Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 Archive 23 Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27 Archive 28 Archive 29 Archive 30 Archive 31 Archive 32 Archive 33 Archive 34 Archive 35 Archive 36

This page has archives. Sections older than 16 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 15 sections are present.

Not a computer user? I'm surprised that you deleted the start of a page for this famous computer retailer and software publisher. Their PaperClip word processor was arguably the first which attained widespread use. Speedy deletion is a speedy way to discourage people from contributing. Lexor1969 (talk)

hello OrangeMike, I edited the new article "long hair"- is it too short? greetings from Munich, Germany garlicboy1969 12:47, April 19th (CET) </nowiki>

Hey, I have no idea how to do a wikitable. I left some data on the article. Could anyone who's reading this make the table. will u help me please

Mike - my purpose is not to dispute the changes made in Chile, I had simply moved that reference to the countries section of that page, and I've opened up a new page on the Chilean pension system.

The definition of pension should stay general and not reference any particular country or system. Country-specific changes are occurring constantly.

Seems a bit confusing for the causal user but I'll be mindful of that in the future. -Leodmacleod 5:28, 24 Sept 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Orangemike! I'm curious at to where I helped you out - I'd like to know if I did something right :-) east.718 at 09:38, December 19, 2007

Orangemike, I would like to better understand why you felt the page I recreated was so blatantly advertising. I wanted to get this product in Wikipedia, and I spent a great deal of time researching other companies that are in a similar space. After being deleted once, I went back over again to include only facts. Would appreciate any advice on how to do this better, but an immediate deletion seems extreme. I would appreciate assistance in getting factual information here. Thx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wallyton (talk • contribs)

Dear OrangeMike,

I think there has been some kind of misunderstanding concerning my supposedly 'inappropriate' editing of Making History (novel). I merely corrected a couple of grammatical errors, and I certainly made no attempt to deface the article, as your message to me seems to imply. Please write back as soon you get this, I'm sure we simply have our wires crossed. Thank you.

Yours,

User:6afraidof7

Thank you for your quick response, and I shall be more stringent in future.

Yours,

6afraidof7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 6afraidof7 (talk • contribs)

		The Orange Barnstar
		For your positive wording in here and in so many other places (and for being orange, of course). --omtay38

Hi Mike,

I dont understand, why you deleted the following article? 03:23, 14 February 2008 Orangemike deleted "SAE - World Council of Hellenes Abroad".

I have all the rights from the SAE Organisation to publish their text on Wikipedia! Could you please undo the deletion.

Greetings Th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bountos (talk • contribs)

Today you murdered my account because you are a fat fucking IWW queer. The reason you gave was that you didn't like my username, which like yours, matches your webpage. Then you started dicking around with other content I posted here, laying warning tags just to be a spiteful faggot. You assholes bypassed all of your own protocol. Therefore, I am fucking all of you from now on. Because you did this to back user IrishGuy, and because my appeals were sabotaged by other whitelisted abusers of nonadmins, you will all be systematically outed at my convenience. Have fun blocking this ip, as it is the ip for an entire library. --contextflexed

There's lyrics all over Wikipedia. See article on Julie London, for example.

I started this entry as I was adding content to the Atlantic Motorsport Park entry and thought that it should be included, perhaps after quickly reading the criteria for entry I should have entered it as a redirected page or something, but I've not really gotten the hang of the Wikipedia protocol yet.

I felt the Bluenose BMW Club likely warranted it's our citation separate from the likes of Atlantic Motorsport Park or Westwood, because it isn't just about AMP. Atlantic Motorsport Park is the facility that the club uses to teach young drivers vehicle control through practicing emergency manouvers, car control along with studying and applying the theories and applications of vehicle dynamics, and while there was a listing for the BMW Car Club of America, there was no such listing for the BMW Car Club of Canada which would, I guess, be the logical place for it to exist.

Do you feel I should create a BMW Car Club of Canada entry and copy the Bluenose Chapter information or link over to it? Or should this material not be in Wikipedia?

Regards, Alan Coles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alan Coles (talk • contribs) 11:38, February 25, 2008

I'm currently having an exchange of e-mails with the author is question. It will probably take a while for me to get all the information I need to write up the article. Just out of interest, is there any way of citing personal correspondence on Wikipedia? Paul Castro (talk) 14:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About the poem I cited. I am writing the article with the knowledge and collaboration of the writer. What would count as permission for me to cite from her poetry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Castro (talk • contribs) 15:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify - I'm citing from poems that have been out of print for more than 40 years. I realise that this probably means they are still in copyright, but the fact that they are important to an understanding of her work and unavailable warrants to my mind their inclusion in Vimala Devi's entry.

She would have to donate all rights to that poem. They would then be licensed for anybody else to reproduce, royalty-free, under the terms of one of our licenses. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Vimala has e-mailed me a copyright form so that I can cite from her poems and post a personal photograph of her on the entry referring to her. I'm a little bit confused as to what to do now. Could you advise?

Paul Castro (talk) 17:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does she understand that she's not just giving permission to post the poems and picture here, but licensing them to be reprinted elsewhere without royalties? If so, go to Wikipedia:COPY#Using copyrighted work from others for further guidance. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have contested your request for speedy deletion. If you still feel that the article subject is fatally non-notable, I urge you to instead nominate the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. --M@rēino 14:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mike, I have declined to delete this and removed t he speedy tag, as I also have from Vincent Klyn. I do not know whether either of these people are actually notable.I do know that saying someone is an actor or a film editor in many films is an unmistakable clear assertion at least of some possible good-faith importance. if the editor role was not significant, or if the parts were all bit parts, then the people might not pass WP:N, but that has to be tested at AfD. Speedy does not apply if you think the importance was insufficient, as long as there is some importance asserted. There have been recent calls for the elimination of category A7 altogether, ad it is taggings like this which encourage such requests. I think we need A7, and therefore should use it carefully and properly, and urge you to be more careful here to follow the text of WP:CSD, which expresses WP:Deletion policy. DGG (talk) 15:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

similarly ". She represented Nigeria in Miss World" as for Matilda Kerry is an assertion of what can reasonably be thought notability. I'm not sure what I would vote on it at AfD,but it needs to go there if you want to delete it. DGG (talk) 15:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I know you weren't talking to me, but just to inform you, Vincent Klyn *IS* a notable person, as he not only was a very famous surfer in his day, but also played the main villain in the very popular (at least where I come from) sci-fi action-movie Cyborg, and also has appeared in a lot of other movies having major parts, especially in those directed by Albert Pyun.KnatLouie (talk) 20:08, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. I am new to editing Wiki (although I use it all the time). I think that a category for Spec. Fic books from writers of color should be created also. I'll be looking at the rules (and trying to understand them all) on how to do this. Thanks a lot. -Booksellergirl (talk)

Halp. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 15:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks!

