User talk:Sandstein/Archives/2015/October

Resources Development Administration (RDA)

Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Resources Development Administration (RDA), the article was only recently listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Film as seen here. Right after closure, I had added additional sources to make the topic's notability more evident. Would you consider reopening the AfD? I am not sure if others have really vetted the sources, as I have shown relevant sources today. Let me know if I should pursue WP:DRV. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 18:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, relisted.  Sandstein  18:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 18:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello

Hello how are you. Just wondring why the result of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Christian Nobel laureates is no consensus, of 13 voters 11 of them voted for keeping the list, While only 3 of the 11 supported the idea of merge, but they basically voted to keep article. I think the result is pretty clear that the vast majoirty voted for keeping. Have a nice day.--Jobas (talk) 14:26, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, these are not votes, but anyway: we have Keep: 9, Delete: 3, Merge: 2 - that's 9 to 5, not enough for positive consensus to keep, in my view, and there are no policy consideration to weigh the argument either way.  Sandstein  15:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

The two list AfDs

I voted "merge" but I think your decision was right on the money. These two articles made me wonder aloud in another venue if there might be some kind of mechanism for dealing with battlefield conduct already dealt with by Arbcom decisions (short of AE). Apparently none, so I guess there will be more guerrilla skirmishes like this one. Coretheapple (talk) 23:25, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

ZALORA

Hi Sandstein,

I am wondering why you deleted the ZALORA page Could you please advise and revert — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jinxian.hoh (talk • contribs) 07:01, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

ZALORA was deleted because that was the result of the community discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zalora.  Sandstein  08:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

List of Disney video games

Hi. I noticed you deleted the articles List of Disney video games and List of Disney video games by genre, but in the deletion logs for both articles you cite only Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disney Magical Dance. Upon reviewing the discussion there I can't find the slightest allusion to "List of Disney video games" or "List of Disney video games by genre", much less any consensus to delete them. I assumed you must have made a copy-and-paste error when writing up the deletion logs, so I tried looking for AfD discussions specific to those articles, but there aren't any. So I'm left still wondering why those articles were deleted.--Martin IIIa (talk) 15:50, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I frankly don't know either. The timestamp tells me I deleted these articles when closing the AfD, so there must have been some bug with the AfD closing script and it deleted these pages it was not supposed to. I've restored them, thanks for the notice.  Sandstein  16:08, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for the quick response.--Martin IIIa (talk) 17:08, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Beta Uprising

Hi Sandstein. I see you've restored the Beta Uprising page following the annulment of the speedy deletion. Could you restore the talk page as well? Thank you. TorbenTT (talk) 15:40, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Sure, done.  Sandstein  15:41, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Sir, You are a brilliant decision-maker. Please re-consider your decision Please, ScoopDen1 (talk) 21:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Which decision, and why? Please provide a link.  Sandstein  21:46, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Ah, this? Moved from above.  Sandstein  21:46, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Respected Sir, You have deleted my page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waqar_Ahmed_alias_Raj without any talks you did so, could you please mention why you did so? I beg you please let the article be there, this isn't fair, Wikipedia was provided enough references to confirm that is it real or not. Please reconsider your action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScoopDen1 (talk • contribs) 21:30, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

That article was deleted because of unanimous agreement at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Waqar Ahmed alias Raj to delete it. I will not restore it.  Sandstein  21:47, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Are your ears burning?

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 October 11 Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Er, no, but thanks for the notice.  Sandstein  11:00, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Tenpenny

I don't agree with the outcome you gave with this discussion. This should have either closed as no consensus or been relisted. The points made by those of us who supported keeping the article based on the coverage the character gets should be taken into consideration. Kokoro20 (talk) 10:19, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Noted, but I think that there is consensus to not keep in that discussion. What that means - merge or redirect - can be hashed out editorially.  Sandstein  11:02, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for Jose Landi

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jose Landi. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. CrazyAces489 (talk) 20:47, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for Sadaki Nakabayashi

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sadaki Nakabayashi. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. CrazyAces489 (talk) 20:47, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

AFD

More time could have been used. I believe that a no consensus could have been achieved rather than a deletion. Using an IP address shouldn't discount their argument. CrazyAces489 (talk) 20:47, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Which AFD is this about?  Sandstein  20:49, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Cuckservative

Hi Sandstein, thanks for removing the WP:ATTACK problem - just a heads up that it will be reverted soon by a couple of editors who think they own the article. samtar ^(msg) 20:28, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

David L. Jones decision

Hi. I think the decision not to delete David L. Jones was an error.

1. The article is of poor quality and objectively does not follow guidelines. This has been discussed extensively, not I do not believe that there is consensus that notability guidelines in particular have been met. Quite the opposite in fact.

2. You say that IP opinions were likely canvassed, while ignoring the very high probability that many of the logged in user opinions were canvassed. There is a clear time correlation between the word of the deletion being put out on the EEVBlog forum and the appearance of several comments, for example. Also, those editors have not been involved in previous discussions on the article, and apparently didn't read them either judging by what they posted.

