User talk:Sandstein/Archives/2006/March

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Ilan Halimi, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 17:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

1911 verification

I'm sorry not to have explained my changes but if you look at the main talk page for the project, you would be able to see that discussion of what actually to do with the list is still underway. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Missing_encyclopedic_articles#Reviewing_1911. It's my fault that I did not also mark each of the pages but that would have taken more effort that it would be worth. Sorry to have done so without explanation. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 14:35, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

• No problem, thanks for the reply. Sandstein 18:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Keith R. Wood & Critic-at-Arms AfD

When nominating multiple articles for deletion at once, check out Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#How_to_list_multiple_related_pages_for_deletion. The AfD tag you left on Keith R. Wood pointed to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keith R. Wood instead of being combined with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Critic-at-Arms. I also edited the title of the later to clarify it was for both pages. Let me know if you have any questions. -- JLaTondre 01:47, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for the corrections. I did manage to do this correctly once, but here it seems I got sloppy late in the evening. Sandstein 07:42, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
  • No problem. I'm certainly not mistake free. -- JLaTondre 14:11, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Shakila

Hi, you nominated the above article for deletion. Could you have a look at that page for my response and the article to reconsider your vote? TIA, --Gurubrahma 13:50, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

• Done. Sandstein 13:57, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Denbeaux study

• I am still working on it.
• It is highly significant.
• I think you will agree, if you look at the .pdf.
• For instance it says (IIRC):
  • Only about 10% of the detainees were captured by the US, about half of the rest were captured by bounty hunters.
  • More than half of the detainees were not members of either Al Qaida or the Taliban.

The DOD said, yesterday, they complied with Jed Rakoff's court order to release the names of the detainees. Last night, when I was working on the Denbeaux study article I came across the site where the DoD put up 200 megabytes of unredacted documents, and I have been downloading them and looking at them. -- Geo Swan 16:52, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of ENotes article

After reading the guidelines more carefully, I see the purpose in deletion, although it may be possible to improve the article, I do not have enough information to do so at this time. My purpose was to improve upon the article "Study Guides" which references various similar sites which do have Wikipedia citations. Should those also be deleted? I feel I am too new to delete them myself but perhaps you can take a look and see if deletion for QuickStudy and/or Bookrags is appropriate? I will remove the internal link on that article to ENotes now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metrofeed (talk • contribs)

• Replied on user's talk page. Sandstein 13:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Sanko zaka

This place is an important place in history of Japan. Such a reason, this report was described. If you consider that Eastern history is not worth, please write in this note.わがまま小皇帝

• Of course Japanese history belongs into Wikipedia, but the article does not say anything about the historical significance of this street. It says that a temple once stood there, but if that temple was notable, it's the temple that needs an article, and not the street. There are many streets in the world, and we can't have an article on each and every one of them; therefore notability must be established. Sandstein 13:26, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Why do you understand history of Japan?
Why can you judge importance or not for the area of Japan.
I respect the history of Many nations, and do not judge the importance of a foreign country.
Or are you racist?
わがまま小皇帝

• First, please review WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. Second, this is not about the importance of the history of Japan, but about the importance of the history of this street. The assertion of historical significance must be verifiable - for the history of Japan as well as for anything else, see WP:V. Sandstein 13:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

For example, the Rubicon river is not a big river geographically.
However, for Italy, it is an important river and is deserves indicate as a report.
Don't you think so?
わがまま小皇帝

问对我的希望回答

• Certainly, that's why we have the article Rubicon. But this article explains why it is notable: "The river is notable as Roman law forbade any general from crossing it with a standing army." We do have lots of articles, too, about notable sites in Tokyo, such as Yasukuni Shrine, Kokyo, Tsukiji Hongan-ji, and that's OK. But the point is not whether we should have articles on notable Japanese sites: of course we should. The point is that the article Sanko zaka does not show why it is supposed to be a notable Japanese site. And unless it does that, it will get deleted sooner or later. Please take the time to review WP:V for an in-depth explanation of this. Sandstein 15:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