But you forgot to indicate the length of the block. Cheers! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 15:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

also

511 Gallery should have made the cut. Thanks again! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 15:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet! Thanks again! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 15:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No offense intended, I just feel (after doing some checking) that the article notable enough for inclusion. I agree that it sorely lacking in secondary sources and citations. -- MisterHand (Talk to the Hand|Contribs) 16:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo, can you please reverse this edit? There already exists an article at Karma to Burn (album) that concerns a different band; your move creates ambiguity. Thanks, скоморохъ 17:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your swift and appropriate action. скоморохъ 17:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, my article Michael Francis Wiley was sourced first of all. Two reputable news sources have articles about this guy. Secondly, it was not meant at all as an attack page. I think the guy's awesome. Help me make it better rather than just deleting it. I wrote this on the talk page and plan to pursue the matter further. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbroderick271 (talk • contribs) 17:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you speedy deleted my "Disputed notability" template. Since apparently the template I was able to come up with wasn't up to Wikipedia's standards, can you please point me in the right direction as to how to get those issues addressed? Specifically, I'm hoping to wind up with something which can mark pages whose notability is being actively discussed, and to make it obvious to other editors that it may be appropriate to wait until that debate has concluded to mark the page under AfD for notability reasons, since this almost became a problem in a couple of articles I've been working on. Thanks for your time. Dalamori (talk) 17:53, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is sourced. I don't know how to make it sound like he's not a danger to all around him. Help me do that. I don't think it's constructive to just go around deleting articles for not fitting exactly into what an article is supposed to be according to the endless pages of guidlines and rules that infest this place. This is a cooperative project, no? We're supposed to working together. I only stated that I think he's awesome to make it clear that I don't want it to be an attack page and I'm happy to do what it takes to make the article work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbroderick271 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, i understand the notibility issue after rereading the guidelines. This is a great organization and I was just trying to call more attention to it. Can I add a local chapter to the National CASA page? If it is the only local chapter mentioned on the page is that okay? Anyway thanks for notification that my page was not in regulation- it was my first shot trying to create a page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casakat (talk • contribs) 19:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ok! I had just read this the wiki regulations page: Individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not notable enough to warrant a separate article unless sufficient notability is established through reliable sources. However, chapter information may be included in list articles as long as only verifiable information is included.

But thanks for letting me know it wouldnt work before trying that. My first response to you was short- I just didnt understand what 'planet-wide nobility' met. No peronal offense taken- i know you have a job to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casakat (talk • contribs) 19:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My page was deleted so I added the hang on and when I posted my response to why it shouldn't be deleted it was already gone. Did you review the talk page for PointClickHome? This is a website that is now the sole online home of Elle Decor, Metropolitan Home, Home Magazine, and Woman's Day special issues which are brands of Hachette Filipacchi Media which has been in existence since 1826. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Absolutdahl (talk • contribs) 19:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. I will re-submit if we can provide the sources that Wikipedia requires. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Absolutdahl (talk • contribs) 19:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Orangemike. You've agreed with me on some of the issues surrounding the questionable-quality Fruita Mansana page, and I wondered if you could give me your opinion on what to do about a couple of additional pages by the same user (ArnoldZippo). As with Fruita, he's showing some real ownership tendencies on Three's Christmas and Chrissy's Date, which he recently wrote - he's removed speedy delete tags, as well as plot, unsourced and notability tags. Do you know if there is a recourse for this? Should I maybe just put the articles up on AFD? I'd love to hear your opinion. Cheers, --Dawn bard (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The links that I made reference noteworthy industry analyst reports commenting on software quality solutions. The analysts in question (Gartner, Ovum Ltd., etc) do not provide these freely (in other words, they are not freely linked on their website). Rather, these analysts perform industry research and are "though leaders" on a range of topics which companies subscribe to for thousands of dollars per topic. The subscribers then use this information to facilitate research and purchasing/development/methodology/etc decisions regarding software quality solutions (or whatever topic they subscribe to).

Additionally, Gartner, Ovum, and other analysts typically allow the companies being reported on to purchase reprints of their research and analysis, which the purchaser can then make available via their website. This is what has occurred in this case. So, although the links point to the Compuware website, the referenced press releases and associated reprints represent the original, published, and licensed for distribution intellectual property of credible software quality analysts (which are linked via the Compuware website as Compuware has purchased these reports and been licensed to redistribute them). In fact, short of you or I paying thousands of dollars to reprint these reports ourselves, this is the only way to access the analysts' opinions.

Both Gartner and Ovum rank Compuware and Compuware's TestPartner software as a leader in software quality and software testing solutions, which I would argue is a credible and reasonable source for establishing the notability of TestPartner in relation to Wikipedia's criteria. If this is not the case, could you suggest specific examples of what sort of information could be provided to otherwise establish the notability of TestPartner?

In terms of the Compuware TestPartner vs TestPartner conversation, I agree with you that Compuware's website is not consistent.

TestPartner talk 19:58, 11 March 2008 (UTC) pfhjvb0

Mike, if you're going to PROD something because you don't think it's notable, I suggest adding a discussion (or at least a note) in the relevant talk page, especially if you've been denied a Speedy Delete on the subject previously. As it is, a 39-year old organization with 75,000 active members (the largest of its kind) and two high-visibility programs (racing and Street Survival) isn't exactly what I'd term 'non-notable.' — Mustang_DVS (talk | contribs) 21:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. First of all, you're going to show me some proof that the articles spurred some kind of libel lawsuit. If that claim has any merit, the articles would no longer be on the Internet for all to see. I doubt MSNBC takes libel that lightly. Secondly, I don't think your narrow idea of notability entitles you the power to speedy delete whatever you want out of hand.

In a brief perusal of your talk page, I noticed many have commented on what they feel to be your arrogance and condescension with regards to this website. I also noticed that many have complained that you are quick on the trigger when it comes to the speedy delete function and that your judgements have been overturned in the past. You have already scrambled to decry my article's notability when your 'attack page' argument couldn't hold water. All this leads me to believe you should restore my article and allow a debate to take place on whether it can continue to exist rather than force me to go the deletion review route.

