User talk:Redvers/Archive32

Samuel Prakel

You deleted my Samuel Prakel page saying that it didn't meet inclusion guidelines! It does, on the recreated article. Samuel is very notable because of his winning so many races, including higher-level races such as the Midwest Athletic Conference. He also got extremely low times of below 10:18 for two miles. Please let it on there, because other than the notability, which he has, there is nothing wrong with the article. Isa Superfast (talk) 23:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

You never said that in the article, and provided no proof of it. Edit the version in your userspace and once you've provided an assertion of notability and some reliable, third-party sources to prove it, the article can be moved. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 07:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Deleted page

I'm new to Wikipedia and was working on an article on my user page, which Redvers deleted for blatant advertising. I wasn't ready to post the article and was planning on learning the ropes and revising it as I went along. I'd be happy to fix anything that's inappropriate, with a little feedback.

The recovery program I'm writing about, His Mansion, has been around for almost 40 years. They aren't looking for advertising. Can I have a chance to revise what I did wrong?

EMTLLC

No, you'll need to give me more information - like your username (signing your post will help that) and the article title. I can't read your mind. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 07:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I've been online for years but am a wiki virgin so please forgive my naivete. I thought typing my user name (EMTLLC) at the end of the post would do as a signature. EMTLLC is also the name of my user page that was deleted. The article title on the page was "His Mansion: Substance Abuse Recovery Program." The url was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EMTLLC.

I'm reading the regs and would like to keep practicing on the article, if you can restore it.

On a personal note, given your European roots, are you a Spinoza-type atheist?

--75.70.77.26 (talk) 22:13, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

No, honestly: I've deleted hundreds of dud articles in the last week. Literally. Log in and sign your post with ~~~~ and the software will automagically expand it to your username, talk page and the date (for archiving). Then I can help. I rarely delete user pages without blocking the creator, so it's more likely that I deleted an article you created. From the suggested title, I suspect because it wasn't suitable for an encyclopedia in some way. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 22:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info.

The organization I wrote about (His Mansion) has been around almost 40 years and has helped hundreds of people with substance abuse and other problems, but that might not be enough to qualify them for an encyclopedia. They aren’t mentioned on many websites and aren’t well known outside the recovery movement.

I see now that I should have created a sub page to work on my article and gotten feedback, but it may be a moot point if it wouldn’t qualify anyway. Can you advise?

EMTLLC (talk) 03:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Right. Found it. Yes, it was deleted as blatent advertising, something two editors agreed was true. The entire article has problems, but the first two paragraphs and the last sentence are particularly like a press release.

Substance abuse has reached epidemic proportions in America. It is a complicated health condition that requires both physiological and psychological treatment. Most abusers think they can stop on their own, but the majority of those who try don’t succeed. Admission to a residential care program can be an important step in permanent recovery, provided the addict wants to get better.

One residential care recovery program that has seen consistent results since 1971 is His Mansion [http://www.hismansion.com].. Tucked into the New Hampshire hills, this 360-acre working farm and rehabilitation center has successfully treated people wrestling with substance abuse, sexual addictions, eating disorders, depression and other mental problems.

That's not an encyclopedia article, that's a PR department's press release. You can finish each sentence with the words "says who?". The closing sentence, More information about resident programs and training opportunities is available on His Mansion's website [http://www.hismansion.com]. is just pure Craigslist. The article at no point said why they should be in an encyclopedia. You might like to try again here User:EMTLLC/His Mansion substance abuse program but you will need reliable, third party sources and an assertion of notability. If there are few sources available, then that's a problem for Wikipedia. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 07:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Got it! Thanks for taking the time to explain. That's very helpful. I'll work on the article offline and scrap it altogether if I can't find sufficient and reliable third-party sources.

Thanks, too, for helping make Wikipedia the great tool it is. I use it all the time in my writing.

EMTLLC (talk) 14:41, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Saint George Roman Catholic Lithuanian Church

Question 1 - You mentioned that the above page "may not meet the general notability guideline". I am interested how this church differs from others at: Category: Churches in Rochester, New York listed at the bottom of the page. Using your guidelines, all of these churches should be deleted. I think they should all be included, as should others that I was searching information about. Category:Churches_in_Rochester,_New_York. It is the home for the Lithuanian community for all of New York State outside of NYC, and has been so for over 100 years. I believe the page is much more developed than any of the other Category:Churches_in_Rochester,_New_York. Please explain your comments, what should be done to improve and remove the notoriety warning from the page. Besides, this page is rated mid-importance (level 3 of 5) as a stub Talk:Saint_George_Roman_Catholic_Lithuanian_Church by Wikipedia:WikiProject_Lithuania and once developed should improve to high-importance (level 4 of 5)

Question 2 - You removed 4 pages from the main founding pastors. They were very well known at the time, not just in the Rochester area, but also in the whole New York state area. This parish pastor priest information project is being developed with the parish and the archbishop. Please relink the parish pastors and allow us to continue our work.

