User talk:Abhih

Forgive me, I'm a bit shaky on the Talk Pages. I was editing the entry for Tylwyth teg and your comment to delete it seems to have undone my latest additions to the page. --Rsweeney 19:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I have explained reason. Tylwyth teg is just another term for Bendith y mamau when I read contents of both articles. I don't think second separate article is necessary. If absolutely necessary, you can redirect to Bendith y mamau if admin allow. If I am erring in logical conclusion, I apologize. Anyway, you are free to convince admin about separate article. I will not involve further. Thanks. abhih 20:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Request to block...
Please post this at Administrator intervention against vandalism (WP:AIV); that way, speedy block requests can be dealt with more easily and faster than if you just post to individual administrators' talk pages. --ais523 13:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT DELETE IT

if you delete it every time I try and do something new I will never learn where I am wrong. There are many pages like this. Two examples Ruggero Santilli and Giovanni Amelino-Camelia. What dothey have that I haven't got for my page to be accepted. I am a physist like them. DO NOT DELET IT PLEASE. INSTEAD TELL ME HOW I CAN MAKE MY PAGE ACCEPTED AS THEIR WERE ACCEPTED. PLEASE. I will add more pages about physics and edit some others but I have just started I am a new User so please be patient and help me I always say to b patient with new users so please. I thought this Giovanni Amelino-Camelia page was good in terms of been accepted and I copied its content and modified to suit me. TELL ME WHERE I WAS WRONG DO NOT DELETE IT PLEASE

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cardone_Fabio"--Cardone Fabio 14:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

First thing - I am just another user like you. I am not administrator. New page patrollers like me propose articles for deletion which is against wikipedia policies and administrators take decision whether to delete it or not.

Second thing- you are supposed explain why the article created by should not be deleted on talk page of article created by you, not here.

Third thing- I will check articles mentioned by you. If those articles does not meet wikipedia policies.

Please read your talk page and read links to understand notability criteria. I apologize if my actions have hurt you. But new page patrollers are supposed to watch new pages. Thanks. abhih 14:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your reply, it is nice to know there is some human beingon the other side and we are not on a robot's hands. I was not hurt at all just scared by automated replies. I will appreciate if you let me know whether those two articles comply with wikipedia policies or not. Thanks again. --Cardone Fabio 15:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I have many papers on international journal as well since I am a colleague of Giovanni Amelino-Camelia and I know Ruggero Santilli as well. So the main thing not to have my page deleted is to mention my peer reviewed publication on international journals. Is that correct? Physics Letters A 326 (2004) 1-13 - Physics Letters A, 289, 279 (2001) --Cardone Fabio 15:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I give you the URL of my web page where all my peer reviewed publications on international famous journal can be found. Fabio Cardone Home Page.

I have a question: once you have posted a speed deletion tag for a page, can you retreat it and remove the threatening tag on the page? Thanks.--Cardone Fabio 15:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

If there is logic, reason, then I can and I did it. On wikipedia everybody is watching everybody. Now please create references section and add list of your publications in reputed journals, links from third party neutral websites to improve quality of article. You got 5 days but let me make it absolutely clear that other user or administrator can still tag it for speedy deletion. So only way is to improve your article instead of talking to me. Thanks. abhih 16:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Please write content
Please write content rather than continuing your efforts to get content deleted. It is better to accept content and improve it than to delete it. WAS 4.250 17:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I failed to understand what you are saying. I am patrolling new pages like other hundreds of users and if I tag right article without reason please let me know. Thanks. abhih 18:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Please explain your tag
On the tag you put on Vendor (supply chain), you mentioned that vendor and supply chain already exist. Vendor is a reference page to a disambig page, and supply chain is the category. The article does need to be expanded, and if you know of another article on the subject, please put it on the discussion page of the article, perhaps to be merged into this, but you need to do more than just tag--perhaps try writing a comment on the discussion page first. Fredsmith2 14:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Vendor redirect to Supplier which is disambig page but it leads to Manufacturer. Vendor, supplier, manufacturer are one and the same thing. And also there exist supply chain article. Mixing header of two existing articles is irrational. You can contribute to existing articles. If not, you may convince admin necessity of your article. Thanks. abhih 15:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair Enough!
Fair enough, we are all a little lazy some of the time! I'm not entirely sure that i know what 'motion perception' is but I will give it a good go! If you have any ideas what I should include in High-rise syndrome but don't particulally want to add yourself, feel free to give me a buzz, I don't bite! PhilB  ~ T/C 15:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Aww sorry I didn't mean it a mean way! :-(
 * I know I have a bunch of things to do that I will do "when I get round to it" PhilB   ~ T/C 15:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
Please only use db if a page unquestionably meets the criteria for speedy deletion. If there is any doubt, please use WP:PROD or WP:AFD. Thank you, Kusma (talk) 19:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * OK. If some mistake happen, please let me know. Thanks. abhih 20:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Check your recent contributions and you'll see several cases where admins (not just me) declined to speedily delete articles that you tagged. Oh, and please use a descriptive edit summary (like "nominated for deletion") when you nominate a page for deletion. Thank you, Kusma (talk) 20:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