If you want to discount the IP comments, you should also discount those editors. Personally I think all should be considered, as I see no evidence that the IP comments were canvassed. Do you have any? As far as I can see two of them commented on the talk page earlier, they didn't just turn up for the deletion review.

Please reconsider this decision, or open a review. Given the contentious nature of the thing it might help to get other editors involved. ゼーロ (talk) 20:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Could you please link to the discussion?  Sandstein  20:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

The archived deletion discussion is here. Jeh (talk) 02:21, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

What specifically is the evidence for "keep" canvassing? Who do you think reacted to which blog post?  Sandstein  06:10, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

I've never been involved in a deletion review before. Or is this just the discussion with the closing admin prior to the deletion review? Er, my real question is: We're doing this here? Jeh (talk) 14:44, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

http://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/dave-needs-help-to-stay-on-wiki-a-general-call-for-help/60/

Do you have evidence that for "delete" canvassing? ゼーロ (talk) 07:29, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I guess we're doing this here... if you'll read that thread you'll find that it's about searches for sources. And there are several pleas, including one immediately following the start of the AFD, to NOT come here and post ILIKEIT !votes, rather that comments to the AFD should be solidly based in WP P&G (with references to same).

Of course there was a time correlation between word of the AFD being posted on the EEVblog forum and the appearance of several "keep" !votes.. and several "delete" as well. The "word" was "posted" shortly after the AFD began, and it is common for AFDs to attract votes, is it not?

But let's look at the "keep" voters and see if any of them appear to have been motivated by that thread. I looked at the last 500 edits of each.

SmilingFace (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) created the article, so no surprise that they turned up with a "keep" !vote.

Staszek Lem (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) , 20,000 edits in five years, has participated in a variety of AFD discussions on a wide variety of topics before and since. Based on past 500 edits I find no obvious evidence of prior interest in electronics-related topics so if they were "canvassed" it's tough imagine how anyone found them to ask them.

Lankiveil (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is an admin, has been here 11 years. Again, lots of participation in AFD, no obvious interest in electronics topics.

GRuban (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) not as much prior activity at AFD as the previous two, but some, and lots of activity at WP:xxx in general. Again, no obvious prior interest in electronics topics - perhaps I've missed some.

Ahem. I've a fair bit of AFD experience. In fact, I've created half a dozen articles in response to AFD discussions (User:GRuban#Other). Few electronics contributions, have been here 10 years. I have eclectic interests, and tend to browse various admin noticeboards and follow links, this was linked somewhere, I think Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2015 October 1. --GRuban (talk) 22:35, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

That was not meant as any sort of slam. As I said, I just looked at the previous 500 edits. In those, it looked to me as though you had quite a bit less AFD activity than the first two, but not (as I said) none. Anyway I was just generally showing that the "keep" !voters (unlike the IP "delete" !voters) had considerable history on WP and (except for me) no apparent focus on electronics or similar articles. The latter makes TheEditorFormerlyKnownAsMojo-chan's accusation of keep-canvassing less likely, since it's tough to see how anyone found you and ID'd you as someone likely amenable to being canvassed on the "keep" side. Friends? Jeh (talk) 22:54, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

jeh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) me. I had considerable participation at talk:David L. Jones prior to this most recent AFD and also concerning the prior one, so if I was "canvassed" it must have started months ago. If anything, I would be the one most likely to be accused of doing the canvassing, but if you're making that accusation you better have some damned good proof. (To my knowledge I have never interacted at all with any of the other "keep" !voters.)

And finally, Tsavage (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Longtime editor; in last 500 edits this is ONLY contribution to AFD; vast majority of edits concerned GMO, esp GM food. No obvious interest in electronics topics.

On the other hand... Every. Last. One. of the "delete" !votes (except the nom, (edit - added) and one late !vote by Onel5969 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (end edit) was an IP with very little—sometimes no—edit history outside of this AFD and related pages. (I can post a detailed breakdown if desired.) I would assume that this would be why Sandstein concluded that at least some canvassing had been going on; one has to wonder just why all these IPs suddenly took an interest in getting rid of this page. For that matter, the nominator's participation on WP, from November 2013 to the start of their involvement at talk:David L. Jones and subsequent AFD, amounted to four edits, again on completely unrelated topics. Jeh (talk) 07:58, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

My assessment is in fact the same as that of Jeh above. I won't change the closure. ゼーロ, if you disagree, you can request community review at WP:DRV.  Sandstein  09:44, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

This is factually incorrect. In any case, this is not a democracy and the keep votes failed to make the case on policy. If you will not reconsider I will ask for a review. ゼーロ (talk) 12:17, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_October_12#David_L._Jones ゼーロ (talk) 12:22, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