- Mbroderick271 (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rich_media_institute —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccharlton (talk • contribs) 23:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You listed this article as a hoax and stated the imdb entry is fake, can you elaborate? –– Lid^(Talk) 09:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replying on the article's talk page, as that seems the most appropriate place. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:15, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you return my User & User talk pages to their correct locations? They were redirected by a vandal, and I can't move them back. User:ShelfSkewed is currently redirected to User:ShelphSkewed. Thanks--ShelfSkewed Talk 14:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you're okay now; glad I could help. Any idea what motivated that scumbag? --Orange Mike | Talk 14:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I revert their edit at Friendship (diff) and left a warning on their talk page. Many thanks for your help!--ShelfSkewed Talk 14:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They're like bad colds, they keep coming back. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:03, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are numerous pages on wiki that give details about websites that are similar to THEINFOVAULT........ Government News Network, The Great News Network, signs of the times (News Website), Guerrilla News Network, etc....

What can I do to make my contribution fit the requirements? I have read the terms and conditions and I do not believe that I am violating them. I don't believe this to be "advertising" - as the website I am trying to write about is entirely non-profit and sells nothing. It is an information resource website. I try to offer facts about the website and I do not give any personal opinions. Any suggestions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Solerift (talk • contribs) 15:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I can find no evidence this article exists on the Arabic Wikipedia and it was tagged as not English. Are you seeing something I'm not? Redfarmer (talk) 17:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what I was thinking, there - you're of course right, State legislators are notable. I had another of the same editor's articles open at the same time, maybe I meant to tag that one? But that article, Linda Bizzarro, a candidate for office in Louisiana, was already up for speedy... That's what I get for editing during lunch. Thanks for the catch. UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...which I see you already have deleted - twice! Good times, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 18:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article is significant for national and international purposes because of the effects of Hurricane Katrina to New Orleans and the resulting recovery and crime problems in New Orleans. Additionally the former elected District Attorney, Eddie Jordan was forced to resign, which also created national attention. --Cliftong84 (talk) 18:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We are creating a Wiki Article similar to that of whole foods market, our existence has been verifiably published in the miami herald and cbs news, I do not understand how the article qualifies as blatant advertising. I was not even given a change to mark the article as hangon Can you please explain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Delivery4tip (talk • contribs) 20:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And apparently nothing I do to the page will be allowed to stand since the idiots have decided the site I created and research that went into it is not reliable. Shsilver (talk) 21:20, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since it was several years ago, I have neither the time or inclination to deal with it at this point. Shsilver (talk) 21:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me if I'm teaching you to suck eggs, but there's a slight difference between {{db-user}} (u1) and {{db-author}} (a7). It would be strange to see u1 outside userspace, as with the page in question. Thanks! _GB^T/C 21:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're entirely correct, and right to call me on it; but by the time I could get to the article to correct myself, somebody else had deleted it anyway! --Orange Mike | Talk 23:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike, I was just about to decline the speedy deletion on this article on grounds that it claims to be highly influential to a genre, and list for AfD, when I saw you had deleted it. I haven't researched it yet, but it might be notable. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 01:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I concur and have restored the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're Kelly Lowrey's dad, right? Well, thanks for the tip. I'm one of the Championchip level boys in Cashel. I would really appreciate you're help with the article. I'm not sure how exactly to make the article "notable", so any help in doing so would be appreciated. Bboy14 (talk) 01:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, thats the problem. The last time I tried citing a part in my article, everything bellow the citation dissapeard. Can you cite the first paragraph with the Cashel webpage? If I can see how you type it, then it'll probably make sense.

Bboy14 (talk) 01:35, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... yeah.... Theres just not enough sources for any verification on the info... I might just have to give this article up. Bboy14 (talk) 01:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh.. This is true. I'll talk to Kate, see what she has. After all, she's been with the school almost since the beginning. If you find anything valuble, be my guest and put it under the sources section. I'll also have to look in the papers, considering St. Pat's is coming up.

Bboy14 (talk) 02:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems as if the website is wrong. Mr. Dennehy isn't the current president of IDTANA. He resigned in '07. This is getting confusing.... yeeesh.

02:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I expanded Cumming's article with the last edit at 1:03 (wikitime), but you deleted the article at 1:00 (wikitime). Could you review the article and see if you took into consideration the additions I made. Thanks!! StewiekilledLois!! (talk) 01:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello?? StewiekilledLois!! (talk) 01:17, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I respectfully disagree, but thanks for responding. Is the deletion with prejudice to future attempts or for pages regarding Ovasort Ltd., provided they are worthy articles? StewiekilledLois!! (talk) 01:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right. I'm sorry :(. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 01:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Orangemike. I tagged this article for A7 speedy, and you carried out the deletion. Since the editor re-created it immediately, I speedied it myself and protected it against re-creation for two weeks. I'll leave a message suggesting the the creator discuss the situation with you. Feel free to undo any of my actions. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Orangemike,

Regarding your deletion of A.WOLF, I just wanted to stop by and let you know (if you didn't already) that the user who closed the discussion was a non-admin (see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Autocracy). The consensus is pretty clear, but I was thinking that it might not hurt for you to stop by the AfD as the deleting admin and confirm the result to eliminate any chances of this winding up at WP:DRV down the road. Thanks, and sorry to bug you! --jonny-mt 07:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I can make an immodest suggestion, I haven't gotten a single complain about CSD tagging since I put up this explanation page and linked to it from my talk page. I know you're under more fire as the deleting admin, but it might help weed out some of the clutter.... --jonny-mt 07:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Orangemike,

Hi. I just learned that the article I'd created about Kambri Crews was deleted.

I honestly believe Crews deserves a Wiki entry. She's a major figure in the New York comedy community, and also in the deaf commmunity as a storyteller.

The article I constructed is obviously deficient, or you wouldn't have cut it. I'm new to this and don't yet fully understand what needs to be done to make a Wiki entry acceptable.

But I want you to know that the underlying substance is there. Crews is a genuinely notable figure who touches the lives of thousands of creative people in NYC via her comedy activities, and the deaf community via her blog.

I obviously don't yet know how to construct an article in the style you need -- but I'd love to so. So I'm writing to ask if you'd be kind enough to give me specific guidance by telling me what in the article is okay, what isn't, and what I'd need to do to fix the article and make it a good entry.

I apologize if these are overly ignorant questions. It could be I'm too close to the article to see it objectively. But I was genuinely surprised to see it removed; so I'd really value your perspective, and your advice.

Most sincere thanks in advance for your knowledge and help.