Thanks for your help and comments. Signed: Milzinas —Preceding unsigned comment added by Milzinas (talk • contribs)

Okay, now go back and read the message I left for you. Your questions are all answered there, complete with useful links. I can see no reason to retype it again.

Second of all, what do you mean "we"? At Wikipedia, we require one-person, one-account. You must not have more than one person editing from one account. Please confirm that you are the only operator of this account. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 12:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and whilst I'm here: We don't accept other stuff existing on Wikipedia as a reason to keep any other article. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 12:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I confirm that I AM THE ONLY PERSON EDITING FROM THIS ACCOUNT. To qualify, I get information from an historical committee that was set up AND I ALONE use it for the final Wikipedia submissions. As you can see, I'm quite new at this and am working through the ropes. Sorry for asking basic questions for which I should know answers, but "am I signing correctly now"?. Milzinas (talk)

Where exactly did you leave me the message that you refer to? On the "history" page of the edits? Milzinas (talk)

You have been provided with a talk page for other users to communicate with you. It's here: User talk:Milzinas. When people write to you, a big orange bar appears on your screen to say you've got messages from someone. The message I left for you is at the bottom of that page. Others have also tried to contact you.

The historical board may be providing you with the information, but you will still need verifiable third party sources that we can check.

As for signing, no, you're not managing that yet. Just type ~~~~ (that's just four tildes) and the software here will produce your name, a link to your talk page and importantly the date (for archiving). ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 12:50, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance. I'll work on the things that you suggested. Milzinas (talk) 13:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for decreasing Wiki links and making the page better. I was adding them because of the comment at the top of the page "Please wikify this article or section. Help improve this article by adding relevant internal links.' Where is the "happy medium" I would be happy to do the work myself, but need some better suggestions. You say to decrease internal links, yet the comment says to add internal links. Maybe you could remove the comment that additional internal links should be added. Milzinas (talk) 13:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the tags are advisory, designed to give advice to the editor. A click of the link in the box noting the problems leads to a page of advice. In this case, the article was suffering from not having useful items wikilinked. Your response was overkill - you linked almost every word and linked to stuff more than once. The happy medium is to link to useful things just the once. The article also has a huge number of red links - links to articles that don't exist. They could do with being reduced drastically. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 13:33, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips. Will do. Milzinas (talk) 17:29, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

WABCO

As an editor who has been involved in the recent controversy on the WABCO page, please refer to (and join in) the discussion on the WABCO discussion page. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcoming

What do you mean? Please cite it in a simple manner. Kampfgruppe (talk) 11:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I'll be careful next time. Kampfgruppe (talk) 11:31, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:51, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

AIV report on 89.207.214.7

I notice your edit summary on this says '(?User-reported: rm 89.207.214.7 - not warned today)'. I'm not clear why you didn't block it, especially after reverting some vandalism a little while ago. This is an address of the Yorkshire & Humber Grid for Learning - which I@ve added, and I've given it a 1 month schoolblock. There's been adequate warning hasn't there and continual vandalism? Should I not have blocked? Is there a guide to AIV by the way? Can I add that I'm thinking I must be wrong, because I've always respected whatever you've had to say. :-) (but true). Thanks. dougweller (talk) 09:58, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The warnings there are ancient and the people using the IP are always different. So there's no reason to assume that the pupil at that PC today saw any warnings. Three edits today, nothing particularly harmful (more testing than vandalism) - I personally wouldn't've blocked, regardless of the editor who kept undoing my decline and replacing the report, especially as 15 minutes had elapsed with no further edits. Your mileage may vary, of course. There's no guide to AIV as far as I know - it's all just rule-of-thumb and common sense. Perhaps we should write one! ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 10:03, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

vandalism reporting

hmm, i was presuming edits with summaries like "replaced content with (nonsense or offensive phrase here)" or "blanked the page" wewre clear vandalism, does template 4im not permit an immediate report? (as it says it is the only warning). Sorry if this is unclear, want to figure out how to help without clogging the system. Wikify567 (talk) 10:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

There's a hierarchy of warnings, starting with {{uw-test1}} and working up to {{uw-vand4im}}. When you jump to the last warning after only one edit by an IP and then report before they edit again, your report will be declined out of hand, no matter what the warning reads. Read the green box on WP:AIV. It says clearly that the page is for obvious and persistent vandals and spammers only (ie not just one edit). Then carefully read Wikipedia:Guide to administrator intervention against vandalism before making any more reports. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 10:22, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Deleted article

Hi, not trying to sell anything, was writing about arrowbio as part of municipal solid waste treatments, I've edited a few other terms in this area, and just saw this was missing (there are a lot of other processes here, each different in process not only in brand...) I am pretty new here, but what did I do wrong? I was working on the language and grammar when it was deleted, did I post too soon? YaelG (talk) 22:20, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