My apologies, there was one non-IP "delete" !vote besides the nom. I've edited the above text accordingly. Jeh (talk) 18:50, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

paraphrase

hi my friend could you plz paraphrase this ____ Potter publishing was never at her best when writing for a clearly defined audience._____

thank you Alborzagros (talk) 14:46, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea what you mean by that. If this is homework, please do it yourself.  Sandstein  14:51, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Self-balancing two-wheeled board edits

Hi Sandstein,

Your reverts of my edits on this article are factually incorrect and not supported by the sources. For example, the mechanism has individual sensor pads and a gyroscope which the feet control. That is what controls its movement. Not simply shifting body weight. I'll revert your edits to reflect this fact in the sources. Thanks. 2602:306:BD61:E0F0:4829:9ACB:FABF:338F (talk) 11:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, can you cite relevant sources and please use the article talk page?  Sandstein  11:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

• I'll be happy to make those sources clear. May I also suggest, since you clearly have an interest in this article, that a good new section to add would be one on the construction and design of the device. That's one area that's still sorely missing in all the adds I've made. Perhaps you'd be interested in adding it? 2602:306:BD61:E0F0:4829:9ACB:FABF:338F (talk) 11:19, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

• Yeah, but I have no sources or engineering knowledge, so probably not.  Sandstein  13:31, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

An old case again

Hello Sandstein,

I wrote a message for you and Callenecc in his talk page: User_talk:Callanecc#ANI_case . --Keysanger (talk) 13:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Not interested, sorry.  Sandstein  13:31, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Question

Please continue elsewhere.  Sandstein  16:09, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello. In this AE request you banned me from participating in ARBPIA related AE discussions unless it's a discussion of enforcement action against me. In this current AE discussion an editor is making statements relating to me I think need clarification. Could you modify my ban to not being able to submit enforcement requests, or alternatively, allow me to participate in this specific discussion? No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 13:36, 13 October 2015 (UTC) No, because nobody requests sanctions against you, and in fact you are not even mentioned by name.  Sandstein  14:42, 13 October 2015 (UTC) They are discussing something that happened on my talk page that relates to me directly. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 14:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Please link to the diff that you believe concerns you.  Sandstein  15:01, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Here is the diff. Please note that both links are to my talk page. Also note that I asked Nishidani a few months ago not to post to my page, and what he did post now is the sort of stuff people normally post on an article talk page (he also accused me of following him to an article I clearly edited before he showed up, but never mind that). That is the background for the WIKIHOUNDING accusation. If you'd like to put that information there yourself, that's also fine by me. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 15:18, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Declined. You commenting on that is not helpful to admins deciding what to do about the request.  Sandstein  15:24, 13 October 2015 (UTC) Substantiation of WIKIHOUNDING wouldn't help admins decide if the accusation of WIKIHOUNDING has merit or not? Weird. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 15:34, 13 October 2015 (UTC) He's now posting stuff I said where he knows I can't defend myself. Would my reminding you that you said you don't object to my sanction being lifted, help here? Notice the timestamp. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 16:11, 13 October 2015 (UTC) No. Just let it go. If you want to take this up, do it elsewhere. AE is for making enforcement requests, not bickering.  Sandstein  16:28, 13 October 2015 (UTC) I am truly amazed. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 16:43, 13 October 2015 (UTC) [1] Just to keep you abreast, he's now mentioning me by name. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 16:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC) I got a notice and an email from that last one. He's pinging me from a page he knows I can't edit. FYI. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 18:17, 13 October 2015 (UTC) I noted this exchange because a very neutral wiki gnome notified me by a brief email. NMMGG. I apologize. I didn't remember that ban from AE pages. Had you notified me that my mention of your conduct there was unfair because you could not respond, I would have struck it out, as I will now do (this in no way means I don't take this matey targeting of a single editor (in this case me) for sniping comments as problematical for the area). Nishidani (talk) 10:20, 14 October 2015 (UTC) You bring up that AE case often and I doubt you forgot the details. It's just another part of your harassing me. Please open an AE request with all the information you just presented where I couldn't respond, and let's allow the admins to figure out who's harassing who. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 15:42, 14 October 2015 (UTC) Oh for goodness sake! Look up courtesy and fairness. Even evil deadshits like myself can remember the old lesson given from Kant's deathbed gesture. I now owe an apology for even dropping a note on this page. That's it.Nishidani (talk) 15:48, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Bring Back British Rail

Hi Sandstein. I think the decision not to delete Bring Back British Rail was an error.