You have not replied to my question. I want you for me to reply to the next question. On what kind of standard did you judge it as notable? The attitude which has only on the standard of its own country and judges other countries is called ethnocentrism. How much knowledge do you have about history and geography of East? I want you to do a creative contribution to Wiki. 您日本来有时？您日语理解？わがまま小皇帝

• First, the same standard of notability applies as to any other street in the world: "A topic has notability if it is known outside of a narrow interest group or constituency, or should be because of its particular importance or impact" (WP:N). Second, it is precisely the problem that I cannot judge the street's notability according to any standard whatsoever, because you do not say why it should be notable. It seems we are getting nowhere here; I'm taking this to AfD. Sandstein 05:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC).

Americans, Japanese, South Korean, and Chinese respect the culture of other countries. Such an attitude is called cultural relativism. But Sandstein is going to delete the report by the self-righteous reason. He is not explaining why a certain report is important , and other reports are not. The attitude is called ethnocentrism. From such a reason, the attitude which he asks for deletion is unsuitable.わがまま小皇帝

I cannot understand why he persists deleting the report which others created.

• Note for the record: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meiji zaka for the ensuing AfD. Sandstein 09:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

AfD

Hi, I thought you might be interested in these votes for deletion:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas McElwain
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Muslim Christianity scholars

Cheers, Pecher ^Talk 16:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Proper Deletion Procedures

Mr. Prymak: You may be interested to hear that I have nominated articles of yours for deletion as not conforming to Wikipedia's policies of notability and original research; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Prymak and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Immaterial world. Please do not construe this as a personal attack; your verifiable contributions on real subjects are much appreciated on Wikipedia. Best regards, Sandstein 13:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Sandstein,

Thank you for keeping me in check. I would like to know what exactly is the trouble with any specific article, and to have the opportunity to defend myself. I agree that your efforts are not a personal attack. You are very civil about this issue, and it is best to focus on the arguments for or against any claims of knowledge. So far, I have had very little will power used against me, and I hope for more sentences of reason and dialogue. Please do not think that I would make personal attacks as well. Thanks again for your comments and attempts to edit. I do appreciate it.

I agree that some of my work needs editing and I appreciate that you have gone through the proper procedures prior to any deletions. There are some arguments to defend my positions, and I hope to have the opportunity to do so. I have already deleting one article, edited others, and clarified. I genuinely find your responses and concern very helpful. Thank you for your efforts to improve Wikipedia.

Yours sincerely,

Joseph Prymak --joseph 17:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Mr Prymak: The matter is now largely out of my hands (see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion for the applicable procedure), and I suggest you defend your articles directly at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Prymak and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Immaterial world, respectively. The specific policies I believe the articles to be in violation of are referred to on these pages, but see WP:NOT and WP:BAI for a general overview of why certain articles have no place on Wikipedia.

This being said, I'd be happy to vote to "keep" your articles once they reach encyclopaedic status, e.g. if the respective articles:

• contain material to show that you, Joseph Prymak, are notable enough for inclusion under the guidelines of WP:BIO;
• contain material to show that Anthropogeology is notable, i.e. a genuine scientific discipline and the subject of respectable writings by scientists other than yourself (see in particular WP:NOR);
• contain material to show that Immaterial world and Universal questions are not merely original research of yours, i.e., that these specific topics have been the subject of scientific research and writings by, again, scientists other than yourself. But even so, with these topics being as all-encompassing as they are, I fear that they would be redundant compared to the more specific (and well-sourced) articles we already have on this, e.g. Philosophy, Ethics, Ontology, Materialism/Idealism and many others. You might be interested in directly contributing to these articles instead.

