, so I would have stubbed it. I'll recreate it myself, no need to undelete, though DGG (talk) 00:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Convoy SC-143

10 minutes into creating this page you want to delete it; you might at least have waited until it was finished!

So it’s “non-notable”; what does that mean, that it’s of no interest to you personally? It’s as notable as all the other articles in the categories in which I’ve placed it; even at the 10 minute stage it would have been that notable. You could have tagged it for improvement, or as a stub; what is the fascination in WP for deleting stuff?

So what happens now; have I got to wait ‘til someone decides my work is of any value? Is it likely to be wiped out while I’m away? I’m bloody annoyed! Xyl 54 (talk) 16:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Here's a suggestion. Sometimes editors create articles by treating Wikipedia as an editor. They don't polish them off-line first, then move them into the visible space all done and dusted. This doesn't mean they're bad articles, bad subjects or bad editors, it just means they're not finished yet. Don't patrol things that are barely seconds old, wait and see if anyone is actually working on the things. There is no earthly reason to kill stuff quite so rapidly.

Maybe they are bad editors. Maybe Wikipedia needs a policy that says, "Don't even think about creating an article until it's almost finished". When Wikipedia has such a policy, then it's time to start slapping editors for working like this, but not before. Maybe you wish that editors did only create things ready-finished (it would simplify some management issues, certainly), but that just isn't the way people are working today. AGF works both ways too - how about assuming a bit of it around article creators who are acting as best they know? Andy Dingley (talk) 17:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I did not delete that article. I put a "prod" tag on it. That gives the creator or others interested five days to bring it up to our standards. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:24, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Longer, really, since he can always delete it after four days, after which five days of AFD is required before it gets deleted. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 17:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not about whether one puts a prod or a speedy onto it, it's about what it's put onto.

The problem here is that you're (quite rightly) trying to kill rubbish pages. Editors are (also quite rightly) creating rubbish pages, because they aren't planning to leave them that way. When it's the first save of a brand-new article, it's just too early to tell. You can't tell at this point whether a well-intentioned editor is beavering away on the rest of the content. Would you have prodded it again how it is now, only a couple of hours later? (I'm sure not - it looks pretty good to me). Would the editor have got it into that state unprodded? Maybe not - not in two hours at least, but I bet they would have done within a few hours.

There is just no reason why new articles that aren't offensive have to be killed immediately on creation. We're not in that sort of rush (abuse, maybe - that's different). Can we change the workflow here so that the "Downright bad" filter happens for new articles, but the "Not bad, but not good either - improve or it goes" filter doesn't get applied to articles that are quite so fresh?

Otherwise we're into a policy that editors really should not treat wikipedia as an editing scratchpad, and shouldn't make stuff even remotely visible until it's near-finished. Now if that's an emergent policy that admins are going to impose, we'd best seeing about making it an obvious policy so that editors know about it, and know how to act within it!

Please remember what a slap in the face it is for a new editor to roll up to wikipedia, write their first article and then be told immediately that it's fit only for deletion (maybe there are 5 days to think about it, but that's what it feels like). We bend over backwards to be "fair" to out-and-out vandals who get all sorts of second-chances (and fourth-chances!) after abusing existing pages, from some notion of "Assume Good Faith" applied to some blatant eeejit who's just replaced an entire page with an mis-spelled insult. Why can't we extend the same courtesy to those genuinely good-faith authors who are just trying to edit a new page, same as they'd edit it at home using a wordprocessor?

AGF is a very good principle. Thinking harder about the last couple of days I really have to apply it to your actions, and try to understand how you're genuinely trying to act towards a best-interest that we both share. However the perception of it from this side of the fence isn't the same thing. Everyone really is trying to work for the best, but there's an emergent behaviour that I think the tools push us into ("New pages" meaning only "really, really, new pages") that sets us into conflict. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Me again: I don’t get a lot of computer time, but I do want to reply:

So no, I’m not a new editor, as my contributions might show; This isn’t the first page I’ve written, but this is the way I write them. I’m on public access; this is the way I work. I have to write it up in Word, over time, then patch it into WP in a couple of hours or so. Does that make me a bad editor?

And no, it wouldn’t have been much different after 2 hours, so a “prod” as you call it, wasn’t much help, except making me madder than hell. You may see it as a prod; it feels like a threat.

But yes, it is a slap in the face.

And "Our standards"?

Xyl 54 (talk) 11:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

"I’m on public access; this is the way I work." That's why, thinking more about it, I don't support the hypothetical policy I just described. You certainly ought to be able to work that way. As a little experience soon shows, even "under construction" and "in use" templates are ignored by the creation police.

As another matter, one of sheer desperation for survival amongst the little community of people who create content, sandboxes under your own user page are certainly the way to go. Don't categorize your creations until they're finished either, certainly don't tidy the inbound links from other pages. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to hide new work away like this (aren't we supposed to collaborate?), but this "instant deletion" problem of admins patrolling new articles means that's the way content creators are currently forced into. Shame we seem to have to find out the hard way, when our work gets trashed. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

---

Hello Mike
I know this may be old news to you, but I just know I need to say it to move on.
I don’t want to fall out with you over this (I can see by your userboxes we have stuff in common) and I'm conscious you’ve described this as whingeing, but I'm othered that we’ve not really talked to each other, at least, I don’t feel I’ve explained my concerns or had a reply from you that addresses those concerns.
I’ve followed the discussion, here and there, and I can see I may have to change my editing style (though if editors have to protect their work against admin’s now, maybe it’s time to pack it in). I’m not sure you’ve looked at your own approach at all, except to suggest a policy that backs up your point of view.
My criticism is that you seem overzealous in deleting stuff; (you describe yourself as a deletionist, and are an admin with the power to delete, which seem to me a lot like giving the kid the key to the sweetshop). What is the pressure to delete? Does WP have a capacity problem? I hadn’t heard that. Have we really got too much content? It still has far less than the average provincial library, and everywhere I look there are gaps. I thought an encyclopædia was “a comprehensive written compendium that contains information on all branches of knowledge or a particular branch of knowledge”; So there should be loads of stuff of esoteric interest Isn’t it better to improve what’s here, instead?
And my original objection was that you labelled it as "non-notable", where (I would have thought) anyone from the special interest groups that look at these categories would know its notability, and threatened it with deletion. You presumably thought you were prodding me to do better; I just thought I was being threatened with deletion; the whole tenor of the message was towards that, not an encouragement to improve.
I don’t know what else to say; but I needed to say it. Xyl 54 (talk) 10:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

To support Mike here, have you read the new articles feed? It's a mess! The vast Augean flood of sheer garbage is impressive in its volume, if little else. I'm never a WP:Deletionist (not in a world with Moore's Law anyway), but even the most ardent WP:Inclusionist would cheerfully kill the majority of this worthless rubbish. What Mike's doing here is a valuable task that really does need someone to do it.

However what the project needs is new article filtering that works. Clearly there's good stuff, or future good stuff, currently getting killed here as collateral damage. More importantly IMHO is the negative effect this must be having on potential new authors. No-one surely supports that, so how do we fix it? As a fire-fighting survival measure, I'm now much more guarded about my new article creations 8-( As a better fix though, I'd implore the new article patrollers to be a bit more cautious and a lot less rapid-reacting. Kill sins of commission on sight, but let the sins of omission rest for a while first and see if they get better without intervention. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Andy, for this clear and reasoned response, especially given the rather rough start you and I got off to! I am listening to what you say here. (The problem with invoking Moore's Law, of course, is that the new equipment must be paid for. Me, I'm still running my 1999 tangerine iMac.) --Orange Mike | Talk 13:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, Thank you for the replies.

No, I hadn’t seen the new pages, and no, I didn’t know we had a server problem; food for thought.Xyl 54 (talk) 14:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

PS Good Health! Xyl 54 (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

You could always get yourself A Real Computer and some paint... 8-P Andy Dingley (talk) 14:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I hope to buy a newer real computer soon; but painting one's computer is a tricky business; a professional can get $500 or more for a good job (I'm not kidding). There is no cheap way of tinting the transparent/translucent portions of a computer casing, that I'm aware of.--Orange Mike | Talk 14:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Fred Toucher

Hey Mike, was hoping I could talk to you about the deletion of this article. The guy is one of two hosts of a very-well known radio show around the Boston area. Further, since the article had a couple sources and a clear assertion of notability, I'm curious as to why you felt he could be deleted under A7. I look forward to your response. GlassCobra 23:23, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of the history; I live in the Boston area, where the show is aired. The show isn't really much like Stern, to be honest; also, while I apologize for Toucher's behavior, I don't think that makes the deletion any more valid. My roommate is a listener, and he was the one who alerted me to the deletion of this article. Toucher and Rich is a popular radio show around these parts, and the article was well-written and factual. If you disagree, might I suggest we take this to AfD or DRV? GlassCobra 21:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Mike, I was really hoping we could discuss this. I'll take it to DRV if you don't respond by tomorrow, okay? GlassCobra 03:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

NCA

I have had this content rewritten and this is the second time I have tried to get information on this organisation up onto Wikipedia. I do not understand how Wikipedia can delete it if it has been approved by the NCA, the organisation that owns this content in the first place.

KR, (Simon Johnson AMAS (talk) 14:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC))

Regards

No problem Mike :) I am a dialectic, and by erasing the article you only stimulated me to write a new better article with more sources than one. No problem. P.S. Mike I do not want to bother you with problems, but there is this fellow User:Kobra85, he constantly erases 80% of the article I wrote National Liberation War of Macedonia. I spent so many time in the library reading books about the subject and taking photos, but this guy erases 80% of my contribution which is backed by references. He also behaves very incivil. I complained at the admins as did other users before me - this and Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Kobra85. Once again, I know it is not ethical to ask you this (first of all as an intellectual I feel ashamed of asking this) but I really do not have any other choice. P.S. Read my version of the article I mentioned and please see that the vandalizing stops. Thanks in advance. --Revizionist (talk) 15:00, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Newton United page deleted :(

Hi Mike, sorry i'm new to this game so apologies if i have done something wrong. Basically last year a friend of mine Joe Horton created a football team called Newton Utd FC which is a big deal for us and i wanted to create a page for the club to allow people to see the history of the club through the years and monitor developments as many other clubs already do. Please let me know your comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scoffgoal (talk • contribs) 15:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments Mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scoffgoal (talk • contribs) 07:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

ParetoLogic

Thanks for the heads-up. The article was deleted by the time I had a chance to check. I don't think it's a great loss to the encyclopedia. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 21:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

C.I.S.

I understand that sir, I do not want to break any guidliens, thats why i havent made the page, if you would please help me make it in a neutral voice, i would appreciate that greatly, thank you sir.King Cangri (talk) 21:18, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Elitism

I know that, and you know that. But there's a number of heavy-handed admin who don't quite get that distinction. Howa0082 (talk) 17:22, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The Agency (Band) Proposed Deletion

Two reasons why this page should NOT be deleted:

1 - It is NOT an ad of any kind for the band.

2 - If you had bothered to do ANY research on how it COULD be a notable article, you would hove found that Mike Marsh, the drummer of the band, is a member of a notable band, Dashboard Confessional. WP:BAND #6 on Criteria for musicians and ensembles.

HitchhikerGriff (talk) 17:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I will work on the wording of the article, and apologies for "abusing" you on your talk page, it's just that this would be the second time that this page would have been deleted.

HitchhikerGriff (talk) 18:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

No, O.K... I see your point... I'll keep that in mind, and put it to good use... Somehow... But thanks anyway, and I didn't mean to be any sort of tormenting rectal itch... Where DID you come up with that name...

HitchhikerGriff (talk) 21:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Art4em (talk · contribs)

Can you try to explain things a little differently? I don't think I'm getting through... (See this.) Thanks. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 19:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Jon Balcourt

Hey there, you noted about conflict of interest on my talk page concerning the page I started on a composer. I question my conflict of interest though, simply because I have met him does not mean that necessarily. It's no different than a fan making a page of a composer they idolize. I put no praise on his page, simply facts and information, so I'm not sure where the conflict of interest comes from since I didn't overly praise or add any information that could not be backed up.Theatrgirl (talk) 15:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right, I did say that. However, by work what I was referring to was that I had done shows that he has directed before, which is what I call work. Not REALLY work as in a company or as an agent for him or anything. So technically I haven't really "worked" with him, just met him in a theatre experience and had the opportunity to talk with him several times.Theatrgirl (talk) 18:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick save bud

You beat me to it with this new guy. My too-long edit summary would have mentioned my trust in the other editors. Of course you vindicated my trust simultaneously. BTW, Paul announced today that The Revolution will move from #7 to #1 in its second week on the NYX bestseller list. I haven't made any use of that yet of course. JJB 17:00, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

What do you think with the latest on this front? ANI? Other? I could go several ways with the data and would greatly appreciate a directional nudge. JJB 17:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

What would this be called?

Electronic tent. Advertising? Vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ESanchez013 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like some kind of notes for a freshman communications or television "journalism" class. I'd say "creation of inappropriate articles" and send the author a uw-create1 warning. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: User:Martindanza

I'm on it. You want to start from his earliest contribs and I'll start from the latest? I'm not an admin, so I can't move pages over redirects. Thingg^⊕⊗ 15:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Jasonhalogen

ahehheh. Yeah, my bad on that one. (I edit conflicted with you when I was removing the warnings and apologizing.) I seem to make mistakes sometimes with my vandal reverting. Anyway, thanks for pointing that out. I really appreciate it. Regards. Thingg^⊕⊗ 18:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

How did this happen?