Warm regards,

Hy Bender —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hybender (talk • contribs) 14:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your concern on this article. I would say it is necessary to delete that redirecting article to reverse a redirect. Now the future infrastructure plan is clearer and the rapid transport station has the name Whampoa Station according to official press release. – PeterCX&Talk 15:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is done now. – PeterCX&Talk 17:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did the hangon tag mean anything? I'm open for discussion, and would rather discuss it before being summarily zapped. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pirkeyw (talk • contribs) 15:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I wondering why the Universal Health Care Foundation of Connecticut entry was deleted. The entry appeared factual, non-advertising, non-promotional, and heavily sourced. This foundation is one of the few foundations in the nation dedicated strictly to achieving universal health care. I find many similar entries for other state-based foundations and nonprofits in Wikipdeia.

Your feedback would be much appreciated!

Wagner45 (talk) 19:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mike - I disagree that Universal Health Care Foundation is not noteworthy. That's because as part of the lawsuit settlement against Anthem Blue Cross, it was given money to specifically work toward universal health care in only one state. I know there are state organizations elsewhere that are similarly limited in their work. Also, I don't think that any of them, as part of a lawsuit settlement, were "ordered" by the court to do this. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think so. Also, I believe it cannot take a position on what kind of universal health care the state should enact. I appreciate the comments about the references and links. I'll try to find others and rewrite it and show how it is notable. I looked at other non-profit pages. I can't see any difference as far as the way they represent a specific issue. Could you provide guidance there?User:Wagner45 15:04, March 13, 2008

• Sorry about that; I think I just redid what you did. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 20:07, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wagner45. I'm not Orangemike, but I looked at the deleted article, and it seems rather promotional and fluffy. The comment that you added above seems (to me) more informative than the entire article that was deleted. Is there a chance that you could offer a more informative article for re-creation? Remember that outside commentary, especially in the press, is more impressive than insider sources regarding the true impact of the organization. Here is a typical sentence from the deleted article: "'The Foundation supports and assists diverse groups to come together to develop ideas..." Sure. EdJohnston (talk) 20:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That guidance is very useful. I will try again. I can tell you that this foundation has been constantly cited in newspapers. But, of course, the articles are taken off the web quickly. I think I'll do more digging into its creation too. I find that interesting. This may take awhile!!User:Wagner45 —Preceding comment was added at 20:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Youth United. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Extolmonica (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your actions were patently absurd and flat-out contradict the norm. From Template:Tempundelete: "To facilitate that discussion, this page has been temporarily restored with this message in place. If you would like to see the article that was deleted, please check its history." If you need more convincing, look at the template page itself. Are you sympathizing with a SPA? Pegasus «C¦T» 01:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should be thanking you for reverting the deletion, I further request you to revert the protection too. Seeking your cooperation at the deletion review also. Sorry if bothering you. Extolmonica (talk) 21:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see this??? Now see what I said to him at his IP page: User_talk:70.178.71.123. I wish this article would just DIE already! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 13:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OHTHANKGAWD!!! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 13:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been considering starting a WikiProject to clean up the "unreleased album" category (I'm finding it's definitely going to take a group effort). If you might be interested, I've started trying to write it up here. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 19:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have just created an article for Inglewood, Virginia. Then, I discovered there are two Inglewoods in that state, in separate counties. Should I separate and make articles: Inglewood, Mecklenburg, Virginia and Inglewood, Rockingham, Virginia? Making a disambig at Inglewood, Virginia wouldn't be helpful as there's a disambig at Inglewood, so it'd be a disambig for a disambig. -WarthogDemon 19:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my article Youth United was deleted this time by stifle. There was no point in deleting the article, as review was going on, and each recommendation was based on earlier deletion criteria. None of them replied after 9 reliable sources were cited. Minimaki replied on my talk page "Same, as I already was watching the DRV discussion.. but since you added additional sources since my last comment, it makes sense, so thanks anyway". I dont't know I am being troubled after doing everything in accordance with wiki policies. 9 sources are not enough to be taken as reliable third party coverage? Let me know what can be done now. Thanks Extolmonica (talk) 08:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

consider reading Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_March_10 Extolmonica (talk) 09:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your prod got removed. I've listed it at AfD here. Best, Iain99^{Balderdash and piffle} 10:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Orange Mike, Hope these contracts count as refferences: http://www.the-skyrockets.com/The_SkyRockets/Agreements/Pages/SkyRockets_Site_Album.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherif Mansour (talk • contribs) 12:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard Spitzer built the largest apartment building in New York City as well as several landmark 30+ story buildings in New York City. If you want to delete the article please use the normal afd process rather than speedily deleting it. Americasroof (talk) 18:35, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got your message on my talk page. If you want to delete the article nominate it for an afd and let it be discussed. Bernard is the topic of a book and countless articles. Don't try to circumvent the process. We've had some pleasant conversations in the past so I'm surprised at how adamant you are. Americasroof (talk) 18:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying me. Can you remove the talk page? (Talk:Film Festival SCENECS). Thanks. Cbdorsett (talk) 07:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, there. I removed the notability tag because it's notable not because of its size but because of its new way of implementing CPA and the pending patent on that, and that Microsoft bought the company only because of that, and for improving Live Search.

It's also midly relevant that it raised $5 million dollars and a $1 million dollars on a short time, which got mentioned on two or three paper bussiness journals from Milkwaukee and Winsconsin. The purchase was mentioned on PcWorld, analyzed on eWeek's Microsot Watch, and mentioned on lots of places.

Launch was mentioned on the online version of Wall Street Journal, too. That and the other sources should satisfy the need for secondary sources on WP:CORP#Primary_criterion .

It's also notable for being the first site using only CPA.

I removed the citations needed because of the sources added.

I also updated Cost_per_action to include Jellfish and mentions to other companies that I found with them.