Best regards, Sandstein 19:52, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

MedCalc

With regards to the notability of the subject, we have listed some independent reviews. Citations in the medical literature are listed on [1]. --Frank 14:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Hazrat Mujaddid Alfi Sani

Since you originally prodded it, I thought you might like to know that Hazrat Mujaddid Alfi Sani is now at AfD. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hazrat Mujaddid Alfi Sani. NickelShoe 16:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks. Sandstein 16:29, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Patricia Graham

What, being Dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Education wasn't notable enough for you? She rather conspicuously meets criteria 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8; and there's also evidence like this. [2]. Admittedly, she's not exactly in the same league as Air Force Amy, Kelly Gregg, Dex Brown, and BrainBread, to cite a few examples of articles that recently survived AfD nominations, but I think a case can be made for including an article on her. Any other questions? Monicasdude 23:54, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Fiona Stephenson AfD

Thanks for pointing me to the WP:PROD procedure. I wasn't aware of that - its always good to learn more about Wikipedia policies. Best, Gwernol 22:09, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

• You're welcome. Have a nice weekend, Sandstein 22:09, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Afd

Thank you for the polite afd warning, i appreciate it. Peace! --Striver 12:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

RFC

Please comment on my rfc Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jersey Devil--Jersey Devil 21:43, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Tsuna Zaka AfD

Just saying "no vote" doesn't actually do anything, you have to actually remove it from the AfD. Oh well, too late now.  freshgavinΓΛĿЌ  23:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry. Though I really didn't intend to retract the AfD, just abstain on this so that other users acquainted with Japan can decide... Though as an admin, I'd have been more reluctant to delete all at this stage of the debate. It would seem that there wasn't yet consensus on Tsuna Zaka. Best, Sandstein 05:57, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

MGSWorld

Thanks for the support in the removal of the article, MGSWorld. He was new so I was hoping he'd ask for deletion when he understood he couldn't make it. :) --Aegwyn 06:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello Pot, Meet Kettle

You've got gall to insult me the way you did about my TT player's list for thinktanks entry. There was no need to be so harsh. A simple Delete would've sufficed. Paisano® 21:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be perceived as insulting. However, your articles do in fact constitute a textbook example of what Wikipedia is not. As such, your apparent expectation to be allowed to misuse this online encyclopedia as a web host for your private games does indeed show quite some gall. Sandstein 21:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Whatever. If it makes you feel better to insult an obvious wiki-rookie then go ahead. I made an honest mistake and will learn from it. I don't consider that gall. Have a nice life. Paisano® 01:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Article for Deletion

Would you be willing to consider a redirect -- without merging -- from Roman Catholic conservatism to Traditionalist Catholic? Thanks. Hyphen5 07:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

• Replied on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roman Catholic conservatism. Sandstein 07:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikiethics Polls

Greetings, having read your comment on Wikipedia talk:Wikiethics I thought you should be aware that there are two polls on it that it seems you'd be inclined to want to participate in. Thanks! Netscott 15:16, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for the info. Sandstein 15:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

C/A/T Article For Deletion

Hello, I see you've suggested an article I had just started, C/A/T should be deleted. As you may be aware, it is extreme difficult for North American industrial and goth musicians to really secure major record releases, and I understand that there is always some Wikipedia related discussion as to what a relevant musicial contribution is. I think you've proposed for an article deletion too soon, and would suggest you check out similar Wikipedia articles for other similar artists, such as Claire Voyant, Switchblade Symphony, and Vernian Process. C/A/T has toured across the United States, and I feel is significant enough to warrant a Wikipedia page. Thank you, MCalamari 19:02, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

• Replied on Talk:C/A/T. Sandstein 19:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

non-notable persons and alternative deletion methods

Having fun on AFD? Might check out {{db-bio}} {{db-group}} {{db-band}} etc. also, as they would have been more appropriate in that last case. If it's borderline even for that, you can use {{prod|reason}}. Anything to help cut down the clutter on afd. — Mar. 18, '06 [19:33] <freakofnur_xture|talk>

• Thanks for the heads-up. I'm well aware of these methods and use them frequently. In today's cases, though, the pages either were contested PRODs (found via [3]) or they at least seemed to assert notability, however unlikely. The Oldham Brothers, for instance, claimed to have produced The Matrix, and this demo company also had some adjectives like "well-known". So their speedy deletion was only really justifiable per WP:SNOW, I think. Best, Sandstein 19:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Floating signifiers

