User talk:Timotheus Canens/Archives/2017/1

Previously Deleted KeyCDN Wiki

Hi Timotheus,

I wanted to create a wiki page for a CDN provider called KeyCDN https://www.keycdn.com however I noticed that a page was already created with that name but was deleted by yourself.

As per the guidelines, I wanted to reach out to you to see what the reason was for deleting that page and if it would be possible for myself to go about creating a page with the same name? Is there anything in particular I should know when creating the page to ensure it doesn't get flagged?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Codyrarsenault (talk • contribs) 18:05, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

@Codyrarsenault: You are going to have a conflict of interest issue due to your association with KeyCDN. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. Hannibal Smith ❯❯❯ 18:50, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Sunday January 15: Wikipedia Day NYC Celebration and Mini-Conference

Sunday January 15: Wikipedia Day NYC 2017

You are invited to join us at Ace Hotel for Wikipedia Day NYC 2017, a Wikipedia celebration and mini-conference as part of the project's global 16th birthday festivities. In addition to the party, the event will be a participatory unconference, with plenary panels, lightning talks, and of course open space sessions. With special guests Katherine Maher of the Wikimedia Foundation and Tim Wu of Columbia Law School speaking on our Post-truth panel! Also featuring an International/Multilingual panel, a Documenting Activism panel, a Multimedia/Tech Panel, a Science panel, an Art panel, and more. And there will be cake. We also hope for the participation of our friends from the Free Culture movement and from educational and cultural institutions interested in developing free knowledge projects. Sunday January 15 Wikipedia Day NYC 2017 (RSVP on-wiki or at meetup.com). 10:00am - 7:00 pm at Ace Hotel, 20 West 29th Street in Manhattan We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Pharos (talk) 14:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

SPECIFICO

My understanding is that SPECIFICO was topic banned for what was described as a mix of incompetence and POV-pushing, which in practice often manifested itself through misrepresenting what sources said. If you look at the evidence presented against SPECIFICO, you'll see diffs like this, where SPECIFICO mocks a BLP under the guise of "Conform to cited source." You might also consider the huge list of SPECIFICO's "Insertion of errors into articles" compiled by Netoholic in the second request against SPECIFICO here. While there were many reasons for SPECIFICO's topic ban and some of this evidence was (wrongly, in my view) dismissed as mere "content disputes," SPECIFICO's ban was originally limited to the Ludwig von Mises Institute rather than Austrian School economics as a whole due to their self-identification as an academic expert in the latter field; the mounting evidence that SPECIFICO's "expertise" was sorely lacking undermined the case for this generous exception. SPECIFICO was primarily topic banned for POV-pushing, BLP violations, and incivility—and their topic ban was extended primarily because they had trouble complying with it—but misuse of sources was part of the problem, and if anything something that deserved a more thorough hearing than it received. Certainly, that SPECIFICO often fails to accurately convey what sources say has been extremely obvious to me ever since I convinced SPECIFICO to create an account four years ago.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 07:22, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the close

At Steamboat Bill. Several respondents there, who agreed with you, also suggested rewriting the closing statement to replace the rant/threat with a more neutral conclusion. Did you look at that and consider doing it or recommending they do it? And did you consider whether Nyttend ought to be trouted or something for his involved close? Dicklyon (talk) 05:20, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm generally not a big fan of doing this kind of after-the-fact surgery to closing statements; the {{move review talk}} at the top should be sufficient to alert any reader that the close should not be taken at face value without looking at the move review. I don't see any consensus regarding whether Nyttend was, in fact, involved; only a small number of editors commented on that aspect specifically, and not in agreement. T. Canens (talk) 05:04, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks for looking. Dicklyon (talk) 05:08, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Einstein's Sink

Hi,

I have noticed that you deleted the Einstein's Sink sink article. Can I still join the discussion? As the sink has been described in two national magazines; the Dutch Physics magazine Volume: 81, Editie: 12, Pagina: 41: https://www.ntvn.nl/archief/?q=wasbak+einstein&volume_start=&volume_end= And a monthly historical magazine (Historisch nieuwsblad) November 2015. It was even on the route of the historical bicycle trip of Museum Boerhaave during the Einstein & Friends exhibition.

It has quite some local fame and I think that that does make it relevant for wikipedia. (I don't know if this was stated in the article, which may be the reason for its deletion.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synethos (talk • contribs) 13:47, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Feel free to take it to deletion review. T. Canens (talk) 04:16, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Done: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2017_January_13 But it does no show up on the page itself, did I do something wrong?--Synethos (talk) 11:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Andriy Lyubka

Hi mate, I see that you relisted this AfD even though it's a copyvio. Did you accidentally miss Ymblanter's comment? All the best—S Marshall T/C 14:13, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

I was going through a bunch of AFDs on the Jan 7 log that showed up only as a link at the bottom because of the transclusion limit and relisting them all, so I didn't really look at the discussion. Now closed. T. Canens (talk) 17:05, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2017

• From the editor: Next steps for the Signpost

• News and notes: Surge in RFA promotions—a sign of lasting change?