...this user was blocked yesterday indefinitely. How did he do this? Just wondering... Prashanthns (talk) 19:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

It looks like he was blocked mere seconds after he vandalized my pages. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm...odd, but the edit by him is dated today (13th May) while his block is dated 12th May. (Wondering if I am missing something very obvious, but...)Prashanthns (talk) 20:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm....odd, must be something to do with my time preference settings, perhaps. His edits are dated "Revision as of 01:15, 13 May 2008 (edit) (undo)" while the block is dated "...the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. MBisanz talk 19:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)" for me!Anyways, nothing to be bothered about, I guess!Cheers. Prashanthns (talk) 20:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm...did you see this? Prashanthns (talk) 20:19, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Datado/Sandbox

I'm disappearing for the day, if you're able to watch this page and help the user, if he's ready to publish it; or, advise him further. Incidentally, Nevada Magazine has been in publication for 70 years, but we don't have an article? Feel free to add it if you care to. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 21:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

martindanza blocking

answered on User_talk:Enric_Naval#User:Martindanza_and_his_vandalisms --Enric Naval (talk) 22:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

sorry!

sorry for reversion of edits on DYBN. i mistook it for vandalism. Sushant gupta (talk) 13:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Nha trang live history muesum

COuld you speedy this. There are no google hits on it -A museum in Vietnam part of the Albert museum in england?? Looks like a hox and meets speedy criteria ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 16:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Much obliged Orange One. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 16:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Trip to Sunderland

Please explain why you reverted the speedy deletion tag placed by this user? I would have been inclined to grant his request to vanish. He didn't formally cite a "right to vanish," but that's what it amounts to, and as long as he's blocked I see no problem with it. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 17:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... you've got a point. The vitriol involved blinded me to this aspect of it. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

The Wheezer Bros.

Since you deleted The Wheezer Bros., you might want to check this out as well. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 18:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Amit Choubey

I'm curious about the speedy deletion of the above article. Why was it deleted apparently in the very same minute the author was being told of it being tagged for speed deletion - even if he was online, the author would have had no chance to correct matters? Also, did no one notice the {{prod}} tag giving the author 5 days to fix the article? Astronaut (talk) 19:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Curtisall

Could you have a look please COI with this editor and has recreated same article 3 times thanks. BigDunc^Talk 20:32, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I seen that it was recreated again today under a different editors name, so I asked DGG to have a look too as he gave a warning last night. BigDunc^Talk 17:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted and a final warning given. I'm watching it & will spot any re-creation. DGG (talk) 20:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Corum Online

you said "Web content; doesn't indicate importance/significance" what does that mean? just because you don't think it's important doesnt mean anything, there are over 2 million registered accounts in this game! I had talked to Accounting4Taste about it, and he had helped me get started on it....this is the third time this page has been deleted, and there was no reason for it this time. I had an "under construction" tag on it, i had just made it yesterday and was adding links and references...... can I please get some answers here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellimist91 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

sorry, in my frusturation I forgot to sign my name Ellimist91 (talk) 23:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

thank you for the info, it IS from a rather reputable company(see Flyff - Fly for Fun, and Rappelz for their more famous games) but until I can get the community to help me, the page will not continue on. Ellimist91 (talk) 05:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Historian

Mike, thanks for your thoughts. I suspect, given your misconceptions, that you aren't very interested in my thoughts on who should be called a historian. But if you'd like to know what I really think, please let me know. Tegwarrior (talk) 03:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting Kevindavid on my talk page. That e-mail was a personal one to friends, and one of them forwarded it without asking me permission to a list of people, and it is causing me a great deal of trouble. I don't know how to stop someone who claims to have nothing against me who would post and re-post a personal e-mail that was not addressed to him in the first place.

For the record, I sincerely wanted to encourage people in the communities I interact in, like the Magical and consciousness exploration communities, to get more active in wikipedia. One thing that moved me to act was Pigman's IMO tagging and deletion nomination spree on articles I wrote or heavily edited, mainly occult authors, most of whome have NOT appeared at the events I work on. I do NOT sell anything personally; ACE sells stuff, but I am a volunteer like all other ACE personell and do not profit in any way. I just feel that a small group in this limited-interest field is calling all the shots according to their own biases, and it's time to promote a bigger working group for articles on these topics so they get fairly treated.Rosencomet (talk) 15:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I do acknowledge others' notability concerns. For instance, on the last few deletion nominations by Pigman, I discussed my reasons for disagreeing at length on both discussion and deletion nomination pages, and added as much material as I could find to help support notability. But Pigman is a major mover in Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism and a long-time member of the Neopagan community; I'm sure he knows that Nevill Drury (author of over 40 books) and Nicky Scully are notable (or Vivianne Crowley, Chas S. Clifton, etc). I haven't seen authors and recording artists of the caliber of many Pigman has tagged or nominated being questioned on a normal basis. He keeps a watchlist on my articles and sets the bar quite differently when it comes to my work.Rosencomet (talk) 16:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

excessive zeal in deleting the friction, and related talk etc pages

you deleted these pages faster than I can type the explaiation for why the page should be there (which wiki rules permit me) and even before I can conclude editing my text (which is why it didnt have a sig yet .. I just saved it based on having lost an earlier partial edit by your initial edit and delte while I was stil lwriting teh original entry !

I understand wikipedia should not be filled with dross, but over zealouly deleting anything that comes along before the author has even had time to extablish is imho a severe over-reach

i see you have been accused of this kind of thing before, see "Speedy deletion of Amit Choubey"

And now I see you have deleted it again - within a couple of minutes, without any attempt to discuss this or justify your unresosnable action. Sorry but imho you are out of control here

tubenutdave (talk) 17:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

The Choubey article was restored by me as a stub, because there was some claim of notability for Choubey as a musician. The Friction is a house cover band. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

This may sound weird to you, tubenutdave, but at wikipedia we have this belief that people can actually CHANGE over time! i know, sounds odd doesnt it? so when editing, we dont use someones past actions as an argument for why we're right, just like i'm not going to point out the biiig tag on your talk page asking you to be a little less gung-ho and use that to say i'm better than you. Ironholds (talk) 17:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

world-famous in shanghai

haha, didnt see that! i was just writing up a paragraph from the wikipedia notability guide on musicians/bands to burst his rather gung-ho bubble when you deleted the page. Ironholds (talk) 17:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Daniel Parker

Hello,

You recently deleted the article Daniel Parker with the comment that notability wasn't established. However he is notable on at least two counts. 1. He was the central founder of the Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptists which includes five different baptist denominations. 2. He was the modern originator of the doctrine of Serpent Seed, a doctrine followed by 1-2 million fringe alter-Christians. I myself have never edited the article in question but I have done som siginficant work on articles related to his doctrines and churches. Would you please consider restoring the article or at least making available the deleted article so that it could be used to recreate a superior article to the one deleted. Thanks Charles Edward 20:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

LoL, come to think of it I have never read his article. I just now noticed that some of the links to his name had turned red on some pages I watch. Thanks for the info. Perhaps I will try to write an article for him. Charles Edward 20:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like the seed of one is already present in Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptists! --Orange Mike | Talk 20:43, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Styles section in Martin Luther King, Jr.

Thanks, I thought the argument was about use of Reverend. Completely missed the header "Styles"; that is, simply thought it was referring to changes in the way people addressed King. Just one more way to learn by working on Wikipedia. This is great for people with curiosity!--Parkwells (talk) 17:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Mike - thank you for explaining the policies and positions of Wikipedia. My first days of Wikipedia article writing have been ones filled with learning. Rolah (talk) 17:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

another pinoybandwagon sock

I warned User:Raleldude about moving radio station names out of their call names[3] so he can't say that he wasn't warned. I see that in his first page move he used on his edit summary an argument that he saw used somewhere else[4]. I remember having seen that same wording on other place. I doubt that this person can explain the argument himself, and, from past experience, I believe that he is just parroting something he read.

What really annoys me from this guy is that he could actually make some really useful stuff if he stopped doing hoaxes, trying to make a separate article for every old closed radio station, and paid more attention to what he gets said by other users.

P.D.: Man, I was going to strike out all the chat on the talk pag of DWLS, but you arrived first :) [5] --Enric Naval (talk) 01:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Damn, he has created *another* sock at User:Extraflavor, look at his contribs --Enric Naval (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

About Broadcasting in WP:NC

It only said what should be appropriate for the Radio Stations in North America, but not in the Philippines. Extraflavor (talk) 09:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

"Radio and television stations in countries where call signs are customarily used, such as North America, should always be titled with the official call sign as assigned by that country's regulatory authority." The Philippines assigns unique call signs to all stations. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Framing Hanley

Judging by this, I'm wondering if a pinch of salt is in order? Regards, WilliamH (talk) 16:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Amit Choubey

Hello, I saw your proposed deletion on Amit Choubey as I was patrolling and I did support it. However I'm confused, it looks like you also created the page and proposed its deletion at the same time. I understand that it existed previously and had spam in it, but if it was deleted for that purpose why not let it stay deleted? I don't think a proposed deletion prevents an article from being recreated, or that it even makes it difficult, although if you had done a AfD that would in fact prevent it from being recreated. I'm just wondering why you did that, I assume you have a really good reason that I'm totally ignorant of and I'd appreciate being enlightened. Thanks! -- Atama^chat 16:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The original was deleted, as it was clearly spam. An editor protested this deletion, arguing that the subject may well be notable, and I compromised in the interest of assuming good faith and "not biting the newby" by creating the stubbiest of stubs. I then prodded it in order to give the article's advocate(s) a time limit by the end of which, if they could not find solid reliable sources, the stub would also be deleted. I've been accused of overzealous deletionism, and I'm trying to find some solid ground here. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:40, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I was just curious. Your explanation makes a lot of sense. -- Atama^chat 16:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abtract

Would it be possible to have this page undeleted and userfied? Editor is continuing to be disruptive and it would be easier to refile if I could start with the one I already wrote up. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Shelby Dillard story

Its a factual story that needs telling so that others may avoid making the same mistakes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smokeyjones69 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? --Orange Mike | Talk 02:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

deletion of Original Software page

I worked hard on making sure that this software company that has made significant contributions to the software testing space and is an IBM and Oracle partner was clearly represented but without putting any marketing info up. I stripped the article down to bare, referenceable facts and now it gets deleted? you should then go delete the Segue Software page as well. It is also included in the Software Testing portal and also has a bare bones site about it. Here is the Segue Software page for your reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segue_Software First I am told it sounds to markety, then you say it isn't significant? I understand the issue of conflict of interest, but I didn't put any opinion into the article, just the facts. Can you please tell me what I need to do to get the Original Software page up without having it deleted? thanks Teune (talk) 02:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I've already responded to this on your talk page (two or three messages ago). --Orange Mike | Talk 02:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Please also delete User:SomeUsr/Calendar

Hey mike :-) ,

you may also please delete User:SomeUsr/Calendar . this was my calendar template. thx in advance SomeUsr|Talk|Contribs 14:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Paul Diamond (lawyer)

Sorry Orange, but you're wrong about the way you're changing the citations, and I am reverting it. Again. Look at the law page, and trust a lawyer to know how to format things properly. I also have no idea why you are putting these tags up. I simply have no idea what you have in mind about wikifying the page, and what you feel is missing. If you want to make suggestions, feel free to go to the talk page. Wikidea 09:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Mr Orange, you've melted my heart with your peaceful path: I wasn't saying you were frivolous at all; but the Blue Book is American - as I can see, from your old uni. Believe or not, the world does not always do the same as Americans! It wasn't me who keeps putting the self promoting stuff back. It's these other non-registered users. Wikidea 15:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Gosh, you're really stubborn! I can't think why you wouldn't believe what I say. Let me make it a bit more clear. You're wrong, and if you spent half a second clicking on any of the links on the end of the cases that I put up on that page you would see why. Wikidea 16:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Orange, the links in the page for the cases! There are inline citations: e.g. the name of the case goes like this: McClintock v. Department of Constitutional Affairs [2008] EWCA 999 - and on that last bit I've usually put in an external link to the text of the judgment. In those judgments you can see that this is the way we (and every other English speaking country in the world, bar America) cites cases!! Also, again, look how I wrote the law page. You can see in the footnotes I put the American cases in the American style, and English cases in the English style. Can I help you in any other way? Wikidea 17:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, that all sounds fine. As I said before the 'honourifics' are being reinserted by this unregistered guy in Cambridge. And yes, get rid of the see also section. I just kind of put one in out of habit when I make pages. For the Administrative Court, it's a wing of the England and Wales High Court (EWHC: which is what goes on the citation), under the Queen's Bench wing; so yes I think you've got the right page there; this is another one: High Court of Justice. :) Wikidea 17:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Images in Israel

Hi somebody is under the impression wikipedia is the commons and unbelievably has created severla categories chielfy for images. Could you take the necessary action to sort out Category:Images of cities in Israel and the sub cats.

There is also categories such as Category: Images of cities in the United Kingdom and Category:Images of cities in the United States. They seem pointless to me when we have thousands of images in the commons like this. By all means take them to CFD and get some views but I am certain they are against guidelines cheers ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 15:21, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of AMAX Engineering Corporation

I'm pretty sure I added a notice saying that the article is still in construction, so why was it deleted the day after? I was currently still working on it and thought that it won't be deleted when it's still in progress. Also, I'm not trying to promote or advertise this company, but using it as a resource tool for online users to find out what kind of company it is. I don't think I was currently wording it in a way where I'm trying to dazzle this company to buy it's product. I'm still citing the other resources that I found through 3rd party sites that I thought would make the article more legit.