I made some major changes to Floating signifiers, since I was familiar with the term. I included some web references. It's still not a great article, and I'm not sure it should be kept, so I didn't deprod it, but I thought you might want to give it a second look to get a better idea of whether or not it has potential with some more work. NickelShoe (Talk) 01:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

• Ah. Er.... Frankly, I still don't understand the article after reading it four times and glancing through Sign (semiotics). But then, it's postmodernism, so I guess it's not supposed to be understandable. Anyway, someone else deprodded it now, and since it's apparently a bona fide scientific term, it doesn't warrant an AfD. Thanks for the work! Sandstein 06:00, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
  • "Floating signifiers" is a postmodernist way of saying that race and gender don't exist, but we have words for them anyway. I just can't figure out an encyclopedic way to explain that. NickelShoe (Talk) 20:41, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

My Rfc

Please comment on my Rfc. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jersey Devil--Jersey Devil 02:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Schaechter-Viswanath

Hi,

I'm pretty new to Wikipedia so maybe you can help me improve the article I posted today that you flagged for deletion, on Yiddish poet Gitl Schaechter-Viswanath. I looked at the notability test and I believe she qualifies. GS-V is one of the most important poets writing in Yiddish today; she has been published in many of the leading Yiddish journals and her book was published by one of the few mainstream (non-religious) publishing houses that publishes Yiddish. Her control of the language is remarkable. Please tell me what to add to make these things clear.

I am trying to create enough information in Wikipedia about Yiddish literature and culture to make it useful for the average undergraduate student. I am a literature librarian with a specialty in Yiddish. I made myself a list of 50 Yiddish writers I thought should be in Wikipedia. My plan is to gradually work my way through the list so that in a year there will be a good body of information there for Jewish Studies and Literature students to consult. I know that many of these names will not be household names outside the small group of people who study Yiddish. But the fact is that one of the main deterrents to people who want to study these writers is the lack of any source material in a major language such as English. Wikipedia seems to me the ideal way to make this kind of information available.

Nomi Jones 02:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Bhai Makhan Shah

Dear Sir,

Further to your vote to delete my article, Bhai Makhan Shah, I would like to bring the following to your attention and present this for the record:

You said: "WP:NOT a book publisher. If verified to be notable, rewrite as an encyclopedia article rather than a story." I would like to bring the following to your attention. Ths article is not a book but a historic record - please see my introduction and the links added recently. Further the style of writing is how these Sakhis are normally written - so I have preserved the style and want to give the readers a feel for how this history was passed from one generation to another in rural India during the 1400 onwards.

You may be aware that this article was tagged by Joe for speedy deletion because he thought that the article "appears to be a fictional story" at 2:58. He had however, failed to notice that the article began with: "Makhan Shah Lubana (also written as Lobana) was a devout Sikh and a rich trader from Tanda district Jhelum (now in Pakistan)..…" – If this was a fictional story, would it refer to "(now in Pakistan)"?

Further, mid-way down the article is the line "He then recited this Shabad of Guru Arjan Dev:" followed by the sacred hymn by the fifth Sikh Guru – Now surely if you are not even aware of the Gurus of the Sikhs, do you have the right to make any judgement on this article or any other article linked to Sikhism?

He was wrong but he realised his mistake and rightly and honourably retracted from that position. However, he did not completely re-evaluate his position as he almost instantly put an AfD notice on the article.

If Joe had the "well-being" of Wikipedia at heart, surely it does not take more than a few seconds to search for "Makhan Shah" on Google to see if this is fiction or fact! – If he had done this, he would have found 654 hits and the first article is at: www.Sikh-History.com – Do I need to say more! – I don't think you would find fictional stories on a history website. Under the circumstances, the comment by User talk:Royboycrashfan that this is "original research" is unbelievable!! 654 hits with Google and you think that this is original research!! This is a record of historical events that took place in about 1620AD. And what is surprising is that you are supported by User:TBC and User:Khoikhoi. Blindly following the leader!!