First as the creator I was never informed that there was a Articles for deletion on said page, if I had known I would have defended the creation of it. I would also say that I was offended by the suggestion that it was here to to "promote a campaign that has not yet reached the required level of prominence" I'm not a member of BBBR but have recently become friends with Ellie Harrison and I do support BBBR, but that kept my own views off the page! It was also surprised that you and the 5 members who commented have not known about BBBR before, tho 3 hail from the states it is little wonder! go to any Anti-Tory rally, RMT march, Green party event or stand outside Railways stations (in the UK!) when their is news of a fair hick and members and supporters BBBR are there in force! the fact you have not come across them till now is your issue, not theirs! and I should know I work as a rail annalist and am a member of the Green party, so I work with them alot. I would also add that the comment "an impossible dream, given the prevailing opinion seems to be that Corbyn is petty much un-electable due to holding left wing opinions" is not helpful, and its comments like that in the media that gives the right the argument that nothing will change and the public do not support a return to public ownership! I beg to differ, in April and May this year, that was the signal biggest issue when it came to transport when the Green party campaigned! it is well documented that Corbyn wants to take the railways back into public ownership (not as fast as meny like me would like) but that has been well documented. as for the link to introduction of Corbyn's biography, that was not my doing, but it not uncommon to find such links on Wikipedia, and I find it wrong that should be a reason to close the page, Not least as this Kristian Jenn is now off Wikipedia!

Yes it is true, I did already tried to create it once through the Articles For Creation process, and that failed... I am I am badly dyslexic, and I did not make a strong case for its creation. the page Renationalisation of British Rail, I was never very happy with, as a new national rail org would not be a return to the old BR... and tried to update it as best I could but when I had the chance I created Bring Back British Rail page (my fist page on face book I will add) as they have over 20,000 members and more than 100,000 likes on Facebook I thought they should have their own page!

Thank you for your time

David (my real name!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Emperor of Byzantium (talk • contribs) 19:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Can you please link to the discussion or article at issue, and tell me what you want me to do?  Sandstein  21:12, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:Order of the Netherlands Lion and subcategories relisted

Hello. You participated in either the CFD discussion to delete the above category and its subcategories or the DRV discussion regarding those categories (or both). The result of the DRV was to relist the categories for discussion. This is a notification that they have now been relisted for discussion here. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Bryant (Virtua Fighter)

You recently closed this AfD as keep. While more users commented keep, they came before the text following my "Redirect" comment, which is about half of all the text. Only four users after that, including me, participated, two for keep, two for redirect. I think if more users participated there could be a more clear consensus. So I ask you to consider reopening it, thank you. Rainbow unicorn (talk) 21:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Honestly, I think the AFD has already ran its course. It was even open for 10 days, whereas AFDs are normally open for just a week. This is not Sandstein, but I thought I would throw in my input anyway. Kokoro20 (talk) 02:48, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

There was a lot of text at the end, but no new opinions. I don't think that relisting would change the outcome or gather many more opinions - people don't like reading walls of text.  Sandstein  04:46, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alabama Crimson Tide football, 1900–09

Please forgive the admittedly pedantic process wonkery, but I wonder if you could amend your change on the above discussion? There were two different merge proposals listed, but the one by Dirtlawyer was preferred by a 3-1 margin, in my case because of attribution concerns. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 09:57, 13 October 2015 (UTC).

How do you think the result should be amended? If it's to link to subsections, I have no problem with that being done editorially.  Sandstein  14:43, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I would like you to change from "Merge as described by User:Ejgreen77" to "Merge as described by User:Dirtlawyer1". They're both proposals to merge, but that's about all they have in common. If you don't think that consensus is clear enough, I'll settle for "Merge with the target to be at editorial discretion" or somesuch. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:05, 14 October 2015 (UTC).

OK, for the record, I agree that the consensus was to redirect (not merge) as suggested per Dirtlawyer1, but generally such issues should sort themselves out in the editorial process.  Sandstein  12:42, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Wonderful, thankyou for your consideration. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 10:05, 16 October 2015 (UTC).

Deletion of mario shabow

Very disappointed at the decision you have made , as the article was about a professional footballer , if Wikipedia users are allowed to delete Articles that are about a upcong footballer then we should not contribute to Wikipedia at all, I would like you to turn the decision and post the article back up . Still don't understand why it was deleted , every profeasional football player has a wiki page who plays for the country — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.146.163.100 (talk) 16:35, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Signed by western sydney wanderers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Outlawdon (talk • contribs) 16:41, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Please link to the article or discussion at issue.  Sandstein  17:15, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Your closing

I think you made the wrong decision, closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Third intifada as a redirect. I don't feel like opening a deletion review, but I did post at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Israel#Deletion_review about this. Just that you know. Debresser (talk) 16:26, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, noted.  Sandstein  17:16, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of page "Caesar & Loui"

Hi my name is Daniel Caesar and I created the page Caesar & Loui which you deleted for some reason.

Caesar & Loui is a songwriting team from Stockholm, Sweden and the page mainly contained info about the artist they have worked with and how many albums they've sold and so on.

Why did you delete the page? Was it not enough references? In that case I can definitely fix more. Caesar & Loui is a legit songwriting company and all the info on the page I made is 100% correct.