I would really wish that you can restore this page, so I can continue to work on it and meet the requirements AFTER the article is completed. Amaxhelen (talk) 18:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

titsup.com

I initially thought you were replying to me on User:Gurubrahma's talk page, which made me very confused, because I was the one who deleted the article. JIP | Talk 16:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Burger Shop

The original deletion was for advertising, not non-notability. My version was not advertising. Electricbassguy (talk) 17:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I added two links. Electricbassguy (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Notability

hello. the article i created even though is about a class in school is a reference of the program to help/guide students about what the program is about. it is a simple info page. is there something wrong with that? can i do/add anything else to fic it? :( thanks. Imcb1925 (talk) 18:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Marcel Dzama

I am finding it impossible to log a complaint about the removal of my edits on Marcel Dzama's page. I am removing the commercial work he has done for him as he does not consider it a part of his artistic career. Why do they keep getting put back? There is no reason to advertise for record companies on his Wikipedia page and to include a few but not all is incorrect and unprofessional. Please respond to me here. Thank you and I trust that you will take this into valid consideration so I don't have to keep coming back here. I appreciate that you do not block my IP address either as my issue is with the content of the page and I am clearly not vandalizing it. Kind regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Serviceinformation (talk • contribs) 20:32, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I am finding it impossible to log a complaint about the removal of my edits on Marcel Dzama's page. I am removing the commercial work he has done for him as he does not consider it a part of his artistic career. Why do they keep getting put back? There is no reason to advertise for record companies on his Wikipedia page and to include a few but not all is incorrect and unprofessional. Please respond to me here. Thank you and I trust that you will take this into valid consideration so I don't have to keep coming back here. I appreciate that you do not block my IP address either as my issue is with the content of the page and I am clearly not vandalizing it. Kind regards, S.I. Serviceinformation (talk) 20:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

titsup.com

WRT your msg on my talkpage, I dunno how the article fails WP:WEB as all the early contributions were on the slang term and not on a particular website. The solution is revert rather than delete and it can't be done unless the article is restored. --Gurubrahma (talk) 07:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Workscited4u.com

I'm curious as to why you saw fit to delete this page. Notability was asserted by a host of external references to the website itself, and by the assertion that the site was the first to include the "Autocite feature." Your input into this matter is requested Stanley011 (talk) 03:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I asked for a response as to why you deleted this page. Note that prodding another article that I created does not count as a response. Stanley011 (talk) 21:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Florida Youth Orchestra

Orange Mike, I received your TALK that you had pulled my page for the Florida Youth Orchestra. Respectfully, I'd like some clear direction on how to make this entry acceptable for post. I have read and followed the directions provided by My First Page. I see nothing about the entry that is not pure fact. I have carefully avoided any subjective or effusive terms that could be construed as non-objective. I fail to see any differentation between the content of my page for the Florida Youth Orchestra and the pages that are in exisitence currently posted on Wikipedia for other Youth Orchestras. Your input would be most helpful. I look forward to hearing from you. Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayauteur (talk • contribs) 16:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Paul Diamond (lawyer)

Definitely just a crank lawyer, but a BIG crank lawyer who has been having a field day under new religious discrimination laws! The trouble is, he keeps on losing. His own website does not mention this, and I think it's really important and notable that this man's work is explained accurately and impartially. Wikidea 18:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, I will endeavour to find sources that conform to Wikipedia's requirements in future. Hopefully, thelawer.com is acceptable? --TheLogster (talk) 16:21, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

removing of external links in the page AtGentive Project

Dear Orange Mike, Can you let me know why you have removed two important external links in the page AtGentive Project?

These two links where complementing the official project web page by providing a reference to a Wiki in which you had much richer information about the project, and the second about a collection of resources related to attention that collected in this project and that we wanted to share with others.

Now as an external link, you just have the official page, which is as usual in such a case, something relatively boring. In particular you have removed the link to description that appeared to be much more valuable in term of knowledge to my opinion.

Thanks, Nabeth (talk) 22:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer Orange Mike. I have to still to learn more about Wikipedia as an editor of content. I try to read the rules, but they are so many that it becomes complicate. Therefore I try to do both: read the rules and publish. Concerning the two extrenal links that I provided, they were relatively reliable sources of valuable, verifiable additional information, since they were generated as part of a research project. The principle that drives me is always if the knowledge I provide is useful. I perfectly understand this idea of keeping Wikipedia in line with the orginal role, and for instance not transforming it into a linkfarm (which in some case can be useful as it was the case for the virtual library).

To finish, I would like to ask you if you have some information and other advice related to another project (a NoE) I am involved named FIDIS. As part of this project which consist in reputable experts in the domain of Identity, we would like to find a way for our consortium to contribute in Wikipedia. As you may know, the participation of Academic in Wikipedia is not particularly good (article: Assessing the Value of Cooperation in Wikipedia), and I am trying to find the way to make this process valuable for us (academic prefer usually to spend their time writing articles than adding Wikipedia content). I have tried to search in Wikipedia, and I have come to the idea of a WikiProject. WikiProject_Identity_in_the_Information_Society. Does it seems to you a good approach, or do you believe there are better ways to proceed? Thank you in advance for your answer (I just want to know if you are aware of a better alternative for what we intend to do). Thierry Nabeth (talk) 16:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Orange Mike for your answer on my talk page. I also have given you an answer in this talk page (not clear what is the most adequate place to answer). I hope it will give you clarification. In particular, I hope it will make clear that what is intended to do is NOT original research. Thierry Nabeth (talk) 13:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool down blocks

Please see Wikipedia:BLOCK#Cool-down_blocks, which says "Brief blocks for the sole purpose of "cooling down" an angry user should not be used, as they inevitably serve to inflame the situation." Without opinion as to whether or not Ncmvocalist's original edits were correct or whether a block was justified in general, a "cool down block" is never appropriate. My unsolicited advice as a not at all uninvolved admin is to consider either removing the block or at least modifying your text to better express what behaviors the block was designed to prevent. Thanks. --B (talk) 18:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, on further review, I think it was a very good and necessary block, just calling it a "cool down block" is a bad idea. --B (talk) 19:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

• I've unblocked per the unblock reqiuest, since the user has agreed not to act disruptively in the future, and I'm going to assume good faith in that. Hiding T 20:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of article on common defenition use of "Monotone"

The deletion log showed you as pulling this stub Monotone (common) that I started. I'd like to know how to proceed to convince you to revert this. I fail to see why this topic that companies spend a lot of effort dealing with, is mentioned as the focus of many Osha effords, merrits entire days and weeks in seminars on public speaking and education/training is "patent nonsense". None of the people above are dealing with mathematics, geometry, economics, voting, and they are not talking about music of only one note either. There's way more to the topic than a dictionary definition. : Maybe your opinion arose from a difference on view how Wikipedia articles should be created. I liken the process to product development. No one is asked to put a finished product on the table including references to all aplicable standards. What you do is throw out ideas and get experts in each area to flesh out details, then you see if it flies. I don't have all the answers, but I think that creating a page and asking the experts with access to all those "members only" articles to supply details, is a way to make information on this topic accessible to those looking to wikipedia for information. The label (common) may also have contributed to having the stub classified as "nonsense", however I'm not sure what label would be better suited. I'm open to suggestions. Labeling it (psychology) might not jibe with the experts' system of labeling {ergonomics) would not include the other 2 uses outlined above, which are closely related. Although each might merit it's separate page later on, I feel we should keep them together till the topics have grown to a size warranting that step, rather than having 3 stubs (where even having one is now being disputed)  : I hope i have managed to present my arguments in a reasonable way, although I admit to being quite incensed by that labeling and process, as you might have gathered if you took the trouble to read the talk page. Having people at companies spend lots of time in meetings and gathering on a certain topic might not necessarily mean it isn't "patent nonsense" (after all we pay lots of people big salaries with little to show for it :-) it would however be nice to have a page to see what they are up to.  : Looking forward to having the sub undeleted or your comments as to why not. Lisa4edit (talk) 20:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

How come you think that what that article tried to get the word "to mean something it doesn't"??? as I tried to explain above, none of the existing articles covers some of the most "common" usages of "Monotone". Or would you kindly explain how the meaning used by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work or Occupational Safety and Health Administration or the other 2 usages are in any way covered by any of the existing articles. I'm willing to listen to arguments, but I will resist having an article deleted just because someone "feels" that it's not useful to them. I don't "feel" anything in Monotone (software) is going to help me explain what makes a speech monotonous. Monotone class theorem is not going to help figure out how to change existing jobs to meet new work safety requirements. Monotone preferences will not aid me in creating exercises that are not monotonous while being beneficially repetitive. I'd be most interested what your "feeling" is based on, exactly what did you think in the suggested examples does not mean "monotone"? As I also explained I don't have all the answers, but I certainly have the questions and I know that none of the wikipedia articles to date cover them and I equally know that there are answers out there because otherwise an amazing number of people would waste their working life on "patent nonsense that is forced to mean something it doesn't mean." --Lisa4edit (talk) 00:38, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

thanks!

...for the constant csd-checking. Every time i nominate something i seem to check my watchlist and find you've deleted it within a couple of minutes :). Ironholds (talk) 00:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of page "Western Carolina University Academic Programs". What about a listing of college majors/minors is blatant advertising ? Glovejr (talk) 00:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

butting in here, the college has a website, I think. There's general agreement that this sort of list is not encyclopedic content, certainly not by itself. It could have been speedied equally on other grounds, such as being a list of links and nothing more. I'm much more reluctant than OM to speedy-delete articles, but I think it a good enough speedy. There is really zero chance of making an acceptable article out of it. DGG (talk) 03:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Liberalism/Additional_reading deletion

While I personally support the deletion, you speedied something that had earlier an inconclusive AfD, so that may cause some sparks to fly. Scott.wheeler (talk) 14:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Paul Diamond.

Alright, sounds good to me. Logster's edits seem suspicious to me too... · AndonicO ^Engage. 16:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Justin K Kazmierczak

Just thought I'd say hello. Thanks for helping me out a bit, one day I'll submit somthing you can't delete lol. Nice to know how fast this comunity works :) Nice to meet you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justinkaz (talk • contribs) 14:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

double voting?

Hi. You voted twice here. In addition, in your second "delete" vote you proposed to "redirect". So I'm a bit confused with your proposal?--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: The unfortunate misunderstanding

Also sorry from my side; I should have realized that this name sounds like a URL. So fortunately everything ended up fine. :-) I just requested to have my name changed to Timosch_xyz on WP:CHU. PS: I had the chance to enjoy beautiful Milwaukee half a year ago. - Timosch.de (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Celeste Dinucci

Mike what are your thoughts on this article. WHy do we need a biography of a gameshow contestant?? SHouldn't it be merged into a section in the main articles summarizing the shows successful contestants?? Probably some people will think this is what wikipedia is about, but an encyclopedia in my view should not have biogrpahical articles on people like this ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 20:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Radioo Naming Conventions

I tried to move the Information of the Radio Station from the Callsign to its Name and I had a very hard time with it because some users undid what I did. I have nothing to do, but to give up those things. Now, I finally accept those Radio Naming Conventions. 203.87.181.218 (talk) 22:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

KPHX

Hi!

Help me please?

I work for KPHX. So I am not supposed to edit it...

Well, Neither is KingDaevid, who has a show on here and he made this edit recently;

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=KPHX_%28AM%29&curid=4535092&diff=215467357&oldid=212200503

Could you revert it for me please and make any other changes you think are appropriate?

Thanks so much!!!!

Direct Action Gets Results.

--BenBurch (talk) 01:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Violet Blue & editor KathrynA

From that list of edits it would appear to me that this person *is* the author the article is about - new press mentions are added so regularly that only the author could know about them. I think I am going to watch that article like a hawk, and if you have time, I'd wish you would too. Thanks! --BenBurch (talk) 16:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Orange!

Cause the line after your signature told me to do so! How's it going? --UWMSports (talk) 19:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, absolutely! I know I'll find you!!! How often you there? --UWMSports (talk) 19:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good, I've already left for the day today, but I'll definitely have to find you! A snack sounds good.--UWMSports (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your speedy action

on the William Wasz article. He's dead, so BLP doesn't strictly apply, but with no reliable sources, lots of derogatory info and dubious notability, the page was still an embarrassment to the project. David in DC (talk) 20:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Fan Fiction templating

I was placing the template on certain articles that have some relationship with fan fiction. It is true that some of them are not related 100%. Yet, I beleive that if there is some aspect of the article that could be an interest to the WikiProject Fan Fiction it ought to be tagged as being part of the project. Take Michael Jordan for example. He is part of the WikiProject for baseball, but only spent a year in the minors a baseball player. --Pinkkeith (talk) 21:37, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

'bout nutshack

hey, orange mike, uh... why did you delete the article? I mean, how come the other stuff that i read made it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Claymore007 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

My prophetic powers

Why, thank you! I gained them after being exposed to the radiation from a meteorite of pure Vandalium! - Vianello (talk) 01:44, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Mohamed Abdelwahab Abdelfattah

Hello -- you're doing a great job. I was looking today for the article on Mohamed Abdelwahab Abdelfattah, on which I had worked painstakingly for months, and found it entirely missing. After about an hour of searching, I was finally able to determine that you had deleted the article entirely (?) here, without any discussion. This is one of the most prominent Egyptian composers of contemporary classical music under 50, and hence one of the most prominent Arabic or Middle Eastern composers of such music, and, as such, I'd very much appreciate your graciousness in restoring this page so that this individual may be properly documented in our encyclopedia. Thanks so much in advance for this. Badagnani (talk) 02:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Bodies of Water deletion

I'm not clear on why the Bodies of Water page got deleted. They've been reviewed by the Rolling Stone, Spin, Pitchfork, and a bunch of top music blogs (as I noted) -- which I would think would fulfill criterion #1 of the music notability guidelines. In addition, they've released two albums on Secretly Canadian and have one coming out in July (criterion #5). Also, they have "at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable" (Adam Siegel) -- criterion #6. All this stuff was noted in the article. I'm not trying to be a jerk; I understand the need to police this kind of thing, but I think they are as deserving of an article as any of the other Secretly Canadian bands, as most of them already have got. Dulcettones (talk) 03:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on the page! Dulcettones (talk) 14:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

clay is now not climbing on a pole

So i had a page called Clay was climbing on the pole and it got deleted, either could i have that back up or have a screenshot of it? thanks very much dude. I can see how you didnt want it on wikipedia.Jrpibb (talk) 04:12, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Bimbo Deluxe