If you still think it's not notable enough, then feel free to nominate for deletion so other editors can opinate --Enric Naval (talk) 11:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tags and for using a prod instead of a speedy deletion. I would try to address the issues, but I feel that I my editing abilities don't reach to redacting the article better, so I'll leave it up to other editors to solve the mess I made improve the article. I'll leave it on my watchlist for the moment --Enric Naval (talk) 15:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

was going to put a comment here, but i'll put instead on the article talk page so other editors can see it when looking at the article --Enric Naval (talk) 17:20, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain/help me as to why our page wasn't relevant? We are simply trying to create our Wiki page. Thanks --Tshizzle (talk) 15:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tshizzle (talk • contribs) 15:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

my mistake- thanks for noticing earlier than i did. Exacerbation (talk) 15:18, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and my apolgies for the lack of communication. This is my first attempt to post any information to Wikipedia. I have rewritten the text for Great Wall China Adoption organziation to be unbiased and unaffiliated, please let me know what parts need more editing. Thank you. - Justin

Hi, just a note to let you know a thread has been opened about yourself at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Orangemike (talk · contribs) is making inappropriate use of the hardblock. Davewild (talk) 20:56, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I've noticed that you've been hardblocking accounts lately for simply having names that you perceive as promotional. The hardblock is intended for cases where it is obvious that the user is ignoring the username policy, and in the case of names that are simply promotional, this isn't obvious. Please in the future just use the softblock (allow account creation), as many of these type of users are legitimate editors. Also, I apologize for bringing this up on WP:AN without addressing you first.--Urban Rose 20:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Orange Mike, Tinsley Advertising is a real advertising agency here in Miami, Fl.

It is not spam or self promotion. It is no different than any of the other advertising agencies already approved on wikipedia such as:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moroch or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martin_Agency or even our neighbors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crispin_Porter_and_Bogusky

Please explain this procedure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Megageox (talk • contribs) 21:00, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not gonna fight you (you do some good work); but notability is not contagious. Having a famous customer doesn't make you famous. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I agree that the company probably isn't notable, but all that's required to defeat a CSD:A7 deletion is a mere claim of notability. This low standard is intended to ensure that only the most clear-cut cases are speedied. There is a claim there (having some famous customers), so a speedy isn't on. Stifle (talk) (trivial vote) 09:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you just do a Google Search on "Tinsley Advertising" you will see many of the mainstream press (ex: Business Week) that are references. Here are a couple (and more can be found in the Hype section of their site): http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A00EFDE1738F93AA2575BC0A96F958260 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_1999_Feb_4/ai_53703115 http://www.allbusiness.com/marketing-advertising/marketing-advertising-overview/6666685-1.html http://www.allbusiness.com/marketing-advertising/4191688-1.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Megageox (talk • contribs) 15:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To the contrary, WP:EL encourages links to Hulu. Consider:

• What should be linked, #2: An article about a book, a musical score, or some other media should link to a site hosting a copy of the work if none of the "Links normally to be avoided" criteria apply. For the type of media that Hulu hosts (film and television, mostly) Hulu usually is the only place on the internet that lawfully hosts a copy of the work. Yes, it's commercial, but for the same reason, no non-commercial website can host a copy of the work, at least not for another 70 years or so before the copyright runs out.
• Now consider the "Links normally to be avoided" criteria. It passes them all. Hulu provides a unique resource, and will be reliable over the long term. The site is primarily to promote not sell works, has a low level of ads compared to live TV, and doesn't require registration (except for R-rated stuff).
• Finally, I don't get a penny from Hulu or from NBC-Universal. I'm just doing this because my philosophy of Wikipedia is that it is useless without proof of sources. Citing the original material makes Wikipedia credible. --M@rēino 14:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with your reasoning, but see your points. To me, this fails the "objectionable amounts of advertising" test. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help! You were so helpful before. I was hoping that you could help me again. Since it seems that Wikipedia is using "Science fiction" as an umbrella term to include "Speculative fiction". I think that maybe the category "Speculative fiction writers of color" should to be changed to "Science fiction by writers of color" and the category "Speculative fiction novels by writers of color" to "Science fiction by writers of color" ("Walter Mosley's Futureland should be here, but because it is a collection of short stories it is being left out.) First is my assertion correct and second, how do I do this without going into every book. Is there a better way? --Booksellergirl (talk) 17:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your help! I think I got it all done --Booksellergirl (talk) 14:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would love to attend WisCon, but it's a problem of to many Cons to little money. I just gave up my ComicCon money for a Rent Party for a friend. Maybe next year I'll go. WisCon sounds amazing! --Booksellergirl (talk) 14:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your continued support. It means a lot to me. This Kevin guy seems a bit like a close-minded jerk. I'm glad that there are people out here like you guarding the hen house, too ;o) Let's hope the that the category doesn't get deleted. I've been telling the guys over at Carl Brandon that we need to get on the ball with this or we will disappear. It seems that I was more prophetic than I realized. There has been a suggestion of a Carl Brandon Wiki. We'll see how that goes. --Booksellergirl (talk) 17:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HA! You gave me my first laugh of the day! This just goes to show something. American may not be what it should be, but its not what it was. We may do some really stupid things sometimes, but we are capable of growth. This place is still worth fighting for. Be well. --Booksellergirl (talk) 18:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made an edit in error to an already erroneous statement, but you merely reverted my edit and left the original erroneous statement in there. This is highly unusual as the change you made left the false information. For the future, please remember to read the full article instead of rushing off to eagerly post patronizing boilerplates on people's talk pages about their own errors. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. Blue Danube (talk) 17:04, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, I was wrong, I apologize in full here and on your talk page. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:15, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I will apologize for my tongue-in-cheek. :D Blue Danube (talk) 17:17, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Orange Mike, Hope these contracts count as refferences: http://www.the-skyrockets.com/The_SkyRockets/Agreements/Pages/SkyRockets_Site_Album.html Mike Why was the Article Deleted? Significance - Egypts first Rock Band (1957), as for proof We have scaned contracts (see Link) with major Hotels Casinos and Clubs in Egypt at the time. The Article itself was witten by the Band, actually everything that was written on their site AND the wiki article was done with their consent & backed by Documented evidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherif Mansour (talk • contribs) 17:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I unblocked her, as she was never warned and was likely unaware of Wikipedia policy or guidelines on External Links. I also left a stern warning directing her to the appropriate policies. Please remember, when blocking new users, give them ample warnings and opportunity to learn from their mistakes. Reverting a few more times is a smaller problem than is losing a potential editor because they were "bitten" unfairly. At leats give them a friendly note before blocking! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Entirely true, and it now seems the message has been recieved. We can always re-block her if she starts again. The ball is in HER court now... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw no reason for your deletion of what appears to be a constructive, acceptable link in the external links section, and you didn't have an edit summary or note on the discussion page, so I reverted it. My mind is open and I'm more than willing to discuss it. Noroton (talk) 18:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fair enough. I've reviewed it now and, without any COI, I personally think it should stay, so that should be the end of it. It seems to me it would help if some kind of edit summary, say "removed as per WP:EL", would help. If I have time, I might go over some of that user's edits and review them to see if the added material is useful in each case, but if I do, it will be a slow decision based on whether each edit improves the individual article. That should get around any spam problems and help the 'pedia. I've got no problem with your having removed them. Noroton (talk) 19:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. Looking at the context of that quote over at WP:SPAM it seems to me it sounds more like advice than a hard and fast rule. (And we all know plenty of people around here who are pushing their off-Wiki agendas; almost all of those agendas worse than this one.) Given the circumstances here, it seems to me that if you can get Artand to make some specific pledges about following policy and note that he'll be watched, then the encyclopedia would benefit. I tend to be optimistic about newbies who mess up in the beginning. As I said, I'm willing to be available if he wants advice. I'm not an admin and couldn't unblock him in any event. Your call. Noroton (talk) 16:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you're more familiar about this kind of thing than I am. I left another comment on Artand's talk page to clarify. Noroton (talk) 16:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mea Culpa - I don't know what I was thinking of. I'm now suitably chastened. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 19:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mike would these do? http://www.bbc.co.uk/films/2002/06/10/cairo_station_1958_review.shtml "With its tense score, contrasting performances of Chahine (twitchy and tightly coiled) and Rostom (sexy but cruel) and audacious moments of formal brilliance (Chahine even slots in a musical be-bop interlude from "Mike and the Skyrockets"), "Cairo Station" is a cinematic triumph." http://www.arabamericannews.com/newsarticle.php?articleid=8339 "Kelada grew up in Egypt where he would sing in a rock and roll band called the Skyrockets." http://www.egy.com/people/97-10-04.shtml "The Skyrockets at the Nileside Casino al-Shagarra and seen eating probably delicious fool'n tamia sandwiches in the 1960s." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherif Mansour (talk • contribs) 21:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hello, i am trying to add westnet, you added speedy delation, citying "nn corp" it is a significant company so please let it hang on . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timberlines (talk • contribs) 00:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notable? i did a good theres tons of sources, regardless i just added it , still putting references, not everything on wiki is instantly sourced and added. give it sometime. not everyone is born on wiki knows how to instantly put everything. i hope u understand and i do understand that you instantly check thigns for their notablity. a quick google searched looks very notable.

