This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Lambluv36 23:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)Why shouldn't local sororities have a voice on Wikipedia? It could come of good use. If they are on Wikipedia, they could become colonized. It's valuable to girls on college campuses not only to see what is going on at other colleges, but also what's going on at their own colleges. According to the page you sent me, WP:ORG, an organization is defined as:[reply]

"... all groups of people organized together for a purpose.

Simply stated, an organization is a group of more than one person formed together for a purpose. This includes commercial and non-commercial activities including, but not limited to, charitable organizations, educational institutions, institutions, interest groups, organizations, social clubs, companies, partnerships, proprietorships, religious denominations, sects, etc."

Local sororites meet that requirement.

"This guideline does not cover small groups of closely related people such as families, entertainment groups, co-authors, and co-inventors covered by WP:Notability (people)."

Local sororites are not of blood relation familiy, entertainment groups, or any other example listed there.

"Notable means "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice". It is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance". Please consider notable and demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education."

Local sororities impact their communities, providing community service and philanthropy, which is much needed in some areas. How do justify those actions not being notable? They are notable in our societies and the history of our collegiate establishments.

"... smaller organizations can be notable, just as individuals can be notable, and arbitrary standards should not be used to create a bias favoring larger organizations."

Local sororities should be allowed on Wikipedia

The first quote you took was not giving a requirement--it was just summarizing organizations. Anyway, local sororities at a single university may have a local impact on surrounding communities, but in a larger perspective, they are not notable. They won't be documented in any reliable sources, and any articles on these sororities will have sources coming from the websites of these sororities itself. For those reasons, articles on local sororities for individual universities should not be included on Wikipedia. Nishkid64 (talk) 23:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, notability is referred to not in the dictionary definition but in the project's guidelines, scopes, and policies. Cbrown1023 talk 23:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (better known as IAMLAME) 00:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 18	30 April 2007	About the Signpost

Students in Western Civilization course find editing Wikipedia frustrating, rewarding	Statistics indicate breadth of Wikipedia's appeal
Featured lists reaches a milestone	Backlogs continue to grow
WikiWorld comic: "Calvin and Hobbes"	News and notes: Board resolutions, user studies, milestones
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, could you bring back the OXERA page that you just deleted. I will appreciate if you did not use this dictatorial manners. Thank you.--Jorditxei 18:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you aren't aware, a policy was recently implemented by the Wikimedia Foundation, regarding access to nonpublic data (see [1]) Please note if you do not comply with these rules you should remove yourself from OTRS volunteering where your name is listed. Otherwise, please ignore this message :) Kind regards, Majorly (hot!) 18:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I have no strong views on the validity of this block and agree it is more likely to inflamme things than calm them, I do think you should have discussed the matter with Mikkalai before unblocking. WjBscribe 20:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a novice and not a teenager. A wikipedian since 2004 must watch their tongue. Period. `'mikka 20:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It will not be tolerated. I am not a rogue admin running amok around here. `'mikka 20:56, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you lend me a hand helping Aeharris understand that the articles he's creating are inappropriate? I've left comments on his user talk page about his articles MRSA Boil Homeopathic Treatments and MRSA Boils--Advice From Infectious Disease Specialists. I'm asking you because you "speedy deleted" the first one already. He's obviously new. Thanks! Jaksmata 21:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is an application in your name to join the unblock list. Could you please confirm an address as nishkid64 @ gmail . com as your email address. Capitalistroadster 00:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please could you bring back the OXERA article. I would appreciate if you left at home your dictatorial manners. Thank you. --Jorditxei 18:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing dictatorial about my actions. Your article did not suit Wikipedia notability guidelines (WP:CORP), and it was deletable under WP:CSD#G11 because the article was written like an advertisement for Oxera. Nishkid64 (talk) 20:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but your actions were completely dictatorial. I wrote the entry erasing anything that could be viewed as an advertisement in order not to violate WP:CSD#G11. But obviously, if you write an entry about a company, you will have to speak about the company. Please, will you bring back the article as soon as possible or at least leave it for scrutiny of other users? Are you some kind of wikipedia director deciding what can be in wikipedia and what cannot??? --Jorditxei 15:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators are supposed to delete articles that go against policy. I looked at your article, and it still read like an advertisement for the company. Please see WP:NPOV and WP:CORP. I didn't delete it just because of WP:CSD#G11 but also because of the non-notability of the company (WP:CORP). Any article that doesn't meet notability guidelines is subject to deletion. I'll undelete the article for now, and you can make the necessary corrections to make it comply with Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia does not allow WP:OR, so you must source information in the article. Also, I would appreciate it if you could stop calling my actions "dictatorial". I am just following procedure, and doing my duties as an administrator.Nishkid64 (talk)