Thanks

/ Caesar

Danielcaesars (talk) 23:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

The article was deleted because that was the result of the community discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caesar & Loui.  Sandstein  08:17, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For being willing to take on tough/time-consuming closes at AfD, and doing so thoughtfully. (This isn't based any one in particular). — Rhododendrites talk \\ 12:04, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks!  Sandstein  12:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of "List of League of Legends Champions"

you are literally living under a rock. league of legends is undoubtedly THE most popular PC game in the entire world. the only reason you dont know this is because you're 40/50 years old and dont know anything about the internet. literally 8 million people play the game in an hour. do you know how many people that is? its a lot. its 20-50 times more people than you've seen in your entire life of living in a small town where they dont teach people about technological advancements, such as the incredible surge of advancement in this games popularity that you have obviously have no idea about. 20-50 times more people than you've seen in your entire life are playing one of the 127 champions of the list on the wikipedia page....in 1 hour. your entire existence is 20-50 million times less important than the page you just deleted, do i detect jealousy? the discussion was about whether to keep the orgins of the champions birthplaces, since that was unnecessary because there was already 1 simple list which featured the important aspects regarding the champion which is extremely similar to the list of champions page on their OFFICIAL wiki page. im sorry im probably talking to a brick wall, you must have no idea what im talking about since you seem to not know nothing about your job. ill make it easy for you. put....up....the....page....you.....deleted.....because.....you.....accidentarry......dereted....it. you made a whoopsy-doodle. comprende senor? put it back, you're destroying this websites credibility, or whatever remains of it. this is why nobody donates and you have to keep pestering people. i wont go into that though lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by U Hwotm8 (talk • contribs) 07:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

The page List of League of Legends Champions was deleted because the community decided to delete it in a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of League of Legends champions (2nd nomination). I myself have no opinion about it. As an administrator, I merely execute what the community of editors decides based on our guidelines and policies.  Sandstein  08:21, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Florent Montaclair

Hello just a word about a page on Florent Montaclair, deleted in october, 15th. He is nominated for the nobel price... http://www.estrepublicain.fr/actualite/2015/10/17/un-comtois-bientot-nobel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin.balmont (talk • contribs) 12:32, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

And your request is?  Sandstein  18:43, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of page Tatiana Shamratova

Dear Sir/Mrs

Could you please explain what should Tatiana proof to publish her page with Wiki ?

Regards, Sergi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.18.22.218 (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Nothing, because article subjects should not write about themselves, see WP:AUTOBIO.  Sandstein  15:14, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casey McKee

Hey thanks for closing this but I had actually removed User:RoySmith's close because I wanted another relist (which I actually initiated before your close) for more comments. Cheers, SwisterTwister talk 21:07, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Regarding this closure of AfD, it was re-nominated within 1 month of first nomination. No new rationale or no new discussion took place. First AfD had very extensive discussion and many more people were commented on it which was closed by RoySmith as "no consensus". Can you restore the article? No discussion took place in 2nd AfD, it was rather a bad faith AfD and 2 of "delete" voters had some bad faith against me. I can prove it by giving various differences. For example 2 delete voters were reported by me at SPI as sock puppets in past. I think they really felt bad for that. (I am the creator of that article). --Human3015^TALK  21:41, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't think that "no discussion took place"; there was discussion and your view did not have consensus. But if you can find new sources addressing the topic in some detail, the article can be restored.  Sandstein  12:19, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of cases of police brutality in the United States

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of cases of police brutality in the United States. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. AusLondonder (talk) 10:38, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

userfy article

Can you please userfy this article as I have found new information that should have it pass GNG.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sadaki_Nakabayashi
http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_fields_0901.htm

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:q1i72pyM-RwJ:https://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/101466676/Judo-Sadaki-Nakabayashi-1965+&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
https://books.google.com/books?id=adkDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=judo+japan+nakabayashi&source=bl&ots=jVPy3l_GB5&sig=sjfyZhvlpfEh2UoHLxN3rkn7BlM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAmoVChMIvoO4qtHVyAIVwnk-Ch3QCg4Q#v=onepage&q=judo%20japan%20nakabayashi&f=false
http://www.usja-judo.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/USJA-Story-V2-5-69.pdf

08:38, 22 October 2015 (UTC)CrazyAces489 (talk)

Can you please present these links and sources in a more orderly, standard citation format? I'm not clicking on random URLs.  Sandstein  12:21, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

ok done. can you userfy it now? CrazyAces489 (talk) 17:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Not convinced. Some random Google search results and PDF files uploaded by somebody somewhere? These URLs still don't look like reliable sources to me.  Sandstein  09:41, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

He was a 2 time college champ in Judo in Japan. This was before there was Olympic Judo and any judo world champion He is an author of a number of Judo books. He held the highest rank in Judo in the United States. This helps him to pass MA:Note. I am only saying to usefy this. Not to immediately put it back into main space. CrazyAces489 (talk) 17:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

That is not new information. I am not interested. If you can convince another admin to userfy this, that's ok with me, but I won't do anything more.  Sandstein  17:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afghan Jalebi (Ya Baba) (2nd nomination)

On looking at the most viewed song pages for September I noted this one as a redlink, but had just shy of 15,000 views during the month. As RS is not a reason to delete, should the article have been deleted. FWIW, I have no opinion on the result but felt this point should be raised. --Richhoncho (talk) 11:40, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