Hi Orangemike, I've just come back from holiday to find you've deleted a page I wrote years ago about a bar in Melbourne called Bimbo Deluxe. Can I ask why you decided to delete it? Thanks, Matnkat (talk) 13:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:User Page Design Center

I see you deleted Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:User Page Design Center as a user request just now. Is that allowable for withdrawn for deletion discussions if others have left comments? I only ask because I contributed an opinion in the discussion before it was deleted. Should it have just been closed as "withdrawn" instead of deleted like that? Metros (talk) 14:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Request review of deletion of Progress Application Partner

This page you deleted today after it was marked for speedy deletion defined a certain kind of software developer for the benefit of similar software developers as well as users of that kind of software. As a resource to netizens, being able to understand the terms and roles involved is important for their own purposes. The page did not advocate any product, company or individuals. It defined the term "Progress Application Partner" as something more specific than simply "independent software vendor" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlucy67 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I had never heard of the term "Progress Application Partner" as a type of software developer, and it doesn't appear to be any buzzoword, it appears to be only a company program --Enric Naval (talk) 16:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

BucApella=

How is a BucAppella page any different from other A Cappella group pages on wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ABusa (talk • contribs) 15:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Moment Theory

Hi there; I know that you have been an admin for longer than I have, and I will defer to your judgement. This user, to whom you gave an {{indefblock}}. is asking for a review. He claims to be only a fan of the band, not a member of it. I have no way of telling, but I have a feeling that he may be telling the truth. Would you care to review? --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 18:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The Ordinary Radicals deletion

Hello! Just today we here at my production company have been attempting to post articles on both The Ordinary Radicals as well as Jamie Moffett, the director of the film. The former entry was deleted due to conflict of interest violations as well as being considered promotional material. As the creators of the movie I am unclear as to how we are supposed to post an article without it being considered as such. At the moment we are the most qualified to provide information about it since the movie is currently in production. I realize that I forgot to cite a reference in the first iteration of the article, but as I was attempting to fix this in my User page (User:Chandlervision, I understand the reason for the username ban as it is also the name of my pseudo-company) that was also deleted. We have a fairly strong following of fans that is growing, and if we can provide them with a foundation to edit then we are confident that it will be fleshed out by them, as well as our staff providing the information that the fans cannot. I have read the page and editing guidelines but it's possible I missed some details or nuances. I simply don't see what was wrong with the entry, especially the one for Jamie Moffett who runs the company and would like to be included for context. One other thing to note is that our movie is not, and will not be copywrited, so the infringement seems non-existant. I'd appreciate a response or even suggestions as to how we can avoid breaking the guidelines for a future entry. Thanks for your time! --Stevemotion (talk) 19:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Question

Is it kosher for SportsMaster to be doing this? SportsMaster's Contributions. Scroll down or hit next at this point. He wrote notes on several users boards about the vote over the AD from Cleveland State. It's relatively neutral wording, but these might be people who he has grown to know and work with on certain articles. What do you think? --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 20:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

He recruited a bunch of other users by leaving them messages on their talk page to get them to the AfD vote. --GoHuskies9904 (talk) 02:40, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE!

Please could you put "The Comics (band)" page back on Wikipedia as they now have a record deal and are a support act for the band 'The Wombats'. PLEASE could you put it back on? -- CrackersTeam (talk) 23:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Lenatalia

The spamming indef block [6] seems a little....harsh. She created the nonsense article once, yes? Darkspots (talk) 02:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

create2 warn. Bored girl in her twenties. Hey, I see your point, too, though. No big deal. I guess I just like to see folks get a warning shot across the bow before the indef unless they really do something egregious. Darkspots (talk) 02:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate you taking the time to explain your thinking to me. That make a lot of sense. Darkspots (talk) 02:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

WHY MY PAGE

HI I AM NEW TO WIKI I HAVE ALREADY HAD MY PAGE DELETED AND YOU DELTING IT DID NOT MAKE ME ANY HAPPYIER AND I DONT KNOW WHAT COUNTRY YOUR IN BUT IN MY COUNTRY IT IS CURRENTLY 3:42 AM AND I AM 15 SO IM SORRY BUT IT DID NOT HELP ME —Preceding unsigned comment added by HACKER1993 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right...

This is a strange case. This may or may not be the same person. If it is, there's a serious COI issue. If not, he/she sure is a fan of this person. Either way, there's some assertion of notability, but hoo boy, trying to unearth it is a gargantuan task. I'm not de facto against an article, but certainly not this one. Oh, well...it's the weekend.  :) Thanks for all your good work. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 04:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Point of Divergence

Nah I don't think so. Omission of the group from the article I don't think takes anything away from what the article is trying to say about a POD. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 14:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah so am I. I even submitted some of my alternate history work to Changing the Times and the Alterante History Wiki. I haven't heard of your friend's group though until I saw that article. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 14:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

What do you know the group does still exist, check out the change to the article. Zombie Hunter Smurf (talk) 15:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikispedia

For real? ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 21:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Dionysus Explorer Scout Unit

Why was this page deleted? I put the reason for its stay on the page and the talk page. It's an important part of the scout's history! I demand it be put back! Cadan ap Tomos (talk) 14:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree! Impeach Bushco and his minions...

I am glad that you aren't a lefty lib. 72.60.178.71 (talk) 19:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

movie

I am a new movie producer Right out of collage and I think and I made a wikipedia page about a movie that is getting made and is very —Preceding unsigned comment added by JackieTeal (talk • contribs) 00:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Ed Biado

Mind taking a look at this thread as well as the DRV? Hoary had just restored it. It wasn't a G7 (it wasn' the author who requested it) and wasn't an A7, which was why I took it to DRV. I was *trying* avoid a wheel war. Thoughts? _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 01:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Can I ask why you reverted the page for Tell City, In after I added information about the city. And added the place for what I was going to put about the type of Government and council, the parks and recreation and so forth, other cities pages have those kinds of information, why can't I add that for the city I live in. It wasn't any thing malicious, did you even look at the additions I made or did you just revert it cause I made it. Constitutional congress (talk) 03:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Bettina Shaw-Lawrence

Have made as many changes as possible to improve the article. However it is difficult for the one writing the article and whose first Wikipedia article it is to pin point all the mistakes. If there is anything missing or if you believe that the article now meets most Wikipedia requirements, I would be most grateful if you could let me know. It would be so nice to be able to delete some of those tags. Regards, Boselawrence (talk) 08:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Boselawrence

Richard Stern

Hello, I understand you don't delete pages simply because someone has retired, but surely you can respect the wishes of the subject of the page itself; my professional life and aspirations are being severely threatened by my internet presence and it would mean a great deal to my future to have this page deleted. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazydork (talk • contribs) 14:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Frank Marshall Davis

The assertion was made by Gerald Home, NOT a blogger, but have become notable because of the repetition of Loudon and Kincaid. This 'audit trail' is therefore part of the notability.Flatterworld (talk) 15:04, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

See articles about other political scandals. Yes, it is indeed encyclopedic to dissect them. The section is about this 'purported link', and therefore requires an explanation of how it became a purported link. Bring it up on the Talk page of the article is you like. Flatterworld (talk) 15:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Krause 450 (talk · contribs)

Hi Mike. I take responsibility for my unblocks, and will monitor his contributions. If he doesn't follow the rules, I'll be the first to block him. Neıl 龱 15:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

Thanks for the quick reply to my question. "citation for personal communication" [7] I have another question about it and I couldn't figure out how to enter it on that page (This is my first day editing). The question is this: If personal experience can't be verified and thus can't be cited (makes sense), then is there a way to remove "needs citation" from the article? It seems a little weird if the information, by nature of its content, can't have a citation - to require one for it. Say, if the New York Times happen to order a DVD from the director and then published a story about it, I could reference that NYT's article, but in fact it was the personal experience of the Times journalist. Which we agree can't be verified. I understand reputation and why people trust some published sources (and not others). But what I'm wondering is how to address this particular situation. Since I happen to know that the statement is true and I would like to help that particular wikipedia article. Thanks again Orangemike.

DoctorRocket (talk) 18:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

OfficeArrow - Kevin Cannella

Hello, I tried to make this page last week and you deleted it for blatant advertising. Is there a way I could discuss the article and which parts specifically are advertising? I had no intension of advertising OfficeArrow on Wikipedia, simply just add the page, similarly to Facebook or LinkedIn or Ning.

Thank you,

Kevin--Kevincannella (talk) 19:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandals for blocking

Block these vandals please:

Here and User talk:Scoobydoo487, Both have had at least three of four warnings and some of their vandalsim has gone undetected. Things would be a lot easier if I had admin tools. It would save me pestering admins all the time. ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦ ^$1,000,000? 21:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Freddy Vs Ghostbusters - Original Research?

How is it that an article about the highly notable film Freddy Vs Ghostbusters is considered "original research"? Mozepy (talk) 00:02, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

But you are the one who said "original research". Mozepy (talk) 03:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hub bike coop

Look Mike, I really don't know why you deleted my Hub Bike Coop article. I'm pretty pissed because it has now been deleted TWO TIMES. My recommendation for you to be CONSTRUCTIVE rather than DESTRUCTIVE; make articles instead of delete them. We did our best to provide an adequate amount of information and references, yet you still deleted it. Please reply to me via my talk page regarding this issue. Believe me, Mike, the Hub Bike Coop will NEVER go away. Just test me. -Ldud ل داد 12:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

WE Youth Political organization

Hi! I've just been given notice by a friend that you wrote there, December 11, 2007, about WE Youth Political organization: «This article looks like an advertisement/party platform to me, but the editor/guardian refuses to address my concerns. Could you take a look at it? I don't read Russian (or Ukrainian), but I suspect the articles cited don't really talk about this organization at all (or not meaningfully)». I see this article has been deleted six days later, probably for the best…
Sorry for being so late answering. Unfortunately, my long-time pal and colleague Ivan Korenyuk died October 6, 2007.
Cordially,
✓ Kanġi Oĥanko (talk) 13:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I greatly appreciate the words you gave me about Ivan. I still mourn him. We've been always together on all paths and in the same “adventures”, including our country's independance and the Orange Revolution.
Sincere thanks to you. ✓ Kanġi Oĥanko (talk) 18:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

notability question

While on NP patrol, I encountered this page and made an attempt to clean it up. It appears to just barely pass the notability requirements to me, but I'm not sure exactly if it does or not. I was wondering if you would look it over a little and tell me what you think. Thanks for the help. Thingg^⊕⊗ 18:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

About Héctor Zumbado

Hello, I just saw that you challenged the neutrality & tone/style of Héctor Zumbado. Please discuss the issue in the article's talk page, so we can fix it. Thanks for your concern!

User:Alfredo J. Herrera Lago. —Preceding comment was added at 21:13, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Urtbox

hangon

Please dont delete urtbox pages i just need to fixe information. i dont now wath is wrong whit the last messages ? ihave not put link ? thanks for your help Martin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Merikavril9 (talk • contribs) — Merikavril9 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

This is a blatant advertisement for a new, non-notable website. It has been deleted three times now. Please do not try to re-create it until and unless the website becomes notable. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Black Starfish...

Could you please protect this page, after deleting it again, as I do not think these kids are going to stop re-starting the article. I've pointed them in the direction of WP:SOAP and WP:N, but that did not seem to slow their efforts any. - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Sable Starr

I see you deleted my page just as I was about to add more references. Why did you do that, may I ask? Sable was one of the most popular groupies of the era, far more so than that Connnie Hamzy from Arkansas, who has her own article at Wikipedia. I had another article on an LA glam punk band deleted just because the editor had never heard of them. That's the problem when editors come from other regions and aren't familiar with people who were extremely popular in California, as was Sable. I well remember having seen her around everywhere and the rock magazines were full of her photos. Just type her name in Google and see how often she comes up. Could you explain why you deleted my article? Thanks.jeanne (talk) 05:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I've written few articles about living persons, most of my articles are about medieval women who have been dead for many centuries. IN fact, I have spent much of my time sourcing these historical people from many sources. Perhaps you are biased towards me due to our conflicting political opinions. I have not failed to notice that all the critcism I receive on Wikipedia come from people who have stated their left- wing POV. I, am openly right-wing as can be clearly seen on my User page. I am a right-wing, Monarchist, which is bound to attract hostility from those on the other side of the political divide. I don't think you realise just how notable Sable Starr was seeing as you did not live in Los Angeles at the time as I did, but I really don't care for your insinuations that my articles are poorly-sourced. Have you, perchance, read all my articles?jeanne (talk) 14:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you please point out one article that I have written where I sourced Astrotheme? You have only been reading my talk pages not my articlesjeanne (talk) 14:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

re: Noelke Law Firm Article

I get paid, the article gets deleted, and my boss probably never looks to see what happened. Everyone wins; I hope it didn't take too much of your time (I have added Wikipedia to my list of charitable contributions -again- in penance). I have it saved on a sub-page of mine, and if he ever does anything notable, I'll add meat and repost it. I suspect this will happen someday, but as of this date, I personally agree that the firm is not notable. I tried to make that clear on my user page. Rule11 (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Regards about GV 99.9

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits for GV 99.9.

I undid what you did in GV 99.9. You erased the History, Profile and the sister stations of GV 99.9 by undoing the whole thing, but now I UNDID WHAT YOU DID and the History, Profile and the Sister Stations are there.

DO NOT undo what I did to GV 99.9 because it is FINAL.