This article has been posted here 5 times and 7+ editors have agreed that it's spam. Are you - and the other accounts creating the same article - copy-and-pasting it from somewhere? ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 08:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I saw pages were deleted about a year ago, but with totally different content than what I'm posting. I wrote most of it myself, and I have no idea who the other people who posted this are. The process part was taken from independent sources, not the company, and I've edited it, and was in the middle of editing more and changing terminology to what's used here in several municipal solid waste articles. But did you also delete the page of the arrowbio facility? this is a one of a kind process of solid waste treatment through water and separation through weight, I was there on a tour and its really interesting and different than other plants that deal with SMW, it really is worth being part of the encyclopedia. the Lubeck Waste Treatment Facility was were I got the model from. Help....thanks :) YaelG (talk) 21:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

What I always advise here is to create it in your user space, where it is (almost) immune from deletion. User:YaelG/Arrowbio would be a good place. You'll need a neutral-sounding title if you get it to the mainspace; you should also look at Wikipedia:Your first article for some useful hints (in short, they are to be very neutral, source all statements to reliable, third-party sources that can be checked and stress some notability for the subject. There's no deadline here, so you've plenty of time to work on it. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 22:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

redirects

The redirect of WP:Accuracy Dispute (what I presume your comment refers to) was unintended, my intent was to redirect WP:Ad to WP:Ads instead of to WP:Accuracy Dispute. Wikify567 (talk) 11:05, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

No, read my comment again. You're in such a tearing hurry, you don't appear to be reading more than the first few words of any sentence. Do not create redirects from article space to the project space. Do not retarget established redirects like WP:AD to random other targets. Do not create pointless redirects from one thing to another redirect. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 11:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

What are you doing to Pulemelei Star Mound article?

I am not vandalising anything, I am working on improving the article with decent amounts of detail about the age, origin, present condition, &c. of the mound. What do you know about it? How can you revert everything I add, especially since I am still drafting it? Please justify your actions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tagaloa (talk • contribs)

You are copying and pasting material from here. I've warned you to stop and I'll warn you again if you continue. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 14:41, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and I added the citation to the External Links. Like I said, I am still drafting the article, this involves pasting stuff from several sources and then massaging it into shape. Are you saying that I should write the article in a text editor and then paste it finished and complete into Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tagaloa (talk • contribs)

No, I'm saying don't paste material into Wikipedia at all. Write it from the start in your own words. See WP:COPYVIO. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 15:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Your online manner is appaling. You are also wrong-headed. Most knowledge is derivative, when someone sets out to write an article it is in REALITY the distilation of others' knowledge unless it is a new peice of research. Since this is not that, just an encyclopaedia article it will of necessity synthesise the work of others. So my question stands, should I work offline and then paste it or not? If not then expect folk to bring source material together online, pasted from several sources and then reworked into a new synthesis. Do you quite understand the question? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tagaloa (talk • contribs)

I've been here 5 years and I'm an elected administrator. You've been here less than two hours and are violating copyright and Wikipedia's long-established rules that we don't accept cut-and-paste material from other websites (and cut-paste-and-edit creates "derivative works": we don't accept them, either). Write it in your own words from the start, then cite the source. It's not rocket science. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 15:35, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Faderhead

Hi. I was going to create a page for Faderhead (a band), but when I went to begin work it noted that the page had been deleted... by you. So, I decided before I re-create something that has been removed for a reason, I'd ask if there was any tips you could give, or notes regarding why the page was deleted in the first place? Even better would be information on how to find the old page, so I'd have an easy place to work from. Iondragons (talk) 19:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! The content of the article in full was

'''Faderhead''' is an [[electronica|electronic music]] band from [[Hamburg|Hamburg]], [[Germany|Germany]].
== Discography ==

* FH1(2006)
* FH2(2007)
* FH3(2008)

so there's not much to go on. As for advice, there are twelve points on this page that if the band meets at least one, preferably more, then it can be included. But you'll need to tell us in the article which points they meet (you'd be surprised how many people write articles without giving even a hint of what the subject has done to get into an enecyclopedia) and provide reliable, third-party sources that prove that they do (not MySpace, not the band's own website, not a sales site - you'd be surprised how many people think that a MySpace page saying "we're the best band in the world!" counts as a reliable source). ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 08:40, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

conflict of interest

I do understand that point, however, I am not using this to promote as I am not deleting any other posts etc. The websites are official and I am just putting them in so that the artist is not misrepresented. I appreciate your help on this point though. I am a new editor and therefore dont wish to do anything wrong! Adam Heayberd (talk) 15:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC)Adam Heayberd