fido is also a subsidy of rogers i dont know what the deal is. this is a canadian company not american so you may not of heard ofi t. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timberlines (talk • contribs) 00:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you deleted this article while I was clarifying the context. After uploading the new version, I undeleted the history for attribution purposes. Just letting you know - Christopher Parham (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, there was an arbitration request on episode articles recently here [1], the conclusion says

It says that there is no consistent precedent or dealing with notability of this sort of articles, so I advice you to be extra-careful on making editions --Enric Naval (talk) 10:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Christopher, you don't remove the deletion notice yourself, what you do is adding a {{hangon}} template below it, so it won't get deleted while you improve the article --Enric Naval (talk) 10:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why would I not remove the deletion notice myself? I was only vaguely aware of the arbitration issue however so thank you. I do not believe it is relevant as the page was deleted as nonsense (arguably true at the time) but I do not think my last version could be described as such. Christopher Parham (talk) 11:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the template says that you shouldn't, for a start. This way of doing things probably originated at {{db-reason}}, the father template from where {{db-nonsense}} was created from. It probably comes from some discussion on some admin noticeboard, but I can't find references for it.

The removal could also be considered uncivil. A more proper procedure (but still not totally correct) would adding "hangon", then changing the article and *then* removing the tag if there has been substantial changes, while leaving a message on the talk page explaining why it is notable meets the notability criteria or why it's not nonsense, so other editors won't label it again with the same tag. A totally correct procedure would be improving the article, and then convince the editor that put up the tag to remove it, or convince someone else to do it because of it no longer being adequate, but that's not always possible. Deleting the notice with no explanation anywhere not even on the edit summary would surely be considered uncollaborative, specially if the article is not improved.

(also, consider placing {{stub}} on your new articles so this doesn't happen so often. There is a ton of more specific stubs at Category:Stub_categories that you can use. Other people interesed on the stub type can then see the article on the thematic category and help to improve the article) --Enric Naval (talk) 11:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can probably use this one on next article {{PowerRangers-stub}}. When added to the article, it will automagically add it to Category:Power_Rangers_stubs --Enric Naval (talk) 11:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Silly me, this editor was not the one that created the article, so he could remove the tag with no problem. My bad, I'll pay more attention to the history next time --Enric Naval (talk) 23:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(P.D.: well, at least the stub advice still stands. A stub template on an article can attract editors interested on the theme that will be happy to improve the article, and it can be added to an article created by someone else) --Enric Naval (talk) 23:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Asghar Mohammadi FAZEL, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Asghar Mohammadi FAZEL is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Asghar Mohammadi FAZEL, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 09:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was about to remove the csd tag when you deleted it. I don't think it's advertising, since the article talks about a specification by GSM Association, which itself is a trade association and wouldn't be advertising anything. The only thing that to me could sound like marketingese is a direct quote, and presented as such. Would you mind if I undeleted the article? Thanks. - Bobet 14:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged it as needing translation and am just going to do some googling to see if I can find any English information on the topic. If I can't get anywhere with it (at the moment I don't even know what language it is - presume something Scandinavian) I would consider a {{db-foreign}} but I'd like to give it a chance of life first. nancy ^(talk) 17:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Mike, I declined this particular speedy (even though when I see your name in page history, I usually just delete as you seem to always have them right). You said in page history that it was taken from a website and was spammy. Fixable, IMHO. Was it copyvio though? I'll delete based on that alone. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 19:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I wouldn't have a problem with an AFD, but if the assertions made in the article are true (future film, produced by Beastie Boy, etc), and verifiable, I might surprise myself and !vote keep. (and I am by no means even close to being an inclusionist) Thanks for understanding my speedy decline though, either way. Too bad about the article creator. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am so glad our world has come to that. She's a published author (whom can be found internationally through Amazon.com) and she's not known enough because only her "official site" is offered as a reference. I own her book and thought her worthy of recognition and hoped others could learn of her written works through wikipedia. But apparently the site is not worthy of the critical acclaim it has recieved (I have had friends who've attempted to contribute to Wikipedia to help make it better and have been treated with this "warm welcome" ie "speedy deletion." When you work hard to write up an article with reference that sounds half-way decent and even intelligent and it gets deleted because it's not "notable enough" despite local and national popularity it kind of turns the stomach.) Carrymeaway (talk) 23:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How are they ever to attain notability if people can't spread the word through popular sources (such as wikipedia)? Carrymeaway (talk) 23:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Therefore preventing a curious web-surfer from looking up information on someone they may have heard a snip-it of and want to learn more. My personal opinion; it's bull-shit. Carrymeaway (talk) 23:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[moved from above]