All those articles are from Category:Wikipedia articles with possible conflicts of interest and indeed those I tagged are blatant advertisement of hotels or self-bio. If we allow such hotels, then there are thousands and thousands of hotel with status of hotels I tagged. We are encouraging such hotels to create articles. There is difference between knowledge and advertisement. If mankind is destroyed and aliens got CD of wikipedia, what kind of information about human civilization aliens will get by reading about hotels, companies, bio of unimportant persons? Do you think that with current articles it is appropriate to send wikipedia CDs in deep space so that someday aliens may find it? I just don't understand what will they learn about human civilization by reading about hotels and companies.

There is only one planet in universe with known life. And wikipedia is biggest encyclopedia on this planet. It is responsibility of all administrators/editors to define meaning of encyclopedia. Otherwise wikipedia will turn in biopedia and adpedia. Better to launch wikibio, wikicom instead of allowing garbage on wikipedia in the name of knowledge.

Which criteria deserve this article Andreas Spanias? Everyday I see such hundreds of new pages deleted within few minutes.

Thanks. abhih 20:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I was trying to say "do not use . Try using reason for articles that you think should be deleted but where you think somebody might disagree that they meet the criteria for speedy deletion." Kusma (talk) 12:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Andreas Spanias
No, I do not think that every inventor needs a page on wikipedia. However, having invented something is a claim of notability, which is all that is required to avoid speedy deletion vi CSD A7. Whether or not that claim is sufficient enough for the article to remain is a matter for more thorough review process, such as Proposed deletion or Articles for deletion. Since I have no idea what the "Java-DSP (J-DSP) software package" is, I have no opinion on whether or not this particular inventor should have an article. If you feel that that this article should be deleted, please nominate for PROD or AfD. Dsmdgold 22:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

SD Tags
First off - welcome to Wikipedia.

I suggest that you read WP:Speedy Deletion before tagging anymore articles.

"Not encyclopedic" is not a valid reason for a speedy deletion...Articles that you feel do not belong on Wikipedia (that do not meet the speedy deletion criteria) should be brought to WP:Articles for Deletion. If you need any assistance, I will be glad to help. Smashville 22:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, please review what you are requesting to be deleted. I notice you tried to speedy delete the article for one of the most reknowned hotel chains in the world. Smashville 23:02, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Good. There are 60000 AAA rated properties across USA, Canada, mexico, new carribian according to link given on those hotel articles. Congratulations! You got 60000 articles on wikipedia.

What more, I will give you similar 'most reckoned hotel chains' across world. Let us create hotelpedia!

You don't get it. People are using wikipedia for advertisements. And more will come. Surely. Mywikibiz.Com! Companies, hotels are hiring professional wikipedians to fool new page patrollers and if I had not brought it to notice, at 3 articles were cleared by other patrollers.

Know thyself and meaning of encyclopedia.

I know I am heading for block. But at the end of the day, you will have to answer yourself. abhih 23:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:CIVIL. And I don't need to answer myself...I don't think you'll find anyone else arguing that the Four Seasons chain does not belong on Wikipedia it meets WP:CORP by a long shot. Smashville 00:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

According WP:CORP, '''Even though the parent organization may be notable, individual chapters of national and international organizations may not be notable enough to warrant a separate article. '''

Please explain why separate articles are necessary to describe all hotels owned by Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts.

According WP:CORP, '''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'''.

Please explain how Four Seasons Hotels and Resorts has demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment, athletics, economies, history, literature, science, or education.

Thanks.abhih 06:15, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed that my two posts in this section are disappeared. I am going to search how this happened. abhih 07:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I got confused by thinking that this user:Smashville is admin. It wasted my considerable time. And I put on hold my new page patrolling and COI cleanup task. abhih
 * Dude, please for the love of it all be civil...I'm just trying to help you out. The actual Four Seasons company meets WP:CORP to a T. -Preceding unsigned comment added by Smashville (talk * contribs) 13:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm going to try and get you some help from an admin...you obviously have good intentions, but I think you need a little guidance. --Smashville 14:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

You should allow admin to decide whether those articles meet WP:CORP. If they are not dubious, then remove COI tag.