Thanks . Wish you a speedy recovery. :) --soum (0_o) 20:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how do u make a colored font?

like this pink; hello??????? if not tell me please Sincerely Runescape playa

You can have colors by doing this:

Hello 

Nishkid64 (talk) 22:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi there,

sorry i'm new to all this. i noticed that you had deleted the king apparel entry. i didn't realise that the rules were so strict so i have re-edited it and will upload again in the next 30 mins. should it need changing please let me know before deleting it and i can make the necessary adjustments. i can be contacted at tim@king-apparel.com too.

i was wondering how brands like lrg get by when they are doing practically the same stuff as us?

also, how do i get a nice box to put my logo in like those guys? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Timhoad (talk • contribs) 14:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Hello ... would you please SALT this page ... see the log ... thnx! —Dennette 14:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

please explain what you mean before you delete my article. Hsus 16:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)hsus[reply]

It doesn't seem to be something of notability, which of course is needed for all WIkipedia articles. For that reason, I am going to delete the article. If you have any concerns, please address them at my talk page, and if possible, provide me with evidence of the subject's notability. See WP:NOTABILITY. I hope that can explain what I am referring to. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to create a page for a band I like, Rest Among Ruins. You deleted it for a second time and now protected it from being recreated. I just wanted to know why. The page was legit and complied with all wikipedia rules. The band is even published in two places. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Awater3 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

From my searches on Google, I did not find evidence that the band met notability guidelines. There is a review in one local Baltimore magazine, but that doesn't necessarily justify that it meets WP:MUSIC guideline since a lot of new and upcoming bands are always being reviewed by critics. The magazine bit is a reliable source, but due to the fact that means there is only one source for the band, it would seem to not meet WP:MUSIC. Also, the band seems to be relatively new, which means there aren't that many reliable sources for the band's article. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Nishkid64, You deleted the page Regulations of the Court which is a part of an attempt to provide the only online commentary to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Is this not suitable for wikipedia? If that is the case, I will not waste any more time on wikipedia and either do it on my own or with the help of a commercial sponsor.

With regards, Mark Klamberg

Rest Among Ruins is published in enough sources. Check out http://media.www.thetowerlight.com/media/storage/paper957/news/2006/11/27/Arts/No.Guitar.In.Qatar-2507487.shtml

They are published in a school newspaper which is read by 19,000+ students. They have also played with bands such as Threat Signal which have their own Wikipedia page. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Awater3 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

That's a trivial source. It's a college newspaper and is not really considered to be an established source. Also, the article has no context. There's no real details about the band and its members. Again, see WP:MUSIC. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see that a college newspaper is considered trivial but it can be reviewed on a case by case basis. The Towerlight has its own Wikipedia page. Towson University is also a large, credible school. So, just let me create page.

There are also rules on Wikipedia that states that before a page is put up for deletion that it should be given time to be corrected. I was not given such time.