ZRMontez (talk) 12:12, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

You should be aware of...

this discussion, but I would suggest that although your evidence and observations might be of value, it might be thought inappropriate for you to be the closing admin. Kevin McE (talk) 08:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

In the Process of editing McIntosh Gallery page

Hi, in the process of editing, will move it to my page and then add it later. Is there a way to get the article checked by one of you before posting it so that ot doesnt get deleted in such a way. Do let me know. Thanks Vishazz (talk) 17:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC)vishazz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishazz (talk • contribs) 17:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

McIntosh Gallery

I must protest and say that it is a notable entity. It the second oldest university are gallery in Canada. It is mentioned in many other places like Kim Ondaatje's page, Philip Aziz's page and some other artists. Its a non for profit organization funded by the Govt of Canada, Univ of Western ontario and many others. It also has one of the biggest collections of Canadian artists amongst University Galleries. Vishazz (talk) 17:21, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Two lights state park

Hi... it's back at Two lights state park. It seems he holds the copyright... but doesn't really understand Wikipedia policies about copyright. I don't know what to do so I'm dropping you a line. --Rividian (talk) 18:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Francis Huster

Hi! Your concern regarding this actor was certainly understandable. I believe that I have added enough material and references to remove the deletion tag. Thank you. Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 19:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Dickipedia

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Dickipedia. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 01:40, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Priscilla Ahn Notability

How isn't she notable? I posted detailed explanations concerning her notability on the article's discussion page, but I'll be brief here.

She satisfies WP:MUSIC in criterion 1 and 10. She has had non-trivial articles about her in Paste and Filter magazines, and has appeared or had music featured in several television shows and a feature film.

Joe Capricorn (talk) 12:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Chris Young (musician)

Why on earth did you tag Chris Young (musician) for possibly not meeting notability? The article makes it pretty clear that he's notable — he's charted three singles on the country charts, released an album on a major label, and he was the winner of Nashville Star, which is a notable talent show. Furthermore, there are plenty of reliable sources, which I will add to the article once I'm awake. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:49, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

• A little bit of good faith couldn't hurt. The article's a mess now, I'll get to rewriting it. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Mercury City (band)

Can I please get some insight on why sight on why this page was deleted. Furthermore, why it was deleted within minutes of the speedy deletion tag. I put credible and proper references and wasn't even given a fair shot to dispute the deletion.(Shick20 (talk) 21:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC))

ionised bracelets

Glad you agree. I'd also welcome (if it is on your patrol) your comments on the page orgone and your assessment of the situation there. Or message me on my talk page. Thanks. Redheylin (talk) 22:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Piece of crap

That's what I thought. It's a legitimate redirect. Dlohcierekim 04:40, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I see. We already have that. Deleted the duplicate. How I long for the days of less colorful titles. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 04:45, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Ionized bracelet G11 review

Could you review the deletion of Ionized bracelet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)? I've reviewed my cached copy, and it does not appear to meet the G11 criteria. Specifically, it did not "exclusively promote" the product. The vast majority of the article was critical of the product, calling it a placebo and referring to false advertisement lawsuits. –Gunslinger47 05:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Apparent Spamming

Mike, I appreciate your keeping an eye on my edits, but I'm not intending to spam. I'm merely trying to create pages on behalf of other people and link them together in order that they can then edit them (and obviously the whole world can, too). If a page is deleted a few minutes after I've added it, they won't have chance! :-) So, what I'm saying is, please don't block me!

Paul

P.S. I'm 1/4 Irish ;-)

Paridox (talk) 15:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Following your comment, "You have created few or no articles on any other topic, nor even edited any unrelated topics. This is often considered indicative of an intention to promote." While this does appear to be true, I have in fact been editing pages anonymously for a long time now (since May 2007), but without creating an account. I created an account because I needed to create new articles. I do not wish to appear to be promoting any company or product; everything I add I intend to be unbiased. If you feel that something is biased, please point it out and I will address it gladly.

Paul

Paridox (talk) 17:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Apparent Spamming 2

Thanks for your note, Orange Mike. I don't know if it was you or someone else, but I've just noticed a formal warning about apparent spamming of Wikipedia. I've only been putting in links to pieces that I think are apposite, and that I believe enhance the Wikipedia project: see, for example, Ronald Hutton's recent fascinating piece about Stonehenge on the "Stonehenge" page; or the equally brilliant piece by Clifford S. L. Davies about the myths surrounding "Tudor" England, on the "Tudor history" page. I don't wish to cause any problems on Wikipedia, and am very happy to discuss anything that you or your colleagues aren't happy about. Cheers, Richtig27 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richtig27 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Contesting deletion

I'm sorry but thinking about contesting your A7 deletion of Sarah Nagy, the claims of importance in the article included founding a student film festival. I realise that the article will almost certainly be deleted at AfD as I doubt the person is notable or that the reliable sources to back up a verifiable article exist but I think the user that created the article deserves the chance to answer such arguments and improve the article. Several external links were given in the article such as these showing that the individual has received coverage on some level and all things considered I don't think it was a speedy delete candidate. I'm sorry if there is something I'm missing such as an old AfD, please be assured that no offence is intended. Regards, Guest9999 (talk) 16:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree in so far as I doubt the person is notable but A7 only requires that the article not indicate why they might be notable, in this case I think that was achieved. Whilst starting up a student event is unlikely to lead to the kind of coverage by reliable sources required to meet our inclusion standards it potentially could and there was at least coverage in the local press which there isn't for a lot of similar things. I just think in situations like these it's better to go through the process to ensure that the article cannot be improved and there is a consensus to delete. Guest9999 (talk) 17:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Peer review of the Esperanto article is now underway

Hello, Orangemike! As a member of the Esperanto task force, I thought that you may be interested in the latest development that we are undertaking: a peer review of the Esperanto article. The ultimate goal of this peer review is to prepare the article for candidacy for featured article status, so please be very critical and demanding in your judgment if you are able to participate. Thanks!

Your fellow Esperanto task force member, TFCforever (talk) 02:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

N.W.A @ Crediton

Yo(kel)! You might want to keep an eye on this as we may be getting into 3RR territory. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

userpage

Hey! You deleted my user page! Other than the 419 scam email snippet, what was nonsensical about it? evildeathmath 13:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of LA-944

I had updated the reason for the speedy deleletion- they said it was because i did not have a reason why LA-944 was important i explained that it was because LA-944 is a very noticed part in the community. i was also not done with the page- i had a few more sections to add. please explain. (i am not mad, just curious) Cyruskety (talk) 17:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Gray magick

You deleted the gray magic page. I really don't know much about writing articles but i do know that there should be articles about gray magic white magic and black magic. And if you like orange magic. also what was so nonsensual about the articles i tried to make about gray magic??? --Condolence( 05:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Jamie Hamilton (motorcycle racer)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jamie Hamilton (motorcycle racer). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Davewild (talk) 20:57, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Ionized bracelet

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ionized bracelet. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 02:40, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I have specifically asked to request to join the discussion there about these articles.

Would you mind also restoring Talk:Ionized bracelet? I think you missed it. Thanks. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 13:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Northwestern University Men's Basketball

Please restore this page. It is of a notable Big Ten basketball team and due to your deletion, it is the only Big Ten men's basketball team to not have a page on Wikipedia. Furthermore, your reason for deletion is inapproriate. The information relating to the team would not be nonsense and if it was nonsense, it would most likely be due to vandalism, in which case deletion would not have been the proper course of action.Eb3686 20:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eb3686 (talk • contribs)

Here's the link where you're listed as the deleter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Northwestern_Wildcats_men%27s_basketball&action=edit&redlink=1

As you can see, it lists you as the deleter and your reason is listed as the nonsense one.

I saw this when looking at the "Men's basketball teams of the Big Ten Conference" bottom section of the Illinois Fighting Illini men's basketball article. Sorry if there's something that I missed along the way, I don't quite know all of the Wikipedia guidelines, but in any case, an article doesn't currently exist for this, and I'm guessing one did at least at some point in the past. Thanks for the response! (Eb3686 16:59, 9 June 2008 (UTC))

Ah, sorry, but I can't figure out how to make my signature show up properly with a link. --Eb3686 17:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I guess I'll start up a page myself =) -- eb3686 | talk 21:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I just finished a new version of the page. Do you mind looking it over, as this is my first attempt at writing a Wikipedia article? Thanks!-- eb3686 | talk 10:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Purr Mama Resistor is dead

hi. you deleted Purr Mama Resistor. go team. could you be so kind as to tell me where the content has been relegated or sandboxed to so i can post it on another website? thanks. Larsro (talk) 14:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Purderous Magina Records is dead

hi. you deleted Purderous Magina Records. go team. could you be so kind as to tell me where the content has been relegated or sandboxed to so i can post it on another website? thanks. Larsro (talk) 14:57, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Good job!!!

I had nominated 4 articles (mostly about living persons) and saw you swiftly deleted them. Just wanted to say thanks and keep up the good work. I am trying to make sure WP:WikiProject India has new articles that comply to Wikipedia standards.

--gppande «talk» 15:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Please reinstate article for Chaindriven

For the following reasons, please do not delete the new article about Chaindriven, as it contains the following notable content which is both important and significant: 1. Chaindriven just won a contest at KLOS, the largest classic rock station in Los Angeles. This contest received more than 300 entries. 2. The Chaindriven article includes a citation to verify that Chaindriven won this contest. 3. This contest was held by the Mark & Brian show, one of the most popular morning radio shows in Los Angeles.

4. The Chaindriven article is as notable as any of the other articles that were created under the

category. Most of those articles do not contain any citations, or any "important and significant" information.

I welcome any suggestions that you may have to make this article stronger. However, please do not just arbitrarily delete this article. JackBaker5 (talk) 16:38, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Hasty deletion of Standpoint Magazine

This page (content below) was deleted instantly. Despite my posting of {{hangon}} Perhaps you do not follow political magazines , and were under the misimpression that this is some sort of non-notable or vanity publication. Perhaps you were merely hasty . Please note that while this publication is new, it is handsomely funded and the project of a group of distinguished, experienced journalists and that its notability is established by the media attention it is receiving.

Standpoint is a “much anticipated new cultural and political monthly magazine” launched in June 2008. It is based in London and edited by Daniel Johnson (journalist).<refr>[ http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2008/06/8c07d84f-2300-4b8d-ae6a-08311ce1aeba.html]</ref>

The editors announced that their “core mission is to celebrate our civilization, its arts and its values – in particular democracy, debate and freedom of speech – at a time when they are under threat.”

Michael J. Totten calls it “impressive.”

Margareta Pagano writing in The Independent desscribes Standpoint as “a highbrow magazine that launches next month to "defend and celebrate" Western civilisation in the post-9/11 era.” “.Standpoint is funded for "at least" a year by the Social Affairs Unit, the independent think-tank linked to the Institute of Economic Affairs (the source of Margaret Thatcher's free-market thinking).” The first issue included art by David Hockney, poetry by Robert Conquest, criticism by Andrew Marr, articles by Ian Bostridge, Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, Jung Chang, Simon Sebag Montefiore, Tim Congdon, Michael Burleigh, Douglas Murray, Alasdair Palmer , Edward Lucas, Emanuele Ottolenghi, Jay Nordlinger Bruce Bawer and Jonathan Bate.

Elan26 (talk) 16:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Elan26

Webpage

http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/

References

.Elan26 (talk) 16:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)Elan26

RE: National Express West Midlands route 283 article

For your information, i was going to be working on it but you had removed the above mentioned article before that. it is a cross Midlands bus rout with a jucey history. i should know most the history because i worked for the companies that has ran the route.

I would like the page restored or i shall go for a deletion review. Please repy on my talk page.

DudleybusUser talk:Dudleybus 8:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC), 09:09 (BST)

Deletion review for National Express West Midlands route 283

An editor has asked for a deletion review of National Express West Midlands route 283. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Dudleybus^{please talkwith the UK Transport Wiki} 11:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

re: gabriel olds picture

I'm unclear why you deleted the free picture provided for Gabriel Olds, actor. I'll re-instate, assuming it was a mistake. If it was not, or you disagree, feel free to reply to me directly. Ps: i like your orange hat. I hope you wear it while typing.  ;)

Wonton884User talk:Wonton884 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.212.215 (talk) 18:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Zemanta article - NO blatant advertising!

Greetings, I would like to hear an elaboration on why the Zemanta article was speedily deleted upon accusations of blatant advertising. I consider it to be a devaluation of my work as I'm not a part of Zemanta and even though I am using the plugin, I remained very objective in my writing. No promotion or advertising, mentioning how "good" it is and so forth, just stating some basic facts on what it is and what it does. That is why I made the core of article about the company and Not the product.

The only reason I can think of why it's been deleted is that you've considered my neutral point of view writing to be PR since I aimed for a condensed pile of facts that could be attributed to further at a later point in time - since I think there's plenty more to write about.

So, with all due respect, what was the actual reason for deleting the article? I maintain my position that there was absolutely nothing wrong with it as a starting point for a new developing article and that it should therefore be reinstated/undeleted/repositioned. However, if there actually were some minor detalis to fix I am of course prepared to listen what needs to be repaired.

Z-lot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Z-lot (talk • contribs) 18:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up, my pulse has gone down a bit :) Yet still, Zemanta is not such a non-notable company - it's a web startup, that is true, but this is all that could serve as an argument for being not notable. What put it on the map a long time ago was an article in TechCrunch (I never even had the chance to add that detail to the article!), I assume that you are aware of its importance - this is far more important than the Guardian interview (that I actually did reference) or perhaps even [http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2008/06/trying-zemanta.html Fred Wilson}'s thoughts. Another "notable" thing is the thing that they're developing - its function is quite unique and certainly a benefit to the blogosphere at large (one of the feature requests by us users was also a plugin for Wikipedia platform, I hope they'll work on that too). If that's not notable, I truly don't know what it is. It's not just some irrelevant garage company.

With that said, I would still like the article back since it is bound to reappear sooner rather than later. So please, take a look at the links I provided and make a second judgement. I'm confident that your conclusion will be somewhat different.