Following my comments on the discussion page highlighting that this article was a example of a Sakhi (ie: Historical Record), which are very popular in Sikhism at 3.09, Jow quickly changed the article to AfD status at 3.13 saying that this was because "text is a Sikh story taken from www.srigurugranthsahib.org website". So in 4 minutes he had read the 2 articles of over 1250 words each and done a proper comparison of the two articles. I am sorry but I don't think this is how articles should be judged - Someone spending less than 4 minutes to evaluate an article that may have taken a few days to create from various resources. Why should someone who appears to have no knowledge of the subject matter, is completely anti-religion and has spent very little time researching the subject take such a step? I wonder?

Having read the Wikipedia:Guide to deletion, I believe that the comments made by Joe – "only that the fashion in which it is currently presented is non-encyclopedic" does not appear to be reason for articles to be deleted.

Further, he say that if the text was: "of great religious import, it would, I think, appear in some form on more than one website" – This is based on a Google search of the words: "Once while he was returning home". What he does not tell us is the Google finds the following:

"with his ship carrying valuable goods over the vast seas, his ship got caught up in a furious storm" in my article and

"with his ships loaded with valuable cargo, there was a furious storm at sea and his vessels got caught in it" on the other site.

Not quite the same sentence – let alone the whole article. So how can anyone say that "text is a Sikh story taken from" www.srigurugranthsahib.org site - is a completely mystery to me? I wonder why you have taken this step as it is totally unjustified!

I believe that your criticisms are entirely ill-founded and without foundation. Further, this appears to a tactic to discourage minority religions to have a reasonable say on this website and this type of behaviour will stall contribution from the minority traditions. The majority sects will dictate what goes on this site - even when they are completely wrong!! If that was your intention, I have no problem with that – just do it openly rather than using unnecessary stealth and poor logic!!! --Hari Singh 07:59, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

• Copied this comment to Talk:Bhai Makhan Shah and referenced on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhai Makhan Shah. Sandstein 08:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hebi zaka

Hi Sandstein. Don't forget to add {{subst:afd1|Hebi zaka}} to the other articles, so that their visitors know that the articles are up for AFD. There're more complete instructions here, if you need. Take care. ×Meegs 22:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

• Now you've made me... do exactly that. I thought I could get by the lazy way, but no chance. Sandstein 22:38, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Sorry ;) ×Meegs 22:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Ham and eggs cells

You asked me:

Would you consider adding encyclopedic information to the article, e.g. what this solution is and what it is being used for (apart from growing cells in general)?" WAS 4.250 06:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

My response is that I did put in the article "what this solution is" and you deleted it as not encyclopedic. WAS 4.250 06:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Well, what I deleted was dozens of lines of the following:

L-Arginine 211 mg

Biotin 0.024 mg

L-Histidine 21 mg

Calcium pantothenate 0.7 mg

which I think doesn't really help anyone except microbiologists trying to recreate the solution. But there is consensus that WP:NOT a repository for recipes (whether for sandwiches or growth solutions). What I meant was: is there information about the solution? Who invented it? For what uses is it better than other solutions? Now that would be useful encyclopedic information. Best regards, Sandstein 07:00, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

We agree on what you deleted. We disagree on whether an encyclopedia with over a million articles should be allowed to have articles in which part of some articles is only useful to a minority of readers. I would like you to seriously compare what you deleted with Monoidal category and rethink your deletion. For example: you deleted "Biotin 0.024 mg" which I find an interesting informative piece of information even though I am not a microbiologist. On the other hand

Given a field or commutative ring $R$, the category $R$-Mod of $R$-modules (in the case of a field, vector spaces) is a symmetric monoidal category with product ⊗ and identity $R$.