Many college newspapers have their own article. Per WP:MUSIC, a college newspaper can be considered trivial and reviewed on an individual basis, and I feel it doesn't count as an independent reliable source. Nonetheless, I will restore the article, and take it to WP:AFD, and you can spend some time improving the article. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't imply I'm in favor of "dumbing down" articles, I find it pretty upsetting given how much work I've been putting in to improving and adding stuff to wikipedia. Madeleine 22:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry you got that impression from my comments. When I wrote that, I referred "we" to Wikipedia in general. I have seen some editors in the past who have tried to make articles more user-friendly by removing complex material from articles that might make the article unsatisfactory. I was referring to Wikipedia as a whole, not you. Anyhow, I looked at your edits before, and I thought they were perfectly fine. I think you've done phenomenal work in your editing of these biology-related articles, Madprime. Please understand that I was not trying to pin you for "dumbing down" articles on Wikipedia. My interpretation of your statement was taken in the wrong sense, and that's why it was inappropriately used. Nishkid64 (talk) 22:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ... don't you think that this block was a little harsh? I mean, did anyone even bother to look at my Talk page, or give me any notice or time to respond? 68.239.79.82 (talk · contribs) 21:28, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beat me to it by mere seconds! Regards, (aeropagitica) 00:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, I was afraid someone was going to beat me (again!). I spent so much time fiddling around with the template because I kept writing it wrong. It was Template:RfA talk and I typed in everything but that. Guess I should have used Copy and Paste. :-P Nishkid64 (talk) 00:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ... would you please have a look at my new talk page? I have copied some of the material from the previously blocked User page into a section called Here about a speedy delete? ... one editor was very upset with my apparent disregard for WP:CIVIL with the tone of the previous version of my greeting, so I wanted to run it by someone before my IP address changes again.

I have also created a section called What to do after your speedy delete has been restored ... I hope that I assume enough of the responsibility for Too Speedy deletes while explaining my lack of authority to "make it right".

I guess I'm thinking of a tutorial with Examples, like I've collected on the previously contentious IP talk page ... I even documented a Dirty Dozen Newbies I have warned in a single hour while on Newpage Patrol one day ... maybe I could even work on the wording of some of the templates to avoid the "Please eject yourself from this website" replies to a nn-warn post.

BTW, I figure that the "Please don't say I have to register ..." boilerplate will be my signpost, even if the "What to do about your Too Speedy deletion" greeting becomes an article of its own, like WP:TOOLATE, that could be referenced from the warning templates.

Anywho, I figure you might as well just make any changes directly to the talk page, because I'll want to do a copy&paste to initialize the next one ... if I make another one. :-) Happy Editing! —68.239.79.82 21:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having a constant issue over prices in articles. It started on one talk page: spread to the Video game project talk page, ANI, and also the talk page of Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. An admin needs to resolve this, in my opinion. As it's just an endless fight back and forth between people wanting the prices listed and people not wanting the prices listed. I went to ANI on the advice of an admin: and it hasn't helped much. Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Not_a_sales_catalogue_or_price_guide,Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Ongoing_issue_that_needs_to_be_resolved,Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video_games#Wii Points: to list or to not list? and Talk:List_of_Virtual_Console_games_(North_America)#Wii_Points_issues_.28again.29 is where it's taking place. Feel free to pass it onto another admin (or admins), because this certainly needs a solution. I'm getting very fed up with this, and I'm very sick of comments by people clearly thinking the problem isn't around. RobJ1981 04:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You must be doing something right :). Hope the recovery/APs are going well. alphachimp 05:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 19	7 May 2007	About the Signpost

Four administrator accounts desysopped after hijacking, vandalism	Digg revolt over DVD key spills over to Wikipedia
Debate over non-free images heats up	Update on Wikimania 2007
Norwegian Wikipedian awarded scholarship	WikiWorld comic: "Friday the 13th"
News and notes: Election volunteers, admin contest, milestones	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you deleted the page for Serious Business Records that was recently created. As best as I can tell, it was deleted because a page existed some time ago for the label and was previously deleted. I'm not sure why the page was previously deleted, but I added the page because it's for a record label that has been getting a good deal of attention lately. The label had a showcase at the CMJ Music Marathon last year and was recently featured on SIRIUS Satellite Radio. Plus one of its founders is a member of OK Go.