--Z-lot 19:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay then, I respect your decision. I'll just wait until it gets broader independent coverage then. It shouldn't take long :)

--Z-lot 20:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Connecticut Gay Men's Chorus

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Connecticut Gay Men's Chorus. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Davewild (talk) 21:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

CSD

Hi Orangemike I hope you don't mind a friendly note of advice but I have seen a couple of your deletions at DRV recently and a quick look at your talk page suggests that there has been some disquiet about your deletions recently. I wondered whether you might be willing to consider sending some of the more borderline deletions to AFD rather then nuking them at CSD? My own view is that the amount of time it take to list something with Twinkle is negligible given how much time and angst gets wasted arguing the toss with unhappy editors and fighting a process like DRV that is inherently in favour of keeping articles if at all possible. I know there is a real temptation to try and save the AFD stuff that looks like it hasn't a hope but you would be surprised what can be salvaged during an AFD discussion and sometimes its just not worth fighting a lost cause. Obviously its down to you what you do but I just thought I should make the suggestion. Best Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

• In that case, I hope yu don't mind my suggesting you leave these borderline cases for someone else to handle. That will free you up to do more interesting stuff andthere are plenty of admins around who haven't used up their quotient of drama or have twinkle so can list stuff really quick. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

The Prelude

Hi there, I ask that you re-install the page for The Prelude (band) since it is a page about a music band, and to be honest it is no more advertising than other pages such as The_Paddingtons, or The_Others_(band), or Guillemots, or Alexis_Blue or just about 97% of the bands that one finds in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:British_indie_rock_groups or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:English_musical_groups or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Music_from_London or any other category in the music/band-related pages that appear on wikipedia.

furthermore, it IS true that if you look at the results of a search on google for "prelude liverpool" you get 5 pages of hits since the band are becoming extremely popular, have recently been praised by the music press on both sides of the pond, and more reasons of the sort http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=prelude+liverpool&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

Thanks.

Springfling (talk) 22:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Be careful with national varieties of English

I thank you for the information. Once more, even though I am well traveled, this does surprise me. I will take note of it moving forward. (Majin Takeru (talk) 03:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC))

SMV speedy delete

The logs indicate you were the deleting admin on SMV (band). According to WP:CSD#A7, only reasonable indication of why the article might be notable is necessary. I believe I've provided that in my discussion with the nominating editor (see: User talk:Legotech#SMV speedy delete and User talk:Fru1tbat#SMV (band)). In summary, it appears to me that, considering the group is made up of 3 notable and influential musicians, according to WP:MUSIC#Criteria for musicians and ensembles #6 ("Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable" - in this case all 3 members) it is by definition notable. Certainly, it would seem to qualify for "a reasonable indication" of notability. I understand that there's not a whole lot of information available at present, as the group was only recently formed, but isn't that what stub articles are for? When I wrote the article, I assumed the links to the members' articles would be enough to provide verifiability of its notability. What other criteria need to be filled? Thanks. --Fru1tbat (talk) 14:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of redirect

It appears that you (and the original tagging editor) applied the wrong set of guidelines in speedy-deleting Basoexia and Apistia earlier: It was a redirect, not a regular article. A3 is the wrong category, and Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Redirects allows this page. Would you undelete the page for me? Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I honor your willingness to do things that you don't like, solely because of the existing consensus. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for The Prelude (band)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Prelude (band). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Springfling (talk) 23:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Akaza talk page

I apologize for the clearing of the talk page, I was not sure what the rules of that were. The deletion I made was to clear the page of old discussions that were pertaining to the delete/keep discussion. Since the article was kept and I have changed it completely, none of that was applicable. Thus I wanted to clear the page. What are the rules for talk pages? Thanks. Idegtev (talk) 18:02, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I will keep that in mind, apologies for the deletion. Idegtev (talk) 18:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

What's going on?

What's Contextflex? I don't think we've ever worked on anything together, but the other person I was gonna ask, has retired, and since wikipedia is gennerally friendly, I'd like to know. I don't mean to waste any time, I'm just curious what this is all about. Yojimbo501 (talk) 19:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I read that article a moment ago and that is just cruel doing something like that to people who only wish to increase knowledge for Wikipedia... Can anything be done about this? It is just childish to search for someones identity, and then post about how you hate that person. Can this somehow be taken to court? Does anybody believe this bullshit "Wiki-war"? Yojimbo501 (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

New Series Adventure novels

ALL are in violation of WP:CRYSTAL? Even the ones which are out already? And how come stating that the LHC is going to be switched on at some point in 2008 isn't a violation of crystal but giving facts about a book that is going to be released is? I'm sorry, you're completely wrong. Clockwork Apricot (talk) 20:47, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Smile!

Hello Orangemike, ShakespearesZombie has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hans Christian King

Hi there. I'd like to know why this page got deleted so quickly even when I put the hangon tag on it. I was in the process of adding it, and had to answer a call at work. There is a valid body of experience here. I had intended it to look like this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Van_Praagh but you yanked it far too quickly for me to build it to that level. I request that it be undeleted so I can improve it to academic standards. user:curtisall 13:37, 13 May 2008 (EST)

Plastic Ingenuity Help

Last year a good friend of mine and I had a class with a professor that went on and on about a company that he worked with through the university. My friend came on to Wikipedia and noticed the company did not have a page so he started researching it further because it seemed interesting. We then both talked to the prof. outside of class, and got more information. I guess my friend tried to create a wikipedia page for Plastic Ingenuity, but it was deleted within a day because of a lack of significance. He and I looked at what was presented, and we understand that there was a lack of references present, and that the information should have been organized differently. He and I have been working on revisions, and have a great new page in our opinions, so I was just asking you for some advice to make sure it doesnt happen again. Any help you could give us would be greatly appreciated. Allstar11

You are clueless

I know Hdayejr and you have no business running your mouth when you only have knowledge of his war with Steve here last summer. You only know that much and nothing more. Makes you look just a bit ignorant. Get lost.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Holderowner (talk • contribs) — Holderowner (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Richard Stern - History Rewrite?

You stated in my request to have my page deleted that I can't "rewrite history." I would understand that if Jimmy Carter or Madonna tried to delete their page, but I was a D-List youtube account who contributed nothing to the greater consciousness of society, pop culture, science, or even history. If I was ever notable, which is open to discussion, those days are long past and my page is a complete waste of space. In fact, wikipedia should be ashamed to even consider having an entry for such an utter and total nobody. Please reconsider; this has absolutely no effect on you, nor will you remember this in a week, but this sticks with me forever. Thank you.

Houston McCoy Article

Hey OrangeMike. I see you deleted my files for Improper License. Sorry if i'm uploading things incorrectly, as you can see I'm not a professional. I'm having trouble getting the right license for newspaper sources and articles. There doesn't seem to be a option in the pull down menu for scanned newspaper articles. I have all the info (author/date/article) and its a vaild source. Why can't I upload and cite these articles. Please lend me a small amount of your expertise. I just don't understand how the "fair use" rational and the copyright system works on wiki. The section about that doesn't included scanned newspaper/magazine articles, but rather article covers/pictures from the internet/photography etc. If I wanted to upload a scan of a newspaper or magazine article that is a valid source, how come there is no option for that in the drop down menu? What am I doing wrong here! :) I even include in the text where I found the article, the date and author. I even include that information in the uploaded file name. What else do I need to do! Any help would be great!

17:07, 5 June 2008 Orangemike (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Austin.American.Statesman.August.3.1979.Miles.pdf" ‎ (I3: Improper license)

Contesting Fundamental Elements Deletion

Mr. Orange. I am trying to create a page for a band on the rise that has met more than enough of Wikipedias criteria to have "notability" as a musician yet you all keep deleting it, and always say I'm advertising. However, the page consists of absolutely no advertising. It's a variety of facts about a band from St. Louis written by myself or other non-biased authors, I am not a member of the band, and I do not work for them. Some feedback would be nice as to why this page continues to be deleted for reasons that are not relevant.

I apologize for this being at the top, I tried to delete and send to the bottom but it went back to this.

-chris emanuel

another Pinoybandwagon sock, repeating the behaviour

User:Sir_Astig is an obvious Pioybandwagon sock, and has been removing the callsign from the lead and infobox on several articles. This time he has also used edit summaries like "removing redundancy" as excuse, when there was no such redundancy.

Can you block him as an obvious sock that is repeating the behaviour that got him blocked on the first place? --Enric Naval (talk) 20:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, and also block him because he has tried to label one of his socks as being the responsible for those three "Montez" socks, look at this for an example, and look at his contribs for edits to the socks' user pages and to a category page --Enric Naval (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

There is another Pinoybandwagon sock just created recently (User:Xtreme Blaster). The user is also implying that Zosimo Montez is the real sock of Pinoybandwagon. -Danngarcia (talk) 07:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I also left a complain on the talk page of the admin that handled the Zosimo Montez sock case here, it seems that he is trying to introduce hoaxes on the articles, see this page which looks suspiciously empty except for the page that he is using as source. The topping the charts page is, well.... no way that this is an official page. --Enric Naval (talk) 17:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

He's blocked now [8] --Enric Naval (talk) 18:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

SeaPort Airlines

Why the delete? It's a new airline and unique because it bypasses major commercial centers at airports. It's news worthy and interesting, especially in today's airline industry climate. Mfrk

Username block

Parature08 sent me an email requesting an unblock because he wants to follow recommendations in this DRV. Passing the request on for your consideration..--chaser (away) - talk 10:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Kalikova and (&) Associates

Thank you for your message and comments. I'm still getting introduced with the requirements for editing articles and I will try to be more attentive further. Can I continue working on this article, i.e. could it be created but "fundamentally rewritten" to meet the applicable requirements? Mmadykov (talk) 06:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Partners in torah

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Partners in torah. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 16:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Sackville Rivers Association

Please restore Sackville Rivers Association. I had cut it down to a stub because of copyright concerns, and was preparing to add references. --Eastmain (talk) 17:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Sackvilleriversassociation

Mike

Whether or not the Sackville rivers association article is restored, the creator's user page is clearly spam and inappropriate as is the user name. Would it be appropriate for a non-admin to blank the user page or is that something for an admin? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ukexpat (talk • contribs)

Took care of it. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Adding irrelevancies to Anti-Federalism

Please don't do this sort of thing. Your intentions may have been good, but it's really a form of vandalism to say something like that in an article. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you explain what you mean? It seems relevant. William Ortiz (talk) 20:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Prof.Carlos Nemer

Hi Orangemike, Prof. Carlos Nemer works as special advisor ([1]) for UFRJ technology center ([3]) dean. One of the projects he is responsible for at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro([4]) is the use of a wiki site for its 45,000 students. This project is considered a top priority and represents a new opportunity for developing a partnership with Wikipedia.Carlos Nemer (Espírito Santo, Brazil) is a university professor at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro-UFRJ)([5]).Professor Nemer holds three undergraduate degrees: Civil Engineering major in Environmental Science (Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro-PUC-RJ), Architecture and Urban Design (Faculdade de Arquitetura e Urbanismo - Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro-FAU-UFRJ) ([6]) and Law/Environmental law (Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro-PUC-RJ)([7]).He also has two graduate degrees: Master of Science in Systems engineering from Instituto Militar de Engenharia - IME ([8]) (Brazil's elite military engineering school - an institution that accepts only 150 new students annually with more than 80% of the students weeded out through intellectual and physical exams). Prof. Nemer developed at IME his dissertation topic: a linear programming model related to fleet planing process including a field application for the Brazilian truck transportation industry.His CV also includes a MBA in Corporate Finance at prestigious Fundação Getúlio Vargas-FGV-RJ([9]). an extraordinary professor and he is responsible for implementing a Wikipedia funding project at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro... all the best Fulvio Morais do Rego

See the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos E Nemer and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos E. Nemer. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Manisouras

Hi Orangemike,

I have twice put a Speedy Delete tag on this article Manisouras, as I think it is probably nonsense - and twice the editor has removed it... despite a 'polite' warning notice I put on their talk page. When you get a chance, please could you take a look and decide what to do next? Thanks.--seahamlass 18:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

MCGEE BIOSKETCH

Hi Orangemike, I do not want to be engaged in some sort of referencing request battle but seriously the claims you are making about "needing better references" are specious. There is nothing here that in any way is unverifiable, which is the standard. Simply asserting that the article written was poorly researched or insufficiently referenced seems egregious to me. I am correcting libelous claims here and you are right behind me suggesting that known facts aren't sufficiently documented. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.76.183.8 (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Further to your comment, this information IS verifiable. See the Institute for Scientific Information Journal Citation Index published last week, the leading source of information about scholarly journals. I will be happy to email you a PDF. There isn't a better source than ISI.--74.76.183.8 (talk) 21:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)--

Interesting article

I think you'd enjoy reading Rev. Nørb, especially after looking at the author. My bet is that you'll delete this one. I don't feel like messing with it. Royalbroil 05:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Batak Fitness System

Hi - you deleted my page on the Batak Fitness System, claiming it was "blatant advertising". It would have been preferable if you could have entered into a discussion concerning the deletion rather than just doing it.

To clarify: 'Batak' was one of the rounds in a fitness competition here at work, and we had no idea what it was. When we found out, we added it to Wikipedia so that others would not have so much trouble finding out in future. It is not 'blatant advertising' as I have no personal interest in the Batak company.