That's okay. Just thought you should know our policy, as in the past several celebs have received very poor publicity (in Private Eye and then the red tops) for their management companies massaging their Wikipedia articles. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 15:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thats brilliant knowledge! Thank you! Adam Heayberd (talk) 15:35, 20 November 2008 (UTC)Adam Heayberd

Red snake

Hi Redvers, I see you reverted my new Red snake and Red snake (snake) edits. Please allow me to explain. Perhaps you noticed the common name category tags?. This is something that I started not only to give readers an overview of all the common names used for certain groups of snakes, but also as a way for editors like myself to keep track of these names -- of the redirects and of the disambiguation pages in which they are mentioned. The Red snake disambiguation page is one example. This page was was just fine as far as I was concerned: along with the roulette entry it mentioned all of the taxa that have been associated with this name and it carries the necessary category tags.
Then things started to go wrong. It seems that in mid-July 2007, a new rule was created by some people working on WP:Disambiguation stating that, with only one or two exceptions, other category tags were no longer allowed on disambiguation pages. Although I started categorizing such pages for snake names back in mid-2006, I was not aware of this new rule and only found out about it recently when someone decided to delete a category tag from the Moccasin disambiguation page. I protested and tried to explain, but to no avail. I was told that my only option was to turn all of the snake disambiguation pages into Set index articles (SIAs), or else they would disappear from the category overviews.
This was something I was not looking forward to. First, all of the disambiguation pages on snakes would have to be tracked down and changed, but of course it's not that easy. With pages such as Diamondback rattlesnake, only the {{disambig}} tag has to be changed to {{SIA|snakes}}, but what about ones like Moccasin and Red snake that are not purely about snakes? No choice there: I was told that the snake information and tags would have to be transferred to new disambiguation pages, such as Moccasin (snake) and Red snake (snake) (ugh, bla), or else these names would disappear from the category overviews. At this point, you may ask yourself "Why not do this, but leave the Red snake page untouched, except for the removal of the category tags?" Yes, we could do that, but then we would have to maintain the same snake information on two different pages, which over time is a recipe for inconsistency.
So, it may look convoluted, and I'm not happy with the situation, but the folks at WP:Disambiguation have not been sympathetic to my plight and I feel as though my work is not stuck between a rock and a hard place. If I do what they say and what you have suggested, then my category overviews (which represent about two years of work) will always be missing a lot of important names, which would be a shame. So, please try to understand; I'd really appreciate it. (PS -- Please answer here) Cheers, --Jwinius (talk) 16:17, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Hold on a second, I think I have the solution. Red snake is now the way it was before, except that it's missing the category tags. Those are now on the Red snake (snake) page, which redirects to Red snake. I think everybody should be happy now. Would you agree? --Jwinius (talk) 16:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that works. Red snake (snake) didn't work for me as a title: it's not useful for readers, it's not useful as a search term... but I see what you mean about the snake categories. The redirect seems an ideal compromise. ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 20:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Jwinius (talk) 21:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Hillpark Secondary School

i attend the school and everything i wrote is ture, Mrs Donnely said back when i was S2 that the Times of school starting and ending would change, and it did and hillpark is the first school to adoped this time plan.

Monday - 8:50 - 15:55

Tuesday - 8:50 - 15:55

Wednesday -8:50 - 15:05

Thursday - 8:50 - 15:05

Friday - 8:50 - 15:05

now on monday and tuesday there are 7 periods instead of 6.

but it is still 6 periods on Wednesday to Friday —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamiemaloneyscoreg (talk • contribs)

Not only is the timetable startlingly unimportant for an encyclopedia article, but also "Mrs Donnely" isn't a reliable source. The "first school to adoped this time plan" bit is important, but you'll need a reliable source for the assertion. Do they not teach spelling and grammar at this school, by the way? ➨ ❝ЯEDVERS❞ a sweet and tender hooligan 08:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Now that they teach 7 periods instead of 6 on two days of the week, we should be seeing a rapid improvement in this young newbie's contributions. Itsmejudith (talk) 13:27, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 17, 2008 and before.

Because the Signpost hasn't been sent in a while, to save space, I've condensed all seven issues that were not sent into this archive. Only the three issues from November are below.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 42	8 November 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
News and notes: The Price is Right, milestones	Dispatches: Halloween Main Page contest generates new article content
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 43	10 November 2008	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens: Over $500,000 raised in first week	ArbCom elections: Nominations open
Book review: How Wikipedia Works	MediaWiki search engine improved
Four Board resolutions, including financials, approved	News and notes: Vietnamese Wiki Day
Dispatches: Historic election proves groundbreaking on the Main Page	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 44	17 November 2008	About the Signpost

Lawsuit briefly shuts down Wikipedia.de	GFDL 1.3 released, will allow Wikimedia migration to Creative Commons license
Wikimedia Events Roundup	News and notes: Fundraiser, List Summary Service, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)