Thanks for your time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sanyc (talk • contribs) 05:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It was deleted under WP:CSD#G4 which states that an article can be deleted in the future after it has been been decided at an AfD to delete the article. Basically, that's what happened with Serious Business Records. Looking at it now, it seems like the record label could be suitable for Wikipedia, but I would advise you go to go to WP:DRV and demonstrate as to why you feel the record label meets notability guidelines (provide links of reliable sources, etc.). Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 14:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Tennis Players (ATP) started in 1972 and the milestone in its history and in pro tennis was their 1973 boycot of Wimbledon (81 men players joined in). That was the watershed in both men and women tennis and everything has been different ever since. Kodes and other players, mostly from communist countries did not joined in the boycot and, therefore, we also had Kodes-Metrevelli finals. The 2003 Guardian's article on the 30th anniversary of the W'73 boycot describes the matter rather well. Therefore I believe that the circumstances of the 1973 Wimbledon title ought to be mentioned here in some relevant way. I am completely new to Wiki editing, unfamiliar with page blocking and all the rules. Sid2007 05:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)sid2007 at sid2007@volny.cz[reply]

It's unprotected now. You are free to edit the page. Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 14:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Log Bay Day is notable, with an estimated 10,000 people that go each year. It has been written about in various articles which I plan to cite, and also the page would give attention to an event that Lake George holds annually. Lake George, New York as you may or may not know is a prime vacation destination in the northeast and it is on wikipedia. You have events on wikipedia such as the H.O.R.D.E. festival which is similiar in many ways to Log Bay Day so I do not understand how that is a notable contribution and my article is not? Also on wikipedia you have such absurd articles on beer pong, flip cup and many other drinking games, where is the notability in that? People play those games to get wasted and having them featured on this website is absurd.

If it is indeed notable, please write about it at Lake George, not in a separate article. It's notable for the subject (Lake George), but not for an entire Wikipedia article. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then why dont you go and delete the H.O.R.D.E. page, and the beer pong page, and the flip cup page? Those pages are garbage that only promote drinking, especially underage drinking. Log Bay Day is notable and worthy of its own page. It has been written about in many articles, and deserves its own credible page. If I have to I will go to administrators about this.

H.O.R.D.E is notable by itself because it was a festival that featured many prominent bands and musical artists. It has established its notability in its own sense. As for beer pong, well those articles have established their notability on Wikipedia, whether you like it or not. This does not compare to Log Bay Day, which is an annual get-together at Lake George. If anything, it should belong in the main article. See WP:NOTABILITY. I looked through Google and could not find any evidence of the event's notability outside Lake George. As for your "threat", I am an administrator, and I'm sure any other administrator would have made the same decision as I have. Nishkid64 (talk) 21:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

..for the *. NawlinWiki 22:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well then how did such asinine articles like beer pong and flip cup gain notability status? Seems like a page like that should have been deleted as soon as it was put up. Oh, and I dont think you are "thee" administrator, so we'll see who else is out there.LogBayDayIsGreat 23:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just read the article. You might dislike the subject, and that's your opinion, but it meets notability guidelines. There are also many reliable sources to back up beer pong. That meets the general guideline that "A topic is notable if it has received significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." Even if Log Bay Day meets this, it should still be incorporated at Lake George. Log Bay Day is an annual get-together at Lake George, and it is only appropriate to keep that section in Lake George, not in an entirely new article. Outside of Lake George, the subject is not notable, and it would seem a bit detached if it were to appear as a separate article on Wikipedia. Nishkid64 (talk) 23:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the sprotect locks.Dineshkannambadi 00:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will think about it.Dineshkannambadi 01:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, im not sarvabhaum. My series of ip is shared by whole city.it is unfortunate that u've deleted the cited info.anyway i do know that the only way to get justice is to do tit for tat.im sorry but kannambadi cant insult the history and go scot-free. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.27.87 (talk • contribs)