-- richiau —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richiau (talk • contribs) 14:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback on this. I've done a bit of research and found that the UK daily newspaper The Citizen reported on 30 January 2007 that Batak is an "electronic test of reflex game" which is used professional rugby players and the football team Manchester United, as part of their fitness programme. Would this be enough to warrant that it is significant? -- richiau —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richiau (talk • contribs) 12:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Vietnam Awesome Travel

I would have no objection to a spamblock. I thought that, for a very new user, a {{usernameconcern}} comment might be enough. He has not edited at all except for his userpage and one reverted edit. Perhaps I WP:AGF too easily, but it's much easier to discourage an editor than it is to attract one. A good one, anyway. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Skeptoid AFD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Skeptoid

I think this is a case for a speedy keep because it appears to be sour grapes from some podcast/blog that did not get in... --BenBurch (talk) 10:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Plymouth Rock Studios

A week ago you deleted the page for the reason that it wasn't notable. I want to contest that decision only because it is notable. The company plans to build a movie studio in Plymouth, Massachusetts. This studio would be the first in New England and possibly the only one east of the Mississippi River. I at least think the article, which existed for over a month, should've been deleted with a discussion. It seems unfair that it would be done since the article is about a company notable to the community as of now and eventualy will be better known after the studio is built. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:25, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could take a second look at your decision since others surely passed over the page in the past and had no issue with it that I know of. Regarding it being famous in the future, the company exists now, it's the studio complex itself that doesn't currently exist. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:35, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Jon janes

...is asking for an unblock. It's your call. –xenocidic (talk) 13:29, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I now understand what he was trying to do - would've declined it myself. –xenocidic (talk) 13:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Still COI. –xenocidic (talk) 17:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

This gave me a chuckle, especially the last sentence. Oh, and notice how he signs it. –xenocidic (talk) 17:10, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

You may want to Salt Via delphi

The creator has simpy recreated the spam article. Salting may be in order. S. Dean Jameson 23:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The Book of Biff

You can find the website at thebookofbiff.com The Book of Biff was created by Chris Hallbeck.PokeHomsar (talk) 02:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello OrangeMike

When I typed, "Jewish Nose Wikipedia" (without the quotes) into google it led me to your talk page. So it makes sense that my first comment should be here. Hello! ( == : MyBigFatJewishNose (talk) 05:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

I believe you made a mistake in deleting Jane Schaffer paragraph. I do not see how the article was an advertisement in any way. Can you please undelete the article. Thanks. -- penubag  (talk) 05:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

No, I wrote it, and I was not advertising or promoting anything. The Schaffer paragraph is a widely used paragraph format popular in secondary schools. I wrote the article only because I found Wikipedia did not have an article on it. Can you please undelete it? I'm allowed to contest to speedy deleion. -- penubag  (talk) 16:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Statistics showed that the article was viewed thousands of times per month. I could prove it to you but http://stats.grok.se/ is down. Google turned up 719,000 results. If you still are strongly against having this in Wikipedia, can you copy the article to my subpage. -- penubag  (talk) 16:50, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

User:FoamRanger Deletion

I was referred here by ukexpat after submitting a plea for restoration. The short of it seems to be I misunderstood the purpose of the Userpage and have been enlightened to the use of subpages. I can provide the whole process as it stands at the moment. I would like my article in progress back or at least of copy of the code to continue the project elsewhere.

Thank you, FoamRanger (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)FoamRanger

Kerala State Electricity Board

Thank you! This is a pleasant surprise, indeed. I intend to work on the article some more in the next few days. Thank you for the encouragement. :) --thunderboltz^(TALK) 10:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, can you put interwikis here = Template:Prettytable ?

[[es:Plantilla:Fichabonita]] [[fr:Modèle:Prettyinfobox]] [[it:Template:Prettytable]] [[nl:Sjabloon:Prettytable]] [[no:Mal:Prettytable]] [[pt:Predefinição:Prettytable]] [[ss:Template:Fichabonita]]

the page is protected and you are a Administrator.

Thanks. OffsBlink (talk) 14:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I Know how to use, I only want that you put interwikis, bacause the page is protected and you are a Administrator.

Only put this = [[es:Plantilla:Fichabonita]] [[fr:Modèle:Prettyinfobox]] [[it:Template:Prettytable]] [[nl:Sjabloon:Prettytable]] [[no:Mal:Prettytable]] [[pt:Predefinição:Prettytable]] [[ss:Template:Fichabonita]] in Template:Prettytable THE PAGE IS PROTECTED

Thanks. OffsBlink (talk) 15:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, Excuse Me. OffsBlink (talk) 15:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Confusion

Hey mike, you might want to take a look at this inline reply and strike or modify comments accordingly.  ;-) Thanks. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 15:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Claudia Antonia Zacchara (fictional character)

The previous Afd: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Claudia_Zacchara and related discussion at Neil's talk page: User_talk:Neil/Archive_23#Claudia_Zacchara. AniMate 18:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Badagnani

Would you mind explaining to this guy the issues regarding Katie Rose Clarke and speedy deletions? I agree now that the article doesn't merit a speedy, though notability is still a little weak, but User:Badagnani seems to be very combative and generally a bad actor, if his block log is any indication. He won't listen to me, so maybe he will listen to you. I don't think I have been out of line with him, but I could be wrong. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 20:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Planarity

This is the difference between the deleted and the recreated version - seems "substantially identical" to me. The article should have gone through Wikipedia:Deletion review instead of being recreated just like that. I won't push it to AfD though - I'm not crazy! ;) Plrk (talk) 20:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

There were some new sources, with properly cited references; not "substantially identical" as I read it. Why not consider a prod or AfD? --Orange Mike | Talk 20:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Because I think it would be kept, so I can't be bothered. I'd prod it if it weren't for the fact that undeleted articles can't be prodded, and taking it to AfD would be a waste of time for all involved. I wanted to have it speedily deleted, brought to deletion review and - perhaps - recreated again, but obviously that won't happen.
It's a great game though. Plrk (talk) 21:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion for Pierce's Bar-B-Que

I was unable to put the hangon tag before you deleted the article. I ask that you restore the page. Pierce's isnt just an eatery but a popular attraction here in Williamsburg, VA, like Geno's is in Philadelphia (which I might add has a page in Wiki). It is damn near impossible to get to, but it is jam-packed all day. I got the idea to put in the article because I travel the country a lot, and everytime someone mentions he or she is from this region, the topic always comes up. I will be happy to expand the article, and I promise you that hundreds of williamsburg natives will be able to expand it as well. As you can see from my recent edits, I am attempting to document the region by expanding or adding articles on the Williamburg Pottery, Soap and Candle Factory, Norge, Va, Croaker, Va, etc. Pierce's belongs with the group of attractions. SemDem (talk) 21:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Request

Hi, could you please undelete HeroEngine? It got tagged and deleted so fast that no one had a chance to respond, but it appears to have been tagged by a SPA competitor.[9] I'll freely admit that I'm a bit biased since HeroEngine is a product from the company where I work, but the article has been around since 2006, has multiple sources, and is linked from multiple locations.[10] From my own experience, I can tell you that the product is definitely notable (it's the #1 game engine in its field), and has won multiple awards, even though the article stub didn't make a very good case for that. But for sources, check here.[11][12] A simple Google search on the name pulls up over 40,000 hits.[13] I could see putting the article through an AfD, but I don't think it meets speedy-deletion criteria, so I'd appreciate if you could take another look. Thanks, Elonka 22:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.  :) I went ahead and did considerable cleanup/pruning (a lot of WP:CRUFT had accumulated), and added a ton of sources. If you have a moment, I'd appreciate if you could take a look: HeroEngine, and let me know if you think it meets notability standards now, or whether it still needs more work? Thanks, Elonka 23:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Confused

Wondering if your deletion of Nonviolent Communication is in preparation for moving Nonviolent communication there, or...? No one has objected to the proposed move for more than a week. [14]. --John_Abbe (talk) 22:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

PNCEA's Deletion

I am not sure why you deleted the PNCEA article. PNCEA is a 501 (c)(3) not-for-profit organization and all of the information contained in the article is 100% correct and verifiable. The information serves a a useful tool in an encyclopedia since the organiztion is the only one of its kind. There were not advertisements within the context of the article. You need to take a second look at the article. It can not be advertising if the organization serves the good of the public, which has been acknoledged by the federal government. The content was written by a professional and well respected author. It was edited by other persons in the same fields that posses a doctorate degree from prestigious universities. Please repost this article. I will be contacting an administrator as well because this is absolutely rediculous. I also would like to know who is your supervisor and how to contact them. CAtoDC (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate links?

You wrote:

None of these links was appropriate.

Please tell me why the link that user:jamesfranklingresham added to squaring the circle was not appropriate.

It is one thing to say that it is inappopriate for a particular person to be the one to add the link when there may be a conflict of interests.

It is quite another thing to say the link itself was inappropriate. If the link itself was inappropriate, then it's inappropriate no matter who adds it. Why is the link added to squaring the circle inappropriate no matter WHO adds it? You clearly said it is. Michael Hardy (talk) 02:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

...and I need to add: I find it annoying that you're posting your opinion in response to mine without actually answering any of the points I raised. It looks as if you haven't read what I wrote. Michael Hardy (talk) 02:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, now I've mentioned your statements in a discussion on this page. Michael Hardy (talk) 03:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

More crap on the Violet Blue (author) section...

From the comments, it appears that her POSSLQ (aka boyfriend) is editing it now...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Blue_%28author%29

--BenBurch (talk) 17:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Please see COI warning I placed at; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wikiwikimoore based upon conversation at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Norquist9 Thanks! --BenBurch (talk) 19:52, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Orangemike, thank you for that action. This same conflicted editor, and another editor who may be a sock puppet of his, are also trying to force a Violet Blue edit into the Boing Boing page about the same silliness, for what would appear to be the same non-NPOV, personally motivated reasons. Please see recent edit history on Boing Boing. Norquist9 (talk) 23:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Mike, the Boing Boing thing has become a full blown edit war. I asked for protection, but there were 3RRVs on both sides here... --BenBurch (talk) 02:59, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wikiwikimoore blanked the COI warning on his page, and I put it back with an explanation of why it was placed and etc. If you think I was out of line, feel free to remove it. Thanks! --BenBurch (talk) 13:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

• Please follow the link referenced here, Mike; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Violet_Blue_%28author%29#Please_see --BenBurch (talk) 15:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Change for the Children Foundation

This page was not intended as an advertisement. The most significant part is that we are NOT selling anything. This Foundation will soon be out in the public and children will need a resource for obtaining information. This adds to the Wikipedia project as a tool for this generation to be empowered through knowledge. There is nothing solicitous about this article and is purely a resource for millions of children to learn how they can take part in charitable causes. AGAIN this article is NOT intended to publicize the Jonas Brothers but rather a RESOURCE for these children to learn about these 5 Charities - 4 of which are located on Wikipedia. I would really appreciate if the article was put back up. Thanks again. Arazara (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I would like some help if you could on how the page can be restored. The charities that the Change for the Children Foundation are on Wikipedia, so why wouldn't it be beneficial for Wikipedia to have a page on the Foundation that will be supporting them? Could you please guide me on what needs to be done for the article to be appropriate for Wikipedia? Could you please restore it so that I will be able to fix it properly? Thanks so much.

Arazara (talk) 14:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I really appreciate it. Can I come to you with any questions I may have? Arazara (talk) 15:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Could what I have already written been put in the sandbox? Arazara (talk) 15:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Patri Friedman

It looks to me like you speedy-deleted Patri's updated page by mistake. I thought I had followed the appropriate Wikipedia process there but it's possible I missed something. Is there a tag one should add to indicate that previously-deleted content was *correctly* re-added? The sequence of events is: in 2006 Patri wasn't notable and his page was correctly deleted. In 2008 Patri *became* notable - there are now many real-world sources that feature him prominently, with more on the way. So in accordance with the wikipedia deletion guidelines I made the case to the wikipedia admin who was associated with the deletion effort in 2006 at his talk page. That admin (mailer diablo) sent me a copy of the old page so I could use it as source material in building a new one. I kept a little of the old material but deleted most of it and added some new stuff. I planned to expand it with more new stuff and add citations for everything. But now you've deleted it, so I'm not sure what to do next. Please advise. Thanks! --Blogjack (talk) 05:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring the page! I will improve the citing and flesh it out more in the next few days. (I agree that being ddfr's son doesn't make patri notable, but it seems like a worthwhile thing to mention about him if he is notable on his own. I'll try to make that clearer too.) When I remove the tag I'll update the talk page to explain the changes. --Blogjack (talk) 14:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Inapproprate page deletion

Osman Larussi most certainly did not meet the definition for a Speedy Delete on grounds of an attack page, it was a sourced page about a hostage-taker in one of the most notable hostagetakings in the past decade. I request you restore the page, and go through AfD if you want to see it deleted. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 17:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Undelete it and I'll add sources, if something looks halfway truthful and it's not "Jake is a fag!!!!!!1!11!!", it's not really an "attack page". Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 17:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I have created a sandbox for you at User:Orangemike/LearnTheRules for you to study the rules of WP. Call attention to an article lacking sources, don't speedy delete it unless it actually meets criteria. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 17:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Osman Larussi

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Osman Larussi. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 17:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of product page

Just a quick one about the Fixx (bug tracker) page that was speedily deleted by you. I get the policy on blatant advertising and I have no dispute with that. However, I cannot understand how the following pages can exist under these guidelines and not mine? - HelpSpot, Track+, JIRA (software), Gemini (software) - All of these are, then by definition, blatant advertising? Is it just the non-existence of a software stub tag? I would have added this but I did not get a chance to do this. If not, please let me know the secret sauce, so I do not make the same mistake twice (or thrice in this case, as I'm baffled) -- Sarat.pediredla (talk) 18:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

advice?

concerning this? Slrubenstein | Talk 23:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of factualTV

Hi! I am wondering how come you issued deletion on factualTV so quick when pages like Joost, Jaman, Babelgum and Veoh exists. I myself am a big fan of internet television and thought that factualTV, even though it's so far a Beta, should have an article on wiki. I am a great fan of the other video services and think they're on here for a good reason, I would just want to know what I'd have to change in order to post my factualTV article. I would very much appreciate any guide lines I could be given! // Denny Danderson65 (talk) 07:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Pulaski County Democratic Party

Hello sir. You recently deleted my article about the Pulaski County Democratic Party. I was wanting to know why. All information on that article was factual, as I am a member of said organization. Please return it to original standing if possible. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halynr1600 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Feminism Task Force

Hello! :) I think I contacted you once about the Feminism Task Force. I am reviving the task force page and the portal. Thought I'd let you know, in case your interested. If your interested, sign your name under participants. --Grrrlriot (talk) 04:36, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Alan Cabal

Hi: Would you kindly provide your opinion about the deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_July_3#Alan_Cabal for the article about Alan Cabal? Sincerely, Manhattan Samurai (talk) 14:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Per WP:EL and talk page?