is mumbo jumbo to me. It would be wrong for me to delete that just because only a very very small minority of readers will find it useful. I suspect the majority of those who understand it, already know it, so who is it for. Let's delete it. we are not a place for people to store just any old thing. Um .. on the other hand, maybe an encyclopedia with room for articles on minor characters in minor TV shows can find room for other things too. I hope you will change your mind on what is fit for Wikipedia. By the way, this is not a food recipe even though it is dinner for the cells that grow in it. I find it very interesting to know exactly what substances are in the intercellular fluid of mammals and thus also have to be in this cell growth medium in order for them to multiply. I am saddened you do not share that. WAS 4.250 17:24, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, yes, "we are not a place for people to store just any old thing" in that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. But since you feel that this information is useful to our readers, and I'm not the one to dispute its notability, I'll revert the deletion and slap a {{context}} tag on it. My suggestion to add some information that is useful to the layman still stands (I can't do it since I have no clue about microbiology...). Best, Sandstein 17:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you that this article like many other wikipedia articles is unfinished and could use help. As I say, I am not a microbiologist either. I ran across the term in cell culture when someone added it without a reference and I had to look it up to see if it was true or a joke or whatever. I discovered many interesting things in that little info jouney, and slightly improved a few wikipedia articles while I was learning. And added this article. Which as you say, could use help. I would love to know how exact these measurements have to be and what if any variations are needed for different cell types or species. But I only have so much time and my priority right now is the H5N1 series of articles and a minor addition about information science evidence for evolution in the evolution article. Best, WAS 4.250 19:06, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

My RfA recently closed and it was a success, passing at 84-02-00. I would like to thank you for taking the time to weigh in and on your subsequent support. And I know it's quite cliche, but if you ever need any assistance and/or want another opinion on something, grab a Pepsi and don't hesitate to drop me a line on my talk page. Thanks again. Pepsidrinka 05:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyrights in Switzerland

Hey, great find with that decision on the Meili photo! :-) Lupo 09:53, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks! I needed to use some trivial photographs from a book, so I remembered reading about that decision in the NZZ one day, dug it up and made a Commons template... Might be useful for a variety of Switzerland-related purposes. Best, Sandstein 10:16, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, except for the Meili photo itself, I wouldn't dare apply this court decision to any other press photo. You are probably aware of the "Bob Marley" photo referenced in that decision, which is copyrighted... But it is useful because it clearly establishes the Swiss analogue to the U.S. Bridgeman v. Corel decision and thus clarifies the situation in Switzerland for reproductive photographs of 2D originals. Lupo 10:33, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Of course. Maybe I'll write a brief Wikipedia article on the decision(s), using the Marley photo (as fair use :-) to illustrate the issue. At any rate, Blau Guggenheim seems to be rather more far-reaching than Bridgeman. Apart from 2D photos, it could also be used for run-of-the-mill photos of press conferences, etc. to illustrate articles about politicians, business leaders et al. Sandstein 10:57, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

The new article: Copyright protection of photographs in Switzerland. Sandstein 18:44, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Schultheiß

I added your article to Portal:Germany/New article announcements and Portal:Germany/New articles. Please list other relevant articles you create there. You might also be interested in the German-speaking noticeboard, which has currently too few Swiss editors. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 06:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

O'Fallon, Illinois Public Library

The person who removed the "prod" for this article did so admittedly without ever having read the Talk page for the tag's justification. In short, he made a mistake. Not allowing the readdition of the prod tag simply perpetuates this mistake. Please re-add. Rklawton 19:23, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

And I, too, made the same mistake... I was just about to redirect to O'Fallon, Illinois after reading the talk. Would that do? Sandstein 19:25, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I doubt folks are going to search for cityname "public library" - so I doubt a redirect would serve much purpose. Speedy delete works for me. I'd hoped "prod" would require the least admin time/trouble. Rklawton 19:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'll revert. Sandstein 19:42, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Somebody set us up the deletion

It would be a shame indeed if anyone eroneously came to these conclusions. Let's hope they have the common sense not to. For great justice. 18:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)