Can you help me understand this edit. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TonyTheTiger (talk • contribs) 22:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Section merging may be necessary, but it is premature. It just got promoted to WP:GA. As soon as it got promoted I set out to pursue WP:FA. I have only edited one of his two college years. If by the weekend you still think the sections need to be merged go ahead. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 23:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will mostly be working from http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player_career.jsp?player_id=432934&y=2000 to expand his college career. Any help is welcome. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 23:21, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The table formatting change will cause a lot of work in the future. I had copied the table from http://www.baseball-reference.com/y/youngch03.shtml, but replaced spaces with "||" for table formatting. Now, one will have to slip in the formatting pipes and remove date from both the current season and career totals columns. What do you think. Try updating it and see what I mean. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 23:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are we suppose to edit based on small screen resolution constraints? I don't think that is a good reason to remove the GF and SV columns. The other columns are odd stats most casual fans don't even know about so that is O.K. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 23:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I finished adding his college career info. You can go ahead and merge as you see fit now. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 17:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for Adam Gilberti. I am an old friend, and I am having a hell of a time finding him. I noticed you edited his wikipedia entry, so I am hoping you have a way to get in touch. let me know: phynixism@hotmail.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.83.155.151 (talk) 12:42, 9 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I'm sorry, but I can't help you there. All I did was fix a template on the article. Unfortunately, I don't know who Adam Gilberti is. Sorry, and I wish you good luck in finding your old friend. Nishkid64 (talk) 17:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I reported this on the vandalism intervention page, but user:Ni$hkid64:Ni$hkid64 has his userpage and talkpage redirect to you. In the meantime, he's been making destructive edits and blanking pages. Just thought you'd like to know... Dchall1 18:08, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your block of Lsi john (talk · contribs), the user has admitted his violation and he is contrite (see his talk page). Given that blocking for WP:3RR is preventative and not punitive, would you consider unblocking him? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your comments on 72.75.*.*

I agree that 72.75.*.* merited civil warnings, not a block.

I dispute that that I taunted 72.75.*.*.

I dispute that I misled the readers of wp:an/i.

I dispute that I "pestered" 72.75.*.*.

Nishkid64's supposition that I was retaliating for 72.75.*.* deletion of articles I started was incorrect. 72.75.*.*'s two nominations for deletion were both quickly removed by other contriubtors. Speedy deletion is kind of a crap-shoot, in my experience. One can't count on the nominator bothering to observe policy, or bothering to give the article sufficient attention to detect whethe the concern that prompted the tag placement was a result of vandalism, not a lack of concern over quality on the parti of the original author(s). Similarly, one can't count on the closing administrator showing any more attention than the nominators show.

72.75.*.* nominated Kevin Sandkuhler for deletion, asserting the article did not assert notablity. The second sentence of the article states:

"Sandkuhler is notable for his participation in discusssions, in December of 2002, of reports that interrogators from the Joint Task Force 160 and Joint Task Force 170 were using controversial interrogation techniques on the captives held in the Guantanamo Bay detention camps, in Cuba."

Let me repeat the first three words of that second sentence:

"Sandkuhler is notable..."

72.75.*.* is fully entitled to disagree as to whether Sandkuhler is notable. But asserting that the article did not assert notability when it clearly did assert notability is, IMO, a clear violation of policy. 72.75.*.* is fully entitled to think that applying the phrase, "is notable" to an article is a stupid loophole. Neverthelss it is policy, and its presence on an article protects it from speedy deletion over "notability".

I acknowledge that clearing the wikipedia of cruft is an important task. This task attracts dedicated volunteers who are careful; who are capable of following policy; who are capable of being civil to their correspondents; and who are capable of acknowledging when they make mistakes.

However, in my experience, this task also attracts some people who are not careful; not civil; not thoughtful; not capable of admitting mistakes. In my experience, I am sorry to say, this task attracts some people who revel in know-nothingism; who feel free to be highly uncivil, who continue to use jargon that is opaque to their victims, the newbies whose contributions offended them. In my experience, I am sorry to say, a subgroup of those who frequent the deletion fora show a willingness to bend or break the wikipedia's policies.

I think my concerns about 72.75.*.* were legitimate, and I think I was civil in how I expressed them.