On this edit: if you look again at the talk page you'll see no consensus there for removing the link to this page. -- Hoary (talk) 22:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Myspace is acceptable IF it is the official page for the subject of the article, correct? "Except for a link to a page that is the subject of the article or an official page of the article subject—and not prohibited by restrictions on linking—one should avoid" and then MySpace is one of the listed items... So the official-ness of the MySpace page needs to be determined... (I'm only butting in because I encountered this on another article recently.) --BenBurch (talk) 22:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I made a comment on the article's talk page about her official page having a prominent link to that Myspace page. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

We only give 'em one link to an "official page"; otherwise we'd have four or five links to their official pages at MySpace, Facebook, YouTube, etc., etc. There's a link to her official official page; that's all we should allow, per WP:EL. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah! OK! --BenBurch (talk) 03:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

WorkflowOne

Hello, I am unsure the procedure to contest deletions, however, there was one near the top of this page. I would like to know why the WorkflowOne page was deleted. This was my first attempt at starting a wikipedia entry from scratch, so the format was very rough and there was not much content added to it (since I had only worked on it for half a day before it was deleted). As I had put on the talk page of it, I am trying to adhere to the criteria for wikipedia pages and cited two pages, SAP AG and Microsoft that I was using as templates. There are other similar company pages with the same format, so I am confused why WFO was deleted while the others have remained for months. If you could inform me on how to improve my entry, I would be more than happy to change it to meet the standards. Again I apologize if the entry was against any criteria, but it was a fault of my inexperience and not my intent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swirlicious (talk • contribs) 13:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC) Just found the comment on the mytalk page, sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by Swirlicious (talk • contribs)

Monaghan Media

Thanks! TN‑X-Man 14:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Boo hoo. Nasty man insulted me, Mommy :)

Grow up. End of story —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hommybeg (talk • contribs)

COI at Violet Blue

Hello Mike,

I must say I don't agree with your decision to stamp a COI at Violet Blue. While its true her boyfriend edits the article, I find the dangers of this to the wikipedia-reader minimal for a number of reasons. 1) The article doesn't contain any value statements or implications which aren't sourced 2) He is open about his identity 3) he actively displays respect for core WP tenants and many times has sought feedback and respected consensus.

At any rate, editor User:BenBurch is consistently deferring to you instead of providing reasons for its inclusion in the article. If you have some, I'd like to know them but honestly I find it a very strong tag, especially given that there is no rationale for it on the talk page. In a sense, by giving no rationale, it is unfixable. If you believe the mere presence of Blue's boyfriend in the edit history is enough, I urge you to consider the above and re-survey his activities on the Talk page. Also, I must say there are plenty of articles edited by their subjects without the tag--this one seems clean. Please provide some rationale so that we may mitigate the article and things there can cool off.Yeago (talk) 06:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I started an entry at WP:COIN --BenBurch (talk) 15:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Please respond to this message. -Chunky Rice (talk) 18:43, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: Tin Man (band)

I was working on the article adding in the references when you deleted. I have a back up and will be updating it soon. I understand your reasoning for deleting something so soon, so I am not bitter, just wanted to say I was on the case :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Readikus (talk • contribs) 13:05, 8 July 2008

Scaleform page

I've added in third party references and tried to neutralize the language. Is there anything else you can suggest that would remove this page from candidates for deletion? Other companies in our industry have articles on Wikipedia (and I know that's not really a valid point, but I am trying to find out why their articles can stay and this one is a deletion candidate). Can you give me some indication why the page wouldn't be notable? It would be helpful to get a bit more help before the page is completely deleted. I understand the COI issue but I am trying to NOT make this sound like a promotion. As far as I am aware we are the only Flash-based user interface middleware provider in the games industry, and we have received quite a bit of industry attention, particularly in the last year or so.Thanks for your help, as I am a completely new Wiki user. I would say I am a bit disappointed that someone else went in and deleted the page so quickly, when I was trying to get some help from you. Wendrew (talk) 17:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)Wendrew

Unblock Request

Please see User talk:AnnalisaShanghai. Thanks, Tiptoety ^talk 02:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It appears to have been resolved. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 02:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: Nelson Blake II article

Nelson Blake's work can be verified online and his work is important to popular culture. I'm confused as to how this article isn't pertinent as Wikipedia needs to have records of creators in its' database. I am NOT Nelson Blake, so this isn't self promotion. I'm very confused as to why you deleted this. --HillMarketing (talk) 14:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

What?!

You are joking, right?

Take a look at our website, which is what you do to check for copyright violation.

No matter what I do, or how I word my article, someone deletes it. What chance does that give me?

I note that Wildhorn's Dracula production article remains on this site. Why have you chosen to delete our article time and time again?

When I did include an independent press source for our production being recognised, some editor tapped in some lines of it into Google and... yep! The quote, from the noted London theatre critic, is on our site. So, our article disappears because the quote is elsewhere on the internet... Our own site! Admit it. You are biased against our work. Otherwise we'd be on here as a bona fide article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hommybeg (talk • contribs) — Hommybeg (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

I never heard of either of you; I just don't approve of attempts to use Wikipedia to advertise oneself. (And WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is never a valid article for retention of an inappropriate article.) What is the name of the other article you feel violates the guidelines as yours did? --Orange Mike | Talk 15:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

As you have pointed out, I am no longer allowed to contribute an article of historical / educational fact to an online encyclopaedia. No matter that the productions exists and has been favourably critiqued by a noted London theatre critic in a recognised Arts magazine. The original article, which briefly appeared on Wikipedia, was not written by me. It was deleted. However, after I was informed there were some copyright issues, I decided to submit a very edited version of my own, as the copyright holder. Believe me, the production does not need any form of Wikipedia “advertising”. The article was very factual. Not even a logo, as the Wildhorn Dracula entry has. Now that’s what I call advertising…with tons of links to their various sites and people involved. I also believe there is another Dracula production listed on Wikipedia too. (Just type in Dracula musical). In short, thanks for being particularly officious and aggressively dogmatic regarding my few lines of valid information, regarding our production within UK theatre.

Other than that, best wishes to you and your, otherwise, fine team.

(Hommybeg (talk) 09:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC))

Yes. I’m sure there are “various” editors involved in the creation of such pages. However, that does not explain why our production is not represented on Wikipedia. We have as much right as Wildhorn & co to have an article entry here, do we not? Ultimately, we only wanted some reference to our independently funded professional musical that has taken eight years of hard work to get this far. I’ll try to get some independent editor to write a few lines about the production for future reference purposes. If only to confirm that a stage musical, commercial CD and a currently televised video exists of our work.

Anyway, all the best to you.

(Hommybeg (talk) 19:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC))

Your personal attack in your last message to me only confirms my suspicion that you are extremely biased and blinkered in your personal opinons and limited knowledge of the articles you ”edit” (aka delete).

You - Quote - “The Wildhorn version has gotten significant press (by no means all favorable). Yours has not; it's just one of the many Drac musicals out there (two this season, plus a panto, in London alone). End of story”.

More misinformation. Both inaccurate and uninformed personal opinions (again) and deliberately insulting to the people that have worked so hard on this production.

If you’d taken to time to view the appropriate information, including the very favourable critique by a noted West End critic, you might have gleaned the fact that our original musical production of Bram Stoker’s novel more than deserves to be, at least, referenced on Wikipedia. Therefore, you have confirmed that you are biased, if not personally biased, against our professional production of Bram Stoker’s Dracula, the musical. Also, as the creative team is Welsh (a minority nation), I shall take it that you are also racist. In favour of musicals written by non-Welsh people and so obviously against entering a perfectly factual article about our production. You are deliberately persecuting us and our production by writing to me in such an insulting way and as a supposedly intelligent man. End of story.

Thanks for nothing.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hommybeg (talk • contribs) — Hommybeg (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

And you still cannot properly justify a perfectly reasonable and balanced reference to our production being deleted? Ultimately, the messaging between us no longer concerns me. I am aware of where we stand regarding any unbiased reference to our hard won production being referenced here. Thanks for the exchange of words.

David Boudia

Hi. I see you've deleted this article whilse I was trying to expand it :-) Personally, I think he's notable as he's won gold, silver and bronze medals at various world diving competitons (see [15]), and is also apparently a member of the US 2008 diving squad. I think this therefore qualifies under WP:ATHLETE. CultureDrone (talk) 14:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. Can you have another quick look and see if it's now notable. The problem here is, although there's an awful lot of articles about him, most are related to competition results and not him as a person, so expanding the textual part is problematical. :-) CultureDrone (talk) 14:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I'm indifferent to sports in general as well - I just picked up on the notability of this one as he seems to be an Olympic hopeful. Anyway, I'll have another stab at the article shortly. Thanks for your help :-) CultureDrone (talk) 15:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Links For The Different Necronomicons

On the Necronomicon Talk Page, you asked for the links for the different Necronomicons. Actually, there is more than seven. The first link has the Black-Letter Edition by John Dee, the Spanish Edition, and the German Edition

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/necronomiconresearch

The next link has the Black-Letter Edition, the R'lyeh Text, the Turner Necronomicon, the Yellow Necronomicon, the Necronmicon Spell Book, and the Simon Edition.

http://satanicsingles.com/library.jsp

Here is a link for the Ripel Necronomicon, the Italian Edition.

http://www.geocities.com/theerium/necronomicon

There. You now have the links to get all of them except for the Latin Edition, Greek Edition, the Voynich Manuscript Edition, and the Arabic Original. Also, I backtracked the history of the Necronomicon to John Dee, finding all versions to his time period. Before that it drops off the map. Couldn't find anything beyond Dee. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.4.248.195 (talk) 01:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Conga rats

Thanks for the info, now I know. However, I still like the mental picture of little rats with sombreros dancing to latino music...--Ramdrake (talk) 14:37, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Los Congueros de Hamelin.... ROTFLMHO!!!--Ramdrake (talk) 14:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Old Town, Chicago

I put this on the Old Town Discussion page. Nice to run into you again. Old Town could use some work. Didn't it used to be the center of the world?

A section on Latino history in Old Town was (probably correctly) removed. The language seemed somewhat provocative and the reference provided might not be considered reliable, since it comes from a (former?) gang, the Young Lords.

That said Latino history in Old Town, the ethnic conflict, gangs, etc. shouldn't be smoothed over. I'll put one link here (connected to the link removed) [16]. Maybe somebody could handle these topics in a somewhat less "in your face" manner. (or maybe Orange M and myself are just getting older).

Smallbones (talk) 15:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Center of the world? I thought that was Hype Park.... --Orange Mike | Talk 16:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The ACTUAL Center is in Hyde Park, but is stored at the Oriental Institute having been looted from the ruins of Akkad by the late Dr. Henry Walton Jones, Jr. in 1928. --BenBurch (talk) 04:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Dance Party USA

This edit doesn't seem to match its edit-summary. Maybe reverted to wrong version? DMacks (talk) 17:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Aw man, you were busy fixing while I was busy writing this note:) DMacks (talk) 18:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Could you have a look

Editor keeps putting this article back on wiki and has posible COI. BigDunc^Talk 20:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorted now article deleted again and editor indef blocked. BigDunc^Talk 21:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

BalkanBet

The author of BalkanBet contacted me on IRC asking for the page to be undeleted so they could improve it. Could you, by any chace, userfy this page and let them know that you've done so? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Chirps•Clams•Chowder)} 17:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

• Okay, you might want to talk to the editor then if you haven't. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Chirps•Clams•Chowder)} 18:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hello! Thank you for blocking the user with the name "Montanalottery." I had reported that earlier in the afternoon, as the user was editing the article on Montana Lottery. However, my report didn't raise any concerns. When I checked the user's latest contribution, for the Fantasy Sports Wagering article that I tagged for Speedy Deletion (and which you deleted), I thought something was strange since the article was just a link to the Montana Lottery web site. Odd, but before this I didn't realise they even had a lottery in Montana -- at least I learned something from this. Be well! Ecoleetage (talk) 20:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Beat Poets (band)

Hi. I'm a bit confused as you seem to have removed the Speedy tag and changed it to a PROD. Considering that a hangon tag was placed to dispute deletion doesn't that mean that the article doesn't meet the PROD criteria as PROD is supposed to be for non-contentious deletions. Or am I misunderstanding the policy? Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Pocket Venus (Band)

Hello Mike,

I have been producing the Pocket Venus article and improving the content of the article when it was deleted today. As far as I'm aware the band are notable as they are one of the few unsigned bands to have been played on BBC Radio 1 prime time and was wondering if you could please un-delete the article so that I may carry on inputting information and making the wiki entry "more notable". Thanks.

Eldeviante.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Eldeviante (talk • contribs) — Eldeviante (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. 17:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: CAFETY

Wow...so giving Congressional testimony and being instrumental in drafted legislation isn't sufficiently noteworthy? I didn't even have the opportunity to complete the reference structure and make the case for rebuttal before the article was deleted in mid-edit!

Please explain why this does not qualify. - Wikiwag 20:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

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

Please keep conversation regarding Community Alliance for the Ethical Treatment of Youth concentrated on its talk page as much as possible. Thank you. • Freechild'sup? 14:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Omni Hotels & ISM, et. al

I really appreciate your help with this. Let me know if there's anything further I can do to help. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 20:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Mentorship

Hi. I'm not sure what the proper way to go about this is but, was wondering if you'd be willing to help me learn the ropes a bit better around here. If you'd be willing to investigate me a bit you can have a look at my userpage, usertalk, contribs, etc. I only get to use a PC M-F but, want to contribute as much as I reasonably can while also getting my "real" job done. Thanks. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)