@Richhoncho: Actually I have raised same issue above. I am the creator of that article. First nomination was closed just one month before 2nd nomination. 1st one was closed as "no consensus" after extensive discussion. It was not good faith to re-nominate it within one month. If you see it do have RS. All major news papers of India and Pakistan were discussing issues related to song. It does passes WP:GNG. I think admin should restore that article. --Human3015^TALK  12:14, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Richhoncho, I don't understand what you mean.  Sandstein  12:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sandstein, My point was that if an article is getting 15,000 views then there is a reasonable case that it is notable. As references (or lack thereof) are not a deciding factor at AfD, should the article have been deleted? --Richhoncho (talk) 12:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Admin, you above said to give some more sources. Ok. Nominator of AfD himself is giving bunch of sources covering all aspects of song. You can read it in 2nd nomination. He is just misinterpreting references. Song has been huge success and topped all Charts in India. WP:CHARTS does not feature any Indian chart, so does any Indian song don;t deserve article? I will give representative examples of news from India and Pakistan. This Indian Express news says song was huge success and "topped charts". Pakistani Express Tribune says same. --Human3015^TALK  12:42, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Why were these sources not cited in the article or put forward in the AfD discussion?  Sandstein  09:43, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

These are relatively recent sources and were not present at the time of article creation. You will not believe but I have been blocked 2 times only for this article. Nominator's only block is also because of this article. During first AfD nominator was doing edit war with me while AfD was going on. We both got blocked. 1st AfD ended up in "no consensus" but nominator took that block personally and nominated it again. I got blocked twice for editing that article. So I decided to not touch that article. You can read my comment on 2nd AfD how sad it is. I have many issues with nominator and first 2 "delete" voters on 2nd AfD. If these 3 gets united then each and every article that I create will get deleted. But anyway, I don't have any bad faith or complain regarding these users. I am good editor generally, even today my DYK FDI in India is featured on Main page. Just to mention one more thing, same nominator came on DYK nomination template of FDI in India just to spit in my soup again.--Human3015^TALK  10:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

• @Richhoncho: Please note that we avoid this rationale at AfDs. And i dont know how pageview stats really work. I have questioned few editors on that. But i fell that pageviews can be altered on purpose or even the in-wiki activities can raise the count dramatically. For an article AfDed twice and relisted too it might be obvious that various editors have hit the article raising the count. Also, if you were to believe that i and few others were desperate to get this deleted then it might be that we were viewing the article number of times and spiking the stats. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
• Well, article passes WP:GNG.--Human3015^TALK  13:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
• Admin, you can see News result for Afghan Jalebi and confirm it with what is written in WP:GNG. I think you can restore article in good faith. --Human3015^TALK  13:19, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

• I'm not convinced by Google search results and allegations of misconduct by others. The AfD just closed, you had your opportunity to make your case and present these sources there. I am not interested in doing anything further about this.  Sandstein  17:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for Afghan Jalebi (Ya Baba)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Afghan Jalebi (Ya Baba). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Human3015^TALK  19:19, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for closing the discussion on Divine wine nepal. I realized that I probably should have done it, since I nominated it for AfD in the first place, but it was my first time doing so and I wasn't sure of whether I needed to do it or an admin had to. Also, I had something big going on in real life and forgot about it the day the 7 days were up. Anyway, thanks!☺ White Arabian mare (Neigh) 20:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for the debat for the Internet Horror Movie Database and for the AfDs but it was done in good faith. I have withdrawn them when I saw that user claim for keep. I'm not here to destroy but to help Wikipedia. Pizzole (talk) 11:15, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Help about vandalism

Hello Sandstein. I'm here to talk you about the incorrect actions of other Wikipedian. There are two users that are percuting me. They delete, change or undo everything I add to Wikipedia pages. They have voted negatively in a AfD debat without reason. User Collect and McGeddon are persecuting me. He voted negatively in the AfD debat of the Internet Horror Movie Database, they are persecuting me in the page [2] and in the page [[3] where I added some titles. He have segnaled me here and here where the debat was archived. They continue to change all I do. Plus, Collect, for what i see in his talk page has various problems with Wiki like sock and blocks. This is why yesterday I afded some of his pages. Please help me stop this persecution. Please verify. Pizzole (talk) 23:10, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Can you give me specific diffs of this "persecution" and explain why these users are wrong to act as they do?  Sandstein  08:21, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello Sandstein. For me it's very difficult to explain in details because I don't know very well the english languages. I opened a discussion here [4]. User Collect persecuting me in every page I edit or open. Even the debat was a clear conflict about something I don't know. --Pizzole (talk) 13:49, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, without specifics I can't help you.  Sandstein  16:05, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Page Iris Computers

Hi Sandstein.

I recently created a page "Iris Computers" which has now been deleted by you. Can I ask you to please help me create the page again as I don't want to repeat my previous mistakes and have the page deleted again.