I don't think I owe anyone an apology for trying to remind people to express their concerns in a civil, collegial fashion. I continue to think it would be a mistake for 72.75.*.* to make their edits from anonymous IP addresses so that the repercussions of breaches of wp:civ don't blow-back on them. That may not be they meant. But I continue to think that is a valid interpretation of what they wrote.

Cheers! Geo Swan 22:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<Heavy Sigh!> Please have a look at one of my sandbox pages under this IP account ... How I got speedy blocked for WP:NPP activity ... this is an edited copy of messages on Geo Swan's Talk page ... I think that along with Talk:Kevin Sandkuhler, it sets the record straight in a fairly impartial manner ... I'm will to use as an example of "When Good Intentions Go Horribly Wrong" ... or something like that.

For reference, see this version, the one I tagged with {{db-bio}} at 03:42, 6 May 2007 (while on New pages patrol) before posting a courtesy warning "Article lacks WP:A to establish WP:N" after the {{db-bio}} was reverted by Ryulong (talk · contribs) without a comment ... so I came back with some other tags, created a Discussion page with my "lacks WP:A for WP:N" stencil ... and then the excrement impacted the ventilating unit, as they say.

Now here's the only thing that matters ... Talk:Kevin Sandkuhler and my three unanswered posts:

• 04:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC) - Article lacks WP:A to establish WP:N

Wikipedia articles must be based on reliable sources to establish notability, and the author has not provided any ...

• 21:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC) - No improvements

What makes a Marine Corps lawyer involved in discussions about abuses at GITMO notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia? Please see the notability criteria in WP:BIO and WP:BLP ... Anyway, that's why I plan to put a {{prod}} on it Real Soon Now ...

• 02:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC) - Looking better!

I've upgraded the {{WPBiography}} class from Stub to Start, and I've removed the {{Primarysources}} tag ... also tweaked the new Awards section ... I'll come back in a few days (trying to avoid edit conflicts) to clean once more before it's time to MOVE ON.

My criteria for WP:BLP is simple ... if there is not enough WP:A to be found to establish (a) Date of birth, and (b) Place of birth, then how can they meet WP:N's "multiple, non-trivial" criteria?

I'll admit that this was one that may have been speedied Too Quickly ... I've offered some contributions, pinged the author, and gave them some strokes when they jumped back to add some more before I tagged it again for not having addressed some fundamental questions to any biographical article, like "when and where was the subject born?"

Hey, I repaired some of the broken links and disambiguations of his Awards, but I stopped because Geo Swan was still editing, and I hit a conflict on saving ... I don't remember if I've been back since I left the "kudos!" post.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I already said that with regards to this article, I'm ready to MOVE ON ... as in "put it behind me', as in "we shall speak of this no more."

Since Geo Swan has declined to respond to my open invitation for feedback at Open Letter from The Bipolar-AnonIP-Gnome, I'll proceed with my sandbox essays as if Geo Swan has no opinion one way or the other.

That is all I have to say. —68.239.79.82 (talk · contribs) 00:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, again ... since you're apparently my Guardian Angel, would you please let me know if I've been playing nice, or did I really "violate the integrity of Laaabaseball's epidermis," i.e., did I bite the newbie as charged? —68.239.79.82 22:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

68.239.79.82, I think perhaps the best way to approach this situation would have been to explain as to why you were restoring the notice on the user's talk page. According to WP:USER, they had the right to delete the message, and I guess it would have been best to let the user know of policy. With new users, you're supposed to anticipate that they have no prior knowledge of Wikipedia policy, and you must teach them how everything works. Perhaps, that would be the best way to handle such situations in the future. Don't get too trigger happy with the "undo" button, since that can provide for a negative reaction from the other user. Nishkid64 (talk) 22:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This all came up during the same WP:NPP that led to my block ... in this case, I guess it was the fact that the author had (a) recreated the page the day after WP:CSD, (b) they kept removing the new CSD tags without comment, and (c) they kept blanking the Talk page that had the previous warnings.