Hi Mike, I just left a note at the CFD for Category:Controversial literature explaining why I don't think it should be handled as a Speedy delete. Can you reverse your deletion and allow the full CFD to run its course? Cgingold (talk) 20:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Mike -- I was hoping for a reasonably expeditious response. Possibly you didn't notice my question due to the other comment that was left after mine. Anyway, I'd still appreciate a reply. Thanks. Cgingold (talk) 02:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, Mike. And more importantly, thank you for taking my request for "procedural justice" seriously. It may seem odd, given that I was the person who asked for the category to be deleted in the first place, but I feel strongly about adhering to the fine points of deletion procedures. Do you have any idea how & why King of Hearts jumped in two hours later and re-deleted it? Cgingold (talk) 13:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i was not the original author of this "article" Did my best to try and figure out how to make it acceptable. Anyway is there a service where wiki's get paid to do this so i can get published Henslee57 (talk) 10:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, I've tried making two updates this past hour, saving once before making more additions, and BOTH times you've been around, marking something for deletion or otherwise trying to destroy my work, no even giving the article a mere five MINUTES before marking it.. could you please explain this?? Thanks.KnatLouie (talk) 20:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I temporarily semi-protected your userpage. You can undo if you want. There were 4 vandalisms in less than 12 hours. It must be an honor to be so popular that your userpage had to be protected! Royalbroil 19:56, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{RFD (talk)|Joy message}}-Thanks for your work on Wikipedia-RFD (talk) 20:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC) This was to be a kitten to cheer you up but somewhere I made some mistake in trying to add it.Again my thanks-RFD (talk) 20:26, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Thank you very much for reverting the vandalism to User:Bearian. I am in a very busy situation in real life, so I've had no time to stop vandals this weekend, and will be so through the end of the month. I appreciate it. Bearian'sBooties (talk) 01:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm back in action, after closing the apartment of an estate. Thanks very much! Bearian (talk) 15:16, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For covering the back of another admin. Bearian (talk) 15:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went to a fair amount of effort to get some of my favorite deleted articles restored to my userspace so that I could improve them or find a good home for them. Userfication of deleted content is explicitly permitted -- see Wikipedia:Userfication#Userfication_of_deleted_content -- but you have not only deleted these articles but have done so entirely outside of process and without ever notifying me. You have forced me to spend more of my valuable time scanning redlinks. Please restore all of these or add them to the ongoing discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Tlogmer subpages.

Here is the list of pages, as far as I can tell:

• User:Tlogmer/Captain Obvious
• User:Tlogmer/Sleaze rock
• User:Tlogmer/Effects of Christmas on the environment
• User:Tlogmer/Death yell
• User:Tlogmer/Book of spells of serpents

- Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 04:07, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Tlogmer message, these should be restored and added to that deletion debate. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OM-- I created a new page for DoubleJay Creative in the sandbox you made for me. It MORE than fulfills notability guidelines (with 2 dozen external links!) and I took all the marketing-speak out like you suggested. So, will you put it up? Or tell me how to? Thanks a lot--

Dingstersdie (talk) 15:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, come on... (DJC)

"A company, corporation, organization, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of coverage in secondary sources." "The organization’s longevity, size of membership, or major achievements, or other factors specific to the organization may be considered."

I don't really know how to reply to your comment that a lot of the links are about their clients, since that's just blatantly untrue. Many of the articles reference specific projects that DJC has worked on or accomplished, but how do you think a production company gets press except through recognition of their projects? Additionally, even IF you remove those from the equation, there are numerous articles where company employees are interviewed and DJC is the main focus of the piece-- more than enough, again, to meet notability guidelines. You seem to have a prejudice against allowing small companies into the Wiki, but seriously, how much more notable can a small company get than national coverage, numerous awards (including an Emmy) and and cover story in the local alt-weekly? Finally, I'll again reference you to AC Entertainment as an example of another notable local business which has been allowed to stay, even with few references, while mine, with TWO DOZEN good references, is continually deleted.

It's a good article. I don't understand why you have such a need to keep it out. If, after rereading the notability guidelines and my responses, you still feel it's not notable, I wish you would tell me how to start a review or talk to some other admin. I am grateful you volunteer your time here but I think that by being such a stickler, it discourages people from contributing.

Dingstersdie (talk) 15:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing to stop you from posting the article as it stands. I repeat, I'll give you 3:1 odds that if you do, it won't last a week. We don't care if a company is mentioned in an article; we need articles about the company itself. We have a major problem now with too many articles about tiny companies like this which confuse local "Emmies" with a national Emmy, etc. And again: if you feel AC Entertainment is no more notable than DoubleJay, then nominate them for deletion as non-notable; WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not a valid argument for retention of an article. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:51, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went back and looked at the links and found six of them where the article was either fully about DJC or at least substantially about them and their involvement with a project. So I'm throwing it up there. As long as you're not determined to pull it down, I'll take my chances. Thanks for your help, Dingstersdie (talk) 16:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He is put awards like Aegis and Daveys, which look like a place where you pay to get a nice award and a place on a list of winners. They have no notability and no reputation for giving awards based on actual excellence. I am doubting on directly deleting on the basis of not reliable sources --Enric Naval (talk) 17:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC) same for telly awards. This does not pass WP:CORP --Enric Naval (talk) 17:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, DoubleJay Creative, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DoubleJay Creative. Thank you. Enric Naval (talk) 17:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Telly Awards, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Telly Awards. Thank you. Enric Naval (talk) 17:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Orange Mike.

I was recreating my F.C. Dragons page again. You deleted it because it didn't show importance or significance of the club. I haven't a clue what that means! Please help. How do I show importance or significance of my football club?

