Pajaro4
This article has already been deleted once today. Please do not repost deleted articles. Also, the article is original research. Wikipedia has a policy against original research, which you can read about here. J Milburn 23:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- In response to your concerns on my talk page, I was not deleting the article because it did not cite its sources, I was deleting it because it was about non notable company. Therefore, notifying you about the lack of sources would not have prevented it from being deleted. The articles was in violation of so many of Wikipedia's policies- first of all, there was no reasoning as to why the company was notable, as per Wikipedia:Notability (companies and corporations) and a simple google search on my part found absolutely no references to the company, at all. (On another note, I think you may have spelt the name wrong.) Secondly, whether or not the information was verifiable, you did not provide reliable, published, verifiable, third party sources. You assure me that you have done this now, so I will review. Thirdly, whether you deny it or not, the article did contain original research. Statements like 'So far, the author has only found...' is original research, which is against the policy I liked you to yesterday. Another note- you do not seem to understand the deletion policy. Some of your arguments are irrelevent, please see this, this and especilly this. Also, you talked about referring the problem to someone of higher standing than me- I cannot delete your article, as I am a non admin. I do not delete articles, I NOMINATE them for deletion, and then, an administrator reviews my reasoning, the article, the article history your reasoning, (if you have made any), the article talk page, what links to the article, and other matters. Through this, the administrator decides whether or not the matter deserves to be deleted. Message me if I can be of any help. J Milburn 09:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- You mentioned that you have recreated the article- please tell me the title of the new article. There is no article currently named Bellotti Cymbals, nor have there been any deleted but the two that I nominated. J Milburn 10:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have found it, and now, as you requested, I am giving you a warning. This article does not cite its sources, reads like original research, has some POV statements (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for more information) and does not acertain notability of the subject. Please provide references, change the style of writing so that it fits with those references and contains no POV statements, and provide reasoning as to why this company is notable, otherwise the article will be eligible for speedy deletion. J Milburn 10:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- Reviewing your contributions, I came across Pasha Cymbals, which has the same problems. No sources cited, reads like original research, contains POV statements and no real assertion of notability. This article also needs work, otherwise it could be deleted. J Milburn 10:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- The fact that another editor has tagged the article does not mean that it deserves to stay. Your argument doesn't make any real sense. I will take it upon myself to do the best I can to remove innapropriate articles, spam and vandalism, whether intended as such or not, from Wikipedia. However, I am giving you the chance to improve these articles. J Milburn 11:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, that's fine. I am glad to see that you are committed to improving these articles. J Milburn 19:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- The fact that another editor has tagged the article does not mean that it deserves to stay. Your argument doesn't make any real sense. I will take it upon myself to do the best I can to remove innapropriate articles, spam and vandalism, whether intended as such or not, from Wikipedia. However, I am giving you the chance to improve these articles. J Milburn 11:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- Reviewing your contributions, I came across Pasha Cymbals, which has the same problems. No sources cited, reads like original research, contains POV statements and no real assertion of notability. This article also needs work, otherwise it could be deleted. J Milburn 10:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have found it, and now, as you requested, I am giving you a warning. This article does not cite its sources, reads like original research, has some POV statements (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for more information) and does not acertain notability of the subject. Please provide references, change the style of writing so that it fits with those references and contains no POV statements, and provide reasoning as to why this company is notable, otherwise the article will be eligible for speedy deletion. J Milburn 10:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- You mentioned that you have recreated the article- please tell me the title of the new article. There is no article currently named Bellotti Cymbals, nor have there been any deleted but the two that I nominated. J Milburn 10:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your edit to Pasha Cymbals:
editYour recent edit to Pasha Cymbals (diff) was reverted by automated bot. You have been identified as a new user or a logged out editor using a hosting or shared IP address to add email addresses, phone numbers, YouTube, Geocities, Myspace, Facebook, blog, forum, or other such free-hosting website links to a page. Please note that such links are generally to be avoided. You can restore any other content by editing the page and re-adding that content. The links can be reviewed and restored by established users. Thank you for contributing! // VoABot II 19:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Pajaro4! I've taken a look at your request for assistance. First things first. Relax and have a nice cup of tea. Edit conflicts on Wikipedia are, sadly, not uncommon. However, it's not all bad. It's a great community, and most people are helpful and friendly. Conflicts can usually be sorted out by appropriate discussions and a little patience. I'll take a look at your article and have a word with the other editor and see what agreements we can come to. I can't promise you that your article will stay on Wikipedia, but I will promise that whatever happens will be explained to you, and you will come to an understanding of the Wiki process. If you want to chat to me you can use my talk page or email me. In the meantime, I'll send you a welcome page. Regards. SilkTork 20:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hi again. I am examining the case of the Italian Bellotti Cymbals and have entered into lengthy discussions with the editor who nominated the article for deletion, and with the admin who deleted one of the earlier versions. They have serious concerns about the notability of the article. That is to say, they are unsure if the topic is of sufficient interest and importance to remain on Wikipedia. I have been arguing that there may be some merit in the topic, but I am finding it difficult to continue that argument. It would be beneficial for you to join the discussion, otherwise the article may either be merged or deleted. Regards. SilkTork 23:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Welcome
editWelcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)
Here are a few links you might find helpful:
- Be Bold!
- Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
- Meet other new users
- Learn from others
- Play nicely with others
- Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
- Tell us about you
You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.
If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on User talk:SilkTork. Or, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}}
on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
We're so glad you're here! SilkTork 20:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Merging cymbal articles
editHi Pajaro4. I have proposed that several cymbal manufacturer articles, including Pasha and Bellotti, be merged into one article: Cymbal manufacturers. I am proposing that your text remains, but is simply moved into a different, more appropriate place. I would appreciate your comments. Regards. SilkTork 00:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)