This looked like a "pattern of Bad Behavior" from someone that (at the time) I suspected of being a sockpuppet ... I admit that caused me to loose patience ... I was also in NPP mode, and resented having to break my rhythm to keep responding to the removals, so that may have made me a little more hasty and harsh, too.

So I guess I failed to assume (or rejected the assumption) "that they have no prior knowledge of Wikipedia policy" ... I'm working on some stencil messages in my sandbox to leave on user Talk pages that do make that assumption, and I'm going to try to make templates from them ... I'll ask for your opinion when they're ready for testing.

Happy Editing! —68.239.79.82 23:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I recently uploaded an article about Parkdean Holidays which was removed because it was considered advertising. I amended the article so the information contained would be considered more factual but again it was deleted. I really can't understand why this was when Haven & British Holidays have an article structured similarly but it isn't considered advertising.

Any help in distinguishing the difference between the two would be most appreciated.

Best wishes Xenutoo

Upon further review, I have decided to restore the article. It seems to be written in a more encyclopedic tone now, and all I request is that you make the article comply with WP:MOS. If you need any help, please let me. (You can use Haven & British Holidays as a model for your article's layout) Nishkid64 (talk) 22:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for sprotecting many pages from anon IP vandals. This anon user has now moved to other articles related to Karnataka, namely Badami, Kadamba Dynasty. Please protect these pages also. Looks like anon user:Sarvabhaum is trying to make a clean sweep of all articles this time. Also, obscene messages are being posted on the Talk:Kadamba Dynasty. I have been collecting his Anon IP's and putting them together in the talk page of admin User:Luna Santin to request for a mass block.thanks.Dineshkannambadi 11:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir i apologize for my obscene message but can u see ka'badi and other kannadi editors are vandalizing maharashtra's history?

Sir, here is the obscene message left behind by a Vishal1976 (he has a user account which he supposedly quit) and later supported and accepted (above) by anon vandal (User:Sarvabhaum).[2] I will provide you all his IP's and request you for a block on all of them.thanks.Dineshkannambadi 14:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That new user has actually been the subject of some serious ganging up from other users who wish their preferred versions of two article to stay. Can you look at the comments on User_talk:Dharmender6767, it appears that one of Dharmender6767's opponents User:Miskin had also violated WP:3rr, so your block maybe giving an unfair advantage to one side of a content dispute. AlexanderPar 14:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, I undid your edit and I added a Underconstruction tag to the article. I just started working on the article yesterday, and the first thing I did was expand and rewrite the introduction so it conforms to WP:LEAD. Hopefully, I can bring this to GA-standards within a few weeks. Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 20:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Howdy! I am very happy you are taking the time to expand the article on one of my favorite pitchers. I understand you are going to add more to the article, but as I wrote in my edit summary, I believe the intro is just too long. The essense of who he was, a dominating pitcher cut down at the height of his career, is lost in details that belong in the body of the article, not the intro. Things like where he was born, sports he played in high school, dates he was drafted and debuted, a listing of pitching categories he excelled in, an attempted comeback in the minors, release date, and the fact he founded a church and became a minister, while important to the article, are mere clutter to the intro. Anyway. That's my 2 cents.  :) Happy editing! --Janus Shadowsong ^(talk)/(contribs) 20:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've always been a fan of J.R. Richard as well. Anyway, the reason for the lengthy introduction is so that it meets WP:LEAD. Leads are supposed to overview the entire article and should be able to "stand up" on their own. After seeing the FAC comments I received for Samuel Adams (which I might add, became an FA just recently), I saw that I had to cover his entire life, not just the notable parts, in the lead. Anyway, by the time I am done with my thorough expansion, I should hopefully get this article to around ~30-40KB in length, which means it will be almost 4x the current length. Thanks, and any help with the article is appreciated. =) Nishkid64 (talk) 22:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Barrapuntologo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 21:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi nishkid64,