• Interview: What is it like to edit Wikipedia when you're blind?

• In the media: Year-end roundups, Wikipedia's 16th birthday, and more

• Featured content: One year ends, and another begins

• Arbitration report: Concluding 2016 and covering 2017's first two cases

• Traffic report: Out with the old, in with the new

• Technology report: Tech present, past, and future

• Recent research: Female Wikipedians aren't more likely to edit women biographies; Black Lives Matter in Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:39, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

UTRS appeal #17336

A user you have blocked has opened UTRS appeal #17336 on the Unblock Ticket Request System. The reviewing administrator, Just Chilling (talk · contribs), has requested your input:

wroscel (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Time: Jan 19, 2017 18:51:32

Message: Hi, any thoughts please about what the issue might be?

Notes:

• If you do not have an account on UTRS, you may create one at the administrator registration interface.
• Alternatively, you can respond here and indicate whether you are supportive or opposed to an unblock for this user and your rationale, if applicable.

--UTRSBot (talk) 18:51, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

American coaches of foreign national teams

Hi, I'm interested in your thinking in how you arrived at the conclusion of no consensus for this discussion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/American_coaches_of_foreign_national_soccer_teams. Thanks. Barryjjoyce (talk) 23:28, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Headcount is split straight down the middle and the critical point of disagreement (significant coverage) has reasonable arguments from both sides. So NC. T. Canens (talk) 04:23, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikitext for the deleted article

Hello, you have recently deleted a page I've created.

Can you please move it to my user page or provide me the wikitext I've written for it which has gone along with the deletion?

The article's name was "Daiqing Tana", and it was removed according the decision linked below:

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daiqing_Tana#Daiqing_Tana

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Daiqing_Tana#Daiqing_Tana

Thank you in advance.

 Done. See User:Chinggis6/Daiqing Tana. T. Canens (talk) 21:31, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Fingazz

Hi, can you please restore the Fingazz article as itwas a soft delete, can you put it in draftspace then I will add some refs before moving back to mainspace, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 03:21, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Draft:Fingazz. T. Canens (talk) 03:33, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sia (software)

Hi! I think the decision to delete this article wasn't a result of that debate. There were 5 keep votes and only 3 for delete. I also see no closing reason to delete it. --Rezonansowy_akaRezy (talk | contribs) 22:33, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

We don't close based solely on headcounts, there are four deletes counting the nominator, and most of the keeps are entitled to virtually zero weight. T. Canens (talk) 22:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, I asked because you didn't provide any explanation there. BTW, this article was cleaned up during the discussion, so many of previous deletion arguments became outdated. --Rezonansowy_akaRezy (talk | contribs) 22:48, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

@Timotheus Canens:? --Rezonansowy_akaRezy (talk | contribs) 16:13, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

The so-called cleanup hardly addresses the question of notability. I'm not undeleting it; take it to deletion review if you want. T. Canens (talk) 18:09, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Mehata Aditya

FYI, Mehata Aditya has created a new user, MAS125. Since he has asked about having Mehata Aditya unblocked, he's not trying to hide or edit deceptively, but he has clearly not understood the advice about personal information :-( --bonadea contributions talk 14:31, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

206.176.123.205

Hello Timotheus Canens. You WP:HARDBLOCKed 206.176.123.205 but left it as a {{school block}}. Could you explain why? You can comment at ACC if you prefer. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:39, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 15:04, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

communicating

Is there any way for me to communicate with you off line? My email address is lickere@ballardspahr.com. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.130.161 (talk) 21:02, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

National People College

Hi,can you please restore the National People College article as it was a soft delete,can you put it in draftspace then I will add some refs and remove sources which advertisment it before moving back to mainspace,thanks49.126.81.134 (talk) 10:48, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Regarding article on Aashish Kalra

Hi Timomtheus, I request for you to reconsider reinstating this article on the grounds on which this article was deleted. Someone obviously made certain edits in January which were not appropriate, but having said that Aashish Kalra is a notable investor who's historically made a huge impact towards the Indian real estate sector in 2001 and most recently the start-up ecosystem. Attaching some articles that I found in reference - http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/todays-paper/tp-economy/article1752552.ece, http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/property/dollar-flow-to-realty-mkt-to-grow-over-3x-by-2010-_306055.html, http://www.forbes.com/sites/abehal/2015/12/29/big-datas-cambridge-technology-enterprises-creates-a-new-kind-of-india-accelerator/#2d0b4ed62c0f. I am happy to help in any capacityBuffer12 (talk) 15:26, 30 January 2017 (UTC)