Your help would be much appreciated.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmalik1111 (talk • contribs) 11:12, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

No. Iris Computers was deleted because that was the result of a community discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iris Computers.  Sandstein  16:06, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Inappropriate Deletion of J.J. Allaire Wikipedia Page

Hi Sandtein,

Writing to follow up on the recent deletion of the Joseph_J._Allaire article (see discussion here: [[5]]). I believe this decision was made due to factual inaccuracies in the discussion. I've highlighted and provided comments on these below.

> "(note that his brother Jeremy Allaire, is notable as the inventor of ColdFusion but that's his brother, not himself)"

This is the other way around. Joseph J Allaire was actually the inventor of ColdFusion rather than Jeremy Allaire (Jeremy provided input but otherwise didn't participate in the development of the product).

> "add a note on the brother's page about Joseph's minor involvement in his brother's enterprise -- sibling rivalry!!!"

This is also incorrect. Joseph was the principal founder and leader of the company rather than Jeremy. He was both the developer of ColdFusion and founding CEO. After hiring an outside CEO Joseph continued as Chairman and Executive Vice President of Products. Jeremy was a critical part of the origin and evolution of the company but formally joined it about a year after its founding and subsequently held the positions of Director of Technology and Chief Technology Officer. You can verify much of this by reviewing the company's S1 filing with the SEC, just search for all instances of "Jeremy" and "Joseph" and note the accountings of role, etc.

> "No notability outside being the ceo of Altaiere...he only additional thing this individual did is devised one of the minor components of what became the MS toolbar"

This is also an incomplete account, and not just in the name of the company. Joseph has developed a number of other highly successful software products:

• Windows Live Writer, a desktop blogging tool from Microsoft ([[6]])

• Lose It!, an iPhone application which was the most Lose It! was the top free iPhone Health and Fitness application in both 2009 and 2010 (http://www.loseit.com/)

• RStudio, a widely used statistical computing tool (https://www.rstudio.com) that was named one of the top 25 technology products of 2015 by InfoWorld (http://www.idgenterprise.com/press/infoworld-announces-the-2015-technology-of-the-year-award-recipients).

Would it be possible to reinstate the page? I've noticed today that pages related to Jeremy Allaire, including this one and the page for his company, Circle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_(company)), have been edited and submitted for deletion recently with tremendous inaccuracy. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Circle_(company))

Thank you, 10mbt (talk) 19:30, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Maria Tucker

I note that you disagree with the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph J. Allaire. Nonetheless, the time and place to make these arguments would have been in that discussion, not now. Recreation declined.  Sandstein  20:05, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Sandstein, just letting you know that I've posted to deletion review. Deleting the Wikipedia page of a guy who singlehandedly wrote ColdFusion just because someone posted incorrect, un-cited information in the deletion discussion seems like bad practice.

David L. Jones

IMHO, you made a good call on the David L. Jones AfD. Unfortunately there are (IMHO again) editors using BLP guerilla tactics to bypass the spirit of your conclusion of a Keep AfD consensus. They are defacing the article and trying shrivel it to nothing. Not sure if there is anything that can be done about it but I thought I'd let you know. Cheers! SageGreenRider (talk) 00:18, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Recreation of a redirected article

Hi, Sandstein. FYI: Per your decision in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 Rosh HaShanah death by stone-throwing, 2015 Rosh HaShanah death by stone-throwing was redirected to Palestinian stone-throwing. I noticed that it now redirects to Death of Alexander Levlovich which appears simply to be a recreation of the initial article. The recreation of the article under a different name appears to be a way to skirt your close, but I'm not sure if this should be tagged with {{Db-g4}}. (BTW: I was not a participant in the Afd.) Thanks! - Location (talk) 03:20, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, speedy deleted as G4.  Sandstein  08:21, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Spottoon

Hello! I've been trying to create a page on a web platform named Spottoon but it has always been deleted. Thankfully, the last administrator explained in detail why and she said that I could ask you to if you'd be willing to transfer a copy of the article to WP:AfC so that I could continue to work on it to add more credible sources and once I believe it meets all of the guidelines ask you if you can make it go live. Would this be possible? Thank you! 110.12.53.135 (talk) 02:35, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Do you have any worthwhile new sources for Spottoon to convince me that this would be worth the bother? Regards,  Sandstein  12:20, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

So the articles that were used in the original post were the english-language articles. I was told that the sources didn't have to exclusively be in English, so here are links of the articles that were published in Korea.