i just read your reply and appreciate where you are coming from. However, King Apparel's exclusive collaboration with the UK govt on the Want respect campaign has garnered press in over 40 different publications in the last two months, and has been commended by ministers including the current health secretary. I can by all means put you in touch both with the press agents of King Apparel and the Government Want Respect campaign to verify this. From the perspective of this campaign alone i would argue that a credible amount of notability has been achieved. Please let me know if this would assist in any way of rectifying the problems Timhoad 23:18, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just happened to notice that Showninner blanked your WP:3RR notice [3]. Notmyrealname 00:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishkid64,

i have done a quick sweep and provided the following links most of which are news items and/or showcases about the clothing and also its collaboration with Want Respect? There has been a larger volume of published press across titles from One Week to Live, RWD Magazine and ATM to international titles such as Vice and Mens Health, particularly recently on the Want Respect campaign collaboration. Should you require documentation of these i can arrange for the PR company of King 'Canoe Inc' to forward these to you. If you require further information do not hesitate to say. cheers

Wordonthescene[4] News item on the want respect collaboration

HighSnobiety[5] News item on the King MP3 cap

FUK[6]News item on the Want Respect collaboration

Style Department[7]News item from Germany previewing the AW06 collection

Month Rag[8] Click through to the showcase to find a brand showcase and interview

Fashion Capital[9]Designer profile

Rago Magazine[10]Brand interview

Kingpin European Skateboard Magazine[11] News item for King skate team

Fashion Capital[12]Press release

Timhoad 00:52, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(sorry forgot to title the last post)

Hi Nishkid64,

i have done a quick sweep and provided the following links most of which are news items and/or showcases about the clothing and also its collaboration with Want Respect? There has been a larger volume of published press across titles from One Week to Live, RWD Magazine and ATM to international titles such as Vice and Mens Health, particularly recently on the Want Respect campaign collaboration. Should you require documentation of these i can arrange for the PR company of King 'Canoe Inc' to forward these to you. If you require further information do not hesitate to say. cheers

Wordonthescene[13] News item on the want respect collaboration

HighSnobiety[14] News item on the King MP3 cap

FUK[15]News item on the Want Respect collaboration

Style Department[16]News item from Germany previewing the AW06 collection

Month Rag[17] Click through to the showcase to find a brand showcase and interview

Fashion Capital[18]Designer profile

Rago Magazine[19]Brand interview

Kingpin European Skateboard Magazine[20] News item for King skate team

Fashion Capital[21]Press release

Timhoad 00:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I was browsing through my subpages, and the number has increased yet again. Could you please delete the following per WP:CSD#U1?

1. User:Spebi/Awards/1
2. User:Spebi/UBX
3. User:Spebi/Awards/Blaaake
4. User:Spebi/Awards/Blaaake2
5. User:Spebi/Awards/MY
6. User:Spebi/Msg
7. User:Spebi/Italic
8. User:Spebi/Scroll
9. User:Spebi/Sandbox1
10. User:Spebi/Awards/2
11. User:Spebi/Bands
12. User:Spebi/MY:UL
13. User:Spebi/Rainbow border
14. User:Spebi/Sandbox3
15. User:Spebi/Awards/Barnstar
16. User:Spebi/Awards/Kaeye
17. User:Spebi/Mailbox
18. User:Spebi/Random
19. User:Spebi/Sandbox5
20. User:Spebi/Templates
21. User:Spebi/Userboxes

Big list, but I'll be sure not to make to many subpages again. Thanks in advance, ~Spebi 05:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no friends here, and am leaving Wikipedia. :( --Defender 911 22:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm...true, what you said. But how does it feel to be the only person to be befending Wikipedia's lonely, unforgotten articles. Anyway, you caught me just in time! I was 2 minutes from leaving! --Defender 911 22:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A very unfair decision to protect Kadamba. It seems kannadi editors have made an unholy nexus even with admins. Any explaination? And whho said i am sarvabhaum? dont declare it by urself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.23.215 (talk • contribs)

Hello, Nishkid64. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:Barrapuntologo.gif) was found at the following location: User:Nishkid64/Sandbox2. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi nishkid64,

did you have a chance to run through the links we sent over?

Thanks

Timhoad 09:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]