And if you think Dude is civil way to call a person, then go on talk page of Jimbo Wales and call him Dude. abhih 16:08, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "Dude" is informal, it is definitely not uncivil. As an editor, I am perfectly within line to remove any tags that do not meet guidelines in articles that I did not create. Once again, I'm just trying to help you out because you seem to have good intentions, but some of your edits could be construed as disruptive. It is actually up to the entire Wikipedia community to help enforce Wikipedia policies, not just the admins. --Smashville 16:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, it would serve you well to read WP:CORP. You don't seem to be looking past the header to the section. --Smashville 17:46, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Your browser
Please either upgrade your browser, or stop using it to edit articles. You are causing problems by putting templates in incorrect places, and by the fact that your browser is reformatting some unrelated text at the same time. I, too, use a mobile browser at times - but I do so with the understanding that it should only be used in a manner that does not create unnecessary work for other editors. Thank you. --Ckatz chat spy  11:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I also thought it is inappropriate. I think I did it max 4 times. Now I am leaving out big articles even if they are deletable. And I am tagging only blatant advertisement. There are suspicious articles which I am not touching. Thanks. abhih 11:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello
It is ok. --Bhadani (talk) 13:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It is ok after slight modifications. Happy Diwali to you too. --Bhadani (talk) 13:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Sandboxes
Sandbox sub pages are a something created in user space to test things rather than disrupt the project, in this case seeing what result a list of tags produced. --Nate1481(t/c) 15:00, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I tagged it because it was blank and it was in conflict of interest category. It was not tagged because I saw it as disruption of project. In fact I tagged it with question, 'what is this?'

I am sorry if misinterpreted. May be I should have removed COI tag. Anyway it was test page. So no damage done. Thanks. abhih 15:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC) --Nate1481(t/c) 15:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You tagged it with a speedy deletion template, you may want to read this about when and when not to use it.

Please Listen to the Other Editors
This is an encyclopedia with set rules, guidelines and processes. If you continue to ignore them or continue to go against policy, you are going to get in trouble. Please just listen to the other editors. --SmashvilleBONK! 15:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Why are you stalking me and what are you talking about? Which editor I ignored? You are disturbing me by your incoherent messages. Please let admin take decisions on my tags and leave me alone. Thanks abhih 15:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Creating a huge thread at WP:ANI and not expecting anyone to notice it is not "stalking". Also...what is incoherent? Do I need to explain something? Again - Wikipedia is a community and anyone can remove tags. --SmashvilleBONK! 15:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I am an admin, and I also am asking you to learn to behave better here. For example, this edit is way out of line. I appreciate when people tag articles helpfully, but every bad tag takes me five times as long to deal with, as I have to do a lot more research and write a lot more in the way of explanation. And if I accidentally get one of those wrong and delete something I shouldn't, it's a big black eye for Wikipedia's image.

Please don't tag articles just because you don't like them. Only tag things that you think the broader community agrees should be removed. I hate spam too, but the approach you advocate is hurting Wikipedia far more than it is helping. Thanks, William Pietri 20:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Usernames
I don't want to get into an academic debate about this, but there is a difference between Rama's arrow (which was the method by which he effected miracles and revealed himself to be divine) and Jesus's Second Coming, which is an event and incarnation of the deity. If you created an account called "Jesus's loaves and fishes", that would be okay, I guess. If you created an account called "Vishnu's Tenth Incarnation", that would not be. The arrow is not part of the godhead; the second coming is. Furthermore, User:Rama's Arrow was a member of the project for a very long time, possibly before our rules about usernames were so stringent. He is, in effect, grandfathered in. I recognize that it bothers you to have an aspect of your faith associated with baser things, but there is no Wikipedia policy violation.

I appreciate your desire to improve Wikipedia by tagging articles for deletion. We have very clearly-defined policies about what constitutes advertising, what can be considered notable, and what should be included in an encyclopedia. This policy is about notability of corporations, explaining why some companies can (and should) have articles. Similar policies exist for musicians, films, books, and so on. I hope you review these policies and can learn to identify articles that should be deleted and those that could be improved. In the end, we want to have an encyclopedia with accurate, well-sourced information about a variety of notable subjects -- and we don't accomplish that goal by deleting everything on sight.

I very sincerely wish you a happy holiday. -- Merope 21:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
OK, sorry, but this has gone far enough. A bit too far, really. I have blocked you for two weeks, which takes us to the other side of Diwali, yes? Hopefully you will feel a bit less pressured then. Guy (Help!) 22:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Happy Diwali
May you have a happy Diwali! Perspicacite 13:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 10:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

New deal for page patrollers
Hi ,

In order to better control the quality  of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)