• Articles about RollingStory on Hankyoreh News:

South Korean webtoons coming to American readers via Huffington Post http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/679111.html

South Korean webtoons taking aim at US market with Huffington Post as partner http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_entertainment/667112.html

웹툰작가조합, 미국에 ‘웹툰 한류’ 퍼뜨린다 http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/culture/culture_general/666872.html

• A couple of articles from HuffPost Korea:

윤태호의 '이끼' 등 한국 웹툰, 미국 독자 만난다 http://www.huffingtonpost.kr/2015/02/17/story_n_6695532.html

웹툰작가들, 허핑턴포스트 통해 글로벌웹툰 서비스 http://www.huffingtonpost.kr/2014/11/30/story_n_6245694.html

Articles about the release of the titles on HuffPost:

[웹툰 전성시대]⑥"허핑턴포스트에 웹툰 연재는 100억 광고효과" http://www.newsis.com/ar_detail/view.html?ar_id=NISX20150802_0010199779&cID=10601&pID=10600

윤태호 ‘이끼‘ 등 5편, 미국 허핑턴포스트 연재 확정 http://m.koreadaily.com/news/read.asp?page=1&branch=NEWS&source=&category=entertainment&art_id=3566563

Thank youSyc916 (talk) 01:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

How are these sources relevant? The English-language ones don't seem to mention "Spottoon".  Sandstein  09:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

These are all articles that were written prior to the actual launch of Spotton, so that is why in some of the English language articles, you only see it being referred to as "the service." But if you go onto the second to last two links, those articles mention spotton and in the first you can actually see the screen capture of the initial service interface as you would if you went on www.spottoon.com at the time. The site has been updated since then. I am working on gathering other sources as well. Is there anything else we could submit other than published articles that would give the page validity? Thank you Syc916 (talk) 00:30, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Here are some additional articles: http://www.newsis.com/ar_detail/view.html?ar_id=NISX20150731_0010196379&cID=10601&pID=10600 http://m.popcornnews.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=10424

Also, Rollingstory and Spottoon were recently a part of an exhibition in New York that concluded on October 16th that focused specifically on Webtoons. Here are some links to that event that credit RollingStory and Spottoon: http://www.koreanculture.org/?document_srl=561379

http://www.nyculturebeat.com/index.php?document_srl=3307136&mid=Art

Syc916 (talk) 01:08, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

OK, userfied at User:Syc916/Spottoon.  Sandstein  08:42, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

I revised the content and added the sources and was wondering if i could have any more feedback that would allow it to go live. Syc916 (talk) 01:47, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, no, the topic doesn't interest me.  Sandstein  08:23, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't understand. Could I have more information because your reasoning is very subjective. Is there no way to make this page active now or in the future? If you could give me any insight on what would make the page more interesting that would be greatly appreciated. Also is there a way to get more opinions on this? Thank you Syc916 (talk) 00:58, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Bring Back British Rail

Hi Sandstein. I think the decision not to delete Bring Back British Rail was an error.

First as the creator I was never informed that there was a Articles for deletion on said page, if I had known I would have defended the creation of it. I would also say that I was offended by the suggestion that it was here to to "promote a campaign that has not yet reached the required level of prominence" I'm not a member of BBBR but have recently become friends with Ellie Harrison and I do support BBBR, but that kept my own views off the page! It was also surprised that you and the 5 members who commented have not known about BBBR before, tho 3 hail from the states it is little wonder! go to any Anti-Tory rally, RMT march, Green party event or stand outside Railways stations (in the UK!) when their is news of a fair hick and members and supporters BBBR are there in force! the fact you have not come across them till now is your issue, not theirs! and I should know I work as a rail annalist and am a member of the Green party, so I work with them alot. I would also add that the comment "an impossible dream, given the prevailing opinion seems to be that Corbyn is petty much un-electable due to holding left wing opinions" is not helpful, and its comments like that in the media that gives the right the argument that nothing will change and the public do not support a return to public ownership! I beg to differ, in April and May this year, that was the signal biggest issue when it came to transport when the Green party campaigned! it is well documented that Corbyn wants to take the railways back into public ownership (not as fast as meny like me would like) but that has been well documented. as for the link to introduction of Corbyn's biography, that was not my doing, but it not uncommon to find such links on Wikipedia, and I find it wrong that should be a reason to close the page, Not least as this Kristian Jenn is now off Wikipedia!

Yes it is true, I did already tried to create it once through the Articles For Creation process, and that failed... I am I am badly dyslexic, and I did not make a strong case for its creation. the page Renationalisation of British Rail, I was never very happy with, as a new national rail org would not be a return to the old BR... and tried to update it as best I could but when I had the chance I created Bring Back British Rail page (my fist page on face book I will add) as they have over 20,000 members and more than 100,000 likes on Facebook I thought they should have their own page!

Thank you for your time

David (my real name!)  The Emperor of Byzantium  19:29, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Can you please link to the discussion or article at issue, and tell me what you want me to do?  Sandstein  21:12, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

I would like you to reinstate this page, so that I and others can improve it ad make it work. I know it worth keeping, as it adds to thediscussion from Both Labour and the Green Party on this issue! its from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bring_Back_British_Rail  The Emperor of Byzantium  05:00, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Declined. That discussion decided to delete the article. Any arguments to the contrary should have been made in that discussion, not now.  Sandstein  08:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

I disagree with the decision, and will challenge it!  The Emperor of Byzantium  04:02, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for Joseph J. Allaire

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Joseph J. Allaire. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 10mbt (talk) 19:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)