Thanks, DJK2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by DJK2008 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining. Have a look at [www.footballclubdragons.wetpaint.com]. It is the team website I made myself. It may not have much in it cause its still under construction. Thank you, DJK2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by DJK2008 (talk • contribs) 21:32, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you've nominated this for speedy deletion on multiple occasions. Since there is obviously a mixture of opinions on deletion of this article I think that starting a Article For Deletion (afd) debate is probably a better approach if you still feel it should go. --BrucePodger (talk) 00:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what did i do wrong? i did a fine page, and there's nothing wrong with it! please dont delete it! please! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkes94 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Next time you nn a page, could you tell the user? Basketball110 _{Go Longhorns!} 17:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Sorry if I sounded accusing. I didn't know that they gave them out. I usually just give the users their speedy warning. Basketball110 _{Go Longhorns!} 19:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a suggestion on its talk page. Never mind. It seems to have been deleted. Basketball110 _{Go Longhorns!} 19:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Basketball110 _{Go Longhorns!} 20:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching that typo Mike, I guess I was visited by the dyslexia fairy.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 03:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering what you thought about the notability of Ironwood Omnimedia. I was involved in the AfD for some of its products a few months ago and I voluntarily merged some content into the article and tried to clean the POV, but I'm wondering if it might be time to see if it deserves a prod. I just can't find anything reliable to verify the article and I wanted your input since I noticed you edit some RPG articles.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 03:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! you tagged Lucia Mauro as {{db-spam}}, can I ask how you think that it is spam? And you also didn't notified the author about its Speedy. Thanks! --SMS ^Talk 03:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted this template as having been contributed by a sock of a blocked user, which appears to be the case. Would you mind providing me with a copy of the template, so I can review it? Thanks.--Abd (talk) 04:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--Abd (talk) 12:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Orangemike. I've removed the speedy delete because I'm activelly working on this article. Thank you for your help. --CyclePat (talk) 04:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the In use template since I'm done working on the article for now. Thank you again for your help in this matter. Feel free to work on the article since there should now be sufficient references to easily improve it's context, which is b.t.w. probably sufficient to no longer meet the criteria CSD A1, meaning it is perhaps time to remove the speedy delete template? --CyclePat (talk) 05:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your comment I do agree that third party sources are best when available. However, I personally feel wikipedia's policy on the need for third party sources all the time is somewhat un-necessary as often times News Organizations use a first party web sites as a source in their own reporting. I know this having written for magazines and newspapers myself and knowing people who work in media. What advantage would a professional organization have in lying about themselves on their own website? Also, in the case of this company all media sources I found were pretty much reviews of individual productions and did not really delve much into the overall history of the company. Furthermore, sometimes third party sources get things wrong. Which would you trust more, the New York Times article or the company's own website if say the New York Times fudged a date or a name? It happens all the time. Most times it is the newspaper that fudged the info and not the other way around. But anyway, I like to play by wikipedia's rules as much as possible which is why I think the tags are there. Hopefully someone else can dig up some better sources. But for now I think what is there is fine.Nrswanson (talk) 05:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh there is tons of media review on productions. Dozens and dozens of reviews done by the New York Times, New York Post, Opera News, etc. That is the thing with opera companies. The media is more interested in the shows they produce than in the actual organization itself. See my problem.Nrswanson (talk) 05:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you look above I already cited Opera News. I am sure they did review the company at some point but the articles are not currently available online and I will have to go to the library hunting through microfich. Like I said, the references are there. Just takes a little digging. But better to start the article and get people interested enough to care and do research than not create/ delete the page and have it never exist.Nrswanson (talk) 05:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded the article and referenced it, to within an inch of its life.;-) Best, Voceditenore (talk) 11:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is the warning you will receive for your disruptive edits for the Radio stations.

I re-edited the radio station info. I moved the Radio Station Info from its callsign to its name such as moving the 95.9 Big FM info from DWBG to 95.9 Big FM.

DO NOT move the Radio Station Info from its name to its callsign just like you did to the Radio Stations in General Santos because it is FINAL.

Pinoybandwagon (talk) 08:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC) THANKS I hope I have understood your instructions correctly about using your user page.Regards, Boselawrence (talk) 12:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)Boselawrence[reply]

Hello, Orangemike. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion can be found under the topic WP:ANI#Philippine FM Radio Stations. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated Jana Kramer, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jana Kramer and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 16:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Orangemike. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion can be found under the topic Manila FM radio stations. --Howard the Duck 16:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I have not materially contributed to the current Modernista! Wikipedia article. I only created our website. Your COI tag is not valid from my perspective. I'll respectfully leave it up for debate but you have my 2 cents. TimBlount (talk) 16:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE Thank you for taking the time to reconsider your COI label for Modernista!. If you could also weigh in with your opinion on deletion regarding notability I'd appreciate it. TimBlount (talk) 20:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough - my apologies for making these entries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriscleave (talk • contribs) 18:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On March 26, you deleted a page for Eamon McEneaney with the comments: "Real person; doesn't indicate importance/significance: db|Non-notable 9/11 victim." Since this is a page I watch, I am surprised it was deleted without it appearing in my watchlist if/when tagged. Neither is it mentioned in the page creators talk page (User talk:10stone5). McEneaney notability was as a lacrosse player. He was a 9/11 victim, yes, but notable since he was inducted into the National Lacrosse Hall of Fame, was awarded prestigeous NCAA lacrosse awards while at Cornell. My recollection was that this was all cited in detail on the page. I am requesting that you re-instate this article. If you think there are issues that need to be addressed, please let me know. Mitico (talk) 19:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I appreciate the quick response . I am not having much luck with d.o.b, will keep looking. Mitico (talk) 21:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand as an admin, you wish to keep Wikipedia free of spam/malicious content. However, I do feel the speedy deletion of an article I created, Doctor Steel, was unnecessary. Doctor Steel is a notable person in the music industry. He has been interviewed many times, and has even appeared on The Tonight Show with Jay Lenno, and has fans numbering in the tens of thousands. If my article is being deleted due to lack of content, please tell me what I can do to make it acceptable by Wikipedia standards. Aridnyk89 (talk)

Doctor Steel's Talk Page

I thank you for your consideration in keeping the page, however the talk portion of the page is currently protected, so I cannot edit or claim my case in the notability of the artist. Please help me. Aridnyk89 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 13:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do appreciate the time you've spent on helping me clean up my Wiki entry, I know you don't need to do this, and can just delete it if seen fit, so I thank you. I hope to bring the article to your satisfactory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aridnyk89 (talk • contribs) 14:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This fact from the Radiosmasher is TRUE:

If the official call sign has a prefix (DW- and DZ- in Luzon, DY- in Visayas, DX- in Mindanao), a redirect or disambiguation should be added for the call sign without the prefix. For stations which do not have a prefix, place the broadcast years in parentheses; for example, "DWRT (1976-2006)". See Radiosmasher for more information on assignment practices.

Brand names such as "Net 25", "UNTV" or "99.5 Campus FM" are very often unique. Even though "Campus Radio Baguio" or "Wild FM Davao" are not appropriate article titles, a brand name may, however, be created as Radio Station and its Dial (Ex. 92.7 "Campus Radio" or "Dream 106.7") page where appropriate.

Radiosmasher (